# Real Christian reacts to "Christian" attacks on gays and their defenders



## Explorer (Jan 9, 2011)

It's been mentioned more than once that if you belong to a group, and you don't actively distance yourself from members who are behaving badly, or if you instead defend those member, you are agreeing with them. 

Recently, the Southern Poverty Law Center published a list of hate groups which included certain organizations which are anti-gay. It wasn't enough to be anti-gay, of course; what got organizations listed was that said organizations were telling lies in order to promote their agenda. Among the groups listed was the Family Research Council.

Many conservative Congress members, as well as others, signed onto a statement published in newspapers, seeking to "stop the hate" against "religious" groups. Among the things they were defending?

The FRC, in a booklet entitled Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys, claimed that "one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the 'prophets' of a new sexual order."

Personally, I believe that "conservatives" who have this kind of knee-jerk reaction are the reason true conservatives have a hard time communicating... but I also think that true conservatives don't try hard enough, and aren't aggressive enough in defending equal rights and the Constitution against Talibangelicals and others.

Anyway, here is an example of someone who is doing the right thing.

Ten Myths about the GLBT community - a Christian perspective

Using lies to promote an agenda, and justifying those lies by claiming that it's just a "religious" point of view, damages the reputation of that religion. It's nice to see someone rational and loving coming out for Big Daddy, Junior and the Spook.


----------



## severussnape (Jan 9, 2011)

*sigh*

It's really too bad Christians aren't leading the equal rights charge here. As a Christian myself I've tried to make it a point to make the case for equal rights whenever friends bring it up. In this religious/political environment though, its a bit of an up hill battle.


----------



## Explorer (Jan 9, 2011)

I've found that it's helpful to realize that it isn't necessarily about convincing bigots, but instead about convincing others that a particular religious or political group isn't just made of bigots. 

However, it sometimes is worth directly challenging those who disagree with, say, Jesus and his admonition to really love one's neighbor as oneself. Do they not believe that Jesus said that? Or do they believe he was lying? Christian martyrs were willing to die rather than abandon Christian principles, and to abandon them just to attack someone is not Christian. Stating these points clearly generally stops someone from being able to claim ignorance at treating Scripture as BS.

And, of course, it prevent others from thinking that Jesus was the kind of narrow-minded, unloving person best exemplified by those who claim to follow, but are doing anything but.


----------



## Loomer (Jan 10, 2011)

Oh man, that is one HELL of a column. It is just dripping with fury, I love it. It is so good to see someone getting the basic Christian message of "Being A Good, Just Person" absolutely right. God bless that guy with a cherry on top.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Jan 10, 2011)

Thank you for the link. If only that was the official position of the Vatican...


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 10, 2011)

Loomer said:


> Oh man, that is one HELL of a column. It is just dripping with fury, I love it. It is so good to see someone getting the basic Christian message of "Being A Good, Just Person" absolutely right. God bless that guy with a cherry on top.



Well it's not even that... What is called for as a Christian is to

1) Acknowledge that you yourself are sinful and only through Jesus are you saved... and that no amount of good deeds will get you to heaven, just as no amount of sin will exclude you 

All sin is equal - Jesus makes that pretty clear. e.g. Anger is the same as Murder, Lust is the same as Adultery

So homosexual sex is no worse than a completely straight man or woman looking at a member of the opposite sex and undressing them with their mind... no difference....


So these right wing religious NUTJOBS completely fail on acknowledging this and are so sure of their own righteousness...

Right wing religious nutjobs sure of their own righteousness... that sounds familiar... Oh YEAH... the PHARISEES AND SADUCEES! People caught up in the practices of religion and their own perceived brilliance at following the law to the letter... You know... the guys who Jesus absolutely drilled into the dirt with whitty retorts... heck it wasn't just Jesus who realised they were complete fucktards... John Chapter 9, story of the Blind Man who is made to see again... read the story and the guy is like "Are you for REAL?"

Jesus hung out with prostitutes... he entertained Tax Collectors (who were basically state sanctioned thieves and swindlers)... he engaged with disabled people and those with serious afflictions (something most people don't do today) and he pissed off EVERY "religious" person in sight.

2) Jesus gives a few extra commandments... Yep like the 10 commandments.
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another as I have loved you" - Which these religious douchebags flying the flag of Christianity fail at miserably

Also the Great Commission... to go and make disciples. Now I don't know what the leaders of these crazy churches were taught as kids.... but screaming at someone about how much God HATES them and how they're going to hell is not going to make them feel like engaging with you... let alone wanting to have anything to do with a philosophy or religion you proscribe to...



GARRRR...


*tl;dr version*

Jesus would've pimp slapped these nutters then gone and spent 4 hours having a beer with a group of gays, poor people, teenage mums...

Because that's the kind of Lord and Saviour he was/is... not a gay hating fucktard.


----------



## SirMyghin (Jan 10, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> Well it's not even that... What is called for as a Christian is to
> 
> 1) Acknowledge that you yourself are sinful and only through Jesus are you saved... and that no amount of good deeds will get you to heaven, just as no amount of sin will exclude you
> 
> ...



Want to make some babies with me? 

That is it right there, thanks for posting so I can be lazy and just agree. The all sin being equal is a very important thing, regicide is on par with lying, the fact of the matter is you are human, you sin and only by divine grace could you possibly stand a chance at a peaceful afterlife.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jan 10, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> Well it's not even that... What is called for as a Christian is to
> 
> 1) Acknowledge that you yourself are sinful and only through Jesus are you saved... and that no amount of good deeds will get you to heaven, just as no amount of sin will exclude you
> 
> ...





Finally. Someone on here that *gets* it. I've been saying this for years now. 
Jesus would hang out in places that nobody else would go, spend time with people considered to be the "worst" of mankind and treated people with love and kindness. 

The bible explains the he is the template that we should strive to be. I see nothing wrong with the way he lived his life. Word has it that he's a hell of a caterer too. The man managed to feed 5,000 people with a loaf of bread and two fish.


----------



## WickedSymphony (Jan 10, 2011)

ghstofperdition said:


> The man managed to feed 5,000 people with a loaf of bread and two fish.



Hey now, I could feed 5,000 people with a loaf of bread and two fish, too! Whether they're still hungry or not afterwards is something else though.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 10, 2011)

We did a year long series at my Church called

"Jesus: The progressive Saviour - come meet the ultimate revolutionary"

Basically the most commonly used phrase by the Lead Pastor was "Jesus pissed off religious people"

Loved it


----------



## WickedSymphony (Jan 10, 2011)

Haha, I've never heard that phrase before. That's pretty good.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jan 11, 2011)

WickedSymphony said:


> Hey now, I could feed 5,000 people with a loaf of bread and two fish, too! Whether they're still hungry or not afterwards is something else though.



Well rumor has it that when Jesus fed them, they ate to their heart's content and there was 12 baskets of food left over. I'd say that man is a helluva chef. 

A thing I've been pondering:
"Could Jesus microwave a burrito SO hot, that not even God could eat it?"


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 11, 2011)

Sang-Drax said:


> Thank you for the link. If only that was the official position of the Vatican...



Christian =/= Catholic


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 11, 2011)

Customisbetter said:


> Christian =/= Catholic



I think what you mean is

Catholic =/= Christian

but

Christian can = Catholic.

There are Catholics who are Christians... who acknowledge their sin and the need for Jesus and repent...

And there are Catholics who are not Christians who seem to think that even though Jesus said "no one comes to the father except through me" that saying Hail Mary's is going to atone for their sins


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 11, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> I think what you mean is
> 
> Catholic =/= Christian
> 
> ...



All Catholics are Christians. Not all Christians are Catholic.


----------



## Explorer (Jan 11, 2011)

Customisbetter said:


> All Catholics are Christians. Not all Christians are Catholic.
> 
> (Deleted - a bunch of the same judgmental crap decried in the first post, indicating the same mindset which is ultimately deeply and ironically un-Christian. What sad irony....)



More to the point, not all who claim to be Christian are Christian. Did you even read the first post?

Don't be a jackass. If you really didn't read the first post, or (worse yet) have no idea how attacking and excluding others = attacking and excluding others, you're part of the problem.

Or, if you really think what Jesus said about loving one's neighbor as oneself is just bullshit, then who are you to judge who is adhering to the message? 

(*laugh* what a clown....)


----------



## synrgy (Jan 11, 2011)

Nice read. Thanks for sharing.

It's always refreshing (and surprisingly rare) to find somebody within the Christian community who really _gets_ it. IMHO, without 'love thy neighbor', the rest is moot. I'm regularly amazed that with so many people who _claim_ to know and love Jesus, it seems to be the first principle to go out the window in favor of whatever bigotry they're into at the time.

I was baptized/raised Lutheran, but I got away from all organized religion around the time I was 10, mostly due to the type of folks this guy is writing about. I don't find religious douchebaggery to be exclusive to Christianity by any stretch of the imagination, but Christians certainly seem to be responsible for a considerable portion of it, and it's terribly unfortunate considering how out-of-step such behavior is with the teachings of Christ found within the Bible.

I just wish religious people were made to actually study the history of their religions in a scholarly fashion. I think the 'Bible-belt' of the States would be a lot easier to deal with if -- for instance -- the blind-followers there understood that there were SEVERAL Gospels that were omitted from the Bible as we know it today. Thanks, Catholicism.


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 11, 2011)

Explorer said:


> More to the point, not all who claim to be Christian are Christian. Did you even read the first post?
> 
> Don't be a jackass. If you really didn't read the first post, or (worse yet) have no idea how attacking and excluding others = attacking and excluding others, you're part of the problem.
> 
> ...



Wait what? I posted 9 words.


----------



## Randy (Jan 11, 2011)

Civility. Name calling and the thread gets locked and the bans get issues.


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 11, 2011)

^I think he quoted the wrong guy or cross-posted or something. :/

Also I am a Jackass. so he wasn't name calling, just being descriptive.


----------



## Randy (Jan 11, 2011)

Well, we'll consider it a warning for anybody who needs one.


----------



## Varcolac (Jan 11, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> *tl;dr version*
> 
> Jesus would've pimp slapped these nutters then gone and spent 4 hours having a beer with a group of gays, poor people, teenage mums...
> 
> Because that's the kind of Lord and Saviour he was/is... not a gay hating fucktard.



Holy shit, Aussie Jesus is awesome.

Judge not lest ye be judged. Mat7:1
Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar&#8217;s, and unto God the things that are God&#8217;s. Mat22:21

Remind me again where the "Let not the rug-munchers adopteth a child, for it displeaseth my Father" verse is?

Man, Christianity would be much less of a problem if people just read the goddamn instruction manual. Good to know some people do.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 11, 2011)

FYI--Actually Jesus told believers to judge other believers to see if they are truly Christian but not to worry about judging nonbelievers. That lil "judge not lest u be judged" is talking about not judging another person from a hypocritical point of view and thats all. Saying that something is wrong and another is right is NOT what he was talking about.

Heres what Jesus Says about Christians judging Christians: verse 21-23 is one that causes many professing Christians to be a bit worried lol

You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17&#8220;So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18&#8220;A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19&#8220;Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20&#8220;So then, you will know them by their fruits.


21&#8220;Not everyone who says to Me, &#8216;Lord, Lord,&#8217; will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22&#8220;Many will say to Me on that day, &#8216;Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?&#8217; 23&#8220;And then I will declare to them, &#8216;I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.&#8217;


--Also just some food for thought. A lot of people assume God is soft or something. Adam and Eve sinned one time.......................just once... before they were condemned to God's eternal hell as punishment for that ONE sin. The only reason they didn't go as soon as they sinned is because God decided to save some people from this judgment against them. Thus mankind have a future, tho not good. So He (Yahshua) comes into the world as a man, lives a sinless life, and suffers the wrath of God upon the cross in which God imputes the sins of all sinful men to Yahshua and crushes Him under the full weight of the judgment due sinful men who are to serve their eternal existence in hell. Pretty hardcore stuff if u ask me.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Jan 11, 2011)

Customisbetter said:


> Christian =/= Catholic



I know. But around here there are more catholics than anything else, although evangelical churches have been growing exponentially lately.


----------



## Explorer (Jan 11, 2011)

Sorry to CustomisBetter. I had originally quoted both of you, and wound up getting confused when I was editing down my post regarding how the Protestants ejected Scripture which, although still referred to by remaining Scripture, disagreed with Protestant rejection of soundly Scriptural things like the intercession of the saints.

I also apologize to the rest of you for the name-calling. Thanks for the warning, Randy. 

If anyone wants to start a thread on Biblical exegesis, I will post there regarding the worldly politics which led to parts of Scripture being tossed out by a small body with an axe to grind. There is a lot there to learn which many probably don't know about. (Surprising fact: Did you know that the Nazi treatment of Jews was based on the sermons and written works of Martin Luther, including the Luther-penned "On the Jews and Their Lies"?) 

Anyway, all that is for another topic. Cheers!


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 11, 2011)

Sorry Sang I'm not trying to be a dick. I just like to nitpick at small details without actually contributing to the discussion. 

EDIT: Saul Good Explorer.


----------



## ss22 (Jan 11, 2011)

_Man, Christianity would be much less of a problem if people just read the goddamn instruction manual. Good to know some people do.  _

Half the problem is that some people _do_ treat it like an instruction manual to a 1978 Dodge and take every single verse literally, including some of the more wacky passages. That's why those morons from the pentecostal chruch handle deadly snakes, or why some people truly believe the world was created in 7 days despite all geological evidence to the contrary.


----------



## IDLE (Jan 12, 2011)

I don't think religion is the issue people are. They just use religion to back up what they are saying because historically it was impossible to refute without being labeled a heretic. As much as I don't like religion there is always going to be douchebags being douchebags...


----------



## yacker (Jan 12, 2011)

ss22 said:


> _Man, Christianity would be much less of a problem if people just read the goddamn instruction manual. Good to know some people do.  _
> 
> Half the problem is that some people _do_ treat it like an instruction manual to a 1978 Dodge and take every single verse literally, including some of the more wacky passages. That's why those morons from the pentecostal chruch handle deadly snakes, or why some people truly believe the world was created in 7 days despite all geological evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Jan 12, 2011)

Explorer said:


> If anyone wants to start a thread on Biblical exegesis, I will post there regarding the worldly politics which led to parts of Scripture being tossed out by a small body with an axe to grind. There is a lot there to learn which many probably don't know about. (Surprising fact: Did you know that the Nazi treatment of Jews was based on the sermons and written works of Martin Luther, including the Luther-penned "On the Jews and Their Lies"?)
> 
> Anyway, all that is for another topic. Cheers!



Interesting; I wasn't aware of that. TBH, it's not that surprising. Nazis wove their doctrine around a literal reading of the law, then had it for the 'purest form' of interpretation. Disregarding its historic background or axiologic inspiration, it's easy to twist any written text into a monstrosity.




Customisbetter said:


> Sorry Sang I'm not trying to be a dick. I just like to nitpick at small details without actually contributing to the discussion.



No biggie, bro


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 12, 2011)

_This post is massive... so I've put a nice bit dashed line to break it up into relevant parts_



Customisbetter said:


> All Catholics are Christians. Not all Christians are Catholic.



Actually... no... you've got it the wrong way around.

Catholic means Universal. So any person who believes in Salvation through Christ alone because we are sinful is a Christian... and is a part of the Universal Church... Which is where the term Catholic Church came from.

Heck, in the Creed that Anglicans say, the line "I believe in the Catholic (Universal) Church, the forgiveness of sins..." Or something along those lines... haven't been in an Anglican service for a bit.

However belonging to denomination "Catholicism" and practicing its dogma does not one a Christian make.

------------------------------------------------------------------



Varcolac said:


> Holy shit, Aussie Jesus is awesome.



Pretty sure Aussie Jesus is the same as normal Jesus... It's just that Australia and Australians are more awesome 

--------------------------------------------------------------



Sonar8 said:


> FYI--Actually Jesus told believers to judge other believers to see if they are truly Christian but not to worry about judging nonbelievers. That lil "judge not lest u be judged" is talking about not judging another person from a hypocritical point of view and thats all. Saying that something is wrong and another is right is NOT what he was talking about.
> 
> Heres what Jesus Says about Christians judging Christians: verse 21-23 is one that causes many professing Christians to be a bit worried lol
> 
> ...



PASSAGE OUT OF CONTEXT ALERT! You can't do that man... that's dangerous. That's how people start to think we're crazy.

Also, you're going to talk about Judgement without referencing Romans 14?

----------------------------------------------------------------

_1 Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One persons faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to judge someone elses servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.
5 One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives for ourselves alone, and none of us dies for ourselves alone. 8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. 9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

*10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister[a]? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before Gods judgment seat. 11 It is written:

As surely as I live, says the Lord, 
every knee will bow before me; 
every tongue will acknowledge God.

12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister. 14 I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean. 15 If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let what you know is good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother or sister to fall.

22 So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if they eat, because their eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin*_*

-----------------------------------------------------------

I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time explaining what the hell Paul is talking about here... The important part for this discussion is in Bold... everything else is context in this case.

---------------------------------------------------------------




--Also just some food for thought. A lot of people assume God is soft or something. Adam and Eve sinned one time.......................just once... before they were condemned to God's eternal hell as punishment for that ONE sin. The only reason they didn't go as soon as they sinned is because God decided to save some people from this judgment against them. Thus mankind have a future, tho not good. So He (Yahshua) comes into the world as a man, lives a sinless life, and suffers the wrath of God upon the cross in which God imputes the sins of all sinful men to Yahshua and crushes Him under the full weight of the judgment due sinful men who are to serve their eternal existence in hell. Pretty hardcore stuff if u ask me.

Click to expand...


That's a really negative way of it putting dude. Yes God is powerful, jealous and throws down heavy Judgement... but he also said he would spare Sodom and Gomorrah if there was one Righteous man there... of course there wasn't so he smite it to pieces...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------



Explorer said:



If anyone wants to start a thread on Biblical exegesis, I will post there regarding the worldly politics which led to parts of Scripture being tossed out by a small body with an axe to grind. There is a lot there to learn which many probably don't know about. (Surprising fact: Did you know that the Nazi treatment of Jews was based on the sermons and written works of Martin Luther, including the Luther-penned "On the Jews and Their Lies"?)

Click to expand...


Are you talking about the Biblical Apocrypha? Because If so I'd LOVE to have a debate about that

Well... firstly don't forget that it wasn't JUST Martin Luther who hated Jews... why do you think there were Pogroms all across Europe... and why do you think the Christian Church took Jerusalem?

"In the name of Jesus" of course

Well... really the Roman Empire Mark II Masquerading as the Holy Roman Empire with the Pope replacing the Caesar as the Military commander in Chief (see the Vatican 'Map' room) and their unbridled lust for power and wealth... all done in the name of Jesus 

To Tie all this together with the thread... I think that the Christians who parade around gay-bashing now are actually worse than the Christians who committed the atrocities known as the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades... simply because they have NO excuse not to know better.

---------------------------------------------------------------




ss22 said:



Man, Christianity would be much less of a problem if people just read the goddamn instruction manual. Good to know some people do.  

Half the problem is that some people do treat it like an instruction manual to a 1978 Dodge and take every single verse literally, including some of the more wacky passages. That's why those morons from the pentecostal chruch handle deadly snakes, or why some people truly believe the world was created in 7 days despite all geological evidence to the contrary.

Click to expand...


No it's not the treating it like an instruction manual that's the problem...
It's taking the instructions out of context that's the problem

Take the text out of context and you're left with a con...

If you look at an instruction manual for a 1978 dodge and how to change the oil... but you only decide that the page that deals with removing the oil is relevant... and that you can then apply that to your 2009 Honda... you're going to end up draining the automatic transmission fluid or something retarded...

Same principle... you've got to read the Bible in the context for which it was written... Revelations is a letter in code to the Christians in Rome, not a description of the Apocalypse 

/End rant*


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 12, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> _This post is massive... so I've put a nice bit dashed line to break it up into relevant parts_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess we agree to disagree.

The definition of Christianity in its basic form is the recognition and belief in the abilities of Jesus Christ.

Catholicism by my (and just about everyone i know) definition is a denomination of Christianity.

Ipso-Facto, I am described as so:
Earth > Human > Male > Caucasian > Christian > Catholic

EDIT:There is a technicality as there are two major Catholic churches, The Roman and Greek, but I will leave them conglomerated for the sake of brevity.


----------



## ddtonfire (Jan 12, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> _This post is massive... so I've put a nice bit dashed line to break it up into relevant parts_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So you're claiming all Protestants are Catholics?


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 12, 2011)

KingAenarion--- I recommend that u get a good Study Bible so u don't misinterpret the Bible.

2nd Peter 3:16-Some of his(Paul) comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction.


In Romans 14, You should have read the verses prior to what u referenced to know what Paul's talking about:


One person&#8217;s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. *3* The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 


That reference you made about Romans is talking about things like FOOD, or communing with NON jews. Things that Jews under the old law were not allowed to do, but after the new one-the law of faith, are able to. Paul is not saying you can watch, listen, or do evil things. Its not a license to sin as many preclaimed Christians would like to believe.


-------------------------------------------------------
---Also I painted a picture of reality with my quote below. Its very dangerous to only hear one side or only part of the story. The God from the Old Testament is the SAME as the NEW. Did you know that the old testament law was given to condemn the people, not to save them, so that they might know they couldn't attain to heaven by their own merit and thus need a Savior being Yahshua. 

Quote:
--Also just some food for thought. A lot of people assume God is soft or something. Adam and Eve sinned one time.......................just once... before they were condemned to God's eternal hell as punishment for that ONE sin. The only reason they didn't go as soon as they sinned is because God decided to save some people from this judgment against them. Thus mankind have a future, tho not good. So He (Yahshua) comes into the world as a man, lives a sinless life, and suffers the wrath of God upon the cross in which God imputes the sins of all sinful men to Yahshua and crushes Him under the full weight of the judgment due sinful men who are to serve their eternal existence in hell. Pretty hardcore stuff if u ask me. 

(KingAenarion)
That's a really negative way of it putting dude. Yes God is powerful, jealous and throws down heavy Judgement... but he also said he would spare Sodom and Gomorrah if there was one Righteous man there... of course there wasn't so he smite it to pieces...

--I find it strange that u claiming to be Christian have a problem with what I wrote, sense I only summed up the main message of the Bible and how it was done. If by negative you mean a realistic way with a straightforward delivery, then yes it is negative, but every bit of it is true. Its easy for men to make up their own image of God based on assumptions contrary to the one of the Bible. Jesus should mean so much more to u because of what He did on that tree, knowing that God didn't have to save men but willingly did so is Awesome! Welcome to Christianity 101.



-------------------------------------------------
Also please explain what was out of context that you (KingAenarion)wrote: 
PASSAGE OUT OF CONTEXT ALERT!




---------------------------------------------------
Below is scripture that shows the other side of God people don't like to talk about. When thinking about God its important to try to understand God is not human and does not think like we think. He is the only infinite being and everthing else is just finite.


--all mankind will come and bow down before me,&#8221; says the LORD. *24* &#8220;And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.&#8221;

--Has not my hand made all these things, and so they came into being?" declares the LORD. "This is the one I esteem: he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word.


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 12, 2011)

^Yeah the Jewish/christian God is totally metal.

However Hindu folk have some serious prog-metal gods.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 13, 2011)

ddtonfire said:


> So you're claiming all Protestants are Catholics?



No not at all... But all practicing Christians who believe in salvation through Faith alone (no works... I do NOT understand how Catholics came up with the elements that are Salvation through deeds... Jesus himself is PRETTY clear on the matter) are members of the Universal Church... or just "the Church" as a better way of putting it... Catholic being a term that is now most commonly used to describe the Roman/Greek Catholic Church... 



Customisbetter said:


> I guess we agree to disagree.
> 
> The definition of Christianity in its basic form is the recognition and belief in the abilities of Jesus Christ.



Well actually the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. Recognition of him as God is kind of important in there too.




> EDIT:There is a technicality as there are two major Catholic churches, The Roman and Greek, but I will leave them conglomerated for the sake of brevity.



You mean the Greek Orthodox?



Sonar8 said:


> KingAenarion--- I recommend that u get a good Study Bible so u don't misinterpret the Bible.



I actually spat out my food when I read this. Firstly a Study Bible in one form is never going to be THAT useful. A good set of balanced commentaries from different perspectives, a reasonable knowledge of basic Church History, an understanding of some of the more important theologians and their ways of reading the bible (Calvin for example) are ways that might help point you in the right direction so that you're less like to misinterpret the Bible.

A Study Bible is usually a small and poxy summary of this put together by a few people and their interpretation of the Bible... usually somewhat accurate to a point but coloured by their denomination beliefs and practices.





> 2nd Peter 3:16-Some of his(Paul) comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters to mean something quite different, just as they do with other parts of Scripture. And this will result in their destruction.



That sounds awfully like the New Living Translation or the New Century Version which are thought-for-thought translations and not really appropriate for serious contextual study. Ok for reading because they are accurate, but not for analysis.



> In Romans 14, You should have read the verses prior to what u referenced to know what Paul's talking about:
> 
> 
> One persons faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. *3* The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them.
> ...



I did not say it was. The point still stands though, and what Paul says is not just dealing with food... only God may judge. Yes we are told to expell the immoral brother etc, but I love the point that J.P Lange makes in his book _The life of the Lord Jesus Christ_

_Now when the apostle received authority to bind and to loose, the meaning is, that he is able to execute the churchs excommunication upon a man, and therewith tie up his guilt, or retain it (John 20:23)...The same authority which the Apostle Peter here received, was subsequently imparted to all disciples with him (Matt. 18:18; John 20:23). This authority, however, maintains its reality in the church only so far as the ecclesiastical function keeps upon the apostolic elevation, in its identity with the Spirit of Christ. For at bottom it is evermore Christ Himself in His Spirit who receives into the true communion and executes the real excommunication, according to that word which we have in the Revelation of John, chapter 3:7. Thus, therefore, that authority stands under an eternal regulative power._

-------------------------------------------------------
---[quoteAlso I painted a picture of reality with my quote below. Its very dangerous to only hear one side or only part of the story. The God from the Old Testament is the SAME as the NEW. Did you know that the old testament law was given to condemn the people, not to save them, so that they might know they couldn't attain to heaven by their own merit and thus need a Savior being Yahshua.[/quote]

Just a quick question. You keep using the "Yahshua" version of Jesus... is this because you follow Sacred Name teaching or because you're wanting to sound smart?

Yes I did know that the Old Testament Law was given as a measuring point by which you could never measure and inevitably must turn to God for Salvation


> Quote:
> --Also just some food for thought. A lot of people assume God is soft or something. Adam and Eve sinned one time.......................just once... before they were condemned to God's eternal hell as punishment for that ONE sin. The only reason they didn't go as soon as they sinned is because God decided to save some people from this judgment against them. Thus mankind have a future, tho not good. So He (Yahshua) comes into the world as a man, lives a sinless life, and suffers the wrath of God upon the cross in which God imputes the sins of all sinful men to Yahshua and crushes Him under the full weight of the judgment due sinful men who are to serve their eternal existence in hell. Pretty hardcore stuff if u ask me.
> 
> (KingAenarion)
> ...



No... you.... GARRRRRRRRRR

FIRE AND HELL AND BRIMSTONE AND GOD SMITES YOU WITH HIS MIGHTY FURY.

The way you described it God came across as this Spiteful Megolomaniac who punishes with RIGHTEOUS FURY... in this style  

Disclaimer: Yes I know this is not in the Bible.

The way you put it sounds like God WANTS to send us to Hell, except for some people he saves from Judgement on a whim... then Jesus comes and God wantingly crushes him under the weight of Sin.

Sin makes us no longer clean, and no longer able to be in Gods presence. Jesus takes all our sin on to himself willingly... he even asks God if he must do it because he doesn't want to... He takes Gods punishment for our sin... which is infinitely worse than the physical torture he suffers.

It scary and sad and heart rending that our own God had to come down to earth to take the punishment for us. It's not hardcore... It's disturbing and should shock you to the very core of your being every time you think about it.

Like I said, God is a powerful God who does punish the wicked... but making a big thing of it, while it is important, detracts from the fact that he is a loving God who offered us Salvation even though we didn't deserve it... Grace...

The out of Context thing was because you just dumped that passage in the middle of your post without even referencing where it came from. You didn't talk about the fact that he's not talking about Judgement, but talking about False Prophets at that point. The verse before makes it pretty clear on that.

Matthew 7:15
_Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheeps clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
_ 

He's talking about people like these crazies in America who go around Gay bashing in his name



> ---------------------------------------------------
> Below is scripture that shows the other side of God people don't like to talk about. When thinking about God its important to try to understand God is not human and does not think like we think. He is the only infinite being and everthing else is just finite.
> 
> 
> ...



Once again it's more important to remember that God offered us Grace...


----------



## Explorer (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> Well actually the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. Recognition of him as God is kind of important in there too. ...A good set of balanced commentaries from different perspectives, a reasonable knowledge of basic Church History, an understanding of some of the more important theologians and their ways of reading the bible (Calvin for example) are ways that might help point you in the right direction so that you're less like to misinterpret the Bible.



Sorry to selectively quote, but you raise a very important point which is completely glossed over.

There is one religion which has spent a long time studying the Old Testament in the original language, and whose perspective is completely ignored on one very important point. It was only by completely changing what the Old Testament had said for centuries that Christianity is around today.

Having visited this particular dog-and-pony show quite a few times over my lifetime, and having witnessed all kinds of justifications as to why this group got it wrong, but the new people got it right, I don't expect anyone with an emotional investment to do anything but start talking about why things have to be taken in a completely non-literal sense... in order to protect that investment.

What could I be talking about?

The Jews have certain criteria for recognizing the true Messiah. They've had many false messiahs turn up over time, but using sound interpretation, they've managed to weed out the problems.

Jesus is one person who didn't fulfill Jewish prophecies of what the Messiah would do when He/She got here. 

Yes, I've heard all the arguments that Jesus will eventually fulfill the Jewish Scriptures at the end of time, but he hasn't yet, and that means he still isn't the Messiah promised to the Jews. 

I'll tell you what, though: Again, I urge you to start a serious thread about why the Jewish prophesies were *not* fulfilled by Jesus, and I'll come in with arguments as to why they *were*. Yes, I'm suggesting we argue opposite sides. It's a great way to really understand others, and also helps indicate when someone has just completely glossed over the facts. I think it would be ultimately more indicative of whether you really understand what the Old Testament specifically states about the Messiah, as opposed to just trying to flood the opposition with a flurry of information which never actually addresses the point.

----

One more thing: There was some misinterpretation of what I said earlier, regarding the Nazi treatment of Jews being based on the writings of Martin Luther. For those who are interested in knowing the truth of how closely the Nazis hewed to a literal interpretation of Luther, including Luther's suggestions of how to treat them, I recommend doing a search on "kristallnacht luther nazi."


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> Well actually the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. Recognition of him as God is kind of important in there too.
> 
> 
> You mean the Greek Orthodox?



Yes and yes.


----------



## ddtonfire (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> No not at all... But all practicing Christians who believe in salvation through Faith alone (no works... I do NOT understand how Catholics came up with the elements that are Salvation through deeds... Jesus himself is PRETTY clear on the matter) are members of the Universal Church... or just "the Church" as a better way of putting it... Catholic being a term that is now most commonly used to describe the Roman/Greek Catholic Church...


Ok, gotcha now


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion


Don't forget the Grace that is given to men didn't come free, but came at a Great cost by God becoming a man and taking our due punishment upon the cross. So its not some little thing buddy. The cross is foolishness to those perishing but to the saved it is the power of God.

That sheep in wolves clothing is talking mostly about guys like Joel Osteen who preach a different/false/humanistic Gospel, such as the prosperity one. We've all bashed people for one reason or another btw. 

IDK about u tho bro, It appears u don't take the BIble that serious. Its important to not just accept the parts of scripture one likes but all of it within the context of it. 

Everyone sins and will always while in this life, but its important that thru the Grace of God in Christ, we start heading a new direction away from sin and to God. That heading in a new direction is called repentance which is what all Christians must do in addition to believing upon Christs sacrifice for sins, to be saved. That's it, plain and simple.

James 2 18: But someone will say, &#8220;You have faith and I have works.&#8221; Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> Sorry to selectively quote, but you raise a very important point which is completely glossed over.
> 
> There is one religion which has spent a long time studying the Old Testament in the original language, and whose perspective is completely ignored on one very important point. It was only by completely changing what the Old Testament had said for centuries that Christianity is around today.
> 
> ...



Don't apologise for selectively quoting me if it's a reasonable point to bring up

Been there, done that... know the arguments from both sides... do not really want to go there.

But I do have to say... I came to be a Christian through research and reason, and one of the things that hit it for me was the prophesies.

You also have to remember that the Jews were also expecting this Messiah to come in and free them from the Tyranny of the Romans... Jesus failed pretty miserably at the whole conquering hero for the Jews thing...

My study, when I was looking at it objectively made me realise quite how closely Jesus fulfills the old testament prophesies... well all of them really... but not necessarily in ways you'd expect at first reading. 




> ----



Love how people have been using this


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 13, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> KingAenarion
> 
> 
> Don't forget the Grace that is given to men didn't come free, but came at a Great cost by God becoming a man and taking our due punishment upon the cross. So its not some little thing buddy. The cross is foolishness to those perishing but to the saved it is the power of God.



Of course Grace didn't come free... Did I say that? But it came... even though we don't deserve it in the slightest, because that's the nature of Grace... it is undeserved.

Did I say it was little? I said, and I'm quoting myself here, "Its scary and sad and heart rending"

As in heart rending, hold your chest feel it in your very being. How could you even think from what I've been saying that I take Jesus' sacrifice lightly...



> That sheep in wolves clothing is talking mostly about guys like Joel Osteen who preache a different/false Gospel, such as the prosperity. We've all bashed people for one reason or another btw.



Nooooo... I'm pretty sure he's talking about any and all False prophets. Anyone who falsely teaches the Gospel... and you can recognise them by their fruits. Jesus wasn't teaching in Parables at this point. He was being metaphorical, but not cryptic.

It's also important to remember that the majority of the Sermon on the Mount only appears in Matthew. While there are some links in Lukes Gospel (possibly related by the Q-source?)



> IDK about u tho bro, It appears u don't take the BIble that serious. Its important to not just accept the parts of scripture one likes but all of it.



Don't patronise me... or get on a high horse...

I take the Bible as the ultimate Authority on the nature of God, Jesus and the nature of salvation. I accept it all as inspired by God... but there are parts that are more important and relevant. I.E. The Gospels are more important than the epistles because they are the account of Jesus ministry and what Jesus himself said. Romans is more relevant than Titus to most people because Titus deals with Church Leadership and discipline.

The message "I am the way, the truth and the Life, no one comes to the father except through me"... which is a direct comment on the way to Salvation is more important than Genesis 34 where Dinah (Jacob's Daughter) is raped, then Jacob makes all the men get circumcised as penance... then while they're all in pain, Simeon and Levi go and kill them all.

Execution for Homosexual sex is superseded by Jesus' New Commandment...


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> I think what you mean is
> 
> Catholic =/= Christian
> 
> ...


 
I think getting caught up in the exact steps taken along the path is counterproductive when pretty much all groups claiming the "Christian" monicker have the same goal in mind... 

I have no clue why ppl get so caught up in what prophet that guy believes in and what church his mama goes to... If they all have love for the same "father" and seek "His" guidance and whatever else it is you need from God, then I don't see what difference it makes tbh...


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 13, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> I think getting caught up in the exact steps taken along the path is counterproductive when pretty much all groups claiming the "Christian" monicker have the same goal in mind...



But they don't. Ask a regular church lady what her goals are and then compare that answer to one of the nutters in the Westboro Baptist church. This is actually what the OP is about.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Jan 13, 2011)

I lost grasp on whatever's Sonar8's sustaining


----------



## Xaios (Jan 13, 2011)

Just want to add a couple points, fairly tertiary to the discussion at hand.

1) Regarding the Catholic = Christian conundrum, something I've encountered is that, culturally, there are lots of people who identify themselves as Roman Catholic who aren't actually believers. They identify themselves as such because they were born into the culture and were baptised as children. A similar phenomenon exists in the Jewish community. If I recall correctly, Carl Sagan, while simultaneously confirming he was agnostic, also stated quite plainly that he was Jewish.

2) My beliefs in a nutshell are that we are saved through faith in Jesus Christ, and that our faith is manifest in our works. 1st John 2:4 states quite plainly, "The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him." That verse has become somewhat of a personal creed for me. The crux of it, of course, is that you actually have to understand what Christ said. This is an on going struggle, and something that no man will ever have nailed down 100%. This isn't because the Bible is deliberately cryptic; it was meant to be read and to be understood. We, however, as humans, are simply incapable of getting it right all of the time.

I believe that, when I see something that blatantly goes against the word of God, staying silent is the wrong thing to do. However, any rebuke must be grounded in love, not in anger or self-righteousness, should be done privately, and should be accompanied by sound reasoning (from scripture) as to WHY it is wrong. No person is going to be saved if they believe that the person preaching to them hates them for their sins. That's why it's important to love people in spite of their sins, as Christ loved us.

If a sin is serious enough that it has dire real-world consequences though, and if it has the potential to hurt other people, then at some point it has to be made public if private rebuke has proven to be unsuccessful, especially within a church.

I'm probably not going to come back to this thread because I don't want to get embroiled in the debate, been there, done that. I just thought I'd leave my thoughts on the matter. Take from it what you will.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 13, 2011)

+ 1 on this:



Xaios said:


> Just want to add a couple points, fairly tertiary to the discussion at hand.
> 
> 1) Regarding the Catholic = Christian conundrum, something I've encountered is that, culturally, there are lots of people who identify themselves as Roman Catholic who aren't actually believers. They identify themselves as such because they were born into the culture and were baptised as children. A similar phenomenon exists in the Jewish community. If I recall correctly, Carl Sagan, while simultaneously confirming he was agnostic, also stated quite plainly that he was Jewish.
> 
> ...


----------



## Encephalon5 (Jan 13, 2011)

"I like your christ. But I do not like your christians. They are so unlike your christ" -Ghandi

There is hardly a more succint way to put it.


There are many christians who need to get the plank out of their eye.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 13, 2011)

Encephalon5 said:


> "I like your christ. But I do not like your christians. They are so unlike your christ" -Ghandi
> 
> There is hardly a more succint way to put it.
> 
> ...


 

I understand what u mean by that and u raise a good point....... no one is perfect and men are not saved by their works, but by grace thru faith. 


Also did Ghandi believe Chirst was the only God as Christ said? I don't really think ghandi liked Christ tho, as ghandi didn't believe Christ. If Christ is not God, He is a liar/deciever and thus not good and thus not God. Or if Christ is not, He is insane to the highest degree to believe Himself as God, but if He is God, then why didn't Ghandi follow Him and do as Christ commanded?


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jan 13, 2011)

Customisbetter said:


> But they don't. Ask a regular church lady what her goals are and then compare that answer to one of the nutters in the Westboro Baptist church. This is actually what the OP is about.


 
What's a regular church lady? 

As far as I know you can go to Catholic Churches... Lutheran Churches... Methodist Churches... Baptist Churches... All of which operate under the pretense of being a "House of God"... My main issue is that from time to time it seems various "Christian" groups seem to like to take turns deciding which of the others are worthy of the title. I thought this decision wasn't even left up to human beings as we're all technically works in progress only hoping to some day be "worthy" (should you care at all).

What it really all comes down to is that we're all human beings and we're all "God's children" (thus brothers and sisters) in the bigger picture and all the imaginary lines that divide us are just that--imaginary... (Again... This is IF you believe in God a god...)



> I'll never understand why we wish to celebrate our differences but be treated equally...


 
But If my points are going to be missed by that large a margin I think I'll just withdraw from this convo now... Bye bye...


----------



## Encephalon5 (Jan 13, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> I understand what u mean by that and u raise a good point....... no one is perfect and men are not saved by their works, but by grace thru faith.
> 
> 
> Also did Ghandi believe Chirst was God as Christ said? I don't really think ghandi liked Christ tho, as ghandi didn't believe Christ. If Christ is not God, He is a liar/deciever and thus not good , or if Christ is not, He is insane to the highest degree to believe Himself as God, but if He is God, then why didn't Ghandi follow Him?


 
I'm not quite sure. I've taken that quote out of context honestly, I just agree with it wholeheartedly. I do not believe in the Christian God or any other Gods. While I don't agree with it, and will fight for my right believe and act as I wish, I will also fight for your right to believe whatever you wish. I've nothing against religious people themselves. I can respect anyone until I'm disrespected. It really comes down to respect which is something a lot of people (religious and non religious) lack. I practice what I preach. Many christians don't do that and that is MY biggest problem. People who call themselves Christians when I know more about their religion than they do. "Christians" who have never read the bible. To quote carlin "Unenlighted self interest does not impress me" It's like they're believing to save their own asses. I could never believe in something out of fear. I'm glad to see that you guys have at least opened the book. You're all alright in my book. PM your address so I can send you all fruit baskets. I digress.....

Pardon my ramblins


----------



## Explorer (Jan 13, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> Also did Ghandi believe Chirst was the only God as Christ said? I don't really think ghandi liked Christ tho, as ghandi didn't believe Christ. If Christ is not God, He is a liar/deciever and thus not good and thus not God. Or if Christ is not, He is insane to the highest degree to believe Himself as God, but if He is God, then why didn't Ghandi follow Him and do as Christ commanded?



First off, it's clear you don't understand the Hindu concept of Bhagwan. Hindus will respect the physical Bible and Koran because they are imbued with Bhagwan. 

I hope I am completely misreading this, but it seems like you see only a dichotomy, and not a spectrum: One can be self-deceived, and still not be disliked or even hated. 

Further, one can get part of something right, but not be completely right, just as one can get part of something wrong, but not be completely wrong. 

A lot of the current political climate in the US has come about due to a small group of people who only see those who don't agree with them 100% as the enemy. (See the thread on the recent shooting for good examples.)


----------



## Customisbetter (Jan 13, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> What's a regular church lady?
> 
> As far as I know you can go to Catholic Churches... Lutheran Churches... Methodist Churches... Baptist Churches... All of which operate under the pretense of being a "House of God"... My main issue is that from time to time it seems various "Christian" groups seem to like to take turns deciding which of the others are worthy of the title. I thought this decision wasn't even left up to human beings as we're all technically works in progress only hoping to some day be "worthy" (should you care at all).
> 
> ...



I should have said, "stereotypical". Ah well. My intention was the emphasize the difference in behavior between WBC members and most other popular denominations.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 13, 2011)

I know a bit about Hinduism but not a great deal. It doesn't make sense to say two opposing viewpoints are right, such as hindus and islam, islam and Christianity, or whatever religion one could put up against another that have conflicting points of view.


----------



## Necris (Jan 13, 2011)

Customisbetter said:


> I should have said, "stereotypical". Ah well. My intention was the emphasize the difference in behavior between WBC members and most other popular denominations.



I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't believe the WBC is a popular Christian denomination, just a well known one.


----------



## tacotiklah (Jan 13, 2011)

Necris said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't believe the WBC is a popular Christian denomination, just a well known one.



WBC is essentially every horrible negative stereotype of the christian faith combined. If you'd ever come across any scripture that spoke of false prophets, they should've just said WBC. 



Oh and I notice that people are still banging away at the whole trinity thing. I'll just leave this here for some light reading:



> Jesus said, "The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." (John 13:16) Jesus said on numerous occasions that, "the Father&#8230; hath sent me." (John 5:37,6:37) The Holy Ghost was also sent by the Father (John 14:26) and Jesus (John 16:7), thus making Jesus inferior to the Father and the Holy Ghost inferior to both the Father and Jesus.
> "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another comforter, that he may abide with you forever; even the spirit of truth." (John 14:16)
> Jesus prays to God. (John 17:1-3)
> Jesus has faith in God. (Hebrews 2:17,18, Hebrews 3:2)
> ...




Now try to find the word trinity in a KJV bible. It's like where's waldo, only there's not waldo to be found.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 13, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> What's a regular church lady?
> 
> As far as I know you can go to Catholic Churches... Lutheran Churches... Methodist Churches... Baptist Churches... All of which operate under the pretense of being a "House of God"... My main issue is that from time to time it seems various "Christian" groups seem to like to take turns deciding which of the others are worthy of the title. I thought this decision wasn't even left up to human beings as we're all technically works in progress only hoping to some day be "worthy" (should you care at all).
> 
> ...



That's a fair enough point. 
A lot of Younger Church Members like to point out what they think are big flaws in other dogmas.
Young Anglicans for example are a classic example I've dealt with. The Sydney Anglican Church is great, particularly because it's an Evangelical Anglican Church. However a lot of Youth and the Young Adults are slightly elitist in their thinking.

They'll make jokes about how stupid Catholics are for believing in Purgatory... without realising that the Apocrypha has stuff about it, and to Catholics the Apocrypha is still the word of God... whether or not it actually is is debatable.




Encephalon5 said:


> I'm not quite sure. I've taken that quote out of context honestly, I just agree with it wholeheartedly. I do not believe in the Christian God or any other Gods. While I don't agree with it, and will fight for my right believe and act as I wish, I will also fight for your right to believe whatever you wish. I've nothing against religious people themselves. I can respect anyone until I'm disrespected. It really comes down to respect which is something a lot of people (religious and non religious) lack. I practice what I preach. Many christians don't do that and that is MY biggest problem. People who call themselves Christians when I know more about their religion than they do. "Christians" who have never read the bible. To quote carlin "Unenlighted self interest does not impress me" It's like they're believing to save their own asses. I could never believe in something out of fear. I'm glad to see that you guys have at least opened the book. You're all alright in my book. PM your address so I can send you all fruit baskets. I digress.....
> 
> Pardon my ramblins



I think you're talking about True Tolerance. Was best put to me as not I'll let everyone believe what they want... that's just pluralism... It's "I completely disagree with everything you believe, but I'll love you anyway and engage with you about that without mocking or attacking you"




Necris said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't believe the WBC is a popular Christian denomination, just a well known one.



I think they have like 30 members




ghstofperdition said:


> WBC is essentially every horrible negative stereotype of the christian faith combined. If you'd ever come across any scripture that spoke of false prophets, they should've just said WBC.
> 
> Oh and I notice that people are still banging away at the whole trinity thing. I'll just leave this here for some light reading:
> 
> Now try to find the word trinity in a KJV bible. It's like where's waldo, only there's not waldo to be found.



Yea, the trinity is a theological concept and an attempt at describing and quantizing God in human and logical terms. It tends to be a pretty nasty stumbling block


----------



## Explorer (Jan 13, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> They'll make jokes about how stupid Catholics are for believing in Purgatory... without realising that the Apocrypha has stuff about it, and to Catholics the Apocrypha is still the word of God... whether or not it actually is is debatable.



Here's a few facts, followed by a question:

As I mentioned earlier, the Apocrypha, including the material relating to the intercession of the saints, was part of Scripture for quite a while until removed by the Protestants. 

Parts of the Apocrypha are referenced by what is left, and accepted in the text of what is left as genuine. 

So, is what remains in error, as it accepts what was removed as genuine? Or did the Protestants not prune enough? 

What's very funny about this is, in the years I've spent in Biblical scholarship, there was only one group which insisted that the research tools available, as well as the original texts which the Protestants removed, were flawed, and that it was the right decision to eject those texts: those who had a religious reason for so asserting. 

Ah, well. I'm not too worried about having to preserve Biblical inerrancy, as even Jesus referring to the mustard seed, unequivocally, as the smallest seed means that either Jesus was wrong, or Scripture was tailored to the understanding of those listening... meaning that it can be factually wrong in terms of how things were dumbed down so those listening could get the gist, but little details could be wrong. Yes, one could argue that Scripture never got an important doctrinal question wrong, only a few facts here and there... but again, if a group of men decided they didn't like certain Scripture and got rid of it, while missing the places where what remained pointed to what what removed, then that's not just an error of fact, it's men deciding that they didn't like Scripture. 

Cheers!


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 13, 2011)

Explorer said:


> Here's a few facts, followed by a question:
> 
> As I mentioned earlier, the Apocrypha, including the material relating to the intercession of the saints, was part of Scripture for quite a while until removed by the Protestants.
> 
> ...



My understanding on the removal of apocrypha was that that it was WRONG perse... just that the material in the apocrypha was not mentioned by Jesus.

So from my studies the modern Protestant Bible was built around these principles.

The Old Testament - anything dealing with God and his interaction with his people. The history of the Jewish People included in the Torah that doesn't relate to Dealings directly with God is removed because in the bigger picture of salvation through Jesus Christ it is irrelevant... It is dealing with Humans... not God.

My understanding of the New Testament is that Gospels included were the ones that were written within 50 years of Jesus Death. Also the ones that Historians determined had corroborating accounts of Jesus like eye witness statements.

Then the epistles that were included were the ones from the Disciples that dealt with issues that Jesus had raised.

But I haven't studied it for a while so I may be wrong


----------



## Explorer (Jan 14, 2011)

I'll be curious as to how you argue the other side, that Jesus didn't fulfill the Jewish prophecies of the Messiah. 

And, regarding the Gospels, avoiding one group (the inerrancy believers), all other serious researchers have fairly consistent views regarding how some of the Gospels were just copied from others. There are also problems with some of the Pauline epistles which indicate they were pious frauds, written in later centuries to clear up some point which was felt to be non-Scriptural... at least to those who inserted them into Scripture. 

----

There are definitely parts of the Bible which are believed by non-fundamentalists to have been written by actual witnesses; Acts is one such book which has entire sections. However, a lot of the Gospels were not. Just look at the problem of the two Herods in the differing Nativity stories, Herod the Great and Herod Antipas, Tetrarch, who was Herod the Great's son and only became Tetrarch after the death of Herod the Great. According to the Gospels, Jesus was born under Herod the Great, and then born again some years later after HtG had died and while HA was Tetrarch.

There's all kinds of silly errors contradicted by established history, including the complete misunderstandings of how and why a Roman census was conducted. 

Anyway, I would recommend you move away from fundamentalist texts which assert that the Bible is without error, and instead read what happens when real-world textual analysis and criticism tools are applied to the Bible. It's a whole different world, in the same way that the Creation Science Journal articles never manage to get enough of the real science down to be considered for publication in a peer-reviewed journal which allows review from everyone, not just those who sign a paper affirming that results must support an already-decided conclusion.

Cheers!


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 14, 2011)

Explorer said:


> I'll be curious as to how you argue the other side, that Jesus didn't fulfill the Jewish prophecies of the Messiah.
> 
> And, regarding the Gospels, avoiding one group (the inerrancy believers), all other serious researchers have fairly consistent views regarding how some of the Gospels were just copied from others. There are also problems with some of the Pauline epistles which indicate they were pious frauds, written in later centuries to clear up some point which was felt to be non-Scriptural... at least to those who inserted them into Scripture.
> 
> ...



I am a History nerd too man... 

I know the difference between "fundamentalist" history "THE BIBLE IS COMPLETELY PERFECT" and the real stuff that actual histortians put out 

I'm not a bury my head in the sand "SATAN IS TRYING TO TEMPT US" person 

The reason I don't want to argue the point is quite simply because I don't have the energy to go back over research that I did 6 or 7 years ago while still keeping up with what I'm occupied with at the moment.

But I'll take a raincheck... in 6 months time we can have a great debate that spawns one of those stupidly long Threads about God, his existence and the existential crises of a generation


----------



## Xaios (Jan 14, 2011)

... which will eventually get locked.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 14, 2011)

Xaios said:


> ... which will eventually get locked.



and...? It will still be awesome


----------



## daemon barbeque (Jan 15, 2011)

ghstofperdition said:


> WBC is essentially every horrible negative stereotype of the christian faith combined. If you'd ever come across any scripture that spoke of false prophets, they should've just said WBC.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This will be ignored big time, since nobody wants to believe that their beliefs was all wrong from the very beginning.

Jesus would be shocked if he would see that people who believe in him pray at his crucified sculpture/figure. Not just he couldn't understand why he would be picked as the source of faith, which should be his Lord, God, be why him in pain and agony!


----------



## Explorer (Jan 15, 2011)

Xaios said:


> ... which will eventually get locked.



I don't think that is as inevitable as previously. As long as people not only remain civil, and as long as the mods work as amazingly as they currently are on reigning in members who are just stirring up shit, threads like that can be fairly interesting. I've noticed that the mod edits and actions are becoming more and more surgical, more apologies are being posted by those who have crossed behaviour lines, and overall the tone has improved. 

And that's why I love you guys.


Most importantly and interestingly, it appears everyone is in agreement with the link I provided in my opening post here. Since he's come up, now is the time for an appropriate quote regarding veneration instead of following:



Gandhi said:


> Everybody is eager to garland my photos, but nobody wants to follow my advice.



Cheers!


----------



## tacotiklah (Jan 15, 2011)

daemon barbeque said:


> This will be ignored big time, since nobody wants to believe that their beliefs was all wrong from the very beginning.
> 
> Jesus would be shocked if he would see that people who believe in him pray at his crucified sculpture/figure. Not just he couldn't understand why he would be picked as the source of faith, which should be his Lord, God, be why him in pain and agony!



Sad but true man. People ignore the most basic of rules and immerse themselves in "well what *I* think happened was...."


----------



## TemjinStrife (Jan 15, 2011)

Great column. It's sad we don't get more of this perspective.

And it is interesting... I did not know that by Christian ideology, all sins are equal. Making cold-blooded preplanned murder of an innocent child equal with fantasizing about your friend's girlfriend seems a little skewed at best.


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 16, 2011)

TemjinStrife said:


> Great column. It's sad we don't get more of this perspective.
> 
> And it is interesting... I did not know that by Christian ideology, all sins are equal. Making cold-blooded preplanned murder of an innocent child equal with fantasizing about your friend's girlfriend seems a little skewed at best.



Well Evil is Evil... and lust is lust, and murder is murder.

All sin is equal in the sense that a single sins makes us imperfect and unable to be in Gods presence.

Hitler and Stalin are still pure and utter evil.


----------



## daemon barbeque (Jan 16, 2011)

KingAenarion said:


> Well Evil is Evil... and lust is lust, and murder is murder.
> 
> All sin is equal in the sense that a single sins makes us imperfect and unable to be in Gods presence.
> 
> Hitler and Stalin are still pure and utter evil.



1 John 5:16 If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray abo

I disagree!


----------



## daemon barbeque (Jan 16, 2011)

I also disagree that God is pure and we are dirty, so as long as we are dirty we are not allowed to be with him.

Well, God is the creator of everything, and everything includes rape, adultery, murder, lust, pedophilia, necrophilia, greed, dishonesty, genocide, and the list goes on.

God created all those sins. Whoever can create something like that can't be pure anyway, or those things are acceptable for God but not humans.


----------



## AySay (Jan 16, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> Also did Ghandi believe Chirst was the only God as Christ said? I don't really think ghandi liked Christ tho, as ghandi didn't believe Christ. If Christ is not God, He is a liar/deciever and thus not good and thus not God. Or if Christ is not, He is insane to the highest degree to believe Himself as God, but if He is God, then why didn't Ghandi follow Him and do as Christ commanded?




Yo...not trying to offend or anything, but what the fuck is this?
I see this retarded "if/then" circular logic bullshit thrown around so much regarding religion. Gandhi obviously was referring to Christ's "moral" teachings(what the core message of the bible should be IMO) and how modern day Christians rarely practice what they preach. Just because he likes the "story" of Christ, doesn't mean he is a Christian. Also, I actually think Gandhi DID follow Christ's TRUE teachings more than most "real" Christians did or do. 



Sonar8 said:


> I know a bit about Hinduism but not a great deal. It doesn't make sense to say two opposing viewpoints are right, such as hindus and islam, islam and Christianity, or whatever religion one could put up against another that have conflicting points of view.



You don't need a great deal of understanding about Hinduism to make sense of what is being said by Gandhi either. Maybe the path is different, but all religions end up with the same set of "morals" that they teach. Love thy neighbor, don't kill/ steal etc, be nice whatever...
So, these 2 opposing view points aren't really opposing at all. Maybe the "fairy tales" (IMO) that the message is delivered through are different, but on a deeper level the message is the same.


----------



## Explorer (Jan 16, 2011)

AySay said:


> You don't need a great deal of understanding about Hinduism to make sense of what is being said by Gandhi either. Maybe the path is different, but all religions end up with the same set of "morals" that they teach. Love thy neighbor, don't kill/ steal etc, be nice whatever...
> So, these 2 opposing view points aren't really opposing at all. Maybe the "fairy tales" (IMO) that the message is delivered through are different, but on a deeper level the message is the same.



I absolutely agree with this, in terms of the same message emerging in vastly different cultures. I believe there is a reason why so many similar values pop up among human religions and codes of ethics: They arise out of our primate nature. 

That's why even the Satanists have their own version of the universal code of not hurting others: As long as you harm no one, "Do what you will" shall be the whole of the law. 

The following bits are from the "Right and Wrong" thread, which explored the idea that what was acceptable was either relative or universal. I give a few examples of how "universal" values don't apply to those who are not members of that particular troop of primates, as does Andromalia. 

(And, Andromalia, I hope you don't feel I've misused your excellent examples. If so, let me know and I'll remove it.)

----



Andromalia said:


> There are actually two ways of seeing such things.
> 
> Some hold that some values are universal and not subject to cultural interpretation. Those following values are if not universal, then held in every society I know of and have studied: rape, murder, theft and incest are frowned upon in every culture I know of, as long as, of course, we consider other people of the sam culture. Raping and murdering "the infidel" is often "right". Doing it inside the tribe/clan/nation is/has been forbidden in every culture I know of. (Note that "murder" does not include religious self-sacrifice of a voluntary victim, or the death penalty, the outcast being, well, outcast and not part of the whole any longer)
> 
> ...





Explorer said:


> Personally, with regards to primate ethics, I believe that human values fall in line with those values practiced by all primates, and by most social mammals: any creature which is "like us" is to be treated well, and any creature which is not "like us" is treated with indifference regarding its emotional state.
> 
> Chimps and other apes will have social structures where they will have internal bickering, but will unite when other chimps come around. In order to push some human apes to attack other human apes, the human apes hoping to provoke or justify such an attack will try to rob the target apes of any facets of "like us." Even the thinly veiled attempts to strip the "like us" qualities from gays and lesbians fail, though, when people realize that someone they classify as "like us" is gay. Experience trumps propaganda.
> 
> ...



----

I just re-watched a film last night called "Stander," about a former police officer in South Africa during the Apartheid era. One white character notes that he and his pregnant black girlfriend were horribly beaten, with the baby being beaten out of her. 

Watching attacks on blacks, gays, or anyone who has been defined as "other" (another religion, wrong flavor of Christianity, etc.) is just sad, but can be very instructive. The attacks and cruelty are always the same, which is shocking to me; the fact that the same violence and arguments against gays are of the same kind and vehemence as directed against interracial relationships. 

I suppose I shouldn't expect more, though. Like all Christians, Hindus, Muslims, and everyone else, we're all just primates. *laugh*


----------



## daemon barbeque (Jan 16, 2011)

Explorer said:


> I suppose I shouldn't expect more, though. Like all Christians, Hindus, Muslims, and everyone else, we're all just primates. *laugh*



Yeah that is true. The very existence of religion is like the biggest proof of Evolution LOL.


----------



## McKay (Jan 17, 2011)

I went to a Catholic school/am Catholic but I don't know a single religious person, even among my old schoolmates. For someone from a country where atheism is essentially ubiquitous this is really.. weird.

How do you marry modern western thinking with your faith? I don't want to sound condescending, I'm genuinely interested because I tried and couldn't.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 18, 2011)

Look what God did against Sodom ( Sodomy) and Gomorrah. Actions speak louder than words. Also is it Christian like for a self proclaimed Christian to curse(sin)?

James 3:9

With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in God&#8217;s likeness. *10* Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. *11* Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? *12* My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.


----------



## Sonar8 (Jan 18, 2011)

[QUOTE 

AySay

Yo...not trying to offend or anything, but what the fuck is this?
I see this retarded "if/then" circular logic bullshit thrown around so much regarding religion. Gandhi obviously was referring to Christ's "moral" teachings(what the core message of the bible should be IMO) and how modern day Christians rarely practice what they preach. Just because he likes the "story" of Christ, doesn't mean he is a Christian. Also, I actually think Gandhi DID follow Christ's TRUE teachings more than most "real" Christians did or do. 

-------------------------

Did you understand what I said? If Christ is God then it means one thing, if not, then it means another. Or did u not understand and mock it by saying its circular reasoning. 


Also, please explain what Christ's True Teachings are? If you are able to do this, then you will be able to explain what a Christian is according to the Bible backed by verses. The greatest commandment is Love the LORD ur God with all your heart, strength, mind, and soul. It seems many forget about the greatest and first commandment, but say the 2nd as the first. How is the first and greatest commandment lived out?

Thanks


----------



## KingAenarion (Jan 18, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> Look what God did against Sodom ( Sodomy) and Gomorrah. Actions speak louder than words. Also is it Christian like for a self proclaimed Christian to curse(sin)?
> 
> James 3:9
> 
> With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse human beings, who have been made in Gods likeness. *10* Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. *11* Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? *12* My brothers and sisters, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.



Yes... most semi-intelligent people can figure out that the verb sodomize came from the city of Sodom...

And are you talking to me about swearing? I personally swear because the intent behind what is said is more important than the word.

If I say shit, or fuck or bugger or bollocks, or damnit... when I stub my toe... it's an expression... a sound that expresses the pain I'm in.

The word fuck is an interesting one. "You are a sexual intercourse idiot" - "You are a fucking idiot"... the use of the word really makes no sense... it's just an emphasis... really it's no different than saying "You are a really really really REALLY big idiot"...

Now in that context, is the word "fuck" the problem, or is it actually the idiot part?

It's something to ponder. The French curse without using expletives most of the time. My understanding of ancient Hebrew and Greek is that expletives as we know them now were just integrated into the language. Whether or not you chose to use them was just a class thing... as it is now.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Jan 19, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> Look what God did against Sodom ( Sodomy) and Gomorrah. Actions speak louder than words. Also is it Christian like for a self proclaimed Christian to curse(sin)?



FWIW, many acclaimed theologists sustain that the reason Sodom was destroyed was actually the lack of hospitality. I can't recall the whole history or the names of said theologists because I couldn't care less to what the bible says, but I did read that in a study in a library a couple months ago. It was not the first time I read about that either, so maybe you should take a look into that before repeating outdated stuff.

Like someone stated a few posts ago, many christians don't really know what's in their book, and are unaware of some documented mistranslations as well.


----------



## AySay (Jan 19, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> Did you understand what I said? If Christ is God then it means one thing, if not, then it means another. Or did u not understand and mock it by saying its circular reasoning.
> 
> 
> Also, please explain what Christ's True Teachings are? If you are able to do this, then you will be able to explain what a Christian is according to the Bible backed by verses. The greatest commandment is Love the LORD ur God with all your heart, strength, mind, and soul. It seems many forget about the greatest and first commandment, but say the 2nd as the first. How is the first and greatest commandment lived out?
> ...



Oh my... I really wanted to be civil, but you sure do come off as a douche.

I think YOU might be a little too close minded to understand me. I'm sure you think _your_ religion is the right one. That everyone else is damned to hell to burn forever blah blah, and that you and your fellow christians will be saved and have that wonderful, eternal G-rated orgy with god and jebus and blah blah. What you don't realize, or perhaps choose not to, is that ALL the religions from that little patch of desert aren't so similar by sheer coincidence.

The morals espoused in all of them are in essence the same. 
The basic tenants they say humans should live by are the same.
As I said, while one book teaches them through stories of talking bushes and parting seas, another does so through stories of dick-free pregnancy, and resurrection. 

THESE MORALS are what I was referring to as Christ's true teachings. "Christ" being interchangeable with Moses, Mohammad etc. The rest of the fairy tale is unimportant and clearly at the very least a rehashed version of previous regional myths that were also there for the purpose of teaching people morality. GOD doesn't even have as much to do with religion as does the need back then for something to keep our savage ancestors from destroying themselves and each other.

It seems many forget that the commandments are more so about living a productive, and morally good life than about God, and eternal servitude to him. 

I would hope that in this day and age people could come to understand this morality without the need of ancient outdated myths, but I also hope the Canucks win the cup this time....


----------



## tacotiklah (Jan 19, 2011)

Well I learned from personal experience that the easiest way to understand the bible and find a "correct" interpretation of it is to take a concordance with the original hebrew and greek words and the proper translations and go through the concept word by word.

Also take note of when and where the punctuation such as semicolons and commas are, because incorrect placement of these can COMPLETELY change the meaning of what's being said. As anal retentive as that sounds (which it is) it is the only real way to understand the bible. Another beef I have with people that throw out bible verse as defense with everything is that they tend to take it out of context. Often what I do when I encounter that is to find the verse and read the entire paragraph that it's in. 9/10 times it doesn't mean what that person thinks it does. Which if that's the case, let's just pick random letters out of the bible to form whatever words we want. Oh wait, they do that already with the supposed "hidden" bible code.


----------



## CrushingAnvil (Jan 23, 2011)

Sonar8 said:


> [QUOTE
> 
> AySay
> 
> ...



2nd language troll is troll.

You're right about Ghandi though.


----------

