Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
It's hard to defend Christianity...
Freejack
Jake the Not-so-Wise
in Zocalo v2.0
...when you have people like Pat Robertson at its forefront.
His comments concerning the unanimous removal of the Dover school board in the most recent election over the ID issue:
[quote]"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city," [/quote]
It a fundamental principal of Christianity (and several other religions I might add) that a single individual does not have the authority to pass judgment on another, and especially when claiming to pass judgment as the will of good. (And yes I realize there is some hypocrisy in just making this post).
Jake
His comments concerning the unanimous removal of the Dover school board in the most recent election over the ID issue:
[quote]"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city," [/quote]
It a fundamental principal of Christianity (and several other religions I might add) that a single individual does not have the authority to pass judgment on another, and especially when claiming to pass judgment as the will of good. (And yes I realize there is some hypocrisy in just making this post).
Jake
Comments
Yeah...
It is easy for some people to look at Christianity through the narrow glass of it being lead by just one individual called Pat Robertson (and unfortunately in the USA, there are a large number of people of influence behind him).
We are not called to judge, and we definately don't view catastrophy as a curse from God. Rather, the absence of God removes his protection if anything (this could be argued elsewhere though and not here)
I think Pat is getting old and senile and has lost his vision or it has mutated quite alarmingly.
:(
[B]
I think Pat is getting old and senile and has lost his vision or it has mutated quite alarmingly.
:( [/B][/QUOTE]
Mutated?
Sounds like evolution to me.
[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051104/ap_on_sc/vatican_science] Vatican: Faithful Should Listen to Science[/url]
[quote]"But we also know the dangers of a religion that severs its links with reason and becomes prey to fundamentalism," [Cardinal Poupard] said.[/quote] Yep, we know those risks from people like Pat Robertson.
He is completely fucking insane.
Also, while I am no longer a Catholic or a Christian, I believe it is rather notable that the largest and oldest Christian church no longer considers science and faith mutually exclusive.
There's a passage in the Bible where Jesus basically says he's come to kill people and break things - taken out of context, one could say "OMG JESUS IS SUCH A GENOCIDIAL MANIAC!!!" Suffice to say, He's speaking metaphorically - as evidenced by the way it was mankind that killed Him, not vice versa.
That said, how is a group of people voting a school board off anything close to a rejection of God. It was mearly the community voicing its opinion on how its children should be educated, not some blatent rejection of God, and it did not warrent a comment from a televangelist that implies that he knows the will of God.
Had they banned churches from within the city limits or began persicuting people for their religious, your comments about warning a person that they are on the wrong path would be valid.
Jake
[B]Had they banned churches from within the city limits or began persicuting people for their religious, your comments about warning a person that they are on the wrong path would be valid.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Just because there are Churches and Churchgoers doesn't mean that the Churchgoers are Christian in a Biblical sense of the word.
But I concede your first point, I haven't been following what Mr. Robertson has been saying lately, and if this is the latest in a pattern of utterly stupid things he's said, then perhaps I was trying to make his rash words fit my more gentle interpretation of them.
[B]It is not hard to defend the true core beliefs of Christianity, just try finding anyone who practices it in this day and age.
[/B][/QUOTE]
The core beliefs of chrisianity is anarchocommunism in its finest form. If only more christians could realize that.
[B]The core beliefs of chrisianity is anarchocommunism in its finest form. If only more christians could realize that. [/B][/QUOTE]
I guess I'd have to ask you to explain, since I'm not sure what your implying.
Here are what I believe to be the core tenets of Chrisitainity. I've split them into two groups, theological and practical. Theological are those belief that make it "Christianity. Practical are those tenets that can be applied even without a belief in Christ (or even God).
[b]Theological:[/b]
Single God
Jesus as the son of God, who died for our sins.
Holy Spirit as God with us.
Heaven (existance with God)
Hell (existance without God <-please notice no mention of fire and brimstone).
[b]Practical[/b]
Love
Forgiveness
Humility
Care for the weak
Charity
Acceptence
Simplicity
Hope
Faith
"Do unto others as you would have done unto you"
"Love thy neighbour as thyself"
I'm curious how the above lead to a anarchocommunist state.
Jake
[B]Pat Robertson is [i]the[/i] American televangelist.
He is completely fucking insane.
Also, while I am no longer a Catholic or a Christian, I believe it is rather notable that the largest and oldest Christian church no longer considers science and faith mutually exclusive. [/B][/QUOTE] & just to reiterate COMPLETE FUCKING PSYCHO!
the guy prays before every sermon errr REPORT...WE PRAY, YOU BEG FOR MERCY! There used to be plenty of these guys too now there are only a handful.
[B]The core beliefs of chrisianity is anarchocommunism in its finest form. If only more christians could realize that. [/B][/QUOTE]
Isn't that a contradiction (the anarchocommunisim part)? I mean, communism requires some sort of central authority to coordinate distribution of work and resources, while anarchy has no central authority, and it's every man for himself as far as work and resources go.
[B]I guess I'd have to ask you to explain, since I'm not sure what your implying.
Here are what I believe to be the core tenets of Chrisitainity. I've split them into two groups, theological and practical. Theological are those belief that make it "Christianity. Practical are those tenets that can be applied even without a belief in Christ (or even God).
[b]Theological:[/b]
Single God
Jesus as the son of God, who died for our sins.
Holy Spirit as God with us.
Heaven (existance with God)
Hell (existance without God <-please notice no mention of fire and brimstone).
[b]Practical[/b]
Love
Forgiveness
Humility
Care for the weak
Charity
Acceptence
Simplicity
Hope
Faith
"Do unto others as you would have done unto you"
"Love thy neighbour as thyself"
I'm curious how the above lead to a anarchocommunist state.
Jake [/B][/QUOTE]
There you go...
Your Theological points (plus a few more) are the basis for Christian Fundamentilism. (not fanaticism... ;) )
Anyone... (especially the media...) can claim the label of Christianity, but are any of these really practicing it.
Sadly... not many...
*sigh*
[B]There you go...
Your Theological points (plus a few more) are the basis for Christian Fundamentilism. (not fanaticism... ;) )
Anyone... (especially the media...) can claim the label of Christianity, but are any of these really practicing it.
Sadly... not many...
*sigh* [/B][/QUOTE] Well, here's a thought, though.
You can practice every single thing in the latter column (save perhaps faith, depending on meaning), and never make a claim to be christian, jew, zoroastian or believe in any higher power, but rather merely be a wonderful human being.
Christianity, and, honestly, many religions occidental in origin, seem (as a theoretical outsider) to be a tool to guide people onto the "right path", if I may be so bold as to draw a relationship to Oriental religion.
...I'm incredibly tired so I'm not sure how much sense that'll make in the morn.
[URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism]Communism[/URL]
Anarchocommunism is a [b]utopia[/b] where no leader is necessary and all are given equal share of the profit. This is what is preached in the new testament.
There is considerable differences between the old and new testament, but when people talk about christianity, its the new testament that counts, right? Otherwise its judean or arabic beliefs.
Actually, Christianity relies on both the old and new testament. To paraphrase the dispensational idea:
The old testament (considered the law of God revealed to man) was given over a period of time to man to show man (who's spirit had died when he fell from grace in the garden when he disobeyed God) that he could never meet all the requirements of the law to return to God (or godly state).
The new testament (considered the spirit of God revealed to man) is the new covenant between man and God, where God takes a human form, meets all the laws of God, is sacrificed for the rest of us as a way back to God, takes dominion over our ultimate destruction, and redeems us in the act of a new spiritual creation.
Why would God do this in this way over an immense period of time? He is a being that exists outside as well as within our limitations of time, seeing everything as the present while we are locked into a progressing time line.
For those covered under the Covenant of Abraham, and the law brought down by Moses, the burnt offerings represent the work of Christ on the cross.
So... the two testaments are very important to Christians (or at least should be...) but the New Testament is what the spirit of a Christian should be...
Not materialism, not crusades, not war, not hatred, not judgement, etc.
;)
[B][URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism]Anarchism[/URL]
[URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism]Communism[/URL]
Anarchocommunism is a [b]utopia[/b] where no leader is necessary and all are given equal share of the profit. This is what is preached in the new testament.
There is considerable differences between the old and new testament, but when people talk about christianity, its the new testament that counts, right? Otherwise its judean or arabic beliefs. [/B][/QUOTE]
By that defenition there are elements of this in Christianity, but the basic tenets do no preclude a government structure or free markets. Conversely, those elements are noted several times in the New Testement (example, Jesus recognized the taxation by Rome).
Jake
[B]It is easy for some people to look at Christianity through the narrow glass of it being lead by just one individual called Pat Robertson (and unfortunately in the USA, there are a large number of people of influence behind him).[/B][/QUOTE]
Fortunately, there are also many more who are not behind him and, instead, believe he's a Class A jackass.
"Intelligent" Design is not science.
Science explains "how" not "why." How do these chemicals act together? How does this thing turn into that thing.
The underlying "Why" is for philosophy and religion classes.
You want ID in public schools? Fine, put it in the classes best suited to it.
"Gaps in the Theory of Evolution"? There are gaps in chemistry, astronomy, mathematics, etc. I don't see anybody pushing for "Magic Jesus Rays" making plants grow instead of photosynthesis.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
[B]I don't see anybody pushing for "Magic Jesus Rays" making plants grow instead of photosynthesis. [/B][/QUOTE]
Well... That's only because I have trademark rights to them for the time being...
;) :D
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by AnlaShok [/i]
[B]"Intelligent" Design is not science.
Science explains "how" not "why." How do these chemicals act together? How does this thing turn into that thing.
The underlying "Why" is for philosophy and religion classes.
You want ID in public schools? Fine, put it in the classes best suited to it.
"Gaps in the Theory of Evolution"? There are gaps in chemistry, astronomy, mathematics, etc. I don't see anybody pushing for "Magic Jesus Rays" making plants grow instead of photosynthesis. [/B][/QUOTE]
That is a sentiment I argee with, that ID is the realm of religion and philosiphy, not science.
The way I look at it: As deep and as far as science can explain, there will [i]always[/i] be a next step, as far back in time you may be able to peer, there will always be a moment before and the even the smallest subatomic particle will always need to have an orgin. It is in that space where religion will always exist, to explain the origin and the why...
Jake
I am sick of life on this planet
[B]Reaver, don't blame the actions of a few on the entire group. Thats all I have to say to you on this matter. [/B][/QUOTE]
Quite a good point. This is exactly what is so hard to get a lot of people to realize about other religions. People argue this about their own religion, but then fail to apply it to others, for instance, Islam. Look at the world today and you will see evidence of that.