I wanted to apologize as a Christian....

[Huggy Bear]

*emphasis mine*

I do not contend that vicarious redemption is immoral, you do, thereby making yourself an immoral hypocrite, since you clearly have no problems sanctioning the taking of a life to sustain your own life and that of your family's..

Okay, I'm an immoral hypocrite.  I also kick dogs...and?

And?

You have no basis for railing against a concept that you are clearly fine with practicing on a day to day basis.

[The Grand Nudger]

Of course I do, I just explained the basis to you.  You're upset that, in your estimation, I don't consistently apply it to the killing of chickens and the killing of the better man.

Tough titties?

I guess, if you were a chicken, you'd be a fool to trust me..but since you're a human being, you're never going to find me stringing you up, least of all to redeem me...lol? Honestly, is this the terminus of your position "hur dur hypocrites"? Try harder, back in a week.

[Brian37]

Okay, I'm an immoral hypocrite.  I also kick dogs...and?

And?

You have no basis for railing against a concept that you are clearly fine with practicing on a day to day basis.

I love that you ignore the irony under your avatar where you put your "religious views" as being "I believe in God, not religion"

That is like saying "I believe in Mickey Mouse, not Walt Disney" or "I believe in Yoda, not Star Wars".

Nope sorry, I might be glad that you are not a right winger or tribal and view it as "personal" not club based, but so what. Still suck with no evidence for your invisible sky hero.

[Huggy Bear]

And?

You have no basis for railing against a concept that you are clearly fine with practicing on a day to day basis.

I love that you ignore the irony under your avatar where you put your "religious views" as being "I believe in God, not religion"

That is like saying "I believe in Mickey Mouse, not Walt Disney" or "I believe in Yoda, not Star Wars".

Nope sorry, I might be glad that you are not a right winger or tribal and view it as "personal" not club based, but so what. Still suck with no evidence for your invisible sky hero.

False comparison seeing how none of those really exist without the other...

Religion is a man made system, so before God created anything did religion exist?

Tell me what religious system Abraham belonged to?

[Brian37]

. . . and that divorce thing, I was brought up with it.  I'm not making up the Princess Margaret/Group Captain Townsend thing. Many/most folks in my parents Midwestern orbit lived and died with Christian marriage as indissoluble.  My family members applied ENORMOUS pressure on a cousin of mine to remarry the vicious kunt he divorced, and he did.  I wasn't allowed to play/visit/invite over some neighbor kids as their mom was divorced and remarried.

-and then something happened-

That the admonition/stricture is now widely rebuked/ignored/repudiated/reviled/retconned doesn't reflect poorly on folks that believed it in the generation ahead of mine, it reflects poorly on the liberal backsliding scripture cherry pickers their Eternal and Unchanging God is stuck with today.

Sorry you family had such a strict view on divorce.

But your family attitude towards divorce is a perfect example of religious Christianity and bible based.. Yes traditional religious views often times can cite certain passages.. but rarly if ever does it take all passages into consideration.

As I pointed out in Mat 19 Christ Himself added a condition or proviso for acceptable divorce. I further pointed out depending on the translation the condition of sexual unfaithfulness was also translated into marital unfaithfulness meaning not faithful to one's vows. Either way ALL translations have either one or the other conditions for divorce.

In traditional/religious based Christianity doctrine are studied and are the center of action and worship, because people don't/won't read the bible for themselves. So they follow tradition, rther than the God found in the bible. but rarly does the doctrinal view account for everything. Doctrine = power in the church. power to control and manipulate its members to fall in line with church thinking/policy. Again doctrine can be both a good and bad thing as the good is paired with the bad to give the bad legitimacy. and thus the church power.

Here is the main reason for this: The Christianity found in the bible seeks to decentralize power... Yes it seeks to keep Christianity in small groups, just look at how the bible it self is laid out after the gospel you have a couple dozen letters going to various regions speaking to individual problems each church had. Meaning each region was it's own central church structure. each region had it's own set of rules based on a given people's ablitiy to comprehend the gospel. (some had to be circumcised, and live as jews for some many year before conversion to Christianity, some could not eat meat while other church could, some had so much freedom in their church they thought it ok to have incestuous relationships. while others were so dedicated to God marriage was off the table for many of its members.) Again this stripping the church of power and putting people in direct contact with God was meant to take power from man's authority and give it all back to God.

Then religion came along with it's cherry picked rules and 'we' traded our freedoms for something easier to comprehend, even though it was far more oppressive. But the truth is still out there in print. That is why I say check all doctrine, to see if it stands up to what the bible says. to start see if the doctrine is spelled out in scripture as it is in the church liturgy. If the doctrine does not appear in the bible in one central place in the bible and has to be cherry picked using 1/2 a verse from here and 2/3 a verse from somewhere else then off the bat this is a bad/non God of the bible doctrine.

The other doctrines we must be super careful of are the 1/2 truth doctrine. You experience in church and divorce is an example of the 1/2 truth doctrine. to expose these you must either read you bible or know someone who does. because as I showed you your passage in mark is only apart of the whole message the Jesus Himself had to say. Once you incorporate all of what the bible has to say you can see it completely undermines the traditional church doctrine.

Then I ask people can you now see the beginning of the divide from religion and the picture of God the bible builds. Church says your life be damned if you married the wrong person you are forever screwed. God says he understands the level of hurt sexual betrayal can produce and does not expect us to be able to continue our role as husband or wife with that person. Which according to Christ does indeed free us to remarry. God shows mercy in the bible, but only demands in doctrine.

---

And leave off bothering the gays.  You're still picking.

what Christian teaching has us 'bothering gays?'

Since we live under a secular government and not a theocracy, it really does not matter to me one bit your old book of myth says about divorce. Unless you are involved in the marriage, you have no say who does what. Islam also has it's views on marriage. So what.

[Huggy Bear]

Of course I do, I just explained the basis to you.  You're upset that, in your estimation, I don't consistently apply it to the killing of chickens and the killing of the better man.

Tough titties?

I guess, if you were a chicken, you'd be a fool to trust me..but since you're a human being, you're never going to find me stringing you up, least of all to redeem me...lol? Honestly, is this the terminus of your position "hur dur hypocrites"? Try harder, back in a week.

Wait... is it your position that one life is somehow more deserving or better than the other? Strange seeing how you believe we are all a product of evolution.

[Brian37]

I love that you ignore the irony under your avatar where you put your "religious views" as being "I believe in God, not religion"

That is like saying "I believe in Mickey Mouse, not Walt Disney" or "I believe in Yoda, not Star Wars".

Nope sorry, I might be glad that you are not a right winger or tribal and view it as "personal" not club based, but so what. Still suck with no evidence for your invisible sky hero.

False comparison seeing how none of those really exist without the other...

Religion is a man made system, so before God created anything did religion exist?

Tell me what religious system Abraham belonged to?

Nope, see this is what you don't understand. Utter crappy claims can turn into a belief that people end up buying to be true. It is why L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer managed to start Scientology.

You do know in England I think, some Star Wars fans have made an attempt to make "Jediism" an official religion. They failed sure, but some deluded fans are bent on making it a real religion. Just like fans of L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer conned people into starting Scientology.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblo...n-decision

The only reason "Jediism" is not currently recognized as an official religion right now is because the people trying to push it have not successfully marketed it to a big enough political power to get recognized. The only difference between a cult and a religion are the numbers and political power. Scientology simply got big enough which is why it is now called a religion.



"Religion is a man made system"......... I agree, stop right there, keep re reading that maybe you will get it someday.

[Huggy Bear]

False comparison seeing how none of those really exist without the other...

Religion is a man made system, so before God created anything did religion exist?

Tell me what religious system Abraham belonged to?

Nope, see this is what you don't understand. Utter crappy claims can turn into a belief that people end up buying to be true. It is why L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer managed to start Scientology.

You do know in England I think, some Star Wars fans have made an attempt to make "Jediism" an official religion. They failed sure, but some deluded fans are bent on making it a real religion. Just like fans of L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer conned people into starting Scientology.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblo...n-decision

The only reason "Jediism" is not currently recognized as an official religion right now is because the people trying to push it have not successfully marketed it to a big enough political power to get recognized. The only difference between a cult and a religion are the numbers and political power. Scientology simply got big enough which is why it is now called a religion.



"Religion is a man made system"......... I agree, stop right there, keep re reading that maybe you will get it someday.

Then you agree with my point...

Rejecting religion does not equate to rejecting God.

God deals with a person on an individual basis, it's a personal experience. Did not one of the crucified thieves go to paradise because he believed Jesus? Does that make him religious?

[Brian37]

Nope, see this is what you don't understand. Utter crappy claims can turn into a belief that people end up buying to be true. It is why L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer managed to start Scientology.

You do know in England I think, some Star Wars fans have made an attempt to make "Jediism" an official religion. They failed sure, but some deluded fans are bent on making it a real religion. Just like fans of L. Ron Hubbard, a si fi writer conned people into starting Scientology.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblo...n-decision

The only reason "Jediism" is not currently recognized as an official religion right now is because the people trying to push it have not successfully marketed it to a big enough political power to get recognized. The only difference between a cult and a religion are the numbers and political power. Scientology simply got big enough which is why it is now called a religion.



"Religion is a man made system"......... I agree, stop right there, keep re reading that maybe you will get it someday.

Then you agree with my point...

Rejecting religion does not equate to rejecting God.

God deals with a person on an individual basis, it's a personal experience. Did not one of the crucified thieves go to paradise because he believed Jesus? Does that make him religious?

NO, not belonging to a club does not matter to me. You like someone who goes to a church still fall for the suspension of disbelief which still requires buying before insuring quality of facts. You are religious too, you simply don't belong to an official club. 

It takes no brains to swallow a religion or God. 

Now, don't sit here and lie to me, and answer the question, is your position that of a generic god, or does this "God" come from a book with a long tradition of being printed?

You cant separate Yoda from Star Wars. You can certainly watch the movie at home sure, you don't have to watch it with others in a group. But Yoda started out because someone wrote the script. 

Now unless you have a generic god, I am betting your use of "God" comes from the traditions of Abraham, which sorry, does make you religious. "I am not like the others"..... Yes you are. Watering down a naked assertion does not separate that naked assertion from its origins. 

I

[Harry Nevis]

Then you agree with my point...

Rejecting religion does not equate to rejecting God.

God deals with a person on an individual basis, it's a personal experience. Did not one of the crucified thieves go to paradise because he believed Jesus? Does that make him religious?

So, you use a religious book to justify that you're not religious?