There's more to religion in general, and Christianity specifically, than pronouncements on sex.

[rug]

This is the Gospel that is being read today in every Catholic church throughout the planet, as it is every year.

Mt 25:31-46

Jesus said to his disciples:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory,
and all the angels with him,
he will sit upon his glorious throne,
and all the nations will be assembled before him.
And he will separate them one from another,
as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
Then the king will say to those on his right,
'Come, you who are blessed by my Father.
Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
For I was hungry and you gave me food,
I was thirsty and you gave me drink,
a stranger and you welcomed me,
naked and you clothed me,
ill and you cared for me,
in prison and you visited me.’
Then the righteous will answer him and say,
'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you,
or thirsty and give you drink?
When did we see you a stranger and welcome you,
or naked and clothe you?
When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’
And the king will say to them in reply,
'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did
for one of the least brothers of mine, you did for me.’
Then he will say to those on his left,
'Depart from me, you accursed,
into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
For I was hungry and you gave me no food,
I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
a stranger and you gave me no welcome,
naked and you gave me no clothing,
ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’
Then they will answer and say,
'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty
or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison,
and not minister to your needs?’
He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you,
what you did not do for one of these least ones,
you did not do for me.’
And these will go off to eternal punishment,
but the righteous to eternal life."

Flame away.

[MNDemNY]

1. Made-up shit is made-up shit.

[rug]

2. Your point?

[MNDemNY]

5. Religion needs to go the way of the flat-earthers.

Religion, ALL religion is the scourge of this world. Little will be accomplished until fairy-tales are seen for what they are. (I define "religion" as any spirituality that is projected beyond one's own mind, believe what you wish, don't attempt to impose, or burden others with your beliefs.)

[rug]

8. Why? And would you include free market claptrap in your jettisoned fairy tales?

Not all bullshit is religious. Not all things religious are bullshit.

[MNDemNY]

12. "Not all bs is religious"-true "Not all things religious are bs" -false.

The mere premise , being bullshit, makes everything derived from it bullshit.

[rug]

19. Which premise? That there is a God?

Because if that is it, you're at a standoff.

[MNDemNY]

24. ? Have you proof? Of course not. Can I prove a negative? of course not.

But, the onus is on you. Can you prove there is no Flying Spaghetti Monster? Sorry, but it is all Bull shit. It is only a tool used throughout the ages to impose control, and gather riches. Nothing more than racketeering.It IS as simple as that, and to argue the point by listing the "good" points of a religion does nothing toward "proving" anything at all.The "stand-off" is only within your mind.

[rug]

33. There's no onus on anyone. It is a standoff.

Having dispensed with that, can you sift any value from reigion as it exists from the patent political use of it?

Or would you rather fulminate at your keyboard typing "bullshit"?

[Odin2005]

41. Religion is inherently political, it is a tool of social control. n/t

Funny, IIRC the man in your avatar pic called religion the "opiate of the masses"...

[MNDemNY]

71. Some enjoy the "high".

[MNDemNY]

70. No value that can not be derived elsewhere.Any "religion" outside ones own "heart" is corrupt.

And no, it is not a stand-off. Absent of proof, the default is there is no god.

[rug]

77. Religion confined to oneself is psychosis.

[Odin2005]

99. Religious belief IS psychosis.

I don't see Jesus and the Virgin Mary in everything from mold stains to grilled cheese like the Religionistas do.

[rug]

109. I don't name myself after a denizen of Valhalla.

:shrug:

[Odin2005]

113. Hey, I'm Norwegian-American and like Nordic Mythology, that doesn't mean I think Odin is real!

:rofl:

[LanternWaste]

53. Much like all imagined, human-constructs

"Religion needs to go the way of the flat-earthers."

Much like all imagined, human-constructs-- like philosophy, the arts, and politics....

Unless of course you think that your imagined construct is "better" than the others, which is (I think), 99% of the problem.

[MNDemNY]

76. Do not tie philosophy and the arts with religion,

the former asks, and invites question, the latter attempts to definitively answer, with no room for question.

[Odin2005]

100. Exactly

Philosophy is about asking questions that may no have definite answers. Art is about asking questions without words.

Religion is about saying "God says this and don't question Him."

[JerseygirlCT]

128. Well that's pure nonsense

Of course there's room for question. To borrow a phrase: faith is not the lack of doubt. Faith is the leading edge of doubt.

Anyone who has tried to tell you that religion means no room for question has not actually experienced much of their faith.

[spoony]

119. Ah, R/T discourse at its finest.

[LearnedHand]

3. I agree, but it's unfortunate that the most vocal...

of those representing christianity apparently skipped this part altogether. No flames here. K&R.

[LaurenG]

4. I always liked that one

No flames from me.

[SidDithers]

6. meh...who cares...nt

Sid

[Deep13]

7. So they promise what they cannot deliver, too.

I knew that already.

[TexasObserver]

9. But 95% of religion isn't about doing any of those good things.

It's about controlling people, making them buy into a narrative which accrues to the benefit of those who seek by such methods to control the believers.

Religion is what you get when you take reason away and add fantasy.

[rug]

13. I'm not so sure about that.

The more it acts like this, the more claim it has on being religious. Just because people says thay're following religious precepts doesn't mean they are. Religions don't attract a higher percentage of assholes than, say, GDP.

[TexasObserver]

28. Religions have almost nothing to do with anything good or positive.

And yes, they do attract far more assholes than GDP. Perhaps you're thinking of yourself, in both instances.

[rug]

42. Ah yes, I read you often in GDP.

[undeterred]

15. Where did you come up with 95%?

Sounds like fantasy to me.

[TexasObserver]

27. It's probably closer to 99.9% that has nothing to do with good works.

See those big buildings that each church creates to impress itself? They spend most of their time and money working on building useless edifices to themselves, and indoctrinating the members.

Religion is a scam.

[undeterred]

32. yeah, I can tell you're an expert

[Odin2005]

101. Who needs to be an expert? Any non-deluded person with half a brain can se that...

...Religion is a load of BS. Most people don't think that because they are deluded.

[JerseygirlCT]

59. How did you arrive at that number?nt

[TexasObserver]

106. Observation. Ever notice any of those church buildings on every corner?

[JerseygirlCT]

150. And?

Buildings on a corner shows you what, exactly? And adds up to 95% of anything how, exactly?

[verges]

73. IMHO you have it backwards.

That's 95% of what religion IS about. You're mistaking the way some people misuse religion for their on gains to be religion. They are not. Don't mistake everyone that uses the religious banner as being tuly religious.

[TexasObserver]

107. NO, I have it right. MOST of the religious in the US are Republicans.

When you go into church on Sunday morning, you're sitting down with the most prejudiced people in America, the most unscientific, and the biggest bigots.

[rug]

110. Obama got 54% of the Cathoic vote.

[TexasObserver]

111. Not the ones that take that stuff seriously!!

[rug]

112. True, he only got the Catholics who juggle in the back of the church during Communion

[JerseygirlCT]

129. Statistics?

Can you back that one up?

Certainly not my experience.

[Warren Stupidity]

10. We have a religion forum for this sort of stuff.

However, while we are on the subject, christianity in general as an historical force, with respect to the sermon on the mount, should be roundly condemned for its stunning hypocrisy: its rejection in practice of everything that is good as expressed in that sermon. In particular, the roman church has long aligned itself (since like 300 CE or so) with the state and with the powerful and in doing so lost any right to claim those words as part of its identity.

Besides, why are sheep good and goats bad?

[rug]

16. If you want to remove al threads about religion from GD, that's fine with me.

Goats are bad because they have horns obviously.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. rams have horns and does eat oats

goats are bad because just look at their eyes, obviously they are alien life forms.

[rug]

89. But little lambs eat ivy.

[TWiley]

118. Why not simply post this crap in the right forum in the first place?

Or, do you feel the need to evangelize?

[rug]

124. There's no evangelizing. It's balancing the crap in GD about religion.

Crap you have willingly flung.

[TWiley]

134. You speak untruthfully about Religion

and, you expect everyone else to shut up and listen to your nonsense? If you want to live a life based on magic and superstition, then go ahead, but try to drop the evagelizing part of your conquest. It was designed to promote wars. If you do not believe me, then research the word "propaganda". You will discover that it was an ancient Roman Curia which granted the power to spread the gospel of Jesus for the purpose of destabelizing and conquoring other nations.

[timtom]

50. Can you name ANY "ism"

religious, philosophical, or otherwise that shouldn't be condemned for its stunning hypocrisy?

[Warren Stupidity]

69. yeah sure

secular humanism
democratic socialism
anarchism
vegetarianism
buddhism to some extent unitarianism and whatever ism quakers etc are
bahaism
the suffi branch of islam
existentialism
...


there are branches of christianity (see unitarians above for example) that aren't stunningly hypocritical either. However when an OP decides that the sermon on the mount is proof about something to do with religion and religious institutions, I kind of throw up in my mouth a bit.

Plus, why are sheep good and goats bad?

[timtom]

93. So, you think that all those you have named

are free from stunning hypocrisy?

How about free from political machinations?

[Warren Stupidity]

125. You just changed the terms of your question

"Can you name ANY "ism" religious, philosophical, or otherwise that shouldn't be condemned for its stunning hypocrisy?"

to

"are free from stunning hypocrisy?"

No - of course hypocrites abound. However, the 'isms' I named are not generally hypocritical, unlike, e.g. christianity.

[Marrah_G]

146. I've never seen my religion termed hypocritical before

:shrug:

(Wiccan, for those who don't know. )

[saltpoint]

11. Hi, rug. There certainly is more to Christianity than pronouncements

by its head people over what other should and shouldn't do with their genitals.

But as others have posted, it is the hierarchical loudmouths who always seem to have the bullhorn.

If I think most archbishops are a pack of authoritarian jerks, I respect Francis of Assisi's genuine dedication to the poor.

If I consider Rev. Jim Dobson an unstable son-of-a-bitch, I will listen to the Rev. Bill Moyers for hours on end on social policy.

Are you familiar with Ohio's Rt. 63 exit off I-75 -- where the gargantuan statue of "Touchdown Jesus" is? That's just not my cup of tea. My guess is it's not yours either. But as folks drive by, that's what they see. It's kind of a monstrosity. There's a Larry Flynt-owned adult toy shop at that exit too, isn't there? I would consider the Flynt store the more honorable venue.

[rug]

18. Religion is easier to mock than Larry Craig's defense.

The harder part is seeing the value in it. And I agree with you, the problem with most religions is the leadership.

[saltpoint]

21. Yes. I take the view of many other DUers on incidents like the Craig

incident at the airport.

I don't care how Larry Craig or anyone else has sex. I really don't. I'm distrustful of those who do care and throw a big fit over it, in fact. What is appalling about Larry Craig is his lockstep adherence to far-Right policies, domestic and abroad, which are so offensive. If I lived out in Idaho I would vote against him not because he sought sex in an airport but because he seems to represent a regressive political ideology.

My great aunt died some years ago now. She was a recalcitrant heathen and chose a Catholic assisted living facility for her final years. The men and women who worked on the staff there were religious people but took the service-to-others tenet of Jesus' ministry to heart and mind and delivered attention and compassion as well as it could be delivered. My aunt would never set foot in any church, Catholic or otherwise, but she stood up for those folks who toil anonymously, well out of the public spotlight, to help others.

[LeftishBrit]

14. Important point

I'm an atheist - but consider these principles a core part of secular humanist ethics as well - but am always amazed at the Christian Righties who think that religion is entirely about prohibiting gay marriage and abortion.

[rug]

20. You're absolutely right. These core beliefs are not at all exclusive to religion.

But they do raise some interesting moral imperatives.

[buckettgirl]

22. These principles

I was thinking that every one should try to live by these principles - whether or not they are part of any religion.

Shouldn't all be trying to do for each other; being kind and helpful neighbors?

[JerseygirlCT]

62. It sure would be a far different world if we did

and motives matter a lot less than actions, I think.

Personally, as a believer, I don't think God gives a hoot what religion we claim, or creed we profess -- or if we don't.

This is what matters. And most probably, all that matters.

[JerseygirlCT]

60. I think they miss

that Christianity isn't so much a club as an obligation.

They're more fixated on some sort of badge of membership, I think, while missing the whole point.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

23. Why aren't Christians following Jesus? American evangelical Christians certainly aren't. nt

[anonymous171]

25. The "religious" right only reads the old testament and certain parts of the new testament.

[blue sky at night]

26. we are also reading it....

actually read it, and had a great sermon about finding christ in those least among us....that is why people who don't believe in god may be able to look the other way when they see something in a person that causes them to ignore them, they don't realize that it is our call. BTW, there is a common lectionary that most protestant churches follow, so we are all on the same page. I am a UCC member.


Mathew 25:40

Learn it , Know it, LIVE it.

[rug]

35. I din't know there was a common lectionary.

That's good, it forms a sense of communion.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

82. Episcopalians heard it today, too

As an aside, I once read that in the Middle East, sheep and goats look more alike than they do here in North America, so separating the sheep from the goats is not as much of a no-brainer as you might think.

Anyway, our sermon this morning was about how Jesus doesn't say anything about believing the right doctrines or performing the right rituals, but that he accepts those who do good.

[GoodSpud]

29. Would anyone like to offer me a moral justification

for eternal punishment for finite crimes?


How is that just?

NB: I will cheerfully ignore all variants of might makes right.

T.D.P.

[rug]

38. Actually, current theology doesn't couch it as punishment.

The conventional understanding is that individuals choose to walk away from God or any concept of God. That is the totality of the punishment.

[walldude]

65. And the ones who don't? The Jews, the Hindu's The Buddhists?

According to Christianity they are all going to hell, yet they have not "turned from god". How do you justify this?

[rug]

67. Only Christian fundamentalists hold this view.

Those reigions seek God or a notion of God, not avoidance of God.

[walldude]

79. Then you people need to wrestle control of your religion

for those um... fundamentalists, because they seem to be the ones with the loudest voices. Plus those "fundamentalists" claim that their belief in their religious superiority comes from the bible so maybe that needs to go as well...

[JerseygirlCT]

No one has control of the religion to wrestle

And I wouldn't want to do so even if it *were* possible.

Religion is just an outward expression, and often a corporate (meaning social, in a body of people) expression, of an individual's search for either the divine or some sort of meaning. The only people who might seek to wrestle control would be the fundamentalist types who thrive on the idea of control and controlling.

I seek no such thing, and don't believe it's actually possible, anyway. I *control* my own actions. That's really about as far as my control goes, and I don't kid myself that I have a right to believe it extends any farther.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

84. As I have told countless people, the liberal Christian denominations have no

more control over the fundies than the Democratic Party has over the Communist Party.

We are second on the fundies' shit list, right below atheists. I've actually heard my own parish condemned by a local public access preacher.

[GoodSpud]

83. So was Jesus misquoted in your original post then?

Then he will say to those on his left,
'Depart from me, you accursed,
into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

<snip>

And these will go off to eternal punishment ,
but the righteous to eternal life.

I have got to say that this sounds like, well... Like some folks will be punished eternal in fire.


Don't get me wrong, frankly I love the sentiment that we should care for others and treat one another well.


That said, this passage (and others) leads me to think your God and his Son may have a bit of a beam in the eye issue going on when it comes to the whole morality thing...

T.D.P.

edit: adjusted my bold tags

[rug]

91. But they're not condemned. It's the result of their own choice.

I read once about a study of people who knew they were dying. Not a one changed anything.

[Warren Stupidity]

138. They aren't condemned? Yes they are.

Your two sentences are argument by non sequitur.

"Then he will say to those on his left,
'Depart from me, you accursed,
into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Those judged good wallow in eternal bliss, those judged to be bad in eternal fire. And this is the deity you worship.

[JerseygirlCT]

81. Much of Christianity is not definitive on who and who is not

"going to hell", believing that that decision is God's to sort out.

There are those who are quite sure they've got it all figured, of course. You will undoubtedly find that they are also always sure to be on the A-list themselves.

And then there are a number (and not a small one) of Christians who are universalists - that is, we don't believe anyone is going to hell. All are loved, all will be welcomed.

[walldude]

64. Please, according to most "Christian" religions

you are punished "eternally" for not being "one of them". I don't see how anyone can take a religion seriously if they claim you are "going to hell" because some dude didn't splash water on your head.

[rug]

95. Not true. Ignorance is not a virtue.

[Odin2005]

30. That doesn't make it any less a load of BS.

Religion is just another evil force promoting irrationality and blind faith over reason.

[rug]

39. See #33, er, Odin.

[bobbolink]

31. Matthew 25 is my all-time fave.

It certainly says clearly what people will be judged on.

It also serves to shut down any argument with a "Christian" who is stingy and judgemental. :)

This is why the "Red Letter Christians" are taking over the religious right... and about damned time!

Thanks for posting this... It gives me a big lift to know that this is being read in so many churches all over the world... I hope it spurs many a strong sermon!!!

:yourock:

[saltpoint]

47. bobbolink, just an observation here from my admittedly remote outpost

on your contribution to this thread.

Your citing Matthew 25 as a personal favorite of yours delights but does not surprise me. It may have something to do with your being a class act.

It may have something to do with your understanding of that passage as an anthem for personal conduct, bot in the spirit of the OP and as an evolved way of interpreting religious texts.

I think the OP is right to claim that Christianity is far more and more complex and interesting than a small group of power-mongering fake-Christians barking ridiculous rules and limits to the multitude.

It appears at its best to have something to do with trying to do good generally and trying to help others especially. You must have got that down pat early on and never looked back. Your DU posts back me up on this. They argue for the wider circle, the more inclusive circle.

[maryf]

94. Hear, hear!

It seems to be you also took in a little of the true message yourself...

[hfojvt]

34. they read that in the Presbyterian church today too

They also announced that the congregation has given away 185 boxes of food. By boxes, they mean $50 worth of food that they buy for $25 and give away to need families.

When I attended Catholic and Methodist services I was surprised to find them using the same verses. I forget the name of the common book they use.

[rug]

40. The positive value of reigion is too often overlooked.

[EFerrari]

36. rug, I got this from Frank Schaeffer today. Check it out:

A Thanksgiving of Hope

By Frank Schaeffer

The election of Obama goes far beyond the political. This was an act of national contrition. Contrition leads to repentance and repentance leads to salvation. This is our Thanksgiving of hope.

This Thanksgiving we have a new brilliant, wise, kind, calm, even tempered, exemplary father and husband for our President Elect. Millions of us crossed party lines and voted for Obama even though many of us -- such as myself, a white, middle-class, former lifelong Republican and former Religious Right leader -- had always voted for Republicans.

Millions more of us had been apathetic and not voting at all and we went to the polls. Millions of Evangelicals decided to vote for hope rather than for theological slogans, for competence rather than for someone being "correct" on all their social issues. Millions more voted for the first time. And even those who had always voted for Democratic candidates participated in the democratic process with a new vigor, sense of purpose and dedication. Tens of thousands of them knocked on doors and made calls. Millions of us contributed money to the Obama campaign when we had never contributed to a campaign before...

This was no mere election. This was a spiritual great awakening.

When we look at the context of our vote -- an unnecessary war, a necessary war gone bad, an economy in free fall, our standing at the lowest that it's been in the world in living memory, the quality of our schools deteriorating, our family's lives falling apart, statistics on single parenthood and other social pathologies rising, a neighbor of ours (Mexico) being destroyed by our drug habit -- the fact that we turned to an untested young black candidate was a giant mea culpa. Electing Obama is a public statement of "we've been wrong," a national confession, a repentance for the sin of racism, of slavery and oppression, of indifference; a giant "I'm sorry" to the world for our hubris and folly.

There is no change without repentance, because a person or country can't change until they admit they've been wrong. We just did.

What have we just repented of?

# Imperialistic preemptive war,

# Racism,

# The "me" syndrome,

# Settling for living lives with no sense of higher purpose,

# Smugly waiting for the other guy (for instance our all-volunteer military) to do all the heavy lifting while we just go shopping,

# Standing by impotently while our wealthy get wealthier and our middle-class sinks below a tsunami of dept,

# Turning away from our poor, our uninsured, our military families stranded, strained, terrified, breaking up, while the rest of us just go about our business,

# Ignoring our men and women in uniform who are returning wounded physically and psychologically from deployment after deployment to a broken veterans health care system wherein their reward for heroism is filling in mounds of paperwork and waiting interminably for the care they earned,

# Reducing freedom and the American Dream to nothing more than consumer choice,

# Making a virtue out of NOT being our brother's keeper,

# Electing George W. Bush -- twice -- this most incompetent of all our presidents and standing back and letting him ruin our country and our reputation, and run our future into the ground,

# Turning into a divided "red/blue" country that hates the "other" half,

# Turning inward and rejecting those not like "us" be they immigrants, or our gay neighbors,

# Becoming a decedent, mindless entertainment culture besotted by celebrities and distracted by the bells, whistles and trinkets of literal and figurative bullshit with our state and national lotteries, expanding casino business, turning every learning tool, from computers to telephones, into another means of entertainment, and letting this firestorm of triviality distract us from actually doing anything about our lives, our spirits, our country, our communities and finally losing touch with reality itself,

# Forgetting that the life of the spirit, the mind and heart is what makes our careers, money and all that stuff we accumulate mean anything in the first place,

# Literally consuming the Earth, becoming a people with 3% of the Earth's oil reserves who consume 25% of its energy, and setting a disastrous example of consumerism that the world has followed as our planet warms and we destroy our grandchildren and their chances for survival, all for a few more minutes of "fun."

How do we save ourselves?

We have made a good start by electing the most unlikely candidate. We have elected a man with a big heart a brilliant mind and a humble spirit. We have voted counter to type, the white guy lost, the established order was overturned. We have confounded not only our own low expectations but those of the world.

We reached outside the usual cast of characters who've been living in a political cocoon and instead elected one of us to president! He is a man of we the people, not part of a political dynasty. Our new president was, only moments ago, driving to work as a community organizer in a rusted out car. He is someone with ordinary connections to an ordinary community. He knows the first name of his barber and the woman at the local deli who served him his coffee.

We have elected a man who combines the extraordinary brilliance of a once-in-a-lifetime leader with a down-to-earth connection to all those things that make up the sum total of a human life worth living: the nodded "good morning" to someone you always pass on your walk, the pat on the shoulder to the man who cuts your hair, the swooping lift of a child to a kiss when you come home from work, that series a quiet and faithful decisions that is the foundation of every good marriage, that humility of spirit which takes a higher path when greed and a lower road would be easier.

This Thanksgiving in the midst of the ruin we made of our country let us give thanks for President Elect Obama, his lovely wife and his lovely children. Let us pray for safety for our new president. Let us pray for an extra measure of wisdom for him. Let us ask for a new measure of humility and a contrite spirit for ourselves, so that when our President Obama asks us to sacrifice and break our bad habits and change, we can find it in our hearts to do what we know is right.

This is our Thanksgiving of hope! For those of us who are secular; let us give thanks for our great and good luck. For those of us who are religious; let us pray: Dear God, we thank You for an undeserved second chance.

_____

Frank Schaeffer is a writer. His latest book is, "CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back," is now in paperback.

You can get it at your local bookstore or from Amazon at:

http://www.amazon.com/Crazy-God-Helped-Religious-Almost/dp/0306817500/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227106751&sr=8-1

[Vickers]

43. "This is our Thanksgiving of hope."

Great phrase.

[EFerrari]

51. Frank can turn a phrase. He's an amazing entertainer, imho. n/t

[rug]

44. I'm not ready to say Obama's election was theologically significant.

But there's no doubt he practices his religion in a far more meaningfu way that Bush and his entire cabinet.

Thanls for the book referral, I'll check it out.

[EFerrari]

46. I don't think that way, either, but Frank makes some good points.

:)

[laconicsax]

148. So being opposed to same-sex marriage on religious grounds is meaningful?

:shrug:

[saltpoint]

52. Whoa. Powerful and excellent.

Not surprinsingly, you are hanging out at the right bookshops. Actually, I guess that would be the Left bookshops.

And to genuine effect.


:thumbsup: :hi:

[EFerrari]

55. Hi there, Old Crusoe!

I hope you're fixing to have a good holiday. They seem to be upon us.

lol

:hi:

[saltpoint]

56. They're here alright. I can't walk into a drug store without hearing

"Frosty the Snowman."

[Sophree]

132. Wow!

Thanks for posting that letter. I've never heard of Frank Schaeffer- now I want to read his book. Does he have a listserv? Is that how you got the letter?

[Iggo]

37. Jesus Fucking Christ!

Not again!

:rofl:

[rug]

45. You sound like the Romans guarding the tomb.

[Iggo]

49. I have no idea what that means, nor do I want one.

I quit religion back in the second grade and never looked back.

[ZombieHorde]

90. Now that's funny. Great post.

[Iggo]

114. Oh wait.

I get it now!

That's funny!!!

:rofl:

[Fleshdancer]

48. nice

I can usually find plenty to complain about when discussing religion, but this passage is beautiful.

[TWiley]

54. Utter BoolShit is what say.

You are describing contemporary Christians in a way that does not reflect the reality of their grotesque spiritual dispositions. Let me help you with a more accurate disposition:

Contemporary Christians have no conscious or moral fiber. They are only bullies who look for socially acceptable outlets for their violence and rage. For example, when the church condones violence against homosexuals, then crack-pot believers, anxious to vent their built up hostility in any way possible, jump to the occasion and feverishly attack whomever the church condemns.

Christians have attacked, slandered, and murdered every type of peaceful tribe and culture through the centuries. These blood-thirsty heathens even attack and kill themselves when they run out of other races to torture and kill. Think about this:

Christians want your soul
Christians want you to drink human blood
Christians want you to eat human flesh
Christians revere a crime committed against an innocent person
and more importantly, Christians worship a brutal God who Tortured and Killed his "only son" to placate himself into forgiving everyone else for being the sinners that He created in the first fucking place.

And you take the absolutely insane christian viewpoint and try to attach something of moral and social acceptablilty to it?

BULLSHIT !

[rug]

68. Speaking of bullshit, this reads like a 19th century nativist tract.

You left out the part about the tunnel from the rectory to the convent.

[TWiley]

115. huh? You do not even present a decent strawman argument.

[verges]

80. Just because someone says they are Christian

Or even thinks they are Christian, doesn't neccessarily mean that they really are Christian.

[Odin2005]

102. "No True Scotsman" Fallacy. n/t.

[TWiley]

116. Christians self identify ..... they use God to justify their hate and prejudice

Contemporary American Christians create God in their own image. A God who hates what they do, and loves only those who look and think like them.

[verges]

122. Then they are not following the teachings of Christ

and therefore are not really Christian. Judge by acts not labels. Self-identity has nothing to do with it. Anyone can say they are anything. It doesn't make it true.

[Warren Stupidity]

126. see above re stunning hypocrisy

and 'no true scotsman fallacy'. Both apply.

[TWiley]

135. oops, where is the conference which determines what is "Christian"

and what is not? Oh, there isn't one? So, you are speaking out of your ass? Furthermore, most Christians hate other Christians as well. The Mormons hate the Unity folks, the protestants hate the catholics, and the fundamentalist evangelicals hate everyone else.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

85. What kind of crazy-ass Christians have you been hanging around with anyway?

:eyes:

[TWiley]

117. Which part are you referring to? I happen to think it is totally accurate.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

120. There's an old proverb that goes

"If you want to beat a dog, you can always find a stick," especially if you choose to deliberately misunderstand what you're talking about.

You sound exactly like a freeper describing the Democrats.

[TWiley]

121. Now wait a minute.

I simply asked which part of my statement was incorrect TWICE, and you respond with some lame personal attack.

Like the old proverb says

"If you lie with the dogs, then dont bitch about catching their fleas" Dont blame me for the shitty crowd you choose to associate yourself with.

If you have a factual argument, then please, by all means, simply state it.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

123. OK, I will take your points one by one

I couldn't answer earlier because I had to rush off somewhere.
-----
Contemporary Christians have no conscious or moral fiber. They are only bullies who look for socially acceptable outlets for their violence and rage. For example, when the church condones violence against homosexuals, then crack-pot believers, anxious to vent their built up hostility in any way possible, jump to the occasion and feverishly attack whomever the church condemns.

You're talking about the fundamentalists, especially the modern politicized variety, who are a development of the past 100 years, a "future shock" reaction to social and intellectual change. They purposely recruit the "mean and dumb" sector of the population. The mainstream denominations are predominantly anti-discrimination of any sort, and they get in trouble with it among their own bigots, but the leadership and the majority are anti-bigotry.

Christians have attacked, slandered, and murdered every type of peaceful tribe and culture through the centuries. These blood-thirsty heathens even attack and kill themselves when they run out of other races to torture and kill.

Alas, torturing and killing peaceful tribes and cultures is hardly unique to Christianity. The Chinese have committed atrocities against the Tibetans and other peaceful minorities, as did the Soviets, who decimated dozens of Siberian tribes for refusing to settle down and assimilate. If we're going to count what anyone has done "through the centuries," we could talk about the Romans and Alexander the Great and the Assyrians, who conquered and slaughtered countless peaceful cultures without any help from Christianity. But if we're talking about NOW, yes, some of the fundamentalist groups are in league with the CIA in the Amazon, but the mainstream churches, no.

As for wars between different styles of Christians, you may be thinking of the Northern Ireland conflict.But that was never really ABOUT religion, in the sense of fighting over theology, like in ancient Alexandria. It was about the British bringing in settlers from Scotland (who happened to be Calvinist Protestants), but more importantly, were loyal to the crown, and letting them lord it over the majority native Irish population, who happened to be Catholic. The fight was ultimately not over preventing one side or the other from practicing their religion, but from removing the political and economic privileges that the Scotch-Irish had acquired over the centuries. You could have called the two sides "shirts and skins," as well as "Protestant and Catholic."

Think about this:

Christians want your soul
So don't give it to them. It's not as if they can steal it from you by taking your picture or something.

Christians want you to drink human blood
Christians want you to eat human flesh
What are you, an ancient Roman who overheard a Communion service and spread the rumor that Christians were cannibals? It's bread and wine, and NO Protestants believe that it's actually flesh and blood.

Christians revere a crime committed against an innocent person
It was a willing sacrifice, and that's the part that we revere.

and more importantly, Christians worship a brutal God who Tortured and Killed his "only son" to placate himself into forgiving everyone else for being the sinners that He created in the first fucking place.
That doctrine is not universal among Christians. It's most common among fundamentalists and evangelicals.

And you take the absolutely insane christian viewpoint and try to attach something of moral and social acceptablilty to it?

Yes, because my church experiences have been the source of some of the greatest joy, fulfillment, and growth in my entire life.

This afternoon, I'm going to help feed approximately 150 homeless and working poor youth a home-cooked meal, and we will not require them to attend a worship service or even say grace (although we cooks and servers will gather for a prayer beforehand). We will also supply personal care items, condoms, and clothing for them, and even diapers for those who have babies.

Maybe a secular group could do this, but it's churches that have the organization, the inspiration, and the commercial kitchens to feed a crowd. They can take people who would not have much to do with one another in the secular world and motivate them to do things like feed the hungry, provide mentoring and stop-gap aid for the unemployed, and go to the sites of natural disasters.

I suspect that your over-the-top hatred comes from being raised in either a fundamentalist, Mormon, or rigid Catholic household. Or else you're living in an area where fundamentalists predominate and come on way strong. (I can't stand them either.)

[JerseygirlCT]

130. Lydia, for what it's worth -

well done.

[TWiley]

136. Thank you Lydia

"You're talking about the fundamentalists, especially the modern politicized variety, who are a development of the past 100 years"
Fundamentalists are not Christians? Are they unsaved and going to hell?

"Alas, torturing and killing peaceful tribes and cultures is hardly unique to Christianity"
So, your argument is that everyone is doing it so it is therefore alright and gawd-approved?

"As for wars between different styles of Christians, you may be thinking of the Northern Ireland conflict.But that was never really ABOUT religion" Wow, you are absolutely wrong about this one. The combatants say it is about religion, the Catholics and Protestants hate each other, and murder each others children? Gods love? Just like the cross is?

"What are you, an ancient Roman who overheard a Communion service?" Drink this, it is the blood of Christ, and eat of this as it is of his flesh ..... what do you suppose that means? Ancient tribes used to kill and eat their kings by the way. They understood that something once living had to be eaten in order to sustain life. Furthermore, they believed that what was eaten continued to live within whatever ate it. Life eating life = Eternal life. This is why prayers and sacrificial rituals were offered prior to the slaughter and preperation of foods. Did you miss the part about the huge controversy about eating meat sacrificed to idols in the new testament?

"It was a willing sacrifice, and that's the part that we revere."
It is a gross rationalization. If God is all knowing, and loving, why would he torture an kill his only son as an act of "love"? Even humans evolve to a higher moral plane. To look at it face-value, it woul seem that either God is NOT loving, God is not All Knowing, or that there is not God. There would be no purpose in believing in that kind of God. Hence, the rationalization. Now, if someone from a rural town tortured and killed his son by crucifixion, would you call that "holy" and worship the event?

"That doctrine is not universal among Christians. It's most common among fundamentalists and evangelicals."
Again, you seem to claim that fundamentalists and evangelicals are not christians.

"Maybe a secular group could do this, but it's churches that have the organization, the inspiration, and the commercial kitchens to feed a crowd"
Just how many christian churches actually do someting like this, and how much of their revenue do they spend on it? If every dollar ever given to a church were given to support a secular organization, then hunger and poverty would be much more addressed than it is by religion. There are 3 soup kitchens in our town, and more than 100 churches. About 1% of their revenue is spent on feeding the hungry. And, you call this some type of accomplishment?

"I suspect that your over-the-top hatred comes from being raised in either a fundamentalist, Mormon, or rigid Catholic household"
First of all, I have no over-the-top hatred. I am simply sick and tired of religion being misrepresented. By in large, religion, especially American Christianity, is filth. Look at the con men on TV every night and day. I oppose those who broad brush religion and make it look like peaches and cream and hide its truly nasty disposition.

It sounds to me like you have a little hatred towards Christians yourself ..... the fundamentalists, Mormons, and rigid Catholics. Maybe you should have that looked at. Or better yet, Free yourself and continue doing good works without expecting the reward of eternal life. Do it because you want to, do it because it is right. To do these things because "you wannna go to heaven" is the sickening morality of a 3 year old.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

141. OK, I don't know what your problem is

I gave you my best answers, and you're determined to misunderstand or misinterpret them.

That's your problem, not mine.

This could lead to a flame war, and I'm not in the mood for that today, so I'm done.

[TWiley]

142. I like to think my "problem" is rational thought.

Answer a simple one for me then. Who has the more pure heart?

1) Someone who feeds the hungry because they believe in a cruel god who will send them into hell if they do not produce "good fruit"

or

2) Someone who feeds the hungry without any thought of reward. Simply because they deeply understand that it is the right thing to do.

(hint) #2 is the right answer.

[Sophree]

149. You do seem determined to misunderstand

War, including the conflict in Northern Ireland, is what wars have ALWAYS been about- power, land, money, greed, etc. The "religion causes all wars" argument is mistaken at best and/or disingenuous. Religion has been abused to mobilize people against each other, but so has race and ethnicity.

You misunderstand the willing sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross and I don't think anything that I can say will change that.

But you do have one thing right- we are called to good works, not because we fear hell, but do so cheerfully, without expectation of reward, here on earth or in heaven, because it is in our nature to do so:

James 1:27 ESV
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.

The writer of Hebrews on Salvation (and good works). If you prefer to read everything literally, do so. I challenge you, however, to look for the deeper meaning of our hearts and bodies being washed with "pure water."

Hebrews 10:19-24
19 Therefore, brothers, <3> since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

Paul on humility, the Cross and other things:

Philippians 2:1-13
So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, 2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. 3 Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. 5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, <1> 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, <2> being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Lights in the World
12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

A loving God, not wishing that any should perish:

2 Peter 3: 9
9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, <1> not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/

edit: typo

[Odin2005]

103. I completely agree with you.

Religion is insanity.

[GoneOffShore]

57. No flame from me - a dedicated atheist

Jesus as Jesus was quite a teacher. It's the authoritarian usurpers (pace Paul - Saul of Tarsus) who did their utmost to hijack the teachings of Jesus and pretty much succeeded.

[JerseygirlCT]

58. That's my favorite.

Says it all.

[Taverner]

61. It also says this!

9Take thou also unto thee wheat, and barley, and beans, and lentiles, and millet, and fitches, and put them in one vessel, and make thee bread thereof, according to the number of the days that thou shalt lie upon thy side, three hundred and ninety days shalt thou eat thereof.

10And thy meat which thou shalt eat shall be by weight, twenty shekels a day: from time to time shalt thou eat it.

11Thou shalt drink also water by measure, the sixth part of an hin: from time to time shalt thou drink.

12And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight.

[rug]

75. You don't like organic food?

[Taverner]

145. I love organic food. It's the human dung I can do without.

Read the verse, then look at the pic :)

Food of Life has missed an ingredient for a while

they must not be biblical literalists

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rug]

72. Nice name.

[ismnotwasm]

66. Hey, it's ok

I'm not religious, agnostic/atheist actually.

What I don't want to do is tell others how to believe in religious matters. Just as I don't want religious people or religion telling me what to believe.

I'll say straight up that I don't understand "faith" in the religious context, but I've never met a human being who doesn't indulge in some sort of magical thinking at one time or the other. (Take gamblers for instance)

As far as Jesus, if I take out the parts before his life, and the parts after, factor in a little historical tweaking of his words by the early church (I'm an Elaine Pagels fan) I like Jesus better than most other religious characters.

For me, it has to do with the historical treatment of woman (don't worry, no long diatribe)Even Siddhartha had to be convinced to "allow" women monks. I use to think I'd find one of the old Gods/religious leaders that acknowledged women as equal human beings--I learned that's never going to happen. That doesn't mean I can't listen to spiritual common sense from any religion even if I don't have the mental makeup to believe in a Creator Deity.

[Recursion]

74. That's in the Reformed churches' lectionary for today too

I always loved that passage.

[Midlodemocrat]

78. Thanks for posting this, rug. Some of us get it.

:hi:

[rug]

87. Yeah, but now I have another book to read.

:hide:

[Midlodemocrat]

97. LOL. Goofball.

[ZombieHorde]

86. the goats on his left

Poor goats. In this story, are they not the 'least ones'. They are being punished by God.

Do you feel that this passage is stating that socialism is a prerequisite for entrance into Heaven? Capitalist pigs (or goats) burn in Hell?

[rug]

88. If that's what it meant I'd say ninety novenas.

[Warren Stupidity]

127. yes what is it with goats?

I'm fine with the sermon, after deleting all the religious bullshit, right up to where all the goats are bad and all the sheep are good. What the fuck? If one believes in god, did not this perfect one create the damned goats too? Were goats an accident? What the hell?

[TexasObserver]

92. I see it got moved to the Religion and other Fairy Tales Forum

That's a cross to bear, eh?

I wish religious advocates could see their religions as they are, not how they imagine them to be.

[rug]

96. Why are you so interested in fairy tales?

[TexasObserver]

104. Because I learned them in church, just as you did.

Except I grew up and used my mind to learn, instead of being led around by the nose by some church official whose job it is to lead around by the nose the incurious.

[rug]

108. Burning your hand on a stove does not teach you what fire is.

Seriously, the most bitter anti-religionists are those who have had a bad taste. I hope you realize that your subjective experience does not define the event, it's just a part of it.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

98. Or as we EXPERIENCE them

You know, I learned soon after the establishment of this forum that atheists do not like to be defined. In fact, I found that there was nothing I could say about atheists that made everyone happy, because no matter how I refined my definition, someone would find something wrong with it.

All right then, don't try to define us. Perhaps you see religion only from the outside, or you had bad experiences with false prophets.

That's your experience.

My experiences over a lifetime have been almost entirely positive--and fulfilling. I have never been in a church that preached hatred or tried to micromanage my life or told me whom to vote for. Your mileage may vary.

[TexasObserver]

105. Oh, I believe in God. I just don't believe God and religion are connected.

Religion is a creation of humans, and it is about life on earth, not the hearafter.

If you go to church regularly, you've accepted a mental framework that is nothing short of absurd.

[trotsky]

131. Why is it that so many liberal believers get caught up in the black-and-white,

good-vs-evil dichotomies?

Do you really think that a vengeful god will sit in judgment, picking those whom it feels are "worthy" of being in its presence for eternity?

How many mouths must one feed to earn a ticket to heaven? How many naked people must one clothe? How many prison visits? If you do a bunch of those things, but otherwise act like an asshole, then what?

Sorry, I don't see this as being all that different than the garbage Jack Chick puts in his tracts. Human beings are flawed, and some are pretty nasty, but a whole lot of those never really got a chance to learn anything else. It seems idiotic to think that no, there are bad people and good people and the good people get to be happy with god in heaven and the bad people all suffer forever. Because they "chose" to turn away from god.

Whatever.

[rug]

133. I don't think it's black and white.

John 8:1-11

1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.



I wonder what he was writing in the dirt.

[trotsky]

140. That's the magic of the bible.

Don't like one passage, no problem, you can find another that says something else. It's the bible buffet, and ANY Christian can get plenty of nourishment, from the whacked-out fundies to the liberal universalists.

Whether you subscribe to the black-and-white thinking or not, the blurb in the OP clearly reflects it.

[rug]

143. Seems to me you're the only one engaging in black and white thinking about religion.

[trotsky]

147. Well with your own reasoning laid out logically like that,

I just don't see how I could disagree. :eyes:

[Warren Stupidity]

137. Even worse good people who choose to turn away from

some god or other can go burn in a pit of fire for eternity while bad people who chose the right supernatural deity in the god-lottery can do extra credit assignments and wallow in his blissful presence. And still we have the problem of why goats:bad sheep:good. And no explanation.

[rug]

139. This should set you off for a good twenty minutes.

http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/pilchj/goats.htm

[JerseygirlCT]

151. I don't think it's the liberal believers indulging in the black and white

thinking, Trotsky. We tend to be the ones saying - stop, quit looking at this in a black and white, literal way, start thinking in metaphor and allegory and symbolism.

We are not generally the ones believing in a judgmental take on religion, or usually even an exclusionist one. Those who do believe in some sort of final judgment usually believe that it will be up to God, not us, to make those choices. (Me, I'm a universalist).

Even here, you seem to find it convenient to miss the heart of this verse to focus on judgment. While we're looking at the message at the center: whatsoever you do to the least of these..., you're looking at punishment.

For myself, I understand that every word we have comes via the understanding and memories and writings of human beings. And as you've happily demonstrated, human beings love their rules and love their judgments. We're made that way, it seems. So of course that stuff finds its way in there. I don't think it's really part of the message. Think of it as the stuff that might get people to listen, if you like, since we sometimes need that stick as well as the carrot, being human.

I haven't come across a liberal believer here who thinks in black and white, or who isn't totally comfortable in the gray vernacular.

[trotsky]

152. Are you kidding? That's what the OP was all about.

Judging the good and the bad, the good get eternal reward, the bad get eternal punishment. You may try to shift the focus to the part of the passage you like better, but ultimately it's judging those who are worthy, and those who are not. No spectrum, just good or evil.

I haven't come across a liberal believer here who thinks in black and white, or who isn't totally comfortable in the gray vernacular.

Really? There are many Christians on DU who believe in hell. Any Christian who believes in hell, IMHO, is guilty of black-and-white thinking, even if they acknowledge shades of gray sometimes.

[JerseygirlCT]

153. No, that's really not what the OP was all about

at all.

Read my post again.

That's what the OP was about. Not judgment. But about how we treat one another. And about why - about thinking about seeing Christ in every person we meet - thinking about treating the homeless guy on the corner as we would welcome God, or the prisoner, or the sick... seeing in each other what God sees in us.

And your reasoning in that last sentence is making me laugh. Who, exactly, is engaging in black and white thinking here?

[trotsky]

154. Oh, of course not.

You can read compassion and the treatment of others into that passage. Perfectly valid interpretation. You can also read judgment and intolerance into it as well. Lack of forgiveness, unwillingness to let people learn and change and grow, you name it. It's a smorgasbord of messages - exactly like just about every passage in the bible, as I noted above before you jumped in.

So while YOU focus on the good, you ignore the message of judgment and eternal punishment. No big deal - every Christian ignores the parts of the bible they don't like. Of course that's why you have a thousand different denominations and sects.

'Depart from me, you accursed,
into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
...
He will answer them, 'Amen, I say to you,
what you did not do for one of these least ones,
you did not do for me.’
And these will go off to eternal punishment,
but the righteous to eternal life."

Black and white. Right there. You either get eternal life, or eternal punishment. There is no in between. *I'm* not saying that, as you are for some reason accusing me - the text is. (Jesus himself, actually, if you believe he existed and said these words attributed to him.) Perhaps you can explain how sending some people to eternal life and some to eternal punishment isn't laying things out in a simple dichotomy? Is that why you'd rather throw things back at me instead of addressing what's right in the passage - wrapping it up nice and tidy at the end?

Do you believe in hell where people are punished for eternity?

[JerseygirlCT]

155. No, I don't

Another reason I directed you back to my other post.

I'm a universalist myself.

And as I said, you'll find plenty who agree with me, and an even larger lot who are either unsure, or whose beliefs could probably best be described as "God will sort that all out - I don't know".

And as Rug pointed out, very few, especially among more mainstream Christianity (that is, not the more new-come fundamentalists) see the idea of hell as eternal punishment (some sort of fiery pit, etc), but rather as a separation from God. And that separation would happen, in their thinking, not through God's choice, but through the person's choice. Under that thinking, God would always be ready to welcome the person home - rather like the prodigal son. (Do you know that story?)

And the reason I was laughing at your claims of black and white thinking is your absolutism when calling all religious people black and white thinkers. You seem to have missed the irony there, though.

Here are your words:
"Any Christian who believes in hell, IMHO, is guilty of black-and-white thinking, even if they acknowledge shades of gray sometimes."

Don't you find *that* a bit black and white? Not a lot of room for nuance in that proclamation is there?

[trotsky]

156. Fantastic!

I didn't think you did. I fully realize that not every Christian does, which is why I never claimed that.

You said: "your absolutism when calling all religious people black and white thinkers"

Provide proof that I said that, or apologize for your insinuation that somehow I'm the fundie. Such a tiresome cliche of an "argument". Because what I actually said was:

Any Christian who believes in hell, IMHO, is guilty of black-and-white thinking, even if they acknowledge shades of gray sometimes.

See that qualifier on the front? Is that the same as "calling all religious people black and white thinkers"?

I await your apology.

[JerseygirlCT]

157. I apologize for the overstatement

but I still think you overstate things, as well.

A belief in hell does not indicate a black and white thinker at all. And consigning someone to that says to me that you're just too ready to indulge in the same sort of black and white thinking yourself.

The thing is that until you interact with each person, you're not likely to know the depth of their thinking on issues like theology. It's a highly individual thing, particularly, I think among the more liberal thinkers - who tend to be so because they stray from the standard teaching.

My own church encourages that sort of thing, which I like. There's lots of room for difference, which I find an entirely healthy thing, even when you disagree.

[trotsky]

158. So just because someone believes that certain people will be tortured for eternity,

while everyone else enjoys eternal bliss, doesn't make them a black-and-white thinker. They don't believe in a middle ground, only two extremes, but they're NOT a black-and-white thinker. Um, isn't that kind of the definition? But you're worried about me because I recognize the definition and apply it?

I'm trying not to, but I really take offense at your continuing insinuations.

[JerseygirlCT]

159. You're just reading what you want to, Trotsky

That's why you're getting insulted. The problem is that they don't believe what you want them to believe!

Have you not been reading what I'm saying about what many think about "hell" now? What a great deal of theological thinking on that count now is? We're NOT talking about bliss vs. torture for eternity. So it IS entirely possible for someone to believe in hell and be not in the least bit a dichotomous thinker. But you cling to that old idea so that you can cling to your claim that anyone who holds to an idea of hell is locked into a black and white way of thinking.

I suggested that you really need to look at each individual, because the understanding of the afterlife is as varied as the individual. But you seem to reject that idea, as well. But seriously - look back through this whole thread - I don't think you find many here who insist on the sort of black and white view of the after life that you want to attribute to even liberal Christians. Yet, you continue to define the belief as an either/or of torment or bliss.

I do understand why that makes a much more satisfying target. But it's just not the case.

[trotsky]

160. No, I'm getting insulted because you're insinuating.

That somehow I'm the black-and-white thinker because I say that people who believe in either eternal punishment or eternal reward - no in betweens - are black-and-white thinkers.

Have you not been reading what I'm saying about what many think about "hell" now?

Of course I have. But you must understand, for MILLIONS of Christians it's just not that complicated. Heaven if you are good, hell if you are bad. Really, I assure you, those Christians are out there. And I'm talking about them, not you, not your church, none of the counter-examples you produce because you apparently have never met one of the genuine bible-thumping Christians who really truly believe in the good-vs-evil dichotomy.

So if you could quit thinking that somehow I'm referring to you or your Christian friends, that would go a long way toward you dispensing with the insinuations and insults.

Yet, you continue to define the belief as an either/or of torment or bliss.

Let me ask you point blank: do you think there are NO Christians who believe exactly that?

[JerseygirlCT]

161. But

first you began with calling liberal believers the black and white thinkers

then it was anyone who believed in hell

then it was anyone who believed in a hell of eternal torment...

So I suppose I'm getting somewhere, though you're not willing to admit it.

Because that's been precisely my point.

It's not liberal believers. It's not even those who believe in "hell". And very few of the aforesaid "liberal believers", even those who do believe in some sort of "hell", hold to the fundamentalist view of a place of eternal torment. I haven't seen a post from any of them in this thread. Maybe I missed one.

So yes, of course there are some Christians who do believe in that. But they're not the ones you've been accusing in this sub-thread!

[trotsky]

162. What the heck is with the strawmen?

first you began with calling liberal believers the black and white thinkers

No I didn't - read my first post again! Why do you keep twisting my words or just blatantly misrepresenting them? I said "so many" liberal believers! That is not "all" - do you understand?

then it was anyone who believed in hell

No, that was pretty much the point from my first post, because it came out of the OP. Are you sure you're following along?

then it was anyone who believed in a hell of eternal torment

Again, was there from my first post. I kept getting more specific because I thought it would help you understand what I was saying. It obviously didn't.

So I suppose I'm getting somewhere, though you're not willing to admit it.

No, you've just been going lots of places with your strawmen and mischaracterizations of what I've said. PLEASE stop arguing with me on what you erroneously thought I said, OK?

So yes, of course there are some Christians who do believe in that.

Thank you for FINALLY admitting there are Christians who believe in hell as a place where souls are tortured eternally. You seemed to want to avoid that, for some reason. NOW you can say we've actually gotten somewhere. Now, answer me a second question: do you think Christians who believe in hell are engaging in black-and-white thinking?

But they're not the ones you've been accusing in this sub-thread!

You must not remember the "hell poll" - it was quite a while ago, but there were a surprising number of R&T readers who did indeed believe in hell. And since the passage in the OP contains a quite specific reference to it (which you still have yet to deny) and was purported as being taught in many churches that some believers on this thread attend, it would indeed appear there are more than a few.

[rug]

163. Concrete thinking and strawmen don't mix.

Do you really think the theme of that passage is the existence of hell?

And, if you conclude it is, what is the purpose of the rest of the passage?

You're pretty hot and bothered about something you don't believe exists.

[trotsky]

164. I didn't bring the strawmen - so far, you two have.

In this passage, hell is beyond just being a "theme" - because the words are right there.

The main thrust that you want the piece to have, and that it does, is the commandment to help others. And that's great! Don't get me wrong! However, it's quite clear that those who don't help others (enough?) are condemned to eternal punishment, yes? You can choose to ignore that because you aren't comfortable with it, but it's there, and millions of Christians take it literally - including many on DU.

You're pretty hot and bothered about something you don't believe exists.

I wish I had a dollar for every frustrated Christian who can't support their theology with reasoning, who threw that tired old piece of ad hom at me.

I'll put this very simply: Your religion affects me. It affects me every day of my life, whether I believe in it or not. Upwards of 95% of politicians profess it vocally. It has hours of television, entire radio stations, and billions of printed pages devoted to it. It saturates public discourse at every level. I therefore feel some kind of responsibility to steer its adherents away from the darker aspects of it.

So, am I entitled to an opinion and the right to argue it forcefully, or am I just "hot and bothered"? How very Christlike of you to fling insults. :eyes:

[rug]

165. Religion affects everyone in the world, not simply you.

You appear to be of a mind that that effect is uniformly negative. I don't. That is the point of the OP, not hell or insulting you (although each topic could be a long thread of its own).

And eyeroll smileys do not make very forceful arguments.

[trotsky]

166. Neither do personal slams.

I guess you are grudgingly allowing me to have an opinion now? Good thing the smiley put my argument over the top.

[Marrah_G]

144. My religion looks favorably upon sex and unfavorably on telling others how (or when) to do it

Or with whom........

:evilgrin:

[struggle4progress]

167. Ubi caritas et amor Deus ibi est

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAt520mFYa0

[rug]

168. Beautiful,

Et ex corde diligamus nos sincero.