Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Bingo. Any number of commentators, including non-Christian ones,
have pointed out that the disdain for traditional, mainstream Christianity and even the appeal of the New Atheism is really about one thing only: sexuality. It isn't about truth or morality or any other highfalutin stuff. It's about sexuality."
C'mon.
That is just not true.
Any atheists wanna chime in on that one? All you hetero married, faithful atheists?
Any gay atheists? You think you are a non believer or agnostic, cuz you're gay?
I don't think so.
And I would believe you guys, rather than someone pointing a finger at you
defining you, cuz you know 'you'. No one else is in your head or heart.
Google the issue, if you like. The reality is, modern morals and mores are focused heavily on issues of sexuality and lifestyle. The reality is, traditional Christian morals and mores are almost 180 degrees out of sync with modern morals and mores. Non-Christian belief systems and communities are far more welcoming or at least non-condemning of modern morals and mores in regard to sexuality and lifestyle than are traditional Christianity and traditional Christian communities. There is a direct link between this reality and (1) the increasingly vehement opposition to traditional Christianity and (2) the appeal of non-Christian belief systems and communities.
In an effort to stem the tide, many churches are indeed bending and twisting traditional Christian morals and mores in order to accommodate sexualities and lifestyles they would have condemned just ten years ago. You may see this as enlightened; I see it as evil.
Certainly my statement about "one thing only" was hyperbole. But sexuality and lifestyle preference has been shown to be a major factor.
You have no way of knowing how much of the OT Jesus supported other than those parts that prophesied about Him because you do not bother to test the spirit of anything against the "mind of Christ" and His revelations about the true nature of God. Your acceptance of EVERYTHING "written in ink" in the Bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God is completely irrational and against the inescapable fallibility of the men who wrote it.
Do you honestly not see how silly this sounds? The only Jesus we have is the Jesus of the NT. Without the NT, neither you nor anyone else would know anything about Jesus and his teachings.
The authors of the NT were more fallible than YOU - is that your notion? The people who knew Jesus personally, who walked with him and saw him in action, and those with whom they shared their direct knowledge - they are more fallible than YOU?
Admit it, the "mind of Christ" to which you refer is YOUR mind, this and nothing more. Where is this "mind of Christ" against which you test the NT except in YOUR head?
I do make it a point to call out self-righteous Christians of any type who go out of their way to denigrate others using Jesus as a screen behind which to throw their grenades, and let's face it--your OP threw the first grenade and in fact was specifically intended for that purpose. No fair crying now that one was thrown back. Isn't the reaction you got exactly the one you were going for? Glad I could be of assistance.
The reaction I was "going for"? No, but certainly the reaction I expected from the peanut gallery of regulars. My posts such as this are not aimed at the peanut gallery. They are aimed at those who may actually gain something from them, if nothing more than an understanding of how a traditional Christian views and defends his faith. I would have welcomed a sincere and intelligent dialogue, but I had no real expectations of that.
My OP was a "grenade" that "denigrated others" and "used Jesus as a screen"? You'll have to point out those parts to me - please, do so - because I frankly don't see them at all, nor does the veritable team of Christians who reviewed my post before I published it. Perhaps the grenade was in your mind?
Hardly. Ever studied the Spanish inquisition? Ever studied what people in this country did to others different from themselves in the name of Christianity?
The reaction I was "going for"? No, but certainly the reaction I expected from the peanut gallery of regulars. My posts such as this are not aimed at the peanut gallery. They are aimed at those who may actually gain something from them, if nothing more than an understanding of how a traditional Christian views and defends his faith. I would have welcomed a sincere and intelligent dialogue, but I had no real expectations of that.
My OP was a "grenade" that "denigrated others" and "used Jesus as a screen"? You'll have to point out those parts to me - please, do so - because I frankly don't see them at all, nor does the veritable team of Christians who reviewed my post before I published it. Perhaps the grenade was in your mind?
So if you had no expectation of an intelligent dialog...what was your purpose here?
For some of us, you worshiping the events depicted in the OT is a denigration of humanity.
So if you had no expectation of an intelligent dialog...what was your purpose here? For some of us, you worshiping the events depicted in the OT is a denigration of humanity.
That's odd. Perhaps his O.T. belief(s) somehow make you feel rejected and/or frustrated.
That's odd. Perhaps his O.T. belief(s) somehow make you feel rejected and/or frustrated.
i couldn't get past his claim that people "worship events"
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
So if you had no expectation of an intelligent dialog...what was your purpose here?
For some of us, you worshiping the events depicted in the OT is a denigration of humanity.
You have no way of knowing how much of the OT Jesus supported other than those parts that prophesied about Him because you do not bother to test the spirit of anything against the "mind of Christ" and His revelations about the true nature of God. Your acceptance of EVERYTHING "written in ink" in the Bible as the inerrant and infallible word of God is completely irrational and against the inescapable fallibility of the men who wrote it.
The educated reinterpretation of the content in the Bible using the "mind of Christ" has nothing to do with sexuality or any other carnal-minded excuses. It has to do with the revelation by Jesus that God IS agape love. God is Spirit. God IS holy. God's Holy Spirit is agape love which is how we separate the corruptions of fallible men from the revelations of Jesus in the Bible. You mistakenly test nothing and accept everything as part of your Bible-believing mindset. That is your stumbling block against knowing God or Jesus.
No one is reinventing Jesus. We are correcting our ignorant, primitive, savage, and barbaric, ancestors' understanding of both God and Jesus USING the revelations and unambiguous demonstration of God's true nature by Jesus. You make no such effort and blindly accept everything "written in ink." That is why you experience disdain, NOT because Jesus said you would.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irkle Berserkle
Do you honestly not see how silly this sounds? The only Jesus we have is the Jesus of the NT. Without the NT, neither you nor anyone else would know anything about Jesus and his teachings.
No one disputes this, but you make no effort to actually know the Jesus depicted. Are you unfamiliar with the descriptions of the Holy Spirit in Galatians 5, or 1st Corinthians 13, or the Sermon on the Mount. There is no ambiguity in those descriptions of God's true nature nor is there in the demonstration of God's true nature by Jesus using His body and life during the scourging and crucifixion. He smote no one and loved even His torturers and murderers. Given that kind of evidence of God's true nature, how can you as a Christian possibly accept those things that are so completely inconsistent with and incompatible with the nature of God revealed by Christ?
Quote:
The authors of the NT were more fallible than YOU - is that your notion? The people who knew Jesus personally, who walked with him and saw him in action, and those with whom they shared their direct knowledge - they are more fallible than YOU?
No. The point is they were fallible, period. To invest their interpretations with infallibility is absurd so why don't you bother to test what is claimed about God or Jesus against the "mind of Christ" as described above?
Quote:
Admit it, the "mind of Christ" to which you refer is YOUR mind, this and nothing more. Where is this "mind of Christ" against which you test the NT except in YOUR head?
I have explained it above but you make no effort to find out what the "mind of Christ" is like leaving you bereft of any possibility to understand the "mind of God."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
