[PookJP]

This thread started the discussion that's being continued below. Funny way to get on to such heavy material, eh?

Originally Posted by Salty

Or at least he could give his reasons, like you hate Christians because you're insanely proud to be gay and hate anyone who doesn't tell you that they think that's great. At least we know the reasons for your personality flaws.

Before I say anything else, I need to point out that you omitted a tremendously important modifier I originally used. I said "evangelical" Christians. Other synonyms: Born Again, fundamentalist, extreme right wing. Those are the ones I'm talking about. I do not take issue with moderate Christians. These mime's are clearly evangelical (their mission is to spread the word of God), and that's why I said what I did.

The reason I'm passionately adverse to fundamentalist Christians is based on three things. The first is the disrespect they show for people who do not share their views. The second is based on how unreasonable their views are, and how they are forced to either dodge questions, walk out of conversations, or laugh off confrontations. And the third is personal experience.

Disrespect for other people's views.

While I understand the motivation behind telling people they will burn in a lake of fire if they do not hear the Good News and allow Jesus to absorb their sins, it doesn't make it any less offensive to be told. I live a good life -- I have never stolen, I treat people decently, I work hard for my paycheck, and I've obviously never murdered anyone or committed adultury or whatever. So who do these people think they are telling me I'm living a life of sin and I need to be fixed?

They'll then ask you things like, "well have you ever coveted another man's possessions? In the eyes of God you're a thief, which means your soul will burn in hell for eternity." Same thing with "have you ever desired fornication with a woman, or fornicated out of wedlock." For someone to tell me I'm going to hell because I want my friend's awesome G5 is absurd, offensive, and makes me angry. The inability to see the good in people that comes from fundamentalists is nonsense, especially for a religion that teaches compassion and decency to others.

You might say I'm showing disrespect for their views by saying the things I do. I agree, but you have to consider the context. I am only responding to stimuli; if a born again had never told me what a disgusting soul I am that's in need to cleaning, I wouldn't give them a second thought. I'm sure there's parts of other religions that would piss me off, but you don't see them on the TV, on the streets, in your workplace, handing out fliers and cramming their opinion into you.

Unreasonable Views

Once again, you're welcome to do and believe what you want in private, but please don't force your entirely unsupportable opinions on people who don't share them. Fundamentalists believe all modern life science is flawed because the Earth is only 5,000 years old. If you have a person who believes something as ludicrous as that, and supports it by such inane qualifiers as "God put the fossil record down to test us," I don't see how I can even begin to speak to a person like that. And yes, I think I'm entirely justified in railing against them when they take these views to the public sector because that now potentially pollutes more people in society. I'm not saying they don't have a right to say it, but I certainly have a right to counter.

Expanding the way evangelicals have expanded their reach into society, thus provoking me to say the things I do, is the entire "moral value" movement. I'm terribly sorry, but not all morals are as clear cut as something like murder. And the arbitrary nature of the fights these people take up (which we've all heard before) -- that it's not okay to see a nipple, but it's fine to see a head blown off in a movie, but it's not okay to see a head blown off in a video game -- only undermine their cases.

Then there's the bigotry and sexism. I find it entirely unreasonable to say that all people in good legal standing don't have the same rights. If they don't, on what measures are you dividing the population? Where did those measures come from? Yeah, The Bible, but we've all know what would happen if we literally interpreted every page of that book. For these people to even consider women less worthy, somehow, of the same rights and privileges of men is sickening. The same goes for homosexuals. Again it's all been said, but fundamentalist Christians would rather have a heterosexual couple married and miserable than a homosexual couple happy and in love.

Another unreasonable view is that fanatical Christians believe all other fanatical Christians should be trusted, favored, and given more respect than non-believers. I'll get more into this in a moment, but my boss at my previous job would selectively hire under-qualified born again Christians because (and this is a quotation), "He's a good Christian guy so I know he'll do a good job." I'm sorry, but when it comes to practical design skills, Jesus' holding the hand of a kid with no professional experience takes back seat to 10 years of experience and a degree from Art Center.


Personal Experience.

I'll keep this section shorter because people, in general, are less willing to extrapolate personal anecdotes on to the population. As mentioned above, I worked for a self-professed Born Again Christian at my last job. He was the owner of the company and my boss (small company!), and my daily life there was characterized by either overtures to religion or direct proselytizing. I could barely mention anything in the real world that didn't offend him in some way
Me: I liked Johnny Depp's performance in Charlie.
Response: More like Johnny French, the America hater.

Me: Well, it seems there's finally consensus on global climate change.
Response: Huh, yeah right, we could have a conversation about that. *silence*

Me: Oh there's a parking space.
Response: Thank you Lord Jesus for the small gifts.

Him: Are you still listening to that communist radio station?
Me: It's NPR.

Him to receptionist who just broke up with boyfriend: You're unhappy not because of him but because you don't have Jesus in your heart to comfort you.

Him to other Born Again: The great thing about being a Christian Man is that you are tested, but you know you always walk on God's path (is that why you steal stock photography, falsify your company's resume, lie to clients about work done, steal music, pirate movies, humiliate and publicly mock your wife, talk at length about how your "glory days" before being born again where you'd **** 19 year old girls... and you were 32!)

Trust me, I could go on, but you get the point. And this guy it's the only born again Christian hypocrite.



For those of you who think I've overstated the viewpoints of mainstream Born Again Christianity, I invite you to look at this site: http://www.wayofthemaster.com/wotm_flash.html.
Click "yes" to the question of whether you're a Christian. And yes, that's good old Kirk Cameron from Growing Pains!

[Y3a]

I thought GOD was gonna sort it all out after we were dead...

[Salty]

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Christians are organized.

You have a couple groups.

Roman Catholic, the original power house, you prolly know enough about them.
Eastern Orthodox, not so big over here but decent sized over in Europe, Russia etc, the original split off of the RC church came from a disagreement between Rome and Constantinople.

Then you have the Protestant Groups
Protestant basically means non Roman Catholic (though the Eastern Orthodox is not Protestant)
You have groups in Protestantism like Baptists, Methodists, the United Church, The Alliance, Presbiterians, Lutherans, Anglicans, Pentacostals, Evangelical Free, and so on and so forth.
Within Protestantism you have three major divisions again that these denominations fit into.
Charismatic
Evangelical
Non-Evangelical

That said you can get Charasmatic Evangelical groups.
Charasmatics are the ones who'll speak in tongues, and do all sorts of wacky things that depending on extreme they are can make a lota people go... what?
Evangelicals are people groups that try their hardest to go in line of what they believe with much deliberation scripture says. These groups range in their beliefs and practices. But essentially they give the proper authority due to scripture, they do not abide by any recognized heresies, and if you were to go to one or the other after attending another Evangelical chruch you would find that they differ on some beliefs but not enough to really be a big problem for most people.
Non-Evangelicals are the ones who you'll see doing things like promoting homosexuality, extremely liberal theology, and where generally you can go in and say whatever you want because the people there are just playing church.

Course I'm bias. But most groups that you see doing anything as Christians that's out reaching are actually probably Evangelical. If you know any Christians you probably know at least a few Evangelicals. The problem is you didn't realize that the word isn't what you meant.

Now what you have been calling Evangelical is actually better called, Stupid. Yes there are lots of STUPID Christians. However stupidity knows no bounds. You will find stupid catholics, you will find stupid eastern orthodox, you will find stupid baptists, stupid methodists, and a whole lot of stupid people in the united church, but they're a different kind of stupid.
Believe it or not you will even find stupid people outside of Christianity! Like in the Canadian government.

[PookJP]

That's a pretty big section of the population you're calling stupid, and it includes our Commander In Chief. Remember, he actually does believe the earth was made 5,000 years ago.

I think you're downplaying the size of the fanatics, and I'd rather you address that and not the proper nomenclature needed to refer to them. Did you watch the link I posted? That organization is huge, and they are only one of many. I, personally, went to a sold-out speech from Kirk Cameron in which over 1,000 people were in attendance.

[Doofy]

Paragraphs and everything.
Very nice post Salty.

[BRussell]

"Non-evangelical?" So all of us mainline Protestant Christians - Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc. - are "playing church." And conservative Christian evangelicals, who focus on evolution and abortion and gays seemingly above all else, are truest to Christianity even though Jesus never spoke a word about those topics, and in fact whose primary ministry was to embrace society's outcasts and reject the divisions promoted by the Judaism of the time. And his recorded words are almost entirely in metaphor, rather than literal truths, despite the (failed) attempts at Biblical literalism of these "good Christians."

Sorry, but most conservative Christians and evangelicals in my view have absolutely nothing in common with Christianity, which is about as "extreme liberal" as you can get.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by PookJP

The reason I'm passionately adverse to fundamentalist Christians is based on three things. The first is the disrespect they show for people who do not share their views. The second is based on how unreasonable their views are...

Um, doesn't this sound just a little hyopcritical to anyone else? There are plenty of hypocritical pseudo-Christians out there, but if you can't respect the beliefs of those you demand respect your beliefs then I fail to see how you are any better than they.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by PookJP

I think you're downplaying the size of the fanatics, and I'd rather you address that and not the proper nomenclature needed to refer to them.

With all due respect, you did say:

Originally Posted by PookJP

Before I say anything else, I need to point out that you omitted a tremendously important modifier I originally used. I said "evangelical" Christians. Other synonyms: Born Again, fundamentalist, extreme right wing. Those are the ones I'm talking about. I do not take issue with moderate Christians

This is a very American viewpoint. Here, at least, "evangelical" does not mean "extreme right wing" or "non-moderate".

[kmkkid]

Jeez, saying other branches of your own religion are "playing church" is getting a bit fanatical isn't it?

I've always hated the churches that pretend their congregation is better than anyone else. You're all worshiping the same God, WTF is your problem?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by PookJP

This thread started the discussion that's being continued below. Funny way to get on to such heavy material, eh?

way too wordy, get over yourself. You're as dogmatic as the next. You are not going to see the incredible good that has also come from the faithful because you are blind. You are not qualified to speak on religion as you have no formal education in it. Your tripe is as worthless as any other racist, xenophobic, anti-Christian zealot out there. Move along all, nothing to see here. Let artist spread their work, if you don't like it move along. If you fear it, good. Perhaps when you're older you'll understand why.

[ebuddy]

lake of fire indeed. Those reading bumper stickers will always find themselves behind everyone else. Enjoy the view LaVey.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

You are not qualified to speak on religion as you have no formal education in it.

I've got to disagree on this one. I have no formal education on religion, and no one has ever said I wasn't qualified. I've been called a heretic a few times -a charge I don't deny- but never unqualified. If he lacks formal education, then he's only as unqualified as I am.

Your tripe is as worthless as any other racist, xenophobic, anti-Christian zealot out there.

Here, on the other hand, we can agree. His conviction and desire to fight against what he sees as evil is admirable, but he forgot Rule Number One: your first hunting ground must always be the mirror.

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by Salty

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how Christians are organized.

He can organize Christians however he likes. What you are describing is how Christians organize themselves. Personally I find it more useful to divide Christians on continuums of their tolerance, preachiness and fanaticism as these are the qualities most relevant to my interactions with them. PookJP seems to be doing the same.

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Perhaps when you're older you'll understand why.

Ageist!

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Scientist

He can organize Christians however he likes. What you are describing is how Christians organize themselves. Personally I find it more useful to divide Christians on continuums of their tolerance, preachiness and fanaticism as these are the qualities most relevant to my interactions with them. PookJP seems to be doing the same.

Oh; you can divide them however you want? Cool! In that case, I'm going to fivide them into the following: (a) those that belong to the Emperor, (b) embalmed ones, (c) those that are trained, (d) suckling pigs, (e) mermaids, (f) fabulous ones, (g) stray dogs, (h) those that are included in this classification, (i) those that tremble as if they were mad, (j) innumerable ones, (k) those drawn with a very fine camel’s hair brush, (l) others, (m) those that have just broken a flower vase, (n) those that resemble flies from a distance. (with apologies to Jorge Luis Borges).

Arbitrary groupings, formed from a lack of understanding, don't necessarily have any real meaning. If you want to classify, you first need to understand.

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Oh; you can divide them however you want? Cool! In that case, I'm going to fivide them into the following: (a) those that belong to the Emperor, (b) embalmed ones, (c) those that are trained, (d) suckling pigs, (e) mermaids, (f) fabulous ones, (g) stray dogs, (h) those that are included in this classification, (i) those that tremble as if they were mad, (j) innumerable ones, (k) those drawn with a very fine camel’s hair brush, (l) others, (m) those that have just broken a flower vase, (n) those that resemble flies from a distance. (with apologies to Jorge Luis Borges).

Arbitrary groupings, formed from a lack of understanding, don't necessarily have any real meaning. If you want to classify, you first need to understand.

My groupings aren't arbitrary and they aren't formed from a lack of understanding. Classification systems are tools for understanding. My system works better for the majority of my needs. If a friend is going to introduce me to her Christian father I will get a much better idea for how to deal with him if he is described as "preachy" or "intolerant" than if he is described as "Catholic" or "Methodist". The first two designations tell me a lot more about what I need to know to avoid offending him than the last two.

BTW, I know the other systems as well and I'm capable of using them when appropriate.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Scientist

What you are describing is how Christians organize themselves.

He's not even doing that, he's talking about how Evangelical Christians define other Christians. Charismatics, evangelicals, and non-evangelicals? Haha. It's like one of those maps of the world with America, non-America, and "here be dragons." He's basically saying that there are evangelicals (real Christians), weirder evangelicals (charismatics), and liberals (who think they're going to heaven but they like gays so they're going to hell).

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by BRussell

He's not even doing that, he's talking about how Evangelical Christians define other Christians. Charismatics, evangelicals, and non-evangelicals? Haha. It's like one of those maps of the world with America, non-America, and "here be dragons." He's basically saying that there are evangelicals (real Christians), weirder evangelicals (charismatics), and liberals (who think they're going to heaven but they like gays so they're going to hell).

True, I was thinking more about him pointing out their names like "Catholic", "Methodist", "Lutheran", etc.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Um, doesn't this sound just a little hyopcritical to anyone else? There are plenty of hypocritical pseudo-Christians out there, but if you can't respect the beliefs of those you demand respect your beliefs then I fail to see how you are any better than they.

This argument is always used, and there is no counter to it.

I find it disingenuous. If I am homosexual, Christians tell me I'm going to hell, that I'm "flawed", I need "saved". A fundamentalist Christian tells his wife and daughters that they must wear skirts, can't cut their hair, and that makeup is forbidden. These things are judgmental and discriminatory, and there is NO reason I should have to "agree" nor respect these beliefs.

Everyone seems to hate Satanists. Why? Shouldn't we all respect their beliefs? Same with pedophiles?

[italiano]

I'm an Evangelical Christian and feel compelled to clear something up... WE BELIEVE Hell will be full of "Good People"... being a good person will not get you into heaven. It requires more than just being a Good Person. Also I know I'll probably be persecuted for this but as a Christian I'm used to it. Loads of folks feel the need to PERSECUTE a Christian and as a Christian I know why... It's God's old "Most Beautiful Angel" hard at work.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Scientist

My groupings aren't arbitrary and they aren't formed from a lack of understanding. Classification systems are tools for understanding. My system works better for the majority of my needs. If a friend is going to introduce me to her Christian father I will get a much better idea for how to deal with him if he is described as "preachy" or "intolerant" than if he is described as "Catholic" or "Methodist". The first two designations tell me a lot more about what I need to know to avoid offending him than the last two.

BTW, I know the other systems as well and I'm capable of using them when appropriate.

I would say this is a good point. Terms like Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Anglican are more descriptive of a specific set of doctrines, or orthodoxies if you will, than of everyday practice.

Whereas terms like "preachy" or "intolerant", while loaded with more contentious semantic meaning, provide a greater sense of how one uses/applies the doctrines of their particular faith. You can be preachy and Catholic, Methodist, Charismatic, Evangelical, etc. Or you cannot.

There is little debate about what the formal doctrines are for specific faiths within the family of Christian belief--every faith has a document outlining what are their doctrines--but there can be MUCH debate about how those doctrines and beliefs are put to use.

It seems to me the OP's points were confusing these distinctions while the follow-up discussion has been about more of the practical aspects of various Christian faiths, as opposed to the doctrinal aspects.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by italiano

I'm an Evangelical Christian and feel compelled to clear something up... WE BELIEVE Hell will be full of "Good People"... being a good person will not get you into heaven. It requires more than just being a Good Person.

Oh you can be sure that "non-evangelicals" are very well aware of your beliefs on those matters.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by PookJP

That's a pretty big section of the population you're calling stupid, and it includes our Commander In Chief. Remember, he actually does believe the earth was made 5,000 years ago.

I think you're downplaying the size of the fanatics, and I'd rather you address that and not the proper nomenclature needed to refer to them. Did you watch the link I posted? That organization is huge, and they are only one of many. I, personally, went to a sold-out speech from Kirk Cameron in which over 1,000 people were in attendance.

I have had a Roman Catholic Priest tell me he believes in god, evolution, and that the world is more than 5,000 years old.

Stop now before you look any more stupid.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by goMac

I have had a Roman Catholic Priest tell me he believes in god, evolution, and that the world is more than 5,000 years old.

Stop now before you look any more stupid.

How does that make him look stupid? That a priest is at least that much in touch with reality? The Catholic church has officially acknowledged biological evolution long ago (though that may be changing with this Pope). For that matter, all christian denominations I'm aware of accept it. It's the American public at large that are creationists, rather than the official doctrines of their religions.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by BRussell

How does that make him look stupid? That a priest is at least that much in touch with reality? The Catholic church has officially acknowledged biological evolution long ago (though that may be changing with this Pope). For that matter, all christian denominations I'm aware of accept it. It's the American public at large that are creationists, rather than the official doctrines of their religions.

So why is this there this odd need to attack Christians? Ok... so maybe PookJP had a boss who was a moron. That doesn't mean all Christians are like him.

People who go on these anti-Christian crusades for no reason look just as crazy as the fundamental Christians.

Really, go find something better to do than worry about the Christians.You want to complain about Christianities role in government? Fine. Other than that, it's just plan stupid to tell someone they are more stupid than you are because of religion.

Would I care if the president forced people to believe the Earth was created 5000 years ago? Yes. Do I care if the President believes the world was created 5000 years ago? Only if it affects his job.

I wasn't trying to make the priest look stupid at all. In fact I was saying he was intelligent. I'm telling Pook his perception of religion is wrong.

[OSX Abuser]

I dislike when when people insinuate that my Wife will burn in Hell because she is a Bhuddist.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by italiano

I'm an Evangelical Christian and feel compelled to clear something up... WE BELIEVE Hell will be full of "Good People"... being a good person will not get you into heaven. It requires more than just being a Good Person. Also I know I'll probably be persecuted for this but as a Christian I'm used to it. Loads of folks feel the need to PERSECUTE a Christian and as a Christian I know why... It's God's old "Most Beautiful Angel" hard at work.

Very well stated. I often forget this. Thanks.

[Railroader]

And on topic: People justify things to themselves all the time. Looks like you've done it too. It would definitely be hypoctrical.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by AKcrab

This argument is always used, and there is no counter to it.

You can't argue with a correct statement.

Originally Posted by AKcrab

I find it disingenuous. If I am homosexual, Christians tell me I'm going to hell, that I'm "flawed", I need "saved". A fundamentalist Christian tells his wife and daughters that they must wear skirts, can't cut their hair, and that makeup is forbidden. These things are judgmental and discriminatory, and there is NO reason I should have to "agree" nor respect these beliefs.

No they don't. Some do. But not all. I consider myself a fundamentalist Christian (FC) and I will not be telling you any of those things. I will tell you your actions are sins, but I don't know you are going to Hell unless you tell me you are not a christian. You are implying that all FC are men with your "wife and daughters" comment. Lastly, there is nothing in the bible about skirts, cutting hair, or makeup telling you that it is sinful. A FC is not saying these things... a controlling male chauvinist is saying these things. and he is sinning if he is saying the Bible says those things.

Originally Posted by AKcrab

Everyone seems to hate Satanists. Why? Shouldn't we all respect their beliefs? Same with pedophiles?

Christians never claimed to be tolerant or tell anyone else to be tolerant.

[Witness2005]

Earth ages

The Bible does not teach that the Earth is 6000 years old. The Bible referres to 4 different Earth ages. Three have already occured and one is to come. In the King James version, in Genesis chapter one it reads the Earth was without form and void and the spirit of the Lord moved upon the face of the waters. The Hebrew word for without form is Bohu, it means ruined. And void, in Hebrew is Tohruw, this means made empty due to a Cataclism. Genesis one in the original Hebrew reads ( The Earth was ruined and made empty). This indicates a cataclism that ended the first Earth age before the creation of man. Many Theologans speculate that there was another race of Intellegent life here before man, probably Angels, who rebelled later against God and were destroyed by a flood, ( the spirit of the Lord moved upon the face of the water's). The second Earth age existed from Adam and Eve until the second flood of Noah's time. The continets were divided during the time of Peleg ,several centuries after the flood. We are living in the third Earth age. The return of Jesus Christ will user in the fourth and final Earth age.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by OSX Abuser

I dislike when when people insinuate that my Wife will burn in Hell because she is a Bhuddist.

But that's what will very probably happen, all abrahamitic religions (and those are the ones that talk about an afterlife, judgment day, hell and paradise) have the qualifier, that in order to be even considered by God to reach paradise and avoid hell, you have to absolutely avoid taking other gods beside God and to believe in the one God, before death approaches you.

So, if your wife doesn't repent and change towards a monotheistic belief towards the creator of the universe, all life and hell/paradise, before death approaches her, then the chances are very slim to be saved.

Some christians even go as far and claim that only those that believe that Jesus is God can be saved, while I believe that these christians risk their salvation by believing the blasphemy that Jesus is God.

But regardless of all that even if you believe in the one God, your deeds will be examined by God, your good deeds and bad deeds will be weighed against each other, and if the good deeds outweigh the bad deeds then you have won eternal life in paradise. Luckily though even when we haved sinned, we have the possibility in this life to eradicate the bad deed/sin by repenting, asking for forgivance and doing something comparable good, since God is forgiving against those that repent and ask for forgivance and then reform and do good.

Some christians though believe that it's enough to just believe in Jesus, ie. faith alone achieves salvation.

I say all this because I don't want to see you be punished in hell, it doesn't matter what holy book you adher to, be it the Torah, the New Testament or the Quran, don't let yourself be distracted from God, the creator of everything, the nurturer, the comforter, the protector, the forgiver, the judge, the rewarder and punisher, and don't forget that we all will return to Him on judgment day after the ressurrection and see what we've done and believed.

What He calls us to do and believe is simple and difficult at the same time, to not set partners to God, to love Him, to pray to and worship only Him, to repent and ask for forgivance for sins and do good as replacement for the sin and to reform (ie., to try not to do the sin again) , and to love your next like yourself, to do charity for the needy ones, to not kill (except for murder, selfdefense or in war), to not steal, to not commit adultery (which means any sexual intercourse with anyone but your married partner), to obey to, respect and care for the parents...

Without guidance of God though it can be difficult, because without it faith doesn't enter your heart, but God is generous and offers guidance to everyone who actively seeks it, so when you pray to God, ask Him for guidance and He will probably grant it, though since you have freewill you can still reject the guidance.

Peace be upon you.

Taliesin

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Some christians even go as far and claim that only those that believe that Jesus is God can be saved

Not some, all. Anyone who doesn't believe that is not a Christian - it's kind of the whole point.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Not some, all. Anyone who doesn't believe that is not a Christian - it's kind of the whole point.

Tell that Jesus in the Bible, cause he himself clearly states multiple times all over the New Testament that he is not God, that he was sent by God, that he is the teacher, that he is the son of man, that he sits at the right hand of God, that he doesn't know the time the end of the world will come, but that God knows it, that God is greater than him...

Another thing to note is that the catholic church declared in an infallible declaration that anyone who believes in the one God, prays to Him and worships Him and commits good deeds is saved. But I guess you don't view the catholics to be christians anyway.

Taliesin

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Tell that Jesus in the Bible, cause he himself clearly states multiple times all over the New Testament that he is not God, that he was sent by God, that he is the teacher, that he is the son of man, that he sits at the right hand of God, that he doesn't know the time the end of the world will come, but that God knows it, that God is greater than him...

Incorrect. But this is not the thread for that.

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Another thing to note is that the catholic church declared in an infallible declaration that anyone who believes in the one God, prays to Him and worships Him and commits good deeds is saved.

So some bloke in the Catholic Church decided to make an infallible declaration on God's behalf?

Originally Posted by Taliesin

But I guess you don't view the catholics to be christians anyway.

Correct.

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Tell that Jesus in the Bible, cause he himself clearly states multiple times all over the New Testament that he is not God, that he was sent by God, that he is the teacher, that he is the son of man, that he sits at the right hand of God, that he doesn't know the time the end of the world will come, but that God knows it, that God is greater than him...

You really need to read the bible more before making those statements.

The Son of man is a title used in the old testiment for the Messiah or Christ.

Sitting at the right hand of God is equating himself as equal to God the father.

He clearly instructs that God as we know him is triune, God the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Jewish leaders at that time new he was was claiming Godhood and tried to kill him. In fact in Mark 14 at his trial the head priest ask Jesus "Are you the Christ the son of the Blesssed One" Jesus responded "I am"

So to refute your statements the Bible is repleat with evidence that Jesus himself claimed and proved that he was God, his disciples thought he was God, and his enemies tried and did kill him because he considered himself God. While he was killed he rose from the dead which also proclaimed would be true.

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Another thing to note is that the catholic church declared in an infallible declaration that anyone who believes in the one God, prays to Him and worships Him and commits good deeds is saved. But I guess you don't view the catholics to be christians anyway.

The Bible did not state the "Catholic" church is infallible but imperfect sinners did. belonging to a denomination does not guarantee a passage into heaven be it Catholic or baptist. Its your personal acceptence that Jesus is Lord and he paid the price for your sins. That being the case Hell will contain a lot of pew warmers claiming that they attended church did good deeds and were generally good people. We measure our goodness by comparing ouselves to each other "I'm not as bad as so in so" but God judges us against his perfect law. If we come up short,which we all do, then we deserve punishment (hell), if we accepted Jesus he paid the price for our sins and we can be in heaven.

Mike

[edited - expanded explanation]

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OSX Abuser

I dislike when when people insinuate that my Wife will burn in Hell because she is a Bhuddist.

If she's a bhuddist, why does this concern her? Is she hanging out in Christian churches or going to youth group with an "I'm a Bhuddist" t-shirt on? This is like the 3rd time I've seen this accusation. You'd think Christians go about saying things like; "oop, you're going to hell. and you, and you, and you, and you..." I'm not sure I know what Christians you're associating with, but perhaps they're not very adept at delivering the "good news". Besides, if you or she doesn't buy in, it means nothing right? If it does give either her or you pause, you should probably ask yourself why you feel convicted.

I've never understood why this would bother someone who doesn't believe. If someone came to me and said Zeus was very upset with me, it'd consume all of 3.5 seconds of thought, a quick laugh and move along... If I felt convicted or insulted, I'd have to ask myself if I really believe there's a chance Zeus exists. Ahhh, now we may be on to something.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Some christians even go as far and claim that only those that believe that Jesus is God can be saved, while I believe that these christians risk their salvation by believing the blasphemy that Jesus is God.

And this makes them accused of being an infidel and subject to the teachings and punishments of the Koran. Thankfully, since I don't buy into your moon god I'm not concerned about what you think. Unless it's enacted through cutting off one's head or attempting to convert through coersion, then it smells more like a Holy War. I wonder if Christian "infidels" and Muslim "unsaved" will be able to reconcile thier differences and peacefully coexist. It seems easy enough to bastardize one another's religions, but can we just agree to disagree without bringing up our false notions of others' faiths? No matter how true we may feel they are.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by AKcrab

This argument is always used, and there is no counter to it.

Yeah; the truth hurts, doesn't it?

If I am homosexual, Christians tell me I'm going to hell, that I'm "flawed", I need "saved".

They believe this of everyone else, so why not you also? What makes you special? There are some who decide to focus their attention on a single group of sinners, but even these if pressed will admit that there are many other such groupings, and that sooner or later we can all be placed into at least one of them. The entire point of divine grace is that all people sin from time to time; what matters is what you do about that.

A fundamentalist Christian tells his wife and daughters that they must wear skirts, can't cut their hair, and that makeup is forbidden.

Some do that, yes. Where they get it from, I don't claim to know, but it sure doesn't come from their God.

These things are judgmental and discriminatory, and there is NO reason I should have to "agree" nor respect these beliefs.

No one is telling you to agree with anyone else's beliefs, only to respect them. Do you understand the difference between agreement and respect?

Everyone seems to hate Satanists. Why? Shouldn't we all respect their beliefs?

Would you be talking about the LaVeyan Satanists, who take their philosophy very seriously? Or are you talking about the pseudo-anti-Christian kiddies who hold Black Masses and other crap to piss off their parents?

Same with pedophiles?

Pedophilia is not a belief; even most pedophiles would agree with this statement. Pedophilia -at least in the sense I think you're using it- is an action.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Doofy

So some bloke in the Catholic Church decided to make an infallible declaration on God's behalf?

Infallible according to said bloke, anyway. God doesn't seem to have said anything on the matter.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Maflynn

You really need to read the bible more before making those statements.

Off course I need, and you need to do it aswell, we should all read more our holy books.

Originally Posted by Maflynn

The Son of man is a title used in the old testiment for the Messiah or Christ.

And? I have never said that Jesus is not the messiah foretold in the old testament, Jesus was the christ, the anointed one, ie. the messiah, but that doesn't turn him into God! Son of man, means son of adam, as adam means "man(kind)", so son of man means to be similar to Adam, ie. created out of nothing by God and breathed into him the holy spirit as a strenghtening.

Originally Posted by Maflynn

Sitting at the right hand of God is equating himself as equal to God the father.

No, quite to the contrary, sitting at the right hand of God means to exactly not be God but to be near to Him.

Originally Posted by Maflynn

He clearly instructs that God as we know him is triune, God the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Jewish leaders at that time new he was was claiming Godhood and tried to kill him. In fact in Mark 14 at his trial the head priest ask Jesus "Are you the Christ the son of the Blesssed One" Jesus responded "I am"

No, he doesn't at all, what the leading jews upset was not that he claimed to be God, but that he was near to God, that he was the messiah, the king of the jews, and therefore threatening to their own power. Besides how can christ, the son of the blessed one mean being God? It even doesn't mean being son of God, much less being God! Son of the blessed one, means nothing other than being the son of the virgin Mary, the blessed one! Only God can bless one, so God can't be the blessed one. May God bless you!

Originally Posted by Maflynn

So to refute your statements the Bible is repleat with evidence that Jesus himself claimed and proved that he was God, his disciples thought he was God, and his enemies tried and did kill him because he considered himself God. While he was killed he rose from the dead which also proclaimed would be true.

Sure, some disciples might have gotten the impression that Jesus was God, and considering all the wonders he did with the allowance of God, that is no surprise at all, Jesus healed the lame, the blind and even raised dead people, everything with the will and allowance of God, and at the end he even arised from the dead, so some disciples have surely believed he was God, but Jesus himself said differently numerous times throughout the gospels. For God's sake, he even prayed to God sweatingly to pass the cup by.

Originally Posted by Maflynn

The Bible did not state the "Catholic" church is infallible but imperfect sinners did. belonging to a denomination does not guarantee a passage into heaven be it Catholic or baptist. Its your personal acceptence that Jesus is Lord and he paid the price for your sins. That being the case Hell will contain a lot of pew warmers claiming that they attended church did good deeds and were generally good people. We measure our goodness by comparing ouselves to each other "I'm not as bad as so in so" but God judges us against his perfect law. If we come up short,which we all do, then we deserve punishment (hell), if we accepted Jesus he paid the price for our sins and we can be in heaven.

Mike

[edited - expanded explanation]

While it might give one a warm feeling inside to know that Jesus died for your sins, it doesn't make any bit more right. It's an intrepretation that has led many protestants to believe that faith alone suffices without deeds, but another interpretation of the virginal birth of Jesus and his arising after his death would be: God demontrated with Jesus' virginal birth that the first creation by Him is real, ie. that indeed God created everything from scratch, the rising up of Jesus from death is a demonstration that ressurection after judgment day is real, and his rising up to God is the demonstration that everything that comes from God will return to God to receive reward or punishment. In the case of Jesus, it's off course reward.


Everyone carries his own burden and is responsible for his own sins, only repentance and asking for forgivance towards God and reform and doing good reduces the burden of the sins, if God wills.

Taliesin

[von Wrangell]

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

And? I have never said that Jesus is not the messiah foretold in the old testament, Jesus was the christ, the anointed one, ie. the messiah, but that doesn't turn him into God! Son of man, means son of adam, as adam means "man(kind)", so son of man means to be similar to Adam, ie. created out of nothing by God and breathed into him the holy spirit as a strenghtening.

No, he doesn't at all, what the leading jews upset was not that he claimed to be God, but that he was near to God, that he was the messiah, the king of the jews, and therefore threatening to their own power. Besides how can christ, the son of the blessed one mean being God? It even doesn't mean being son of God, much less being God! Son of the blessed one, means nothing other than being the son of the virgin Mary, the blessed one! Only God can bless one, so God can't be the blessed one. May God bless you!

Sure, some disciples might have gotten the impression that Jesus was God, and considering all the wonders he did with the allowance of God, that is no surprise at all, Jesus healed the lame, the blind and even raised dead people, everything with the will and allowance of God, and at the end he even arised from the dead, so some disciples have surely believed he was God, but Jesus himself said differently numerous times throughout the gospels. For God's sake, he even prayed to God sweatingly to pass the cup by.

Originally Posted by Matthew 16:13-20

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

End of that argument.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by OSX Abuser

I dislike when when people insinuate that my Wife will burn in Hell because she is a Bhuddist.

Well, in the theological world-view of certain Christian faiths your wife IS going to burn in Hell.

The question is, why do you care? Your wife is Buddhist. Her theological world-view doesn't acknowledge a Heaven or Hell and certainly not the Heaven or Hell certain Christian faith proclaim exist.

So, what's the problem? If your wife is concerned about going to a Christian Hell then she isn't a very good Buddhist--as they don't acknowledge a Heaven or Hell--nor is she a very good Christian--by straying from the one true path through practice of Buddhism.

What you and your wife need are confidence in the faiths you have chosen and a willingness to continue practicing in spite of what others might say about your practice. I mean, that's the whole point of faith, isn't it.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by Doofy

End of that argument.

In what way does it end it? Because he's clearly talking about two different persons (Jesus (pbuh) and God as separate entities)?


btw: Why is Jesus (pbuh) talking about the Greek mythological hell?

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Doofy

End of that argument.

Really? First of all you should comprehend what argument we have here. The argument was about if Jesus is God or not and if Jesus said such thing.
And you tried to prove that Jesus is God's son, albeit even that not really, as you should know that son of God can be equally translated as servant of God from the hebreic and greek versions of the Bible which are the closest to the original writings as the arachmaeic versions are lost or never written down.

Son of the living god, doesn't mean Jesus=God, and not even son in the sense that we today understand son, as it can be equally translated as servant of the living God.

Unfortunately translations are always interpretations, too, as concepts that were clear in one language-system can change into another in another language. Son of God meant at that time and language not much more than servant of God, ie. one who lives and walks God's way, the old testament is full of sons of God.

But that is all beside the point of the current argument, if Jesus is God. And for that idea there is only a small basis in some passages of John's gospel, eventhough other passages of the same gospel say something differently.

Taliesin

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy

End of that argument.

No, it's not Doofy. He's blinded by his moon god into believing that Muhammed was as important as Jesus, just another prophet. Muhammed attempted to unite various warring factions of Arab tribes by bringing all of their multi-gods into one moon god and monotheism. It proved Muhammed was an intelligent man as he was even able to change his god as he saw fit to suit his own selfish sexual desires. I mean, we can go on and on in interpreting one another's religions as we see fit, but it doesn't make us right. At the end of the day, Taiesin will believe what Taliesin wants, and we will believe what we want. We can choose to espouse it, but that's when civil discourse comes to it's logical conclusion... it's end. If he insists on continuing this thread's derailment, I will continue to reply. Jesus is God and may God have mercy on Taliesin.

It's one of those things that if you have to continue explaining it, it won't make sense to that person anyway.

[dcmacdaddy]

<ranting mode>
Why does anyone here care what others think about their religious belief or practices?
If you are confident in the path you have chosen to pursue for your religious beliefs then
what everyone else says shouldn't matter, right?

What I see happening here is a whole lot of people trying to convince others that
they are right, that their particular interpretation of said religion is "correct". Again I
ask, why does it matter? You have your faith, practice it and be confident in it and
leave others to practice their "incorrect" faiths.
</ranting mode>

This is why I am glad I am an atheist. While my world-view acknowledges and accepts
the existence of various religious faiths I don't believe in any of them.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

In what way does it end it?

The argument was that Jesus never said he was the Son of God, only the "son of man". The quoted passage clearly has Jesus stating that he is the Son of God.

Now, this could of course be twisted to something like "but we're all the sons of God because we're human"... ...however, if that was the case then Jesus wouldn't have stated that this information was revealed to Peter by God. It's not used in the "human" sense, as if it were it wouldn't have needed God to reveal it (I can pretty much tell when a human is standing in front of me without God having to reveal any information to me).

Therefore, Jesus was certainly the Son of God, different from other humans.

We won't go into the exact method of Jesus actually being God, as the physical/metaphysical nature of the Trinity is truly mind-bending stuff (end up like the guy from the film "Pi" kind of mind-bending).

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

No, it's not Doofy. He's blinded by his moon god into believing that Muhammed was as important as Jesus, just another prophet. Muhammed attempted to unite various warring factions of Arab tribes by bringing all of their multi-gods into one moon god and monotheism. It proved Muhammed was an intelligent man as he was even able to change his god as he saw fit to suit his own selfish sexual desires. I mean, we can go on and on in interpreting one another's religions as we see fit, but it doesn't make us right. At the end of the day, Taiesin will believe what Taliesin wants, and we will believe what we want. We can choose to espouse it, but that's when civil discourse comes to it's logical conclusion... it's end. If he insists on continuing this thread's derailment, I will continue to reply. Jesus is God and may God have mercy on Taliesin.

It's one of those things that if you have to continue explaining it, it won't make sense to that person anyway.

Nice try, ebuddy, but you are in the wrong century, maybe you should return to the dark ages, where prophet Muhammad, the Quran and the islamic religion was defamed as the product of the devil by the same catholic church you seem nowadays to despise.

May God have mercy on you and guide you to the right path so that you will see that Jesus is God's servant and free your mind from the blasphemies you utter against Jesus and God.

Taliesin

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

In what way does it end it? Because he's clearly talking about two different persons (Jesus (pbuh) and God as separate entities)?


btw: Why is Jesus (pbuh) talking about the Greek mythological hell?

Look everyone, a winky face from the one who has no idea about the Greek Septuagint.
Why do you insist on discussing something for which you have absolutely no clue???



I can respect Taliesin at least for sticking to his guns regardless of whether or not I agree with him. His fanclub on the other hand...

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Why does anyone here care what others think about their religious belief or practices?

Who says we do?
Could it be that we're simply having a discussion to pass some downtime at work?