sheep;1451707 wrote: How am I rationalizing evil? I am only trying to point out that Paul was a heretic. Sheep, I had not intended to comment further on this thread, but I GOTTA say, you give new meaning to the phrase, "beating a dead horse".
Paul's writings, along with Acts, are of enormous importance to Christians as they give us great insight regarding the early years of Christianity.
No question, Paul's views are pharisaical, as would be expected, which Christ's definitely are not! Accusing the former of heresy, after the fact, is just plain silly.
And by the way, as would be expected, Googling the words Paul and heretic brings up the usual assortment of nut websites, including one which claims that Christians are also being deceived by heretical space aliens, and no, it's not a "gag" website.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
-
Mark Aspam
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Mark Aspam;1451800 wrote: Sheep, I had not intended to comment further on this thread, but I GOTTA say, you give new meaning to the phrase, "beating a dead horse".
Paul's writings, along with Acts, are of enormous importance to Christians as they give us great insight regarding the early years of Christianity.
No question, Paul's views are pharisaical, as would be expected, which Christ's definitely are not! Accusing the former of heresy, after the fact, is just plain silly.
And by the way, as would be expected, Googling the words Paul and heretic brings up the usual assortment of nut websites, including one which claims that Christians are also being deceived by heretical space aliens, and no, it's not a "gag" website.
Dear Mark, most people like to avoid dealing with facts, when they have no rational argument, by diversion red herring arguments and you are no different.
As I stated before, Jesus taught us to return good for evil and Paul taught that men are justified, no "ministers of God", who return evil for evil. Never mind that Paul's teachings clearly contradict the following old testament verses: 1Sa 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign/Rule over them.
Is not Paul clearly a heretic?
P.S. Why cut out the rest of the post I made, which holds my argument for proving my statement of Paul being a heretic? I'll post it again below, maybe you can try dealing with the bases for my comment: instead of just creating a diversion.
"Paul clearly gave an exemption to men that walk contrary to Jesus' teachings. It is not I who wish to rationalize evil but you: as you wish to rationalize the evil Paul ignorantly condoned.
Jesus taught men to forgive, not to employ evil for evil, but rather good for evil. Paul clearly condoned the evil practices that Rulers employ and as long as you embrace Paul you cannot embrace Christ and this is what I am clearly trying to show. You feel that men should be employed to enforce teachings that are contrary to Christ's teachings and thereby you are propagating beliefs that stop the teachings of Christ from being embraced by all men: as Paul did. Is it I who is wishing to rationalize evil or you?"
Paul's writings, along with Acts, are of enormous importance to Christians as they give us great insight regarding the early years of Christianity.
No question, Paul's views are pharisaical, as would be expected, which Christ's definitely are not! Accusing the former of heresy, after the fact, is just plain silly.
And by the way, as would be expected, Googling the words Paul and heretic brings up the usual assortment of nut websites, including one which claims that Christians are also being deceived by heretical space aliens, and no, it's not a "gag" website.
Dear Mark, most people like to avoid dealing with facts, when they have no rational argument, by diversion red herring arguments and you are no different.
As I stated before, Jesus taught us to return good for evil and Paul taught that men are justified, no "ministers of God", who return evil for evil. Never mind that Paul's teachings clearly contradict the following old testament verses: 1Sa 8:6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
1Sa 8:7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign/Rule over them.
Is not Paul clearly a heretic?
P.S. Why cut out the rest of the post I made, which holds my argument for proving my statement of Paul being a heretic? I'll post it again below, maybe you can try dealing with the bases for my comment: instead of just creating a diversion.
"Paul clearly gave an exemption to men that walk contrary to Jesus' teachings. It is not I who wish to rationalize evil but you: as you wish to rationalize the evil Paul ignorantly condoned.
Jesus taught men to forgive, not to employ evil for evil, but rather good for evil. Paul clearly condoned the evil practices that Rulers employ and as long as you embrace Paul you cannot embrace Christ and this is what I am clearly trying to show. You feel that men should be employed to enforce teachings that are contrary to Christ's teachings and thereby you are propagating beliefs that stop the teachings of Christ from being embraced by all men: as Paul did. Is it I who is wishing to rationalize evil or you?"
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
What is clear is that you use "clearly" far too often.
"Paul clearly gave an exemption to men that walk contrary to Jesus' teachings. It is not I who wish to rationalize evil but you: as you wish to rationalize the evil Paul ignorantly condoned.
Jesus taught men to forgive, not to employ evil for evil, but rather good for evil. Paul clearly condoned the evil practices that Rulers employ and as long as you embrace Paul you cannot embrace Christ and this is what I am clearly trying to show. You feel that men should be employed to enforce teachings that are contrary to Christ's teachings and thereby you are propagating beliefs that stop the teachings of Christ from being embraced by all men: as Paul did. Is it I who is wishing to rationalize evil or you?"
Paul was speaking to fellow Christians, and was telling them the same thing that Jesus had said, before. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never condoned evil acts, but rather told Christians to submit to human authority as if it came from The Lord, because to resist evil with evil only makes you as evil as that which you resist. Certainly, evil rulers have read those words and interpreted them as you do, and tried to show that Paul did, indeed, condone their behavior. But Paul was talking to the individuals, not the rulers.
You need to stop judging Paul, and look unto your own heart. The only one you are qualified to judge is yourself. This is the same for all men.
"Paul clearly gave an exemption to men that walk contrary to Jesus' teachings. It is not I who wish to rationalize evil but you: as you wish to rationalize the evil Paul ignorantly condoned.
Jesus taught men to forgive, not to employ evil for evil, but rather good for evil. Paul clearly condoned the evil practices that Rulers employ and as long as you embrace Paul you cannot embrace Christ and this is what I am clearly trying to show. You feel that men should be employed to enforce teachings that are contrary to Christ's teachings and thereby you are propagating beliefs that stop the teachings of Christ from being embraced by all men: as Paul did. Is it I who is wishing to rationalize evil or you?"
Paul was speaking to fellow Christians, and was telling them the same thing that Jesus had said, before. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never condoned evil acts, but rather told Christians to submit to human authority as if it came from The Lord, because to resist evil with evil only makes you as evil as that which you resist. Certainly, evil rulers have read those words and interpreted them as you do, and tried to show that Paul did, indeed, condone their behavior. But Paul was talking to the individuals, not the rulers.
You need to stop judging Paul, and look unto your own heart. The only one you are qualified to judge is yourself. This is the same for all men.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
LarsMac;1451805 wrote: What is clear is that you use "clearly" far too often.
Paul was speaking to fellow Christians, and was telling them the same thing that Jesus had said, before. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never condoned evil acts, but rather told Christians to submit to human authority as if it came from The Lord, because to resist evil with evil only makes you as evil as that which you resist. Certainly, evil rulers have read those words and interpreted them as you do, and tried to show that Paul did, indeed, condone their behavior. But Paul was talking to the individuals, not the rulers.
You need to stop judging Paul, and look unto your own heart. The only one you are qualified to judge is yourself. This is the same for all men.
Dear Larsmac, you do err greatly in your post and your servitude. Jesus never said to serve Satan, neither did he say one should pay taxes... all he stated was that since the coin boar the image of Caesar, it was proof that the coin belonged to Caesar and to give it back to Caesar.
Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? (if the answer is yes there is no trickery in the question)
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (Serving earthy governments is to partake in the wickedness they inflict)
Mat 6:24 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.
Mat 17:25 ...And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee. (It is clear that Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes to men, but only did so to continue his mission)
Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes and thus those who questioned him hoped to get him to declare it, so they could accuse him and have him put away for his declaration.
The support of men forcing men into subjection is to support oppression and to financially support them is to fund their acts of violence. Again, I state: Jesus taught us to love our enemies and not to return evil for evil, but good for evil and if you support government you are supporting men that act contrary to the teachings of Christ.
P.S. One would do well to see what Satan offered Jesus and the fact that Jesus never argued that the kingdoms/governments belonged to Satan: in the following verses.
Luk 4:5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
Luk 4:6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
Luk 4:7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast (Government) rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
Rev 13:2 And the beast (Government) which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon (Serpent: which represents Satan) gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast (Government).
Rev 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon (Satan) which gave power unto the beast/government: and they worshipped the beast/government, saying, Who is like unto the beast/government? who is able to make war with him?
Dan 7:2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
Dan 7:3 And four great beasts (Governments) came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
Dan 7:4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
Dan 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
Dan 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
Dan 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
Dan 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
Dan 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
Dan 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
Dan 7:15 I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.
Dan 7:16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
Dan 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
Dan 7:18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
Dan 7:19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
Dan 7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
Dan 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
Dan 7:22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Dan 7:26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
It is not Christ's followers which should obey governments, but governments (men who force others into submission) that should obey Christ (by subjecting themselves to his teachings) and that will not happen until men stop serving earthly governments and start serving Christ alone.
Satan rules all earthly governments.
Paul was speaking to fellow Christians, and was telling them the same thing that Jesus had said, before. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. He never condoned evil acts, but rather told Christians to submit to human authority as if it came from The Lord, because to resist evil with evil only makes you as evil as that which you resist. Certainly, evil rulers have read those words and interpreted them as you do, and tried to show that Paul did, indeed, condone their behavior. But Paul was talking to the individuals, not the rulers.
You need to stop judging Paul, and look unto your own heart. The only one you are qualified to judge is yourself. This is the same for all men.
Dear Larsmac, you do err greatly in your post and your servitude. Jesus never said to serve Satan, neither did he say one should pay taxes... all he stated was that since the coin boar the image of Caesar, it was proof that the coin belonged to Caesar and to give it back to Caesar.
Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? (if the answer is yes there is no trickery in the question)
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (Serving earthy governments is to partake in the wickedness they inflict)
Mat 6:24 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.
Mat 17:25 ...And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee. (It is clear that Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes to men, but only did so to continue his mission)
Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes and thus those who questioned him hoped to get him to declare it, so they could accuse him and have him put away for his declaration.
The support of men forcing men into subjection is to support oppression and to financially support them is to fund their acts of violence. Again, I state: Jesus taught us to love our enemies and not to return evil for evil, but good for evil and if you support government you are supporting men that act contrary to the teachings of Christ.
P.S. One would do well to see what Satan offered Jesus and the fact that Jesus never argued that the kingdoms/governments belonged to Satan: in the following verses.
Luk 4:5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
Luk 4:6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
Luk 4:7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast (Government) rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
Rev 13:2 And the beast (Government) which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon (Serpent: which represents Satan) gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast (Government).
Rev 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon (Satan) which gave power unto the beast/government: and they worshipped the beast/government, saying, Who is like unto the beast/government? who is able to make war with him?
Dan 7:2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
Dan 7:3 And four great beasts (Governments) came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
Dan 7:4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
Dan 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
Dan 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
Dan 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
Dan 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
Dan 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
Dan 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
Dan 7:15 I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.
Dan 7:16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
Dan 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
Dan 7:18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
Dan 7:19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
Dan 7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
Dan 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
Dan 7:22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Dan 7:26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
It is not Christ's followers which should obey governments, but governments (men who force others into submission) that should obey Christ (by subjecting themselves to his teachings) and that will not happen until men stop serving earthly governments and start serving Christ alone.
Satan rules all earthly governments.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
[sigh] Whatever you say.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
-
Mark Aspam
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1451803 wrote: A. Dear Mark, most people like to avoid dealing with facts---
B. Is not Paul clearly a heretic?
C. Why cut out the rest of the post I made...
D. Satan rules all earthly governments.A. Heresy is not a fact but rather a concept.
The RCC considers all Protestant denominations heretical, with the possible exception of those of the Anglican Communion. Protestants obviously disagree with this appraisal.
B. See A.
C. For the same reason that I cut out most of the latest one, anyone can go back and read them in full.
Also, you never replied to my inquiry regarding Christ's admonition to those troubled by the temptations of the flesh, which is to say, all of us.
Can you name ANY Christian body that actually requires, or even advises, the gouging of eyes or the truncation of limbs in response to temptation? I certainly don't know of any, but you obviously travel in much different circles than I, perhaps you can name one or two. If so, it would be interesting to attend one of their services.
D. The hell you say.
B. Is not Paul clearly a heretic?
C. Why cut out the rest of the post I made...
D. Satan rules all earthly governments.A. Heresy is not a fact but rather a concept.
The RCC considers all Protestant denominations heretical, with the possible exception of those of the Anglican Communion. Protestants obviously disagree with this appraisal.
B. See A.
C. For the same reason that I cut out most of the latest one, anyone can go back and read them in full.
Also, you never replied to my inquiry regarding Christ's admonition to those troubled by the temptations of the flesh, which is to say, all of us.
Can you name ANY Christian body that actually requires, or even advises, the gouging of eyes or the truncation of limbs in response to temptation? I certainly don't know of any, but you obviously travel in much different circles than I, perhaps you can name one or two. If so, it would be interesting to attend one of their services.
D. The hell you say.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Mark Aspam;1451813 wrote: A. Heresy is not a fact but rather a concept.
The RCC considers all Protestant denominations heretical, with the possible exception of those of the Anglican Communion. Protestants obviously disagree with this appraisal.
B. See A.
C. For the same reason that I cut out most of the latest one, anyone can go back and read them in full.
Also, you never replied to my inquiry regarding Christ's admonition to those troubled by the temptations of the flesh, which is to say, all of us.
Can you name ANY Christian body that actually requires, or even advises, the gouging of eyes or the truncation of limbs in response to temptation? I certainly don't know of any, but you obviously travel in much different circles than I, perhaps you can name one or two. If so, it would be interesting to attend one of their services.
D. The hell you say.
Jesus told us that unless we hate our Family we will in no way enter into heaven... since loving our neighbor as ourself, means loving our family, he was speaking metaphorically... you remind me of the people that question Jesus in his day. Jesus said to them: tell me one thing then I will answer you. Are you not just trying again to avoid the real issue again by diversion?
Is not Jesus stating that one must be so willing to make heaven that they will not allow anything to stop them: even their eyes or any other body part?
Why do you continue to avoid dealing with Paul's err?
Again let me clearly state that as long as one embraces Paul they cannot embrace Christ.
P.S. can it not be truly stated that as long as you continue to avoid the issue of Paul's err, and embracing Paul, that there is no honesty in you at all?
The RCC considers all Protestant denominations heretical, with the possible exception of those of the Anglican Communion. Protestants obviously disagree with this appraisal.
B. See A.
C. For the same reason that I cut out most of the latest one, anyone can go back and read them in full.
Also, you never replied to my inquiry regarding Christ's admonition to those troubled by the temptations of the flesh, which is to say, all of us.
Can you name ANY Christian body that actually requires, or even advises, the gouging of eyes or the truncation of limbs in response to temptation? I certainly don't know of any, but you obviously travel in much different circles than I, perhaps you can name one or two. If so, it would be interesting to attend one of their services.
D. The hell you say.
Jesus told us that unless we hate our Family we will in no way enter into heaven... since loving our neighbor as ourself, means loving our family, he was speaking metaphorically... you remind me of the people that question Jesus in his day. Jesus said to them: tell me one thing then I will answer you. Are you not just trying again to avoid the real issue again by diversion?
Is not Jesus stating that one must be so willing to make heaven that they will not allow anything to stop them: even their eyes or any other body part?
Why do you continue to avoid dealing with Paul's err?
Again let me clearly state that as long as one embraces Paul they cannot embrace Christ.
P.S. can it not be truly stated that as long as you continue to avoid the issue of Paul's err, and embracing Paul, that there is no honesty in you at all?
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Politically speaking, sheep, would you call yourself a Libertarian? In the American sense.
https://www.lp.org/
https://www.lp.org/
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
AnneBoleyn;1451822 wrote: Politically speaking, sheep, would you call yourself a Libertarian? In the American sense.
https://www.lp.org/
I think the term Christian (follower of Christ) is actually appropriate. I think those who follow Paul should not be called Christians though: that is for sure.
https://www.lp.org/
I think the term Christian (follower of Christ) is actually appropriate. I think those who follow Paul should not be called Christians though: that is for sure.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1451823 wrote: I think the term Christian (follower of Christ) is actually appropriate. I think those who follow Paul should not be called Christians though: that is for sure.
Your political affiliation is Christian? How does that work for you?
Your political affiliation is Christian? How does that work for you?
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
AnneBoleyn;1451824 wrote: Your political affiliation is Christian? How does that work for you?
Politics is about the supporting of a kind of oppression, I support no oppression. I think all oppressors are evil. And that works very well for me.
Anne, I don't know you and you don't know me, but if you were sitting across from me and I told you I was going to force you to obey me, you would know that is wrong and not agree to my tyranny. If it is not right for me, as your equal, to control you, it is not right for a group of men with an army behind them to do the same thing. Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil: as governments by their very existence propagate evil behavior.
You and I can co-exist without the need for one of us to control the other and work towards a common good. But we will never live like that as long as one of us feels they have a right to control the others behavior.
Politics is about the supporting of a kind of oppression, I support no oppression. I think all oppressors are evil. And that works very well for me.
Anne, I don't know you and you don't know me, but if you were sitting across from me and I told you I was going to force you to obey me, you would know that is wrong and not agree to my tyranny. If it is not right for me, as your equal, to control you, it is not right for a group of men with an army behind them to do the same thing. Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil: as governments by their very existence propagate evil behavior.
You and I can co-exist without the need for one of us to control the other and work towards a common good. But we will never live like that as long as one of us feels they have a right to control the others behavior.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
You are abdicating your public responsibility to others in terms of policies, social conditions. I'm not being judgmental, most people abdicate their public responsibility in regards to voting, organizing, etc. But yet you have subjugated yourself to the rule of others whether you are involved or not.
"Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil.......". Broad statement. If one's government is involved in evil & one does nothing fearing recognizing the existence of government is supporting evil, then how do you fight the evil? Are you suggesting we have no laws? No raising of public funds for the public needs? Everything should be in private hands? If you do, if you want there to be no taxation, then you are an American style Libertarian. Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's---that's not support, but it is acknowledgement.
"Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil.......". Broad statement. If one's government is involved in evil & one does nothing fearing recognizing the existence of government is supporting evil, then how do you fight the evil? Are you suggesting we have no laws? No raising of public funds for the public needs? Everything should be in private hands? If you do, if you want there to be no taxation, then you are an American style Libertarian. Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's---that's not support, but it is acknowledgement.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
AnneBoleyn;1451856 wrote: You are abdicating your public responsibility to others in terms of policies, social conditions. I'm not being judgmental, most people abdicate their public responsibility in regards to voting, organizing, etc. But yet you have subjugated yourself to the rule of others whether you are involved or not.
"Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil.......". Broad statement. If one's government is involved in evil & one does nothing fearing recognizing the existence of government is supporting evil, then how do you fight the evil? Are you suggesting we have no laws? No raising of public funds for the public needs? Everything should be in private hands? If you do, if you want there to be no taxation, then you are an American style Libertarian. Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's---that's not support, but it is acknowledgement.
Dear Anne, what does my condemnation of government have to do with helping people in need?
No one is saying the poor, needy,or disabled, should not be cared for. Your statements are totally made in ignorance. What is clearly being said is that all governments maintain power by force and that all earthly governments violate the rights of people to be free from tyranny.
I cannot control others actions, but I can control my own. Just because others are evil doesn't mean I have to act as they do. You say it is my public responsibility to vote, I say it is my obligation to preach that all who vote are supporting oppression and that men should not only not vote, but that they should be willing to die rather than support the oppression of others: which all governments are guilty of by their very existence.
Governments only rule by force. And all the necessities of life come from the earth and all the earth is claimed by those who rule, with armies: to protect what they claim is theirs. Those armies use force (evil actions) to enforce their rule and they are all evil. They violate the rights of others, withholding the necessities of life from them, unless they pay extortion fees/taxes: to have access to those necessities. The problem is so bad that not one person can be free from these oppressive regimes, to have free access to the necessities of life, unless one leaves the earth. I did not ask to be oppressed by these evil people, nor do I wish to harm others, but I know I am not the one in the wrong: as I am not the oppressor.
Your support of government is both oppressive and a violation of my rights as a human being. It is not I who wish to do harm to others, but by your supporting of government (men controlling other men by force) you are oppressing others and you try and blame me somehow for not supporting governmental systems of oppression: which oppress me and others who want to be free of this oppression? The only way to be free from this oppression is to forsake it: not to continue it in another form; you cannot make that which is oppressive, by its very existence, liberating, by maintaining its existence. That can only be done by ending its existence.
Have you ever considered the word "government"? it is employment of the use of force to control others, the very thing I told you you would not accept from me, if I told you I was going to control you, as you would not agree to my tyranny. You think it is okay for someone to force you into submission if they give you a choice of who will control you? What about if they give you the opportunity/possibility to control others: now do you think it is okay? It still does not make it right.
Have we become so stupefied/stupid that we cannot see what is clearly in front of our eyes? You justify oppression (which is what government is) and try and blame me for shreeking my responsability to be a part of this system of oppression? I can assure you: Jesus would not vote for any government and would have condemned them openly if he could have carried on his mission without being hindered by their acts of violence, that he would have endured, had he openly condemned them.
"Your supporting of government is the supporting of evil.......". Broad statement. If one's government is involved in evil & one does nothing fearing recognizing the existence of government is supporting evil, then how do you fight the evil? Are you suggesting we have no laws? No raising of public funds for the public needs? Everything should be in private hands? If you do, if you want there to be no taxation, then you are an American style Libertarian. Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's---that's not support, but it is acknowledgement.
Dear Anne, what does my condemnation of government have to do with helping people in need?
No one is saying the poor, needy,or disabled, should not be cared for. Your statements are totally made in ignorance. What is clearly being said is that all governments maintain power by force and that all earthly governments violate the rights of people to be free from tyranny.
I cannot control others actions, but I can control my own. Just because others are evil doesn't mean I have to act as they do. You say it is my public responsibility to vote, I say it is my obligation to preach that all who vote are supporting oppression and that men should not only not vote, but that they should be willing to die rather than support the oppression of others: which all governments are guilty of by their very existence.
Governments only rule by force. And all the necessities of life come from the earth and all the earth is claimed by those who rule, with armies: to protect what they claim is theirs. Those armies use force (evil actions) to enforce their rule and they are all evil. They violate the rights of others, withholding the necessities of life from them, unless they pay extortion fees/taxes: to have access to those necessities. The problem is so bad that not one person can be free from these oppressive regimes, to have free access to the necessities of life, unless one leaves the earth. I did not ask to be oppressed by these evil people, nor do I wish to harm others, but I know I am not the one in the wrong: as I am not the oppressor.
Your support of government is both oppressive and a violation of my rights as a human being. It is not I who wish to do harm to others, but by your supporting of government (men controlling other men by force) you are oppressing others and you try and blame me somehow for not supporting governmental systems of oppression: which oppress me and others who want to be free of this oppression? The only way to be free from this oppression is to forsake it: not to continue it in another form; you cannot make that which is oppressive, by its very existence, liberating, by maintaining its existence. That can only be done by ending its existence.
Have you ever considered the word "government"? it is employment of the use of force to control others, the very thing I told you you would not accept from me, if I told you I was going to control you, as you would not agree to my tyranny. You think it is okay for someone to force you into submission if they give you a choice of who will control you? What about if they give you the opportunity/possibility to control others: now do you think it is okay? It still does not make it right.
Have we become so stupefied/stupid that we cannot see what is clearly in front of our eyes? You justify oppression (which is what government is) and try and blame me for shreeking my responsability to be a part of this system of oppression? I can assure you: Jesus would not vote for any government and would have condemned them openly if he could have carried on his mission without being hindered by their acts of violence, that he would have endured, had he openly condemned them.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
If you think disbanding governments would result in peaceful co-existence, be it local communities or world cooperation, you are just as ignorant as me, or rather, as you say I am.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
AnneBoleyn;1451873 wrote: If you think disbanding governments would result in peaceful co-existence, be it local communities or world cooperation, you are just as ignorant as me, or rather, as you say I am.
Before governments can be safely disbanded, people must be reconditioned, but people must first understand why governments are wrong/evil before they will start to seek solutions. All I am doing is stating that the problems that we are facing in our society, mainly originate from governments actions and the laws/rules they allow and employ within our society and we will not be free from the corruption created by oppression/government: until we forsake oppression/government.
Before governments can be safely disbanded, people must be reconditioned, but people must first understand why governments are wrong/evil before they will start to seek solutions. All I am doing is stating that the problems that we are facing in our society, mainly originate from governments actions and the laws/rules they allow and employ within our society and we will not be free from the corruption created by oppression/government: until we forsake oppression/government.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
-
Mark Aspam
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1451932 wrote: Before governments can be safely disbanded, people must be reconditioned, but people must first understand why governments are wrong/evil before they will start to seek solutions. All I am doing is stating that the problems that we are facing in our society, mainly originate from governments actions and the laws/rules they allow and employ within our society and we will not be free from the corruption created by oppression/government: until we forsake oppression/government.Hmmm...and this bird is condemning everyone who doesn't follow Christ's teachings?
Seems as how I remember something about rendering to Caesar...
Seems as how I remember something about rendering to Caesar...
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1451932 wrote: Before governments can be safely disbanded, people must be reconditioned, but people must first understand why governments are wrong/evil before they will start to seek solutions. All I am doing is stating that the problems that we are facing in our society, mainly originate from governments actions and the laws/rules they allow and employ within our society and we will not be free from the corruption created by oppression/government: until we forsake oppression/government.
I seem to remember reading something like that back in high school. It was written by a fellow in the Nineteenth Century. Fellow by the name of Karl something or other.
Then, of course, there was that Skinner fellow, too.
I seem to remember reading something like that back in high school. It was written by a fellow in the Nineteenth Century. Fellow by the name of Karl something or other.
Then, of course, there was that Skinner fellow, too.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
LarsMac;1451934 wrote: I seem to remember reading something like that back in high school. It was written by a fellow in the Nineteenth Century. Fellow by the name of Karl something or other.
Then, of course, there was that Skinner fellow, too.
Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. Do you remember reading "love your enemies", spoken by that Jesus guy? Why did you not make the association with the contradictions between governments actions and Jesus' words and see that those who contradict Jesus' words are evil, not good? How is it that you can still stand here and support oppression and oppressors? Have you not heard of the thousands that were thrown to the lions? Or about how both Jesus and the early Apostles were killed by the Roman governors, in their days? Have you not heard of the millions killed by Hitler and how the Natives were killed by the early explorers, in the name/authority of the kings/kingdoms they represented, for their gold and lands? How is it that you can sit here and support men who use force to oppress others: as though it is okay?
Just answer me this: would it be okay for me to force you into submission and tell you that you cannot have access to the necessities of life, unless you pay me to use the land: that I claim as mine. Is not free access to land the natural right of all creatures? And is it not those who keep others from having access to land, that are the violators of all creatures: as they have equal rights to its usage?
Land preexisted man and beast and while man and beast may belong to the land, land cannot belong to man and beast: as they did not create it, or bring it into existence. Until you learn to share the land, with all who need its bounty, you will be the violator of others: who shall condemn you for your damnable behavior.
Do you remember reading how the followers of Jesus sold all their lands and goods and distributed the wealth to all: as they had need? Was not communism the practice that was embraced by the followers of Christ? Communism, in modern times, did not fail because it is a failing ideology, but rather because the governors who tried to implement communism embrace force, and are capitalists: acting in hypocrisy. We are seeing the results of capitalism and the immorality it spawns in the U.S.A.: as it is the most crime ridden culture on the face of the earth; whenever people work selfishly, for their own good, they become uncaring towards others: as that is exactly what the ideology demands. It is a self-evident truth.
I am afraid you have to much to lose and thus you care nothing about truth larsmac, only about protecting your own selfish interests and thus you cannot argue using reasoning, only rather by trying to create fear. Woe unto you who are rich! for you have received your consolation: do you know who made that statement? Turn money into food and pay each man their wages in food and the selfishness of the wealthy not only becomes evident, but their condemnation as uncaring, inequitable beings, is easily seen. The rich cannot care for those they exploit. While the poor, because they do not exploit, are exempt from such poison. Do I say to much? somehow I don't think so.
Then, of course, there was that Skinner fellow, too.
Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. Do you remember reading "love your enemies", spoken by that Jesus guy? Why did you not make the association with the contradictions between governments actions and Jesus' words and see that those who contradict Jesus' words are evil, not good? How is it that you can still stand here and support oppression and oppressors? Have you not heard of the thousands that were thrown to the lions? Or about how both Jesus and the early Apostles were killed by the Roman governors, in their days? Have you not heard of the millions killed by Hitler and how the Natives were killed by the early explorers, in the name/authority of the kings/kingdoms they represented, for their gold and lands? How is it that you can sit here and support men who use force to oppress others: as though it is okay?
Just answer me this: would it be okay for me to force you into submission and tell you that you cannot have access to the necessities of life, unless you pay me to use the land: that I claim as mine. Is not free access to land the natural right of all creatures? And is it not those who keep others from having access to land, that are the violators of all creatures: as they have equal rights to its usage?
Land preexisted man and beast and while man and beast may belong to the land, land cannot belong to man and beast: as they did not create it, or bring it into existence. Until you learn to share the land, with all who need its bounty, you will be the violator of others: who shall condemn you for your damnable behavior.
Do you remember reading how the followers of Jesus sold all their lands and goods and distributed the wealth to all: as they had need? Was not communism the practice that was embraced by the followers of Christ? Communism, in modern times, did not fail because it is a failing ideology, but rather because the governors who tried to implement communism embrace force, and are capitalists: acting in hypocrisy. We are seeing the results of capitalism and the immorality it spawns in the U.S.A.: as it is the most crime ridden culture on the face of the earth; whenever people work selfishly, for their own good, they become uncaring towards others: as that is exactly what the ideology demands. It is a self-evident truth.
I am afraid you have to much to lose and thus you care nothing about truth larsmac, only about protecting your own selfish interests and thus you cannot argue using reasoning, only rather by trying to create fear. Woe unto you who are rich! for you have received your consolation: do you know who made that statement? Turn money into food and pay each man their wages in food and the selfishness of the wealthy not only becomes evident, but their condemnation as uncaring, inequitable beings, is easily seen. The rich cannot care for those they exploit. While the poor, because they do not exploit, are exempt from such poison. Do I say to much? somehow I don't think so.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Mark Aspam;1451933 wrote: Hmmm...and this bird is condemning everyone who doesn't follow Christ's teachings?
Seems as how I remember something about rendering to Caesar...
Dear Mark, you misunderstand what Jesus was stating...
Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? (if the answer is yes there is no trickery in the question)
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
All Jesus was stating was that since the coin boar the image of Caesar, it was proof that the coin belonged to Caesar and to give it back to Caesar.
Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes and thus those who questioned him hoped to get him to declare it, so they could have him put away for treaon.
Jesus was very clear, our service belongs to God alone: not to other humans:
Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
P.S. Sorry for the old post. I got home from work late and was too tired to respond properly.
Seems as how I remember something about rendering to Caesar...
Dear Mark, you misunderstand what Jesus was stating...
Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? (if the answer is yes there is no trickery in the question)
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
All Jesus was stating was that since the coin boar the image of Caesar, it was proof that the coin belonged to Caesar and to give it back to Caesar.
Jesus did not think it right to pay taxes and thus those who questioned him hoped to get him to declare it, so they could have him put away for treaon.
Jesus was very clear, our service belongs to God alone: not to other humans:
Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
P.S. Sorry for the old post. I got home from work late and was too tired to respond properly.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1451938 wrote: Truth is truth no matter who speaks it. Do you remember reading "love your enemies", spoken by that Jesus guy? Why did you not make the association with the contradictions between governments actions and Jesus' words and see that those who contradict Jesus' words are evil, not good? How is it that you can still stand here and support oppression and oppressors? Have you not heard of the thousands that were thrown to the lions? Or about how both Jesus and the early Apostles were killed by the Roman governors, in their days? Have you not heard of the millions killed by Hitler and how the Natives were killed by the early explorers, in the name/authority of the kings/kingdoms they represented, for their gold and lands? How is it that you can sit here and support men who use force to oppress others: as though it is okay?
You presume a lot about me from what I said. Your reply says more about your own preconceptions than it says about mine.
sheep;1451938 wrote:
Just answer me this: would it be okay for me to force you into submission and tell you that you cannot have access to the necessities of life, unless you pay me to use the land: that I claim as mine. Is not free access to land the natural right of all creatures? And is it not those who keep others from having access to land, that are the violators of all creatures: as they have equal rights to its usage?
Land preexisted man and beast and while man and beast may belong to the land, land cannot belong to man and beast: as they did not create it, or bring it into existence. Until you learn to share the land, with all who need its bounty, you will be the violator of others: who shall condemn you for your damnable behavior.
Obviously, no it would not be OK for you to force me into submission. But that would be on your head, not mine. If you take the land, and prevent others' access, you have committed the sin. For me to take it away from you, would require my being as sinful as you. You may have the land and the wealth, if you desire, and the weight of it will pull you down to the depths when the reckoning comes. I will have no part in it.
sheep;1451938 wrote:
Do you remember reading how the followers of Jesus sold all their lands and goods and distributed the wealth to all: as they had need? Was not communism the practice that was embraced by the followers of Christ? Communism, in modern times, did not fail because it is a failing ideology, but rather because the governors who tried to implement communism embrace force, and are capitalists: acting in hypocrisy. We are seeing the results of capitalism and the immorality it spawns in the U.S.A.: as it is the most crime ridden culture on the face of the earth; whenever people work selfishly, for their own good, they become uncaring towards others: as that is exactly what the ideology demands. It is a self-evident truth.
I am afraid you have to much to lose and thus you care nothing about truth larsmac, only about protecting your own selfish interests and thus you cannot argue using reasoning, only rather by trying to create fear. Woe unto you who are rich! for you have received your consolation: do you know who made that statement? Turn money into food and pay each man their wages in food and the selfishness of the wealthy not only becomes evident, but their condemnation as uncaring, inequitable beings, is easily seen. The rich cannot care for those they exploit. While the poor, because they do not exploit, are exempt from such poison. Do I say to much? somehow I don't think so.
I have very little to lose, Brother.
Some thoughts:
Enlightenment must start with the individual. Every teacher knows this.
Jesus said it best. Remove the beam from your own eye before you try to pluck the mote from the eye of your brother.
History shows that nearly every time "The People" overthrew an oppressive government - with very few notable exceptions -the government that followed became even more oppressive.
Paul knew this as well. He was not talking to the government, or the princes. He was talking to those individuals who would try to use the message of Christ to cause revolt against the established authorities. He said to not give evil for evil, but to let your own heart be pure, and then the evil will fall by the wayside.
The only way to win against oppression is for everyone to become enlightened. Until that time, we suffer the ignorant and the brute.
People are lead because they would rather follow than strike out on their own path. Until we stop following, there will always be someone ready to lead us off the cliff and into the fiery pit.
Tend to your own house, my friend.
You presume a lot about me from what I said. Your reply says more about your own preconceptions than it says about mine.
sheep;1451938 wrote:
Just answer me this: would it be okay for me to force you into submission and tell you that you cannot have access to the necessities of life, unless you pay me to use the land: that I claim as mine. Is not free access to land the natural right of all creatures? And is it not those who keep others from having access to land, that are the violators of all creatures: as they have equal rights to its usage?
Land preexisted man and beast and while man and beast may belong to the land, land cannot belong to man and beast: as they did not create it, or bring it into existence. Until you learn to share the land, with all who need its bounty, you will be the violator of others: who shall condemn you for your damnable behavior.
Obviously, no it would not be OK for you to force me into submission. But that would be on your head, not mine. If you take the land, and prevent others' access, you have committed the sin. For me to take it away from you, would require my being as sinful as you. You may have the land and the wealth, if you desire, and the weight of it will pull you down to the depths when the reckoning comes. I will have no part in it.
sheep;1451938 wrote:
Do you remember reading how the followers of Jesus sold all their lands and goods and distributed the wealth to all: as they had need? Was not communism the practice that was embraced by the followers of Christ? Communism, in modern times, did not fail because it is a failing ideology, but rather because the governors who tried to implement communism embrace force, and are capitalists: acting in hypocrisy. We are seeing the results of capitalism and the immorality it spawns in the U.S.A.: as it is the most crime ridden culture on the face of the earth; whenever people work selfishly, for their own good, they become uncaring towards others: as that is exactly what the ideology demands. It is a self-evident truth.
I am afraid you have to much to lose and thus you care nothing about truth larsmac, only about protecting your own selfish interests and thus you cannot argue using reasoning, only rather by trying to create fear. Woe unto you who are rich! for you have received your consolation: do you know who made that statement? Turn money into food and pay each man their wages in food and the selfishness of the wealthy not only becomes evident, but their condemnation as uncaring, inequitable beings, is easily seen. The rich cannot care for those they exploit. While the poor, because they do not exploit, are exempt from such poison. Do I say to much? somehow I don't think so.
I have very little to lose, Brother.
Some thoughts:
Enlightenment must start with the individual. Every teacher knows this.
Jesus said it best. Remove the beam from your own eye before you try to pluck the mote from the eye of your brother.
History shows that nearly every time "The People" overthrew an oppressive government - with very few notable exceptions -the government that followed became even more oppressive.
Paul knew this as well. He was not talking to the government, or the princes. He was talking to those individuals who would try to use the message of Christ to cause revolt against the established authorities. He said to not give evil for evil, but to let your own heart be pure, and then the evil will fall by the wayside.
The only way to win against oppression is for everyone to become enlightened. Until that time, we suffer the ignorant and the brute.
People are lead because they would rather follow than strike out on their own path. Until we stop following, there will always be someone ready to lead us off the cliff and into the fiery pit.
Tend to your own house, my friend.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Larsmac, you stated again: "Paul knew this as well. He was not talking to the government, or the princes. He was talking to those individuals who would try to use the message of Christ to cause revolt against the established authorities. He said to not give evil for evil, but to let your own heart be pure, and then the evil will fall by the wayside."
No one is talking about causing a revolution of force, but rather a revolution through education and forsaking the support of government, but again you fail to see that Paul stated that Governments (who do evil) were "ministers of God" and he was wrong. You've said before that Paul was talking to people who would try and use the teachings of Christ to cause revolt, but the teachings of Christ teach men to love your enemies so how do you support such ignorant claims?
My exception with Paul is that he claimed that those who do evil are ministers of God and this gives an exemption to men from walking in the teachings of Christ. Paul was wrong, but yet you fail to acknowledge that and thereby justify his teachings. Again I state, embrace Paul and you cannot embrace Christ.
Governments are evil and to call them ministers of God is to negate the teachings of Christ, as governments (Groups of men who take power by force over other men) walk against what Jesus taught. Jesus did not sanction governments actions, on the contrary: he taught against such actions.
No one is talking about causing a revolution of force, but rather a revolution through education and forsaking the support of government, but again you fail to see that Paul stated that Governments (who do evil) were "ministers of God" and he was wrong. You've said before that Paul was talking to people who would try and use the teachings of Christ to cause revolt, but the teachings of Christ teach men to love your enemies so how do you support such ignorant claims?
My exception with Paul is that he claimed that those who do evil are ministers of God and this gives an exemption to men from walking in the teachings of Christ. Paul was wrong, but yet you fail to acknowledge that and thereby justify his teachings. Again I state, embrace Paul and you cannot embrace Christ.
Governments are evil and to call them ministers of God is to negate the teachings of Christ, as governments (Groups of men who take power by force over other men) walk against what Jesus taught. Jesus did not sanction governments actions, on the contrary: he taught against such actions.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1452615 wrote: Larsmac, you stated again: "Paul knew this as well. He was not talking to the government, or the princes. He was talking to those individuals who would try to use the message of Christ to cause revolt against the established authorities. He said to not give evil for evil, but to let your own heart be pure, and then the evil will fall by the wayside."
No one is talking about causing a revolution of force, but rather a revolution through education and forsaking the support of government, but again you fail to see that Paul stated that Governments (who do evil) were "ministers of God" and he was wrong. You've said before that Paul was talking to people who would try and use the teachings of Christ to cause revolt, but the teachings of Christ teach men to love your enemies so how do you support such ignorant claims?
My exception with Paul is that he claimed that those who do evil are ministers of God and this gives an exemption to men from walking in the teachings of Christ. Paul was wrong but yet you fail to acknowledge that and thereby justify his teachings. Again I state embrace Paul and you cannot embrace Christ.
Again, you presume much about me.
You should also study more of the historical context of the times.
Besides, If everything comes from God, and God is in control, as most Christians declare, then Paul was correct. God permits those in power.
That in no way means that their abuse of that power is justified, by Paul or anyone else.
Interesting how you can attack Paul's words in one thread, and embrace those same words to support you argument in another.
No one is talking about causing a revolution of force, but rather a revolution through education and forsaking the support of government, but again you fail to see that Paul stated that Governments (who do evil) were "ministers of God" and he was wrong. You've said before that Paul was talking to people who would try and use the teachings of Christ to cause revolt, but the teachings of Christ teach men to love your enemies so how do you support such ignorant claims?
My exception with Paul is that he claimed that those who do evil are ministers of God and this gives an exemption to men from walking in the teachings of Christ. Paul was wrong but yet you fail to acknowledge that and thereby justify his teachings. Again I state embrace Paul and you cannot embrace Christ.
Again, you presume much about me.
You should also study more of the historical context of the times.
Besides, If everything comes from God, and God is in control, as most Christians declare, then Paul was correct. God permits those in power.
That in no way means that their abuse of that power is justified, by Paul or anyone else.
Interesting how you can attack Paul's words in one thread, and embrace those same words to support you argument in another.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
LarsMac;1452617 wrote: Again, you presume much about me.
You should also study more of the historical context of the times.
Besides, If everything comes from God, and God is in control, as most Christians declare, then Paul was correct. God permits those in power.
That in no way means that their abuse of that power is justified, by Paul or anyone else.
Interesting how you can attack Paul's words in one thread, and embrace those same words to support you argument in another.
Just because God allows things doesn't mean that they are right. Again I state that Paul said those who do evil are "ministers of God": why do you fail to address that.
I was only showing how one on this thread took his words out of context: that in no way constitutes embracing his words
You should also study more of the historical context of the times.
Besides, If everything comes from God, and God is in control, as most Christians declare, then Paul was correct. God permits those in power.
That in no way means that their abuse of that power is justified, by Paul or anyone else.
Interesting how you can attack Paul's words in one thread, and embrace those same words to support you argument in another.
Just because God allows things doesn't mean that they are right. Again I state that Paul said those who do evil are "ministers of God": why do you fail to address that.
I was only showing how one on this thread took his words out of context: that in no way constitutes embracing his words
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
sheep;1452626 wrote: Just because God allows things doesn't mean that they are right.
Funny, I think that was what I just said, in different words, of course.
sheep;1452626 wrote:
Again I state that Paul said those who do evil are "ministers of God": why do you fail to address that.
I believe I did address that.
And I think the truest words you have put in this thread were: This misconception is rooted in the misinterpretation of a few key texts,...
From there it has been a downhill spiral.
I will leave it at that and retire.
TTFN
Funny, I think that was what I just said, in different words, of course.
sheep;1452626 wrote:
Again I state that Paul said those who do evil are "ministers of God": why do you fail to address that.
I believe I did address that.
And I think the truest words you have put in this thread were: This misconception is rooted in the misinterpretation of a few key texts,...
From there it has been a downhill spiral.
I will leave it at that and retire.
TTFN
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
LarsMac;1452628 wrote: Funny, I think that was what I just said, in different words, of course.
I believe I did address that.
And I think the truest words you have put in this thread were:
From there it has been a downhill spiral.
I will leave it at that and retire.
TTFN
You say that Paul was not talking to those who use force to control others, but Paul did endorse those actions, and by agreeing with him, so do you and therefore you, and him, support the evil they do. And you both call yourself followers of Christ, but I say you are self-deceived and know nothing about Christ or his teachings. Those who use force (Governments in particular: as they are the focus of this discussion), to control others, are not ministers of God, but ministers of Satan.
Rom 13:4 ...But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
The above verse was what Paul claimed: but Jesus condemned such actions. Try and twist it as you will, but such people who support the harming of others are evil, not good. Jesus clearly condemned people who do what governments do and by supporting them: you are one with them.
I believe I did address that.
And I think the truest words you have put in this thread were:
From there it has been a downhill spiral.
I will leave it at that and retire.
TTFN
You say that Paul was not talking to those who use force to control others, but Paul did endorse those actions, and by agreeing with him, so do you and therefore you, and him, support the evil they do. And you both call yourself followers of Christ, but I say you are self-deceived and know nothing about Christ or his teachings. Those who use force (Governments in particular: as they are the focus of this discussion), to control others, are not ministers of God, but ministers of Satan.
Rom 13:4 ...But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
The above verse was what Paul claimed: but Jesus condemned such actions. Try and twist it as you will, but such people who support the harming of others are evil, not good. Jesus clearly condemned people who do what governments do and by supporting them: you are one with them.
Atheists have a belief system which is based upon not one shred of factual evidence.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
The historical Jesus of Nazareth would be appalled at what we have done to him and his name. It seems to me that Christianity went wrong at about 300 CE when it changed from following in the footsteps of Jesus" to the idea of "right belief" which is simply a non-starter. As far as Paul goes It would seem that without him it probably wouldn't survive.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
I do not support the evil done in the name of God.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
My posts were here and now they are gone????
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
They magically reappeared.????
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Ted;1480679 wrote: The historical Jesus of Nazareth would be appalled at what we have done to him and his name. It seems to me that Christianity went wrong at about 300 CE when it changed from following in the footsteps of Jesus" to the idea of "right belief" which is simply a non-starter. As far as Paul goes It would seem that without him it probably wouldn't survive.
Something with which I have always agreed. I have no issues with anyone having an ideology of Peace, and if what we are told about Jesus has any basis of truth at all, that is all he was - a promoter of Peace. It is only in latter times that his followers elevated him to the status of a Deity & began killing & torturing each other in some overblown squabble of who has the right interpretation of 'Peace'.
Ghandi was a preacher of Peace. He was not a God. However, I have no doubt that one day he will probably be promoted as such. The Messiah of Hinduism.
Something with which I have always agreed. I have no issues with anyone having an ideology of Peace, and if what we are told about Jesus has any basis of truth at all, that is all he was - a promoter of Peace. It is only in latter times that his followers elevated him to the status of a Deity & began killing & torturing each other in some overblown squabble of who has the right interpretation of 'Peace'.
Ghandi was a preacher of Peace. He was not a God. However, I have no doubt that one day he will probably be promoted as such. The Messiah of Hinduism.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
We do not have the "God language" with which to speak about the Divine. No human words can capture the essence of God. Right belief? That is a non-starter.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
It would seem that Jesus had no intention of creating a church. He lived and died a very devout Jew. Even Jesus wasn't a Christian.
-
Mark Aspam
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:00 am
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Ted;1480695 wrote: It would seem that Jesus had no intention of creating a church. He lived and died a very devout Jew. Even Jesus wasn't a Christian.Ted, where on earth have you been?
I thought that you and Bronwen might have run away together or (hopefully not) both gone to that great Forum in the sky!
I thought that you and Bronwen might have run away together or (hopefully not) both gone to that great Forum in the sky!
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Mark. No didn't run off with anyone. Took some time off, long time LOL. However i'm back. Have done a tremendous amount of reading besides the trips to Greece, usually for 10 weeks. My Greek is improving.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Actually we know very little about Jesus. 80% of the words attibuted to Jesus cannot be traced bac to the historical Jesus of Nazareth. The Gospels were a developing tradition. That is each one expresses what the church had come to believe at that time. They are not biography mostly "mid-rash"
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
The words attributed to Jesus for 80% of them are words the evangelists put into Jesus mouth. This is not to say that they may reflect something passed on after the crucifixion.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
There is a lot of oral history recorded in the Bible. It has over time become embellished, redacted, added to and subtracted from. Even the church added some things in.
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
Ted;1480738 wrote: Mark. No didn't run off with anyone. Took some time off, long time LOL. However i'm back. Have done a tremendous amount of reading besides the trips to Greece, usually for 10 weeks. My Greek is improving.
And very welcome you are too :-6
As to the Greek, I only wish I could say the same
And very welcome you are too :-6
As to the Greek, I only wish I could say the same
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
It's all Greek to me.
(Well, someone had to say it).
(Well, someone had to say it).
Where did the church go wrong? The answer is actually relatively simple.
The church went wrong when it failed when it did not try to bring in the latest knowledge, updating the Bible to the passing eras. Some still want to read the Bible literally. They are still trying to lived according to literal interpretation. It tried and tries to perpetuate the ignorance of the past. That is it did not try to keep upwith the evergrowing fund of knolage. No wonder the church is passing into history.