On Capitalist Jesus. The Evil of Christianity.

[PaulaGem]

Well, we have 1-3 satanists and a wicca lover. Both among their mumbo jumblo have weird rituals involving bondage etc.

They're perverts if not worse. They like cussing. What they need is scripture.

Anyone who lies about the beliefs of others and thinks himself to be morally superior based on those lies is a pervert of the worst sort.

 

[LATruth]

My oh my, you first come to this forum and profess to be a Christian and who knew, you are really a communist troll who now puts your agenda front and center.

Your entire post is laughable. I am not a Christian, I have NEVER claimed to be so. And I have never advocated communism. If I were a troll one would have spotted it 1800 posts ago. You attack me as if I should conform to your beliefs, and get in line with the masses, yet you claim to be libertarian where one is free to choose and write what he wishes.

This forum does not promote free speech or individualism. Doesn't matter about the 1st amendment here, you scream and yell of your strong support for it only in show.

I stand corrected, it does promote free speech as long as its Christian influenced, doesn't ask tough questions, doesn't point out ironies in life, or make someone challenge their own world view. I am not a satanist, but in a libertarian world they would have their little corner of the world too, and it would and should be okay. They are protected under the Constitution to worship who they wish. If I wanted to dress in all green, hop everywhere I go, worship the frog in my backyard and call the religion the "Church of Froggy-Doggy-Dew", I could.

 

[TurtleBurger]

I actually agree with the point I think the OP is making by posting that article. When people rely solely on one book for their religious views, there's no limit to the craziness that can come out of it. Just from 3 words in the Constitution's "commerce clause" comes a bottomless spring of wacky interpretations; think of how many crazy theories can come out of interpreting 66 books of many different genres. You can find support for absolutely anything you want from the Bible: communism, capitalism, pacifism, fascism, atheism, Buddhism, sadomasochism, you name it. Protestant Christianity holds that each person needs to read and interpret the Bible for themselves, and that exponentially explodes the number of unique interpretations that can come out of the Bible. A new Protestant sect is formed on average every few days, and each one is based on a completely new and usually bizarre interpretation of the Bible.

 

[BeFranklin]

I actually agree with the point I think the OP is making by posting that article. When people rely solely on one book for their religious views, there's no limit to the craziness that can come out of it. Just from 3 words in the Constitution's "commerce clause" comes a bottomless spring of wacky interpretations; think of how many crazy theories can come out of interpreting 66 books of many different genres. You can find support for absolutely anything you want from the Bible: communism, capitalism, pacifism, fascism, atheism, Buddhism, sadomasochism, you name it. Protestant Christianity holds that each person needs to read and interpret the Bible for themselves, and that exponentially explodes the number of unique interpretations that can come out of the Bible. A new Protestant sect is formed on average every few days, and each one is based on a completely new and usually bizarre interpretation of the Bible.

Like the wiccian said, there is a lot in common between wicca (witchcraft) and catholicism.

Both deny the bible in various ways. Lots of riturals, etc.

Sometimes people use the term "priestcraft" for what priests do, which seems appropiate.

 

[PaulaGem]

Like the wiccian said, there is a lot in common between wicca (witchcraft) and catholicism.

Both deny the bible in various ways. Lots of riturals, etc.

Sometimes people use the term "priestcraft" for what priests do, which seems appropiate.

You don't care much for the truth, do you? You quoted my opinion and ascribed it to a "wiccan". I am a Christian. I have never subscribed to any other religion than Christianity.

Like Jefferson and Franklin there are parts of the Christian myth I don't accept as fact, and you can't have it both ways. If these dissenting founding fathers are Christian by your definition then I am too.

 

[Theocrat]

Contradicting Yourself

You don't care much for the truth, do you? You quoted my opinion and ascribed it to a "wiccan". I am a Christian. I have never subscribed to any other religion than Christianity.

Like Jefferson and Franklin there are parts of the Christian myth I don't accept as fact, and you can't have it both ways. If these dissenting founding fathers are Christian by your definition then I am too.

[Emphasis mine]

Christians do not call their faith a myth. You are not a Christian, and you've been called out. So stop lying and making a mockery of Christianity by your false profession. Your very words betray you.

 

[PaulaGem]

A Christian is one who follows the teachings of the Rabbi Yeshua. Myths are used in all religions to answer the unanswerable or communicate a Spriritual concept by allegory.

Yeshua used parables to illustrate a point. Myths are the same as parables except some misconstrue them as fact. Both Jefferson and Franklin were quoted in this thread as not accepting the myth as fact.

 

[idiom]

So no part of Catholic traditions are myths Theo? Thats not what was said two posts above.

Just saying, I wouldn't want to be accountable to God for pontificating on who is and isn't a Christian on some internet forum.

 

[Theocrat]

Semantic Confusion

A Christian is one who follows the teachings of the Rabbi Yeshua. Myths are used in all religions to answer the unanswerable or communicate a Spriritual concept by allegory.

Yeshua used parables to illustrate a point. Myths are the same as parables except some misconstrue them as fact. Both Jefferson and Franklin were quoted in this thread as not accepting the myth as fact.

Parables and myths are two different things. Parables are stories which illustrate true doctrine to its hearers, while myths are fables which are accepted as true occurrences in their entirety. I'd love to know which "Christian myths" you do not accept because I still believe you're not a Christian if you reject any teaching or precept found in the Scriptures just because you relegate it as a myth.

 

[Theocrat]

The Profession of the Lips Bewrays the Intent of the Heart

So no part of Catholic traditions are myths Theo? Thats not what was said two posts above.

Just saying, I wouldn't want to be accountable to God for pontificating on who is and isn't a Christian on some internet forum.

The Bible tells us that we would know a person by his fruit (Matthew 7) and what comes out of his mouth (Luke 6:45). When I hear a professing Christian calling the any part of the Christian faith a myth, that is evidence to me that person does not have the Spirit of truth (John 14:17; 16:13) abiding within him.

Roman Catholic traditions are myths, precisely because they are not part of true, Biblical Christianity. However, calling them "Christian myths" is a contradiction of terms, to be sure.

 

[idiom]

How handy.

 

[Up The Deise]

The Bible tells us that we would know a person by his fruit (Matthew 7) and what comes out of his mouth (Luke 6:45). When I hear a professing Christian calling the any part of the Christian faith a myth, that is evidence to me that person does not have the Spirit of truth (John 14:17; 16:13) abiding within him.

Roman Catholic traditions are myths, precisely because they are not part of true, Biblical Christianity. However, calling them "Christian myths" is a contradiction of terms, to be sure.

But isn't tradition rooted in the past. nothing something that is dead and boring but something that is handed on?

 

[PaulaGem]

The deification of Yeshua was done by the Roman Church in the pagan Roman tradition of deifying its heroes and leaders. It is not a Christian or a Jewish tradition. It is myth.

It is illogical and contradictory to the image of a fair and loving God taught by Yeshua.

Franklin clearly stated that he had personal doubts about the divinity of Christ, I cited that passage, you ignored it and continue to claim that Franklin was a Christian.

Jefferson made his own Bible by cutting out everything but the teachings of Yeshua. I can only imagine how thrilled he would have been to have access to the Gospel of Thomas. Jefferson removed the miracles of Jesus from his Bible. I closely identify with the following quote from Jefferson:

To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others, ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other.

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html

 

[Bossobass]

The deification of Yeshua was done by the Roman Church in the pagan Roman tradition of deifying its heroes and leaders. It is not a Christian or a Jewish tradition. It is myth.

It is illogical and contradictory to the image of a fair and loving God taught by Yeshua.

Franklin clearly stated that he had personal doubts about the divinity of Christ, I cited that passage, you ignored it and continue to claim that Franklin was a Christian.

Jefferson made his own Bible by cutting out everything but the teachings of Yeshua. I can only imagine how thrilled he would have been to have access to the Gospel of Thomas. Jefferson removed the miracles of Jesus from his Bible. I closely identify with the following quote from Jefferson:



http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html

You might enjoy Sir Isaac Newton's writings (comprising more than half of his life's writings) on this subject as well.

BTW, why don't you refer to Thomas as Te'oma?

Bosso

 

[idiom]

Oh, curious piece of wild speculation, the Magi were probably following a collection of prophecies left by Daniel in Babylon.

 

[Theocrat]

This is What I'm Talking About

The deification of Yeshua was done by the Roman Church in the pagan Roman tradition of deifying its heroes and leaders. It is not a Christian or a Jewish tradition. It is myth.

It is illogical and contradictory to the image of a fair and loving God taught by Yeshua.

Franklin clearly stated that he had personal doubts about the divinity of Christ, I cited that passage, you ignored it and continue to claim that Franklin was a Christian.

Jefferson made his own Bible by cutting out everything but the teachings of Yeshua. I can only imagine how thrilled he would have been to have access to the Gospel of Thomas. Jefferson removed the miracles of Jesus from his Bible. I closely identify with the following quote from Jefferson:



http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html

[Emphasis mine]

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is divine (John 1:1-3; 8:56-58; Colossians 1:17; Hebrews 7:3; et. al.), but you would rather attribute such an important characteristic of Christ to Roman Catholic tradition (without any evidence, I might add). That is one reason why I know you do not follow the doctrines of Jesus; you doubt His own testimony about Himself.

Also, the Jefferson Bible is not really a Bible of sorts. Because Thomas Jefferson admired the morals and teachings of Jesus Christ, he separated them into a treatise of his own to illustrate the morals of Christ compared to other religions. When Jefferson did that compilation, he did not call it a Bible. However, sometime later, his chronicling of Jesus's morals and teachings was labeled as "Jefferson's Bible," when it was never intended to be such.

 

[idiom]

I often check to see if an interpretation of the wider scriptures lines up with the 'Red letters'. If Paul, for example, writes something that seems to contradict the Red letters then obviously I am interpreting what Paul wrote incorrectly.

To me the Red letters are the most straightforward to interpret and reliable part of the Bible. The rest is just expanding on them.

 

[TurtleBurger]

Roman Catholic traditions are myths, precisely because they are not part of true, Biblical Christianity. However, calling them "Christian myths" is a contradiction of terms, to be sure.

Considering the Bible is itself a Catholic tradition, you must consider it to be a myth too.
Anyway, the word "myth" doesn't imply something is untrue or unchristian. A myth is just an ancient genre of literature, which actually is a part of Jewish and Christian literature (including parts of the Bible).

 

[TurtleBurger]

Like the wiccian said, there is a lot in common between wicca (witchcraft) and catholicism.

Both deny the bible in various ways. Lots of riturals, etc.

Sometimes people use the term "priestcraft" for what priests do, which seems appropiate.

Have you attended both Wiccan and Catholic services? Just curious.

Anyway, Catholics don't deny the Bible, they just deny your interpretation of it. Since you believe that each person should read and interpret the Bible for themselves, how can you say the Catholic interpretation (or the Communist interpretation for that matter) is less valid than your own?

 

[PaulaGem]

Considering the Bible is itself a Catholic tradition, you must consider it to be a myth too.
Anyway, the word "myth" doesn't imply something is untrue or unchristian. A myth is just an ancient genre of literature, which actually is a part of Jewish and Christian literature (including parts of the Bible).

But the deification of a hero is Roman tradition. The myth of resurrection on the third day is Mithraism, and it is not Jewish or part of the original Christian beliefs system which was based on judaism.