westboro baptist WTF

[sanjuro_ronin]

Not to take sides, but the only evidence for Jesus Christ and the word of (the Christian) God is that book (and the various non-cannonical works, e.g. Gospel of Thomas). So how can Jesus Christ be the "ONLY ONE word of God...not some book" when that very book that is the only evidence of his existence and his words in the first place?

I hope that made sense.

What I am trying to say is that, what is written in the bible, can't contridict the actual word of God, Jesus and his teachings.
EX:
Jesus tells us to love thy neighbour, including are enemies.
Some where elses in the bible, Paul for example, says that we must throw out those that don't agree with what He/the apostles are teaching.
This is contrdictory, so what do we do?
Take what Jesus said and reconcile it with what Paul said and sense Jesus is the word of God, his word carries more weight, so either Paul was wrong or misunderstood or taken out of context, wither way, one does NOT "throw out" but one does indeed, "Love".

Is that what you meant?

[Matt Stone]

Matt, you make far too many assumptions.
But then, so do I

Conceded.

yes I am a moderate, but I don't think I can be viewed as doing little to step up and curb or fight against the intolerances of fundies, as you call them.
Over the last few years I have done quite a bit trying to get people to not only understand the message of love that Jesus preached, but doing it without being a bible thumber and at times VS cults like the JW's and some more radical ones.

How about not "versus" the fringe groups that are silent and already self-embarrassing (the JWs have claimed end of the world several times - obviously they were wrong, and nobody seems to take them seriously anymore as their own proselytization has marginalized them). How about versus Westboro, Pat Robertson, New Life Church, Rick Warren and more prominent, mainstream, yet no less fundamentalist, elitist, separatist wackjobs?

This is a MA forum, so not the place for discussion like this.

This is the "off topic" forum, so this is exactly the place for discussion like this. Where would it be better held?

You obviously have decided that the bible holds "nothing" for you and question it's legitmacy and you are quite correct to do so.

But the way you phrase that is condescending and implies that I'm somehow in error.

The bible is a collection of works, written and edited by men that felt they were under divine inspiration and as such, must be taken as just that.

Just as the eddas, the suras, the sutras, and all other manner of allegedly "revealed" texts should be taken - as man made texts, hoping to extol that which is best in mankind, but focused through the cultural lens of that particular time period and geographic location, completely absent of any actual divine contribution.

As a Christian, there is ONLY ONE word of God and that is Jesus Christ and not some book.

But the word is in the book... You can't separate the two. And given that the book is the only record of what the alleged person allegedly said (since there's absolutely no verification that a personage of such acclaim and impact ever existed whatsoever, and references to his existence in the few histories of the time have been proven to be forgeries), they are, then, inseparable.

And you demonstrate the elitism... There is no more legitimacy for a claim to the primacy of christianity, for the legitimacy of christianity to the exclusion of all other religions, than any other religion possesses. There is the inherent exclusivity and separatism of religion, illustrated easily for all to see...

Nor does ANY organized religion or group speak for Jesus.

Then there better be a whole lotta universities, seminaries, churches, and pastors shutting down shop ASAP. Since Jesus isn't speaking for himself, that makes them the de facto mouthpieces, basing their commentary on the biblical fabrication alleging to record what he said.

Grace is a gift and indeed, no works will make us anymore deserving of it, but it is a gift that must be received.
If you believe in Grace then, even without any conditions, there is THAT condition, it must be received.

God's let Joshua deal with him directly, putting human constraints on belief, and Thomas got away with Jesus providing him immediate prophecy to convince him. Why the conditions on the rest of us who are in so dire need of his grace?

There is a reason why no man is allowed to judge, because no one knows what is in the heart or another, only God does and he will Judge that heart and will do so with love and compassion.

No, he won't do it with love and compassion... Again, go to the book. There's no love and compassion in the book. There's heaven for a select group, limited in number, and there's hellfire for everyone else. It's actually quite clear...

We all find our path in life, for some it is a Christian path in Jesus for others it is a Christian path in Atheism , but for all, there is hope and faith and love and the greatest of these is love.

A "christian path in atheism?" What ever do you mean by that?

The only thing I can ask you Matt is to be open to the fact that you may be wrong, just as easily as you may be right, just as I am open to the fact that I may be wrong, just as easily as I may be right.

The difference, my friend, is that I am quite open to being wrong. Being wrong is the first consideration I make... I'd happily run to the corner and beat the drums to get folks in line for Jesus if he'd only give me one easily identifiable sign that something happened, something that might not have happened on its own, and that was easily, irrefutably linkable to his involvement. So far, in 2000 years, not a thing... Occam's Razor's a real ***** sometimes, and the far simpler solution is that "he doesn't exist." So I content myself with living a life based on ethics, not fairy tales (though I'm not above using Star Wars or Warhammer or Tolkien to explain an ethical dilemma or moral construct to someone ).

[Reality_Check]

What I am trying to say is that, what is written in the bible, can't contridict the actual word of God, Jesus and his teachings.
EX:
Jesus tells us to love thy neighbour, including are enemies.
Some where elses in the bible, Paul for example, says that we must throw out those that don't agree with what He/the apostles are teaching.
This is contrdictory, so what do we do?
Take what Jesus said and reconcile it with what Paul said and sense Jesus is the word of God, his word carries more weight, so either Paul was wrong or misunderstood or taken out of context, wither way, one does NOT "throw out" but one does indeed, "Love".

Is that what you meant?

Somewhat. But since what is written in the Bible is the only example of the "actual word of God, Jesus and his teachings" how can you tell if it's contradictory to those teachings? In effect, how do you know that what the Bible says Jesus taught is in fact what was taught? You can't say what Jesus taught supersedes the Bible, when the Bible is the only place with those teachings. There is no independent example with which to compare. Without the Bible (and various non-cannonical works) there is no "Jesus and his teachings".

[sanjuro_ronin]

How about versus Westboro, Pat Robertson, New Life Church, Rick Warren and more prominent, mainstream, yet no less fundamentalist, elitist, separatist wackjobs?

We do what we can, when we can, as I assume you are.

This is the "off topic" forum, so this is exactly the place for discussion like this. Where would it be better held?

Don't even go there with the off topic, LOL !!

But the way you phrase that is condescending and implies that I'm somehow in error.

I agree that you are right to question the bible, hos does that sound condesending?

But the word is in the book... You can't separate the two. And given that the book is the only record of what the alleged person allegedly said (since there's absolutely no verification that a personage of such acclaim and impact ever existed whatsoever, and references to his existence in the few histories of the time have been proven to be forgeries), they are, then, inseparable.

And you demonstrate the elitism... There is no more legitimacy for a claim to the primacy of christianity, for the legitimacy of christianity to the exclusion of all other religions, than any other religion possesses. There is the inherent exclusivity and separatism of religion, illustrated easily for all to see...

The book is simply that, a book, it is not what teaches us about God and Jesus.
I am an elitist, but that has to do with ma MA, not my faith

Then there better be a whole lotta universities, seminaries, churches, and pastors shutting down shop ASAP. Since Jesus isn't speaking for himself, that makes them the de facto mouthpieces, basing their commentary on the biblical fabrication alleging to record what he said.

Those places express opinions and views, they do NOT speak for God and Jesus.

God's let Joshua deal with him directly, putting human constraints on belief, and Thomas got away with Jesus providing him immediate prophecy to convince him. Why the conditions on the rest of us who are in so dire need of his grace?

They both has to receive God's gift, just as anyone else.
Ever try giving someone something that they don't want to receive?
How did that work out for you?

No, he won't do it with love and compassion... Again, go to the book. There's no love and compassion in the book. There's heaven for a select group, limited in number, and there's hellfire for everyone else. It's actually quite clear...

Don't ever take one book (Revelation) over the Word Of God, it doesn't work that way.
It's as clear as how you choose to interpret a hand full of passages over the direct teachings of Christ.

The difference, my friend, is that I am quite open to being wrong. Being wrong is the first consideration I make... I'd happily run to the corner and beat the drums to get folks in line for Jesus if he'd only give me one easily identifiable sign that something happened, something that might not have happened on its own, and that was easily, irrefutably linkable to his involvement. So far, in 2000 years, not a thing... Occam's Razor's a real ***** sometimes, and the far simpler solution is that "he doesn't exist." So I content myself with living a life based on ethics, not fairy tales (though I'm not above using Star Wars or Warhammer or Tolkien to explain an ethical dilemma or moral construct to someone ).

I am glad that you are open.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Somewhat. But since what is written in the Bible is the only example of the "actual word of God, Jesus and his teachings" how can you tell if it's contradictory to those teachings? In effect, how do you know that what the Bible says Jesus taught is in fact what was taught? You can't say what Jesus taught supersedes the Bible, when the Bible is the only place with those teachings. There is no independent example with which to compare. Without the Bible (and various non-cannonical works) there is no "Jesus and his teachings".

Oh, I understand what you mean now.
And I think Matt brings up the same issue too, but I don't think either one of you will like the answer, at least I don't think you will because you see, the answer is the Holy Spirit, that guiding force of God and Jesus 's essences that, if we allow it, guides us to the truth of God's Love.
Yeah, I know, it isn't the answer you want and I wish there was a more "concrete" or "factual" one.

[David Jamieson]

Conceded.



How about not "versus" the fringe groups that are silent and already self-embarrassing (the JWs have claimed end of the world several times - obviously they were wrong, and nobody seems to take them seriously anymore as their own proselytization has marginalized them). How about versus Westboro, Pat Robertson, New Life Church, Rick Warren and more prominent, mainstream, yet no less fundamentalist, elitist, separatist wackjobs?

the JW's have not claimed end of the wrold several times. their teaching is that when the people who were born before 1914 die out and there is none of that generation left, then the end of the world as we know it will occur. So, at best, we are close according to them, but they haven't made "several" calls.

As for Mormons and ADLS members. Well, they are a conundrum in and of themselves. They appear to be churches that sprang forth out of necessity to be removed from old world ways. Very in keeping with Americanism though, but not really "Christian" in a Judaeo-Christian sense. Still, peaceful enough. Televangelists are not Christian in practice, they are profiteers who sell readings of scripture to finance wealthy lifestyles and power both political and social. Frauds in essence, to the last unfortunately.

This is the "off topic" forum, so this is exactly the place for discussion like this. Where would it be better held?

In a church basement really.

But the way you phrase that is condescending and implies that I'm somehow in error.

arguing about scripture is always an error, especially if one takes a position of stating it as fact.

Just as the eddas, the suras, the sutras, and all other manner of allegedly "revealed" texts should be taken - as man made texts, hoping to extol that which is best in mankind, but focused through the cultural lens of that particular time period and geographic location, completely absent of any actual divine contribution.

Each of these in essence carries more or less the same base message, but to each culture, an accordance of tehir own context and understanding. IE: It's hard to sell a euro on the idea of god being a nepalese aesetic. Blong hair blue eyed jesus painting is much easier to sell, especially when it tool about 1000 years to get the foot in the door! lol

But the word is in the book... You can't separate the two. And given that the book is the only record of what the alleged person allegedly said (since there's absolutely no verification that a personage of such acclaim and impact ever existed whatsoever, and references to his existence in the few histories of the time have been proven to be forgeries), they are, then, inseparable.

True. there is no Jesus without the New Testament and without the records of the essenes and a nasorenes.

And you demonstrate the elitism... There is no more legitimacy for a claim to the primacy of christianity, for the legitimacy of christianity to the exclusion of all other religions, than any other religion possesses. There is the inherent exclusivity and separatism of religion, illustrated easily for all to see...

I think this is related to out innate tendency towards tribalism. How can he promote a thought form that is not native to his own belief structure? he can't and shouldn't be expected to anymore than you should be expected to correlate all the texts into one final text that brings it all together.

Then there better be a whole lotta universities, seminaries, churches, and pastors shutting down shop ASAP. Since Jesus isn't speaking for himself, that makes them the de facto mouthpieces, basing their commentary on the biblical fabrication alleging to record what he said.

Nope. these folks provide life guidance according to the interpreted word of Jesus as laid out in the gospel. they are doing what they are expected to do. Priests as a construct existed as a social fabrication long before Jesus was walking around as a human. Everything is continuity, not abruptly beginning with the story of Jesus. THat needs to be recognized I think.

God's let Joshua deal with him directly, putting human constraints on belief, and Thomas got away with Jesus providing him immediate prophecy to convince him. Why the conditions on the rest of us who are in so dire need of his grace?

God lets' all of us deal directly with God. Many of us, do not choose to do so and ignore god. Or come to the mind that there is no god or that god is not possible to comprehend, so just fetch wood and carry water (which may be the way I think.. )

No, he won't do it with love and compassion... Again, go to the book. There's no love and compassion in the book. There's heaven for a select group, limited in number, and there's hellfire for everyone else. It's actually quite clear...

There is nothing of the sort. there is no set number for who goes to heaven and there's no hellfire for everyone else. This is found exactly NOWHERE in the new testament. This is a fabrication of New world cults who believe in the rapture (which is also not mentioned in the bible). In fact, there is very little about the end times in the bible. Revelations has more to do with the fall of rome when studied with a scholarly eye.

A "christian path in atheism?" What ever do you mean by that?

An atheist can be a loving, giving and compassionate person. This is a Christian Path as well. Although, it's not necessary to deem it "christian" in particular as ChHristianity is not a requirement to practice these things at all.

The difference, my friend, is that I am quite open to being wrong. Being wrong is the first consideration I make... I'd happily run to the corner and beat the drums to get folks in line for Jesus if he'd only give me one easily identifiable sign that something happened, something that might not have happened on its own, and that was easily, irrefutably linkable to his involvement. So far, in 2000 years, not a thing... Occam's Razor's a real ***** sometimes, and the far simpler solution is that "he doesn't exist." So I content myself with living a life based on ethics, not fairy tales (though I'm not above using Star Wars or Warhammer or Tolkien to explain an ethical dilemma or moral construct to someone ).

If it was easy, then your faith wouldn't be a requirement. If everything was just handed to you in order for you to easily understand then you would work for nothing and you would be grateful for nothing. YOu would also learn nothing.

What you are stating though is the position of a nihilist really. If it is your prerogative to not believe in Jesus, then so be it. I doubt you'll convince someone who does believe though. Especially not in a few paragraphs in a kungfu forum. ;D

But consider this:

You are living in 2010. This date is calculated according to the CHurches declaration of the birth of Jesus.

If you live in the west, you get a holiday at Christmas and Easter and it is built into your social construct.

Most of the rule of law you live under is drawn from Mosaic law (the laws of Moses).

Most of the social construct you function within is based on the traditions and knowledge of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and knowledge. pretty much exclusively.

there are few places that do not function within this construct. But the whole world recognizes 2010 as the operative date for all business, all trade, all modern time keeping.

While some keep their ancient calendars as cultural tradition for religious holidays and cultural holidays, we all otherwise adhere to the Gregorian Calendar.

The whole world still exists under the rule of Rome. In a Christian context.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Revelations has more to do with the fall of rome when studied with a scholarly eye.

Revelation was indeed, basically, anti-roman propaganda literature that was then converted to apocolyptic literature.

[David Jamieson]

Hate is held in the hearts and minds of many towards others.
Don't you think that is their right?

I think I stated it outright that it is their right to think and feel as they wish.

It is when people act on their hatred. They have no right to impose their hatred on who they hate. That is bringing harm.
They have the right to hold up hate signs in public.

Do they? Words bring great harm. They can harm the psyche of another. Saying hateful things IS a hateful action.

Hate cripples the hater more than the hated.
So they have chosen a crippling path.

They intend to cripple others with their hatred as well, so while they are spiritually and intellectually lame, they wish to further their lameness by imposing it on others.

[Pork Chop]

going back to the original topic
i just want to give props to Papa Bear

[kfson]

Oh, I understand what you mean now.
And I think Matt brings up the same issue too, but I don't think either one of you will like the answer, at least I don't think you will because you see, the answer is the Holy Spirit, that guiding force of God and Jesus 's essences that, if we allow it, guides us to the truth of God's Love.
Yeah, I know, it isn't the answer you want and I wish there was a more "concrete" or "factual" one.

I wish more "Christians" would use the Holy Spirit for their way of being.
Very rarely do you you here about the Holy Spirit in the mainstream church. Why?

I wonder what the Holy Spirit would have to say about those hate signs? Never mind, I was just informed.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I wish more "Christians" would use the Holy Spirit for their way of being.
Very rarely do you you here about the Holy Spirit in the mainstream church. Why?

I wonder what the Holy Spirit would have to say about those hate signs? Never mind, I was just informed.

Organizations like to do the thinking for you, cults like to do the thinking for you.
See, Christianity is funny that way,it is very anti-organization and anti-cult and this is why-
It advocates ONE leader- Jesus Christ and no earthly leaders at all, because the whole of Christianty (believers) is the church and the the guiding force is The Holy Spirit that lives in us all.
Now, the HS may decide to lead you in a different path at times, but as long as we follow it and use the guidelines given to us by the HS so that we know it is what is leadung us, we will be OK.
What are the guidelines you ask?
God is love and all those that profess love have God and those that have God have the HS.
Anyone that does not profess love does not have God nor the HS.

[David Jamieson]

Organizations like to do the thinking for you, cults like to do the thinking for you.
See, Christianity is funny that way,it is very anti-organization and anti-cult and this is why-
It advocates ONE leader- Jesus Christ and no earthly leaders at all, because the whole of Christianty (believers) is the church and the the guiding force is The Holy Spirit that lives in us all.
Now, the HS may decide to lead you in a different path at times, but as long as we follow it and use the guidelines given to us by the HS so that we know it is what is leadung us, we will be OK.
What are the guidelines you ask?
God is love and all those that profess love have God and those that have God have the HS.
Anyone that does not profess love does not have God nor the HS.

Christian churches such as the RC church and teh Orthodox church are in fact "cults" by definition.

Christianity doesn't advocate only Jesus as their leader, the RC church advocates their pope as leader and as vicar of Christ on earth. The same goes for the eastern orthodoxy and their pope and for Episcopalians it is the queen etc.

Christianity as a religion is as fractured and messed up as any organized religion.

The holy spirit is not guiding you in my opinion. But it is your own spirit, your own breath, your own life that was basically a gift. It is not an intelligent being that makes decisions and then presses you towards them. You make the decisions and you pay the consequences good or bad.

God's guidance to us was that we have our own free will now that we are out of the garden.

God is all things. In a Christian sense, God is also hate, indifference and evil itself. God is all things, God is omnipresent, God is omniscient and god created everything including duality, the devil, evil and good.

As creatures of god, we meet all these expressions and all have a purpose.

If we were naught but do gooders, we would not need free will to learn good and evil. We would not be out of the garden, we would be back in it.

But, this is only my opinion. I personally do not believe in the trinity model as laid out by the church. It is inelegant, complicated, contradictory and not necessary in my opinion.

But, again, I reiterate, like all things religious or pertaining to god(s), we only have our own opinion, we onl have our own belief. Someone else validating your own certainly doesn't help the expansion of one's own knowledge either.

Know thyself, and you will come to understand many things.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Christianity is NOT an organization David, no matter how much organizations want people to think that.
Jesus was very anti-organization, as is god, they dealt with people, individuals, not organizations.

The holy spirit is not guiding you in my opinion. But it is your own spirit, your own breath, your own life that was basically a gift. It is not an intelligent being that makes decisions and then presses you towards them. You make the decisions and you pay the consequences good or bad.

Our own spirit is only complete when we accept the HS into us.
And yes, we are responsible for ALL we do, always.

As for the Trinity, it is simply a human doctrine, mans attempt to understand God's nature ( as if you could).
Is Jesus God?
If you believe him to begotten, Yes he is God, just like a human child is human because his father is human and not a beaver or turtle or whatnot.
Is the HS God?
Of course, it is the spirit of God, what else can it be?
Does god have a distinct personality? yes, why not?
Does Jesus? Yes.
Does the HS? Yes, though can be a tough one for some.

Do we need a trinity doctrine to understand this?
No, not really.

[David Jamieson]

Christianity is NOT an organization David, no matter how much organizations want people to think that.
Jesus was very anti-organization, as is god, they dealt with people, individuals, not organizations.



Our own spirit is only complete when we accept the HS into us.
And yes, we are responsible for ALL we do, always.

As for the Trinity, it is simply a human doctrine, mans attempt to understand God's nature ( as if you could).
Is Jesus God?
If you believe him to begotten, Yes he is God, just like a human child is human because his father is human and not a beaver or turtle or whatnot.
Is the HS God?
Of course, it is the spirit of God, what else can it be?
Does god have a distinct personality? yes, why not?
Does Jesus? Yes.
Does the HS? Yes, though can be a tough one for some.

Do we need a trinity doctrine to understand this?
No, not really.

Christianity is an organized religion and by default, an organization if 2 or more people are involved in the propagation of it. By definition, the church is an organization, no matter what the church.

I don't believe in the construct of the trinity or the holy spirit to be anything other than a construct of the early Christian church.

I do appreciate christianity for it's teachings, but am wary of its interpretations in their myriad versions.

To me, it is as dead simple as any other organized religion.

IE: Be good to each other. Each and all of us.

[sanjuro_ronin]

If Christianity has an organization, what is it's name?