Getting Used To The Dark

[Accountable]

Originally Posted by gmc

Why do so many Christians have such a prurient interest in the lifestyles of others? Only in the religious posts do you see such fascination with homosexuality and none of them are about preaching christian tolerance.

Fire and brimstone, be afraid of hell and the wrath of god. What happened to the god jesus seemed to believe in? Not scary enough or something?

You'd prefer this thread to be in some pro-homosexual forum? This is exactly the place for this discussion. And btw I think yours is the first mention of homosexuality in this particular thread but I haven't checked.

Tolerance doesn't equate to acceptance. Nowhere has Bobby said his beliefs should be mandatory law, only that Christians should act as Christians.

For example (and correct me if I'm wrong, Bobby) if someone approached a Christian bragging that he just got an extra tenner in change at the local store. of the following options:

A. Saying, "Cool! Treat me to a burger. I'm starving."
B. Saying, a little uncomfortably, "Good for you."
C. Saying nothing.
D. Saying coldly, "Well, a GOOD Christian would return that immediately."
E. Saying, "Good thing you noticed. That cashier will get in big trouble if we don't get that back to her. Let's go back in. After that I'll treat you to a burger. I'm starving."
F. Screaming "YOU'LL BURN IN HELL, THIEF!!" then praying loudly for his soul.

The proper approach would be E, tolerating the person but not the sin.

[gmc]

Posted by accountable

You'd prefer this thread to be in some pro-homosexual forum? This is exactly the place for this discussion. And btw I think yours is the first mention of homosexuality in this particular thread but I haven't checked.

Let me rephrase the question

Why do so many Christians have such a prurient interest in the lifestyles of others? For instance Only in the religious posts do you see such fascination with homosexuality and none of them are about preaching christian tolerance.

Fire and brimstone, be afraid of hell and the wrath of god. What happened to the god Jesus seemed to believe in? Not scary enough or something?

You're right I am the first one to mention it in this particular thread. I was making the point that threads bringing up the subject of homosexuality, promiscuity or anything sexually related subject in a condemnatory tone is almost invariably in a religious thread.

If this was on a pro-homosexuality forum I would not have been reading it. Not being homosexual such forums don't have any particular interest.

Politics and religion do.

Sin is subjective.

Theft is a crime against society. As such society has a right to take sanctions in a manner agreed upon.

posted by BHughesNC

Thanks condemnation is totally the wrong word. I do believe that sin needs to be exposed as sin. I think there are Christians who burn their own personal candles dimly so as not to expose their own sin.

.

In this day and age it seems that sin is seriously on the increase. Morality in or nation is at an all time low.

The common idea is that people should be able to live their lives in the open without fear of condemnation. How have we come to such a place? Answer: Christians are getting used to the dark.

A sin, in one sense is something that is deemed to offend divine law. Divine law is something you believe in or you don't-as indeed is the divine.

Because some think a particular lifestyle a sin does not make it so. Nor do those who believe in the divine have any better sense of right or wrong although they would have us believe that they do.

There are some things we can all agree on should not be tolerated. There are also some things or lifestyles that may be repugnant but so long as they take place between consenting adults of their own free will then if you wish your own freedom to live as you choose you have to extend the same to others.

Sin is not on the rise. what is different is that we do not pretend that things, like child abuse don't happen whereas before a child would not be believed and in the case of some churches the culprit protected. Marriage and the family are stronger than ever but now people are not forced to stay in unhappy marriages even if some churches still excommunicate those who exercise that new freedom and condemn easy divorce as breaking up the family without taking cognisance of the misery that was the lot of many when there was no choice in the matter. Thumping the wife is no longer a husband's right. (in my case it would be the last thing I ever did anyway)

The only dark we need worry about is the darkness of narrow minded religious and political bigotry.

To paraphrase martin luther-reason is the greatest enemy that faith has. What you see is not the lights going on but rather the light being shone on all the dark corners where once people were afraid to speak out for fear of condemnation as a sinner and people standing proud away from that fear.

perhaps the greatest sin of all is sanctimony ( and just to make myself clear. That is a general comment in the interests of pursuing a debate and is not in any way directed at anyone who posted on this thread)

posted by accountable

For example (and correct me if I'm wrong, Bobby) if someone approached a Christian bragging that he just got an extra tenner in change at the local store. of the following options:

A. Saying, "Cool! Treat me to a burger. I'm starving."
B. Saying, a little uncomfortably, "Good for you."
C. Saying nothing.
D. Saying coldly, "Well, a GOOD Christian would return that immediately."
E. Saying, "Good thing you noticed. That cashier will get in big trouble if we don't get that back to her. Let's go back in. After that I'll treat you to a burger. I'm starving."
F. Screaming "YOU'LL BURN IN HELL, THIEF!!" then praying loudly for his soul.

The proper approach would be E, tolerating the person but not the sin.

I would actually agree with you there in principle, but not quite for the same reason.

[Accountable]

Originally Posted by gmc

I would actually agree with you there in principle, but not quite for the same reason.

Right. So would a Muslim, I would imagine. Some principles are universal. For everything else, there's MasterCard. Sorry, had to do it. I have a problem with Christians or anyone else who thinks we should impose Christian rules & values on everyone ... smacks of radical Islam to me. We should follow Jesus' teachings because we want to and because it is right, full stop. Let Caesar have his law & we can have ours. They don't have to be the same. If we live ours lives properly, others will naturally want to know how and why. They'll be drawn to us like, well, moths to the light.

[Accountable]

Originally Posted by rjwould

This is a contradiction. Not surprising though. Dark is, and light is a 'correction' to what is...Jesus said, 'I am', so, logic would lead us to understand that Jesus, as God, was the darkness itself. Jesus as saviour, is the light which is added to or subtracted from that darkness in order to change the perspective.

Consider the idea that Jesus came to destroy the law by fulfilling the law...Christianity is a contradiction to itself, that is why people are drawn to it. It is so contradictory that it leaves people feeling so confused that one submits to the idea because there must be some sort of cosmic, godly key to understanding it, otherwise how could it have survived as long as it has....Another contradiction....

All your contradictions are only contradictory if you accept your original premise, which makes no sense - thus the rest of your argument goes. Besides, Jesus never came to destroy the law.

[Accountable]

Darkness is the absence or deficiency of light: the darkness of night. Darkness is zero. Nothing. One can't create zero. I can't show you nothing.

[Accountable]

Originally Posted by rjwould

Well, although you are making my point for me, I will contradict you using your own bible. According to the above, God made darkness. You may give it a value of zero, but unless darkness was either a mistake or simply a consequence of God's creation, it didn't exist before God's hand got involved......That gives darkness value...

It goes along the same lines as cold....One must add or subtract heat, the consequence of lack of heat is coldness, which 'is'

'kay.
Apparently you quoted something different than what you're reading, because I don't see it. Not sure of the relevance anyway. Doesn't take away from the contradiction that you say Jesus came to destroy the Land Jesus said the opposite.

[Accountable]

Originally Posted by rjwould

In my post I made the observation that Jesus came to destroy the law ..

Bible Verse: Matthew 5:17-18 (Jesus said) - "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

We now return you to the original subject already in progress.

[gmc]

posted by rjwould

Consider the idea that Jesus came to destroy the law by fulfilling the law...Christianity is a contradiction to itself, that is why people are drawn to it. It is so contradictory that it leaves people feeling so confused that one submits to the idea because there must be some sort of cosmic, godly key to understanding it, otherwise how could it have survived as long as it has....Another contradiction....

People are drawn to it because in essence it is a good approach to life. Whether you believe in god or not there is much to commend the philosphy.

If jesus was the light -supposed to how a new way a new testament as to how all should live their lives etc etc why do so many of his followers cling on to the, vicious, vindictive god of the old testament and look for passages to justify any particular hatred they might happen to have, armouring themselves in the self righteous protection of almighty god and preach hatred of anyone that does not conform to what they think is the correct way of behaving, or better still pity them because they are going to hell so have fun while they are on earth tormenting them.

Having done that you can then argue with fellow Christians about whether the holy trinity is the way to go or not. Protestant can slaughter catholic because they worship idols and Catholics can slaughter protestants because they don't worship properly.

If there is only one god then it must be the same one that muslims worship and jews worship so where does this my god is the only one and yours is wrong come from? You either believe in one god, or you don't believe. You can't be seeing a different god from the muslim or the jew because if you believe you are then you accept there is more than one god.

Religious belief is by it's nature irrational but at least you would think the sheer surprise of finding others equally irrational would be enough common ground that you want to sit down and talk about it rather than bash someone's head in because they don't belief quite the same kind of nonsense as you do. At least pagans were open to the idea that the other god worshipper might have a valid belief system as well.

posted by accountable

Right. So would a Muslim, I would imagine. Some principles are universal. For everything else, there's MasterCard. Sorry, had to do it. I have a problem with Christians or anyone else who thinks we should impose Christian rules & values on everyone ... smacks of radical Islam to me. We should follow Jesus' teachings because we want to and because it is right, full stop. Let Caesar have his law & we can have ours. They don't have to be the same. If we live ours lives properly, others will naturally want to know how and why. They'll be drawn to us like, well, moths to the light.

So would anyone with half a brain. You don't need religion to be moral. nor do you need a priest to tell you right from wrong. I have the same problem. I can tolerate someone's religious beliefs up until they try and impose them on others and demand the right to be heard without being prepared to be criticised.

Jesus may or may not be the light (I'm an agnostic in case you are still wondering) but a lot of his followers put on dark glasses and turn back to the darkness taking great glee in finding justification fuel for their prejudice.

Logic and religion do not belong in the same sentence.

[Ted]

gmc

Holding the fort as ever. I've been away but I do agree with most of what you have been saying.

The fact of the matter is that the fundamentalist/literalist approach to the Christian faith was and is an invention of man resulting from the reformation. It does not go back to the earliest church, that of the apostles. These folks have indeed, created God in their own image.

The fundamentalist/literalist approach simply, as you have pointed out, leads to complete absurdities. For those who want to follow that approach I say go for it but you do not reflect the church established by the apostles.

Then I get blasted because I point out alternative interpretations. Yet I am told no one is proselytizing. LOL.

Shalom
Ted

[Ted]

A quote from "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong, pg283

"Once the Bible begins to be interpreted literally instead of symbolically, the idea of its God becomes impossible."

Ibid. 279

"A sense of peace, serenity and loving-kindness are the hallmarks of all true religious insight."

Shalom
Ted