Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Immortal Goat Immortal Goat is offline
Now with less sodium!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Old Jan 11th, 2006, 06:27 PM       
Well, the hardcores that I went to school with certainly thought he was on to something. Maybe not the casual Catholics, but they pretty much kept quiet. So maybe it wasn't the fact that there were more people that liked him, but that they were the loudest motherfuckers in the school.
__________________
I like snow. If winter's going to be cold anyway, at least have it be fun to look at. Probably why I was with my ex for so long...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 11th, 2006, 06:33 PM       
Let's talk numbers. How many people are we talking, 3, 5 people?

Being loud and being "hardcore" aren't necessarily the same thing, btw. I don't consider myself to be a "casual" Catholic, nor do most of the Catholics I deal with in my every day life.

I think the bottom line here is that you have encountered a few vocal (gasp!) Christians in your day, and they probably supported Robertson. And of course, the only "good" Christians in your mind are the ones who don't say anything, and hide in the shadows somewhere.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
Old Jan 11th, 2006, 06:59 PM       
Quote:
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hyprocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." (Matthew 6:5-6)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Immortal Goat Immortal Goat is offline
Now with less sodium!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Old Jan 11th, 2006, 08:42 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
I think the bottom line here is that you have encountered a few vocal (gasp!) Christians in your day, and they probably supported Robertson. And of course, the only "good" Christians in your mind are the ones who don't say anything, and hide in the shadows somewhere.
That is far from the truth. I have no problems with people being vocal and proud of their faith. There is a difference, however, between you, for example, and VinceZeb or Kulturkampf. Perhaps my point was missed, but to reiterate, in my many years attending Catholic schools, I have run into a group (yes, they are the minority in my experience) that are more vocal and more hardcore than many.

And yes, I realize that loud and hardcore are different, but you have to admit that it definitely seems that the more hardcore you are, the more vocal you are about it (I am referring to the people with sandwich board signs yelling "PRAISE JESUS", not the people who put up flyers for prayer groups, believe it or not).

And thanks, Ziggy. I was actually going to post that verse myself, but you beat me to it. Well played indeed.
__________________
I like snow. If winter's going to be cold anyway, at least have it be fun to look at. Probably why I was with my ex for so long...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 02:45 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
Quote:
"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hyprocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." (Matthew 6:5-6)
If this were true (or more appropriately, if it actually were intended for the context you put it in), then Paul was the worst of them all! Not to mention Peter, who was given the responsibility of building the Church.

There's a difference between what you say to God and what you say to everyone else. But hey, let's play the Gospel Google game a little bit more:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gospel of Matthew 28:19-20
Go ye therefore and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost:
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;
and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."

Quote:
Originally Posted by immortal Goat
And yes, I realize that loud and hardcore are different, but you have to admit that it definitely seems that the more hardcore you are, the more vocal you are about it (I am referring to the people with sandwich board signs yelling "PRAISE JESUS", not the people who put up flyers for prayer groups, believe it or not).
It's ok to be hardcore about politics, about sports, about music, about ethnic background, and all sorts of other stupid things. You live in a country that's over 80% Christian. Why shouldn't Christians be really vocal and visible? it's their right to due so, just as it's your right to ignore them.

Quote:
And thanks, Ziggy. I was actually going to post that verse myself, but you beat me to it. Well played indeed.
Yeah, and I'm sure you would've used it just as out of context as he did. :/
Reply With Quote
  #31  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 03:30 PM       
Kev, I know lots of very worthy Christians, but the ones I like best all take what Jesus had to say with more gravity than Paul or Peter. Paul in particular (while I do not question his faith) had strong political concerns and was trying to establish and maintain some degree of control of content and interpretation over a geographically spreading religion.

In addition, I think you would be hard pressed to find many serious biblical historians who think the passage from Matthew you quoted was something Jesus actually said, and many scholars believe the line about Father Son and Holy Spirit was added even later than the rest of the passage.

I take your point that one can find passages to support differing speciffic views, but I think (personal opinion) the passage Ziggy picked is better supported by the other gospels. I think it speaks not only to the natture of prayer, but to the intent behind the public display of ones closeness to God. If the purpose is that one may be seen by men to be holy, this is pride. I can't guess what Pat Robertson's relationship with God is when he's in the closet, but the 700 club is a mighty big street corner where you can be seen by a lot of men.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 04:52 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Paul in particular (while I do not question his faith) had strong political concerns and was trying to establish and maintain some degree of control of content and interpretation over a geographically spreading religion.
Christianity wouldn't be what it is today without the works of Paul.

Quote:
In addition, I think you would be hard pressed to find many serious biblical historians who think the passage from Matthew you quoted was something Jesus actually said, and many scholars believe the line about Father Son and Holy Spirit was added even later than the rest of the passage.
Then we should dismiss ALL scripture references from this conversation, there are a lot of biblical scholars who think the entire Bible is bullshit, so we probably shouldn't be citing the Bible to support or dismiss Christians using their 1st Amendment rights, right?


Quote:
I take your point that one can find passages to support differing speciffic views, but I think (personal opinion) the passage Ziggy picked is better supported by the other gospels. I think it speaks not only to the natture of prayer, but to the intent behind the public display of ones closeness to God.
God never tells us to be mimes. The scripture Ziggy quoted is specifically about one's relationship with God. It's a commentary on the practices of the day, and probably a shot at the Pharisees. I only cited that particular scripture because it too was from Matthew, just to again show that the Gospel Google game can often go either way.


Quote:
If the purpose is that one may be seen by men to be holy, this is pride. I can't guess what Pat Robertson's relationship with God is when he's in the closet, but the 700 club is a mighty big street corner where you can be seen by a lot of men.
I don't care what Pat Rovbertson's motives are. That will ultimately be for him to deal with. I don't care about Robertson, but my problem in general with the secular Left is that they can't just agree with most people that Pat Robertson is a fool. They have to use it as fodder to attack ALL of Christianity, because frankly, it suits their political agenda. I believe the reason for this is that pat Robertson-- a white, wealthy, Southern, and Republican male-- is their typical image of a Christian, which is sort of sad, IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 05:32 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew
Chapter 6

1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew
7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread.
12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
16 Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
17 But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
25 Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
OK, I take it back. Within that context I can totally see that Jesus would be down with all the bumper stickers and folks dragging around full size crosses (on wheels) and shouting at people on college campuses.

But enough with the sarcasm. When Jesus said to teach, he didn't say to berate. He didn't say convert. He didn't say to grandstand and make a nice cozy living off of televangelism.

Really Kevin, in my experience Catholics (excluding the clergy) are MUCH better about humilty and what is my understanding of "Christlike behavior" than the evangelicals. In it's context the quote I posted from Matthew is the strongest argument for asceticism other than when Jesus went on about camels and needles.

I mean for fuck's sake, Robertson claimed that HIS prayers steered a hurricane! How is the passage I quoted out of context or irrelevant?

Do you not see any difference between "teaching" and the sort of "wearing your Christianity as a badge of righteous authority" that Goat is talking about?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 05:47 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
But enough with the sarcasm. When Jesus said to teach, he didn't say to berate. He didn't say convert. He didn't say to grandstand and make a nice cozy living off of televangelism.
Really? What does the word "baptize" mean to you? I again think that you are confusing what Christ told us to do, and how to behave, regarding our own expression of faith and love for God. Being "ascetic" and being a mute are two different things.

Would you say Jesus was a hypocrite, and that he didn't follow his own teachings? Did he lead an ascetic life, and did it entail never preaching, never debating, and yes, never berating? It would seem like this whole discussion would be difficult had he not. Even in this scripture he is making a comparison, he is judging how to be and how not to be, no?


Quote:
I mean for fuck's sake, Robertson claimed that HIS prayers steered a hurricane! How is the passage I quoted out of context or irrelevant?
You don't need to quote the Bible to dismiss Pat Robertson. We are all pretty much in agreement that he is an idiot and a lunatic. What he does is wrong, but the solution to this isn't the so-called "ascetic" life you speak of. Speaking is one thing, saying stuff that's crazy is another.

Quote:
Do you not see any difference between "teaching" and the sort of "wearing your Christianity as a badge of righteous authority" that Goat is talking about?
But if a Christian tries to teach, if they teach teach on college campuses, if they post signs which say "praise Jesus," or if they again do anything that doesn't seem to entail doing nothing, then they are "berating" you.

It's all about judgement. If a Christian tells you that your life is wrong, they are trying to teach you. They truly believe that they have heard the "Good News," and thatto not share it with you would be a disservice to you. If a Christian says this, either directly to you, on a billboard, or on television, you take offense. You're smarter than them, and how dare they judge you. Let's be honest, you don't want Christians trying to "educate" anybody. That's fine, but please don't pretend that you make this grand distinction between Pat Robertson and everybody else. I've seen no evidence of such on these boards.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 07:05 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
Quote:
Do you not see any difference between "teaching" and the sort of "wearing your Christianity as a badge of righteous authority" that Goat is talking about?
But if a Christian tries to teach, if they teach teach on college campuses, if they post signs which say "praise Jesus," or if they again do anything that doesn't seem to entail doing nothing, then they are "berating" you.
I have NEVER seen so-called Christians preaching on a college campus that weren't screaming or calling names. I've seen the Gideons handing out Bibles, and I'm Ok with that. Generally speaking, I'd see a sign posted about an outreach meeting at some local youth center or even a conference room is it's a RSO. Again, I have no problem with that.

If you can't see the line between pushing your beliefs and offering to discuss them, then I don't think you have a very good understanding of the parts of Christianity and most Christians that I find nice. But I think you do, and you're just being contentious cuz Goat uttered those two words that send you into kneejerk mode: "most Christians".


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev
If a Christian says this, either directly to you, on a billboard, or on television, you take offense. You're smarter than them, and how dare they judge you.
Wow, you know me so well! Yes, I get just so darn mad when I see a Jesus billboard or bumper sticker.

I don't think I'm smarter than a person of faith, and the fact that you say that bothers me more than anything else said in this thread.

I was raised to believe in Jesus. Others were raised to believe in the things their family believed. Just because I will no longer say that I am certain that the things I was taught are correct and that the things others were taught is wrong, does not make me smarter. I fully admit I do not know the truth. If reality is what the Christians say, then they are smarter than me, cuz they're going to heaven and I'm not (unless those once-saved-always-saved Christians are right). If reality is what the Bhuddists say, then both of us are fucked, and I don't think either of us could say we were smarter for it, but maybe we'll get it right on the next go-round.

I think it's kinda funny that you say that I think I'm smart for saying that I don't know stuff. I will admit that the "Militant Agnostic: I don't know and you don't either" bumper sticker my old neighbor had amused me. But I don't begrudge my new neighbor for buying me a book written by a minister who used to be an atheist either.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 07:21 PM       
I'm pretty much of the opinion that christianity and buddhism teach the same thing, so I wouldn't worry about it. If you read early christian teachings you'll find if you just replace the word god with nirvana or some other word that may or may not be appropriate you'll get some satisfactory results.
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #37  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 07:32 PM       
If a Budhist were preaching on my campus, or on my corner, i would engage him/her in a conversation. Same goes for Islam, Judaism, Mormonism, Scientology, and whatever else. I like that, and i don't think less of them for attempting to win me over. If i don't like what they have to say, perhaps i shall ignore them, or maybe even challenge what they're saying.

If a Christian tries this, there are "some people" who will react as if they are being encroached upon. I don't personally watch the 700 Club, and I'm guessing most folks on this board don't either. Yet it seems to bother "some people" that it's even out there. I dunno, my remote works just fine, but that's just me.

And Ziggy, if i said to you that most black people enjoyed watermelon and fried chicken, you'd probably get annoyed a tiny bit too, especially after hearing it over, and over, and over again.....
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Immortal Goat Immortal Goat is offline
Now with less sodium!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 07:56 PM       
I am guessing you include me in your "some people", even though it isn't true. I have no problem with the 700 Club existing. I think that it is a waste of airtime and generally mindless television (as in I would rather watch O'Reilley), but as you said, my remote works just fine, and I can switch it over to whatever I would like.

Also, you have also probably included me in the "some people" that feel they are being encroached upon. Again, you are wrong. I have many Christian friends with whom I debate philosophy/ sociology/ religion/politics/ news/ etc. with all the time, and for the most part, it stays civil. The one and only time it ever got past the point of not being civil was with this one Catholic girl (I say this not to say this is all Catholics, but to point out that there are people that I debate with from all brands of Christianity) that decided halfway into the debate to take the inarguable path of "We'll see who'se right". Aside from that, all my debates are calm, civil, and generally friendly, even to people who flat out tell me that I am going to hell.

So, yeah, it isn't that I have no respect for Christians, it is that I have no respect for Christians who decide that I am nothing more than another number to add to their list of "believers". It is when I am treated as less than a person than they are that I get pissed off. You, Kevin, are not guilty of this, and I thank you. And I will try and stop using the phrase "most Christians", but maybe it would be good to remember that I may be using it because I have been on the recieving end of the "mostly" arguments in the past, having gone to Catholic schools and vocally never believed it.
__________________
I like snow. If winter's going to be cold anyway, at least have it be fun to look at. Probably why I was with my ex for so long...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 08:06 PM       
"If a Christian tries this, there are "some people" who will react as if they are being encroached upon."

If a buddhist/islam/muslim/satanist/thelemite/wiccan/pagan/etc. tried it towards some christians there's a fairly large chance they would respond negatively, right?

For the most part i find preachy christians in general to know little to nothing about their faith anyway, so it's generally safe to ignore them.
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
  #40  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 08:15 PM       
Again, other than handing out literature (and perhaps talking to anyone who intiated a conversation) the only in my time at a public university the only unsolicited proselytization I saw was from a zealot who called himself "Brother Moses" and some group of creepy kids who sounded like they were affiliated with Fred Phelps' church.

I guess it comes down to whether you're preaching peace or whether you're preaching hate. If you're preaching peace, I'll like you. If you're preaching hate, I'll despise you. Simple as that.

I used to love religious debate, but it seems fairly tedious lately.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Old Jan 12th, 2006, 08:19 PM       
I used to enjoy it a lot more too, back when I could debate with people who played by the rules of logical debate.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 13th, 2006, 09:42 AM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by ziggytrix
I used to love religious debate, but it seems fairly tedious lately.
Agreed.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
Old Jan 13th, 2006, 11:03 AM       
"Christianity wouldn't be what it is today without the works of Paul."

I know. I favor the Gospel of Thomas. While there's plenty of room for disagreement, I don't think Jesus would even recognize the church today, and probably would have stopped recognizing around the time of the Nicean Creed, when the doctrine of salvation surpassed The sermon on the Mount (or wherever) in importance.

"Then we should dismiss ALL scripture references from this conversation, there are a lot of biblical scholars who think the entire Bible is bullshit, so we probably shouldn't be citing the Bible to support or dismiss Christians using their 1st Amendment rights, right? "

Don't be abdsurd. I understand you're irritated. I assure you I do not equate Christianity since the creed with Pat Robertson. But there is a point here, and to me it's this. A lot of Christians of all denominations focus so much attention on Salvation and damnation, much to the disservice of the bulk of what Jesus had to say about how God wants us to behave. I'm fairly dissinterested by any Biblical scholar that says 'the bible is all bullshit' but to date I haven't read any. It seems like an odd field to go into if that's your opinion. A generally accepted working argument is that if a passage can be found that is fairly similar in content in all four canonical gospels and various Gnostic gospels, you go on the assumption it's something Jesus said. That doesn't mean to me tat the Virgin Birth for instance isn't interesting, meaningful, possibly true, symbollically key, That belief in hasn't strongly influenced the course of history, etc. etc. etc. What it does mean to me is that I would place a good deal more of my focus on the content of the sermon on the mount, since aspect of it appear in almost all texts. Even if that doesn't mean it's true, I think it's clear that there was wide spread agrement among early Christians of it's importance to the movement and that the virgin birth (or in the case you sited, the concept of a trinity) were concidered of lesser importance.

As for baptism, John the Baptist and Jesus were both Jews. Todays evangelism seems to me awfully far removed from their reform movements.

And as far as Christians witnessing on campuses and bringing the good news to local coffee shops, I'm sure there is a great deal of sincerity in many of them and a great deal of pinched, self righteous superiority in others. In some cases I even think that their true, uncluttered, primary inetnt is to teach something. If my Christian friends are right, God already knows the content of their souls better than they do themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jan 13th, 2006, 05:38 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by mburbank
Then we should dismiss ALL scripture references from this conversation, there are a lot of biblical scholars who think the entire Bible is bullshit, so we probably shouldn't be citing the Bible to support or dismiss Christians using their 1st Amendment rights, right? "

Don't be abdsurd. I understand you're irritated. I assure you I do not equate Christianity since the creed with Pat Robertson. But there is a point here, and to me it's this. A lot of Christians of all denominations focus so much attention on Salvation and damnation, much to the disservice of the bulk of what Jesus had to say about how God wants us to behave.
Damnation is mentioned more often in the New Testament than it is the Old (no offense with the Old and New stuff, I'm just a goy ).

Jesus did talk about a lot of stuff that we should do, but don't be mistaken in thinking that it was in order to make this planet a better, nicer, safer, and happier place. He told us how to behave, because he was interested in our souls, not the planet earth. For example, see Matthew 25:41-46. We don't exhibit charity simply for the poor, but rather, we exhinit charity for ourselves. It's not just right to feed a hungry man because he's hungry, it's also right because our very life depends on it. So say what you want about salvation and damnation, but it's all tied in there.

I realize you aren't a Christian, so frankly, you have the luxury to pick and choose whatever you like from the New Testament.


Quote:
As for baptism, John the Baptist and Jesus were both Jews. Todays evangelism seems to me awfully far removed from their reform movements.
See the Paulists, the Franciscans, as well as other great Christian missionary groups. Again, I'm not here to defend Pat Robertson. I think you'd have difficulty in doing that. Perhaps my anger is misdirected. Rather than getting upset with critics b.c. they react to Robertson, perhaps all of my blame should go on Robertson for giving Christianity such a bad rep. I have met some great evangelicals in my day, very caring, loving, and spiritual people. It's unfortunate that cynical Americans see Pat Robertson's face when they often think of American Christians (which is really what we're talking about, isn't it?).
Reply With Quote
  #45  
ziggytrix ziggytrix is offline
Mocker
ziggytrix's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: i come from the water
Old Jan 13th, 2006, 06:21 PM       
I would agree that obnoxious "Christians" tarnish the image of Christianity in general. I'm also so cynical that I think a lot of people, especially in politics, would go around saying Hare Krishna at the end of their speeches if the majority of Americans were Krishnas.

As for what Jesus would think of modern Christianity, there is no way of knowing that, it's a personal faith issue. I believe Jesus would reenact the moneychangers in the temple scene, but that's just me.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Jan 13th, 2006, 06:33 PM       
I'm sure he'd be quite satisfied with corporatation Christianity.

I'm sure he'd also be quite satisfied to see that the world hasn't changed much since he's been here, despite his teachings and "Sacrafice".
__________________
NEVER
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:20 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.