If theres any religions philosophy that deserves respect it is buddhism, Abracadabra is right.

Carnavon, how do you explain all the killings in the Bible decreed by God? Sodam, Egypts first born, the Amalekites... Do you think "the good lord" as described in your book considered everyone equal? Do you think individuals found at the hands of those who were filled with righteous fervor were thankful for Gods mercy? What of the chosen who will supposedly emerge from the prophecy of the Book of Revelations in paradise while non-believers are left to suffer? Is this not a separation?

If you believe the message of the Bible, of your "God" is one of peace then you have obviously not read it thoroughly but rather had people quote cherry picked verses that you have adopted and looked specifically for on occasion. Make no mistake; the message of the Bible is one of fear and control not of morality.
If you want to form an actual perspective on it you should read it all.

(February 16, 2012 at 3:09 am)Carnavon Wrote: I agree that it is a pity that disagreements should "deteriorate" into "mud slinging", using foul language in many cases. But that is human nature? Indeed it is - as we can see from many of the discussions.
You are seemingly mistaken on the issue of Abrahamic religions that renounce anyone who refuses to climb on board as being a 'worthless heathen' unworthy of respect. From my perspective as a Christian, that is 180 degrees from what the Bible teaches. (See i.e parable good Samaritan). To suggest that one should judge others because you are "better than them" is directly opposed to the Bible as there is nothing that we did not receive and hence have nothing to boast about or feel superior (1Co 4:7 For who makes you to differ? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive? )
The Christian perspective is exactly this : Thankful that God in his mercy, and not because of my "goodness (superiority?)" looked kindly upon me and saved me as I am no better than anyone else.

I'll be the first to agree with you that "Christianity" appears to be about grace first and foremost. The only problem is that the scriptures themselves are grossly self-contradicting on that very point.

You say, "The Christian perspective is exactly this : Thankful that God in his mercy, and not because of my "goodness (superiority?)" looked kindly upon me and saved me as I am no better than anyone else."

But that's a contradiction right there. Ultimately neither God nor Jesus decides to 'save' anyone. It must be their choice to "repent their sins", and ask for forgiveness, and to accept Jesus as their LORD.

So in a very real sense they must 'earn' this grace via their own choice to repent their sins, ask for forgiveness, and make a commitment to obey Jesus as their LORD.

So they can indeed lay claim to a special "goodness (superiority)", over those who refuse to chose goodness over evil (i.e. over sin).

But the whole story is grossly riddled with contradictions concerning this very ideal.

Even Jesus supposedly asked of the Father, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do".

This is an oxymoron in many ways.

First off, it suggests that people who are doing bad things "know not what they do". And that this is sufficient reason for bestowing them with forgiveness and grace.

Well, if that's true then all non-believers would automatically be eligible for this kind of "Jesus Grace" because, if they don't even believe in the religion and 'sin', then clearly "they know not what they do".

So a mere disbelief in the religion, and a disbelieve that Jesus was the son of God, would be an automatic pardon based on Jesus' own request to the Father that people be forgiven if "they know not what they do".

The second oxymoron is to ask, "Why should Jesus even need to suggest this to a supposedly all-wise God?" Shouldn't the Father already be wise enough on his own to recognize that people who "know not what they do" should be pardoned if righteousness is to have any meaning at all?

Why should Jesus need to suggest to God-the-Father what should be considered to be 'righteous judgment'? Was the Father not already wise and righteous to begin with?

~~~~

I mean, seriously. If a person honestly sees no reason to believe in the ancient Hebrew tales, then even if those tales were true, that non-believer would qualify as "knowing not what they are doing" with respect to rejecting "God's word", because they honestly see no reason to believe in it.

Therefore people who don't believe in the religion would necessarily need to be automatically saved through the "Grace of Jesus", because Jesus himself proclaims that people who "Know not what they do" should be forgiven.

So the whole religion breaks down right there. Especially the idea that a person would need to do anything "special" on their own free will choice (like accepting Jesus as their LORD and savior) in order to earn the "Grace" of forgiveness, etc.

The whole religion is just a Pandora's box of one contradiction after another.

(February 16, 2012 at 8:50 am)Epimethean Wrote: Carn, your religion has taught people more about fear and loathing than nearly any other, so, simply because you are too brainwashed to get the point doesn't give you any moral height from which to hand down your astonishment.

Mote, eye, you know the drill.

Hi there Epimethean. Trust you are well. Epimethean you make some statements which may be a perception, I agree. Whether it is the truth, can only be judged by the actual proper interpretation of relevant texts, don't you agree? I will be happy to discuss any of the texts, seen in context (as proper exegesis requires).
Many texts have been used for various purposes when taken out of context - for the specific purpose of supporting a specific viewpoint.
As an example, the "prosperity teachings of guys like Copeland rests on very poor interpretation of for instance 2Co 8:9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that being rich, He became poor for your sake, so that you might become rich by the poverty of that One. If you were to read the text in context of the paragraphs surrounding it, it is evident that it is very little about earthly riches - but that is not what people want to hear. (see 2Co 8:7 Therefore, as ye abound in every thing, in faith, and utterance, and knowledge, and in all diligence, and in your love to us, see that ye abound in this grace also.)Being basically self-centered people want wealth, health and happiness and God is the vehicle - to satisfy their "lusts".

But getting back to your comments, it will be great if you could then support your claims with some proof?

Sorry, "my interpretation disagrees ergo they are wrong" doesn't cut it for me.

(February 16, 2012 at 3:10 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Sorry, "my interpretation disagrees ergo they are wrong" doesn't cut it for me.

Hi Rhythm. Good to chat to you again.
The principle is nobody can just consider their own interpenetration to be the right one (including me). I am open to correction and so is anybody that is honest and do not wish to support their viewpoint by a few carefully selected verses, that is contrary to the argument by the writer, the purpose why he was writing, to whom he was writing, the book (Psalms is different to Romans), the Bible as a whole and the specific word used etc.

Even so (with honest discussion) there may be differences of opinion. So it will be a good idea if you agreed with the position taken in the point raised, to support it with argument.

Let me concede from the beginning that if you take "Christians" as the standard, there will be ample proof of the view expressed. That is however not the standard. The Bible is.

The NT was written by men who were, at least ostensibly, xtians.

(February 18, 2012 at 8:08 am)Epimethean Wrote: The NT was written by men who were, at least ostensibly, xtians.

You are suggesting they were without vice? Jesus knew that they were not and even taught them to prey "please forgive us our sins". In my previous post I admitted that Christian often do not measure up to living holy lives. That has no impact on what the Bible teaches. It actually confirms that which you will find all over Scripture - Rom 3:23 for all sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and every true Christian will attest to that fact.
But let us look at your statement "your religion has taught people more about fear and loathing". Please support that from Scripture.

Carn, if we look at what xtians actually do as opposed to what they are supposed to do, we see that they prefer the OT, so let's look at their deeds. A book which proclaims itself as a standard is only as good as those who revere it, and xtians depart from it every chance they get. The bible teaches nothing. Man teaches, and if he uses the bible as a tool, but still lashes out at those who are different from him, his standard is his own conduct. look at my statement. It did not say that your bible teaches people fear and loathing (though it certainly does do that): It says that your religion teaches these things.

Shall we start with Charlemagne and the execution of the Saxons? Or perhaps the massacre of Jews in Germany and Poland in the 14th century? Do the Crusades (including the Albigensian Crusade) ring any bells? How about the Inquisitions of Spain and Italy (Cathars, anyone?)? Or perhaps the witch hunts of the 15th through 17th centuries? Hmmm, or maybe the murder of the Huguenots? What about that insidious fellow named Columbus? Good ol' John Mason? The list runs very long, and many others can be placed amidst the ones I have listed.

Really, given the comparison Carn gave, we have to ask why xtians in general tend to obey governmental laws but have no problem violating scriptural ones. A given state's statutory laws are far more respected by these folk than their ten commandments or anything about being kind that their godboy supposedly ever said.