[RooneyX]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
I don't call you stupid for what you believe. Though I don't agree with your thoughts, you have every right to them and more power to you. However, you have a beef with the institution. Christ didn't teach about the "institution", he taught about love and forgiveness.

Myth.

A messiah is supposed to be a theocratic leader. Remember, it means 'annointed' king? You trust politicians when they kiss babies too?

All you have regarding love and forgiveness is hearsay, Greek writers well versed with Greco-Buddhism (both of which were loving and forgiving) and then contradictory stories about Jesus, one moment he's angry and arming his followers and then next he's getting all cozy.

Look, I can teach you about peace and love, will you worship me? No? Why not? I can't walk on water, raise the dead, wear a skirt or want be an annointed theocrat? I wouldn't want to lower myself to such levels.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by MorningStar:
I don't know about Christ, but I say ROCK ON!!

Here is some lyrics to one of my fav all times bands that worshipped me.

If I existed I mean.

Black Sabbath

-SNIP-

That song reads very nicely, not bad poetry. Wow, Ozzy and I agree on more than I would have thought.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by RooneyX:

Look, I can teach you about peace and love, will you worship me?

Well, so far you're not showing it.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Well, so far you're not showing it.

Ah, are you sure? You're just reading a lot of blah blah text from myself, yourself and others. What about in person? I personally think I am a better rounded 'person' than the guy I read about in the Bible.

He was a theocrat. Remember that. Politicians stop kissing babies once elected.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Ah, are you sure? You're just reading a lot of blah blah text from myself, yourself and others. What about in person? I personally think I am a better rounded 'person' than the guy I read about in the Bible.

He was a theocrat. Remember that. Politicians stop kissing babies once elected.

I think a lot can be said about a person by the way they act online, it represents a distinct part of them. No, you don't show "love" or "peace" in here, and I don't have anything else to go by... `spose I should take what you're saying "on faith" despite your attitudes?

He didn't say he was the Messiah, others did. He also said he wasn't setting up an earthly kingdom, others did, despite his words.

"The kingdom of God is not built with morter and stone, but in the hearts of all who believe." - Gospel of Philip

Gotta hit the hay, early day tomorrow. Will continue in the morning.

[iWrite]

MacNStein:

I wasn't making fun of you, I thought that you'd spelled crucifixion that way on purpose -- it was amusing.

You sure are ready to flame me, though, aren't you?

As far as it being a "cultural thing" (the spelling), like "realization" or "realisation," maybe you can find a British dictionary that spells it as such.

For now the only spelling that I can find is "crucifixion" as the only spelling.

[MorningStar]

I was happy when they nailled the jew to the cross.

I was all like "Finally, someone is shutting him up"

Then a few days later he came down and beat my ass.

Took some keys away from me too.

I swear I wasn't drunk.

The bastard!

[sanity assassin]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
The very bases of Christianity is about a man dying on the cross for your sins.

I don't think so, true for Pauline Christianity, but certainly not true in the broader sense of those who took upon themselves the teachings of Christ, and I don't just mean that which is contained in the 4 canonical Gospels.
There were quite a few Gnostic, and other sects that had quite different views on what Jesus' life, and teachings were.

As someone else said, " The Gospels are just the DVD version of Christianity".

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by iWrite:
MacNStein:

I wasn't making fun of you, I thought that you'd spelled crucifixion that way on purpose -- it was amusing.

You sure are ready to flame me, though, aren't you?

As far as it being a "cultural thing" (the spelling), like "realization" or "realisation," maybe you can find a British dictionary that spells it as such.

For now the only spelling that I can find is "crucifixion" as the only spelling.

Yep, only a mild flaming though. Advice: don't run into threads like Chicken Little proclaiming that "the sky is falling" and berating people because of their opinions... especially without any form of evidence or explanation. It doesn't help your position. I will apologize though, no excuses, I was a bit heavy-handed with my comments.

FWIW, Webster's abridged dictionary leaves out many (most) alternative spellings for words.

As someone else said, " The Gospels are just the DVD version of Christianity".

They just aren't aware of the "Director's Cut".

The Coptic and Ethopian Orthodox jurisdictions never ratified the "ecumenical" view regarding the Gospels. Further, the Copts have included the Gnostic Gospels of Thomas and Philip for quite some time. It's funny how people view that the Bible HAS ALWAYS been according to the KJV content.

[sanity assassin]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MacNStein:

They just aren't aware of the "Director's Cut".

lol, that's true.

The Coptic and Ethopian Orthodox jurisdictions never ratified the "ecumenical" view regarding the Gospels. Further, the Copts have included the Gnostic Gospels of Thomas and Philip for quite some time. It's funny how people view that the Bible HAS ALWAYS been according to the KJV content.

It makes one wonder what all those other Gospels that early writers, and Christians referred to, the ones that were purged, discredited, and dismissed contained.

[willed]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Myth.

A messiah is supposed to be a theocratic leader. Remember, it means 'annointed' king? You trust politicians when they kiss babies too?

All you have regarding love and forgiveness is hearsay, Greek writers well versed with Greco-Buddhism (both of which were loving and forgiving) and then contradictory stories about Jesus, one moment he's angry and arming his followers and then next he's getting all cozy.

Look, I can teach you about peace and love, will you worship me? No? Why not? I can't walk on water, raise the dead, wear a skirt or want be an annointed theocrat? I wouldn't want to lower myself to such levels.

Forgive him, Lord, for he knows not what the f*ck he is talking about.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by sanity assassin:

It makes one wonder what all those other Gospels that early writers, and Christians referred to, the ones that were purged, discredited, and dismissed contained.

Many are still around. Many books which contain a good portion of the Nag Hammadi library, and several sites ( www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html ), not to mention the Gospels of Peter, Philip, Andrew, and of course Thomas. There are some more difficult to acquire works, though the Rosicrucians have had copies of them for many centuries; ie, the Egyptian Infancy Gospels, 1st and 2nd Manchurian Gospels, Persian Gospel of Bartholamew, Indian Gospel of Issa (a personal fav), and the OPM Gospel of Light (not to be confused with the Children of Light versus the Children of Darkness). Then there's the letters from Pilate, very interesting stuff there.

There's a wealth of non-Helenistic Christian/Gnostic information. Though dogma and traditon usually exclude them.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by willed:
Forgive him, Lord, for he knows not what the f*ck he is talking about.

Ah, the dismissal, insult and reference to the divine all rolled in one!

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by sanity assassin:
I don't think so, true for Pauline Christianity, but certainly not true in the broader sense of those who took upon themselves the teachings of Christ, and I don't just mean that which is contained in the 4 canonical Gospels.
There were quite a few Gnostic, and other sects that had quite different views on what Jesus' life, and teachings were.

As someone else said, " The Gospels are just the DVD version of Christianity".

Ok let me rephrase that, MOST Christians believe he died on the cross for our sins.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by MorningStar:
I was happy when they nailled the jew to the cross.

I was all like "Finally, someone is shutting him up"

Then a few days later he came down and beat my ass.

Took some keys away from me too.

I swear I wasn't drunk.

The bastard!

While distasteful, that was highly amusing there Lucifer

From what I read, you'll get another visit from him.

[Superchicken]

MacNStein you know I respect the amount of stuff you know despite disagreement with you. But Paul didn't Give authority to clergy in the setup of the RC Church, don't gimmie that junk because both of us know what Paul wrote in regard to people working in the church, it He never gave the basis for the early Church.

And your objections with the church of the past do not make sense today since those are things of the past, beliefs held to honour God aren't killing Gnostics. Did the early church fathers and what not hunt down and kill tons of Gnostics? I don't know that I haven't studied the info you have. However Moody and Spurgeon, etc haven't done that, and I would be incredibly surprised if you'd find Paul having drawn a sword against anyone.

You need to look at things in regard to what Paul taught, not to what people used his teaching to do. Do you have major doctrinal problems with a modern day Baptist church? Then argue on those the people of the past aren't here to defend their actions.

[Superchicken]

By the way rooney, I had a friend in high school who used to spout off the same bigoted stuff you're saying now... he started reading paradise lost and some dante etc. And he had all his questions about God answered, perhaps you should actually look for your questions to be answered and until them humbly realizing that you're not the prophet of anarchy, stop trying to force your beliefs on everyone else

[awcopus]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
By the way rooney, I had a friend in high school who used to spout off the same bigoted stuff you're saying now... he started reading paradise lost and some dante etc. And he had all his questions about God answered, perhaps you should actually look for your questions to be answered and until them humbly realizing that you're not the prophet of anarchy, stop trying to force your beliefs on everyone else

Not interested in getting involved in your debate over all this mumbo jumbo stuff, but rooney isn't "forcing" his beliefs on anyone. He may be expressing stuff you don't agree with, but that's it. So, take a step back and respect that we live in a country where personal expression of ideas is never coercive.

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by awcopus:
Not interested in getting involved in your debate over all this mumbo jumbo stuff, but rooney isn't "forcing" his beliefs on anyone. He may be expressing stuff you don't agree with, but that's it. So, take a step back and respect that we live in a country where personal expression of ideas is never coercive.

We don't live in the same country.

And he is forcing his beliefs by the general understanding of the term "forcing beliefs" is he doing the standard Islamic line of "we've taken over your country now be Islamic or be imprisoned?" No. But is he saying this is the way it is not believe it cause this is my quest, yes.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
By the way rooney, I had a friend in high school who used to spout off the same bigoted stuff you're saying now... he started reading paradise lost and some dante etc. And he had all his questions about God answered, perhaps you should actually look for your questions to be answered and until them humbly realizing that you're not the prophet of anarchy, stop trying to force your beliefs on everyone else

I majored in archaeology and mythology. I know I don't bother having rational debate, because it's really a waste of time with some people. Wasted energy. So I just have my fun. Might be bigoted to some but actually it's just humanist piss taking.

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
I majored in archaeology and mythology. I know I don't bother having rational debate, because it's really a waste of time with some people. Wasted energy. So I just have my fun. Might be bigoted to some but actually it's just humanist piss taking.

Question do you see yourself as being able to learn a lot more or a little more?

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Question do you see yourself as being able to learn a lot more or a little more?

Certainly. But I got bored with monotheism a long time ago. It was so easy to trace how those beliefs came into being. It's just stories to serve theocracies and we live in a different world now. So time to grow up and forget about silly things like religion, race and nation - the three evils. Even pollution is a safer manmade product.

[Superchicken]

So question then, since you reject the standard moral absolute standards, how do you judge right and wrong?

[Pedro the Migo]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
So question then, since you reject the standard moral absolute standards, how do you judge right and wrong?

Every person has this wonderful little thing called a conscience. It lets us feel whether the things we have done are right or wrong.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
So question then, since you reject the standard moral absolute standards, how do you judge right and wrong?

Logic? That which causes suffering is wrong and that which creates prosperity and harmony is right. Isn't that good enough?

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Pedro the Migo:
Every person has this wonderful little thing called a conscience. It lets us feel whether the things we have done are right or wrong.

No. Some people don't use conscience. They need a book or religious figure that does the thinking for them.

It's those people who need a slap. On the bottom.

[willed]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Ah, the dismissal, insult and reference to the divine all rolled in one!

No offence meant mate, glad you took it well. I just disagree with you, that's all.

[theolein]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
It was Ponchos Pilot who let him die.

Damn right, the man shouldn't have used a pilot in the first place, and especially not a used mexican one. Everyone knows that they're just pocket pcs with fake gold plating.

(Mad props to Madra for having spotted this piece of chilli first)

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Certainly. But I got bored with monotheism a long time ago. It was so easy to trace how those beliefs came into being. It's just stories to serve theocracies and we live in a different world now. So time to grow up and forget about silly things like religion, race and nation - the three evils. Even pollution is a safer manmade product.

You say such things as if it were a fact.

You have a lot of faith. I commend you for your faith.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Pedro the Migo:
Every person has this wonderful little thing called a conscience. It lets us feel whether the things we have done are right or wrong.

Right, but why do we have such a thing?

Were does "right and wrong" come from?

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Were does "right and wrong" come from?

Taiwan. Just like everything else.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Taiwan. Just like everything else.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Right, but why do we have such a thing?

Were does "right and wrong" come from?

Shuddup, Gigli. Now open your Bible and 'gobble gobble'.

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Shuddup, Gigli. Now open your Bible and 'gobble gobble'.

Man doesn't live on bread alone after all.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Superchic[k]en:
Man doesn't live on bread alone after all.

Ah I would have tried for a better "comeback" but I don't think I could have topped this one.

[Pedro the Migo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Right, but why do we have such a thing?

Were does "right and wrong" come from?

An innate understanding of the fact that certain behavioral restrains are necessary to maintain a stable society arising from a herd instinct?

[sanity assassin]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Many are still around. Many books which contain a good portion of the Nag Hammadi library, and several sites ( www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html ), not to mention the Gospels of Peter, Philip, Andrew, and of course Thomas. There are some more difficult to acquire works, though the Rosicrucians have had copies of them for many centuries; ie, the Egyptian Infancy Gospels, 1st and 2nd Manchurian Gospels, Persian Gospel of Bartholamew, Indian Gospel of Issa (a personal fav), and the OPM Gospel of Light (not to be confused with the Children of Light versus the Children of Darkness). Then there's the letters from Pilate, very interesting stuff there.

There's a wealth of non-Helenistic Christian/Gnostic information. Though dogma and traditon usually exclude them.

That was a nice read there, thank you for the information and link.

[desi]

tis funny how this thread was about a man being struck by lightning...but now...


well, I think it should be brought up that not all Christians believe the same thing about Jesus. some believe after the resurrection, he traveled to India, where he lived until he died of old age, this is how Christianity arrived in India, or there is the story of how he went to China and started Christianity there. but regardless of these differing accounts, does it change the value of their faith that those Christians in those regions believe in those versions of Christ? Some of you bicker over semantics, and in the end become pedantic, arguing about some dated rule others have already modified. It's quite like the fact that some Muslims think others aren't true Muslims because they can't read the Koran in Arabic, or that they pray the wrong way. I suppose it's insulting to all avenues of Christianity that there are those who feel that their way of worship is better than others, which implicitly demeans these perfectly valid off-shoots/variations of Christianity. It must be remembered that there is more to the world than the West.

Secondly, if there were no religion, would you believe that man wouldn�t know what�s right or wrong? plenty of people who are religious commit sins and crimes willingly and knowingly, then there are others who are not religious, but they are stand up citizens. Religion doesn�t tell humans what is right or wrong, though there are those who like to believe that. Religion can be a good thing, but as far as history has shown us, not in the hands of man.

I think it is rather insulting to compare the credibility of the events of the Bible and 9/11, not that the events of the Bible are false or true, but 9/11 happened so recently, particularly when compared to the events of the Bible. I've personally been to Ground Zero, and to make such a hypothetical argument is outrageous and indecent. The Bible, whether true or not true is open to interpretation, people can read it differently because we are subjective and sentient and not robots. it doesn't matter if anyone says otherwise, because people will always view it differently than others.

personally, I don�t know why people trust the words of someone they have never met, who lived what seemed like eons ago, whose character is only known throughout their own writings. men who make themselves out to be virtuous are always the ones who are the most despicable. I am willing to trust a man who is willing to say that he is indecent and that he is no good, because then, I at least am getting some honesty.

and please, snide comments are not welcomed, nor will they reflect the good character you no doubt are obviously trying to expose.

and remember, I am treating everyone here with respect, without knowing any of you, and at the very least you can do the same, with each other too. it would be extremely indecent to do otherwise. some say respect must be earned, but with me, you already have mine, it�s just yours to lose.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Pedro the Migo:
An innate understanding of the fact that certain behavioral restrains are necessary to maintain a stable society arising from a herd instinct?

Yes that is the def of being born with the ability to discern right from wrong.

But the conscience is a bit more than that also.

There is a reason we have such discernment and it has nothing to do with "stable society"

As we have seen, man can ignore it and turn society into something unstable.

Because there is a choice. It would be different if we had no choice to maintain that stable society. But obviously we do.

Originally posted by Pedro the Migo:
Been there, done that, involved picking a lock.

I was rather proud of myself for that last bit.

[Pedro the Migo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes that is the def of being born with the ability to discern right from wrong.

But the conscience is a bit more than that also.

There is a reason we have such discernment and it has nothing to do with "stable society"

As we have seen, man can ignore it and turn society into something unstable.

Because there is a choice. It would be different if we had no choice to maintain that stable society. But obviously we do.

Your conscience does more than tell you what is right and wrong? I'm pretty sure that's all mine does. Yes, ignoring your conscience would allow you to commit acts that destabilize society, that's exactly what it means to say that a conscience helps guide you into commiting acts that keep society stable. What you're saying isn't contradictory to what I said, but complementary. You conscience does not control you, it is, as I proposed before, an instinctual thing. As humans, we are no longer controlled by our instincts, only influenced by them.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Pedro the Migo:
Your conscience does more than tell you what is right and wrong? I'm pretty sure that's all mine does. Yes, ignoring your conscience would allow you to commit acts that destabilize society, that's exactly what it means to say that a conscience helps guide you into commiting acts that keep society stable. What you're saying isn't contradictory to what I said, but complementary. You conscience does not control you, it is, as I proposed before, an instinctual thing. As humans, we are no longer controlled by our instincts, only influenced by them.

If you think my post was complementary you didn't understand what I was saying.

For it to be something that was NEEDED to maintain a STABLE society, we wouldn't have a choice. It would just be.

Our choice lets us screw up society. And it has on many occasions.

Why do WE have a conscience? Wouldn't us having no conscience and just acting on solid "do good for the species only " mentality be a bit more productive in the evolutionary ladder?

Of course.

Man having a choice, also gives him the ability to ruin this place we live on. It has nothing to do with survival.

This is what is known as free will.

[catsank]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Certainly. But I got bored with monotheism a long time ago. It was so easy to trace how those beliefs came into being. It's just stories to serve theocracies and we live in a different world now. So time to grow up and forget about silly things like religion, race and nation - the three evils. Even pollution is a safer manmade product.

Sane men are as rare as rubies.
But when you find one, it really
illuminates why they are mans
most precious gift.

[christ]

Originally posted by catsank:
Sane men are as rare as rubies. But when you find one, it really illuminates why they are mans most precious gift.

Explain.

How is a 'sane man' a gift from (or of) a man? Which man is doing the giving? Or did you mean 'makind', in which case I still fail the comprehension test - How does one anthropomorphise 'mankind' to the extent that it can 'give', and if you did, to whom would it be giving?

And, perhaps as importantly, who judges him sane? Sanity, like beauty, appears to be in the eye of the beholder.

This riddle talk is pretentious navel-gazing tosh.

[catsank]

Originally posted by christ:
Explain.

How is a 'sane man' a gift from (or of) a man? Which man is doing the giving? Or did you mean 'makind', in which case I still fail the comprehension test - How does one anthropomorphise 'mankind' to the extent that it can 'give', and if you did, to whom would it be giving?

And, perhaps as importantly, who judges him sane? Sanity, like beauty, appears to be in the eye of the beholder.

This riddle talk is pretentious navel-gazing tosh.

So says a man who has
covered himself in dogma.

[christ]

Originally posted by catsank:
So says a man who has covered himself in dogma.

I'm sorry, you must have misunderstood: I posted some questions:

"Explain.

How is a 'sane man' a gift from (or of) a man? Which man is doing the giving? Or did you mean 'makind', in which case I still fail the comprehension test - How does one anthropomorphise 'mankind' to the extent that it can 'give', and if you did, to whom would it be giving?

And, perhaps as importantly, who judges him sane? Sanity, like beauty, appears to be in the eye of the beholder."

It is a tradition to present answers to questions, not haikus. Grasshopper.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by christ:

It is a tradition to present answers to questions, not haikus. Grasshopper.

Do you get permission to use the name 'christ' or is this an act of blasphemy?

[christ]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Do you get permission to use the name 'christ' or is this an act of blasphemy?

Read the sig. It is a juxtaposition of my first name with the first letter of my surname. And if it were blasphemy wouldn't you be at the front of the queue to tell me that blasphemy is not possible? So why the question?

And from whom should I ask permission?

[catsank]

Originally posted by christ:
I'm sorry, you must have misunderstood: I posted some questions:

"Explain.

How is a 'sane man' a gift from (or of) a man? Which man is doing the giving? Or did you mean 'makind', in which case I still fail the comprehension test - How does one anthropomorphise 'mankind' to the extent that it can 'give', and if you did, to whom would it be giving?

And, perhaps as importantly, who judges him sane? Sanity, like beauty, appears to be in the eye of the beholder."

It is a tradition to present answers to questions, not haikus. Grasshopper.

Men are a dime a dozen,
To see freethinkers who
don't need to use dogma
are as rare as the rarest
treasure.
They show it is possible to
stand up as a man and not
grope around in the dark
with only feeble and fallible
archaic stories as a guide.
As such they are a gift.




Sounds like another 'Religious
tourist' is just a little bit jealous.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by catsank:
Men are a dime a dozen, to see freethinkers who don't need to use dogma are as rare as the rarest treasure.

So if you get a contraption that comes to you in pieces, and you want to put it together, you don't read the instructions? I mean being a "free thinker" you should just IMAGINE how to put it together right?

As if believing in a doctrine makes you any less of a free thinker. This is what I talk about when I say your posts verge on pretension.

They show it is possible to stand up as a man and not grope around in the dark with only feeble and fallible archaic stories as a guide.
As such they are a gift.

And again you are showing that your 'free thinking" mind doesn't really know much about religion or those who believe if you think this is the case. You condescending banter sounds more like insecurity.

Sounds like another 'Religious tourist' is just a little bit jealous.

There is nothing to be jealous of.

I am not better than you because I believe.

I am however better off than you.

[MorningStar]

I came up with that whole "free thinking" bit a long time ago.

I wanted non-beleivers to feel they were on a higher ground in a secular way.

It made them feel important.

What they don't realize is, they weren't thinking free, but being fooled by me.

Muahahhaha!

If I existed that is, but I don't.

That's the ticket.

Boy a lot of them got pissy when they died and saw me.

They are the most fun to bring down here.

The surprise on their faces is worth the time I came up with the "Free thinking" bit.