You Can't Steal My Christmas!

[ExoticSpotting]

[quote-MagicRat]When perusing the press releases, you can see the latest religious issue shows the ACLU protecting the religious freedom of an individual:[/quote]

How do you know this guy isn't a pedophile or a murderer? What was he preaching up on the stage? Neo-nazis carry bibles and use the guise of being a religious group to take advantage of freedom of speech. If you really want to make a point, cite a case where an innocent, constructive member of society has genuinely been denied one of their basic rights.

[quote-MagicRat] As for the Westboro Church, they are a fine example of how the inherent inconsistencies in Christian ideology can be interpreted in a harmful way. [/quote]

Every group of people has a couple of nutjobs (Ex: Islamic Extremists).
ANY ideaology on any subject can be interpreted in a negative way, that doesn't say anything about the mainstream members of the group.


[quote-MagicRat] IMO they simply are doing what other Christians do; pick-and-choose parts of theology to suit their own ends. [/quote]

Please explain further, the way you bait us with insults like that intrigues me.

[speediva]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

Please explain further, the way you bait us with insults like that intrigues me.

As far as I can read, I hardly consider his comment an insult... the whole thing about the denominations of Christianity is so people can choose the parts of the Bible they want and brush aside the other things they aren't so fond of.

For example... all the good Christians cite that marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman. What about Adam and Eve? Not only are they related (incestuous relationship whether there was divinity involved or not) but they weren't even married. *gasp* Oops.

All organized religions pick and choose - that's why there are so many denominations. It's not an insult, it's an observation.

[ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by speediva

As far as I can read, I hardly consider his comment an insult... the whole thing about the denominations of Christianity is so people can choose the parts of the Bible they want and brush aside the other things they aren't so fond of.

Wrong. The point of denominations is so a christian can live in a fellowship of other believers who have interpreted the word of god in a similar way and embody the same beliefs.

It's like clothes shopping.

Even though a friend shops at American Eagle and I shop at Walmart, we both wind up wearing clothes. We still have the same base beliefs.

[quote=speediva] For example... all the good Christians cite that marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman. What about Adam and Eve? Not only are they related (incestuous relationship whether there was divinity involved or not) but they weren't even married. *gasp* Oops.
[quote]

God created them and placed them in a serene enviroment to live together in harmony as perfect beings in gods image, there was no need for marriage in that situation.

[speediva]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

Wrong. The point of denominations is so a christian can live in a fellowship of other believers who have interpreted the word of god in a similar way and embody the same beliefs.

Interpretation is another pretty word for "I take what I want and throw the rest out the window". I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but it's still picking and choosing...

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

God created them and placed them in a serene enviroment to live together in harmony as perfect beings in gods image, there was no need for marriage in that situation.

That's your interpretation. My interpretation is that the Bible has holes... that's just one of my personal faves. As for creating perfect beings, God didn't even get that part right since Eve sinned.

Don't get me wrong... I do believe in a higher power, but I do NOT believe in organized religion. Once you get a group of people all picking and choosing, you start to lose sight of the bigger picture.

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

Wrong. The point of denominations is so a christian can live in a fellowship of other believers who have interpreted the word of god in a similar way and embody the same beliefs.

Tell that to the Huguenots. They fought 8 wars with the Christian establishment of the day in the 16th century in their efforts to gain religious freedom
Please read some history. Your statement is excessively idealistic, naiive and does not reflect Christian history.

The history of Christian fragmentation is rife with violence and condemnation, especially during the Reformation. The notion of Christian cooperation is relatively recent and is imo due to the beneficial effects of secular law and modern, peaceful international relations.

Historically the Christian establishment has bitterly resisted change or fragmentation for a variety of economic and political reasons.

Much of historical religious ideology is about power and control of the masses by an elite few. For centuries, the Vatican ruled over their followers, wielding excommunication and inquisition as tools to ensure their followers stayed in line and continued to financially and politically support the Catholic hierarchy.

The Jesuits were established (16th Century) in part to be the shock-troops during the Reformation in order to (literally) fight the rise of Protestantism.

The Reformation and the rise of Protestant sects was all about groups and even entire nations violently rebelling against the Catholic church and their political supporters (including other nations). Look at the Thirty Years War as a prime example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War

Even Protestant splinter groups had to struggle with opposition faced from the existing Protestant establishment. For example, the Puritans did not become American pioneers for their health. They had to struggle for their religious freedoms. And the Mormons certainly did not move to Utah for the climate.
(And yes, I consider the Mormons to be as Christian and make as much sense as any Christian group. )

[CL8]

Originally Posted by MagicRat

Tell that to the Huguenots. They fought 8 wars with the Christian establishment of the day in the 16th century in their efforts to gain religious freedom
Please read some history. Your statement is excessively idealistic, naiive and does not reflect Christian history.

The history of Christian fragmentation is rife with violence and condemnation, especially during the Reformation. The notion of Christian cooperation is relatively recent and is imo due to the beneficial effects of secular law and modern, peaceful international relations.

Historically the Christian establishment has bitterly resisted change or fragmentation for a variety of economic and political reasons.

Much of historical religious ideology is about power and control of the masses by an elite few. For centuries, the Vatican ruled over their followers, wielding excommunication and inquisition as tools to ensure their followers stayed in line and continued to financially and politically support the Catholic hierarchy.

Exactly right, which is why they are a heretical denomination, teaching false bible doctrine. No denomination, being biblically correct will come into existence to weild power over others.

The Jesuits were established (16th Century) in part to be the shock-troops during the Reformation in order to (literally) fight the rise of Protestantism.

The Reformation and the rise of Protestant sects was all about groups and even entire nations violently rebelling against the Catholic church and their political supporters (including other nations). Look at the Thirty Years War as a prime example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War

Even Protestant splinter groups had to struggle with opposition faced from the existing Protestant establishment. For example, the Puritans did not become American pioneers for their health. They had to struggle for their religious freedoms. And the Mormons certainly did not move to Utah for the climate.
(And yes, I consider the Mormons to be as Christian and make as much sense as any Christian group. )

Mormons teach that Jesus is Satans brother. That is as anti-Christian as you can get.

[03cavPA]

Rat,

Do you actually understand real, vital Christianity, or do you only know what you find in the history of "religion"?

Each of the points you make, while valid in their own right, can also be made for the humanist manifesto throughout history. At the risk of incurring invocation of Godwin's rule, I won't mention the most notable group in recent history to visit evil upon the world. Was Stalin a Christian?

Have you read the bible? Do you really know what scripture tells true believers about how they should behave and treat others? As easy as it is to denigrate the Christian movement for doing things "because the bible says so", the bible is the book of rules (from God) for the Christian to follow. We are considered to be walking in error if we do not follow scripture. We are to examine what we do and say and determine if we are acting to bring a positive message in our lives.

True Christianity does not force itself upon anyone. Believers are obliged to share their faith (in fact, we've been told to do so) but we have also been told to move on if the hearer does not accept the message. Recipients of the message are still free to accept or reject it as they see fit, to answer eventually for doing so.

One may bristle at the message, but even Penn himself said, in his video blog, that Christians who don't share the message with unbelievers are not acting out of love. We'd have to really hate someone not to share what we believe to be a positive message of hope and salvation for eternal life.

Some groups will get it wrong and do things contrary to scripture. It's up to each of us to examine that behavior and determine whether or not it fits with God's word. Churches do suffer through splits over doctrine and some decisions are made because of selfishness and pride. New churches are started every day. People are free to disagree. The apostles themselves had disagreements, but they all worked toward a common goal, which was preaching the Gospel of Christ.

Christians aren't perfect, nor will we ever be in this corporeal existence. We are, however, accepted by God as His children through Christ's sacrifice and intervention before the Throne of God on our behalf.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by 03cavPA

Recipients of the message are still free to accept or reject it as they see fit, to answer eventually for doing so.

Nothing is more telling about Christianity than this simple statement. The use of fear in maintaining control traces its roots a long way back, to the middle ages and feudal times. The parallels are rather frightening, actually. Fear-mongering is largely isolated to the Coservative Christian community nowadays, but it is still very much alive. Just check in the politics forum and the ridiculous doomsday predictions from members who will remain unnamed, and you can see this sort of thinking in action.

Luckily, those of us who live in the US exist largely free from this fear-mongering (despite the current administration's attempts to the contrary). We choose to follow the logical, scientific interpretations of the world that generally lead to Atheism and live free of fear because we have no reason to believe in the fairy tales that are the bible. If a god were to exist, he/she/it would be VERY different from that found in Christian theology.

[ExoticSpotting]

[quote=MagicRat]The notion of Christian cooperation is relatively recent and is imo due to the beneficial effects of secular law and modern, peaceful international relations.quote]

You actually think 'secular law' is benefiting society? Its tearing society apart. How is it possibly beneficial for the goverment to get involved with religious issues? How is it beneficial to wipe away hundreds of years of positive traditions, simply to please a tiny proportion of the population?

Without God, there is no foundation for basic morals and a sturdy ethical code.

Do you really think a bunch of bearucrats and lobyists can invent a morally stable society? All of these secular movements are hurting America, not helping it.

[03cavPA]

Originally Posted by thrasher

Fear-mongering is largely isolated to the Coservative Christian community nowadays, but it is still very much alive. Just check in the politics forum and the ridiculous doomsday predictions from members who will remain unnamed, and you can see this sort of thinking in action.

I'm not sure I'd call what I said fear mongering, but I can see how one might perceive it as a threat if it stirs even a small doubt about the existence of a life beyond this one and consequences in the hereafter. I can't answer for the wrong doings of others; I know what the people I associate with are doing, and we don't spout fire and brimstone in anyone's face, nor do we threaten to club anyone to death for not accepting a message about salvation.

I suppose we could lie about what we believe and leave out the part about the consequences of rejecting the message, but stating it in simple terms doesn't amount to any attempt on our part to control anyone. I'd liken it to warning someone about to step out into traffic in front of a truck.

Doomsday predictions have been around since Christ was crucified. The first century Christians thought they were living in the last days.

It's not just Christians; how about that 2012 and the Mayan calendar deal?

[CL8]

[quote=ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by MagicRat

The notion of Christian cooperation is relatively recent and is imo due to the beneficial effects of secular law and modern, peaceful international relations.quote]

You actually think 'secular law' is benefiting society? Its tearing society apart. How is it possibly beneficial for the goverment to get involved with religious issues? How is it beneficial to wipe away hundreds of years of positive traditions, simply to please a tiny proportion of the population?

Without God, there is no foundation for basic morals and a sturdy ethical code.

Do you really think a bunch of bearucrats and lobyists can invent a morally stable society? All of these secular movements are hurting America, not helping it.

You'd be surprised how convinced Atheists are that "basic morals" evolved when mankind saw what was most beneficial for them and society.

But if thats the case shouldn't we have a lot FEWER inmates in prisons for cimes? Not a record high number of inmates in prison?

Any of you Atheists correct me if I have it wrong in how you think.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

You actually think 'secular law' is benefiting society? Its tearing society apart. How is it possibly beneficial for the goverment to get involved with religious issues? How is it beneficial to wipe away hundreds of years of positive traditions, simply to please a tiny proportion of the population?

Without God, there is no foundation for basic morals and a sturdy ethical code.

Do you really think a bunch of bearucrats and lobyists can invent a morally stable society? All of these secular movements are hurting America, not helping it.

Lol, lol, and lol...so when did rape, murder, slavery, and human sacrifice (all of which are rampant in the bile) become good morals that are part of a sturdy ethical code?

Atheists, in general, support object secular humanism, social justice, equal rights, and environmentalism. Is this a poor moral code? I'd be delighted to see how that is.

[ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by thrasher

Lol, lol, and lol...so when did rape, murder, slavery, and human sacrifice (all of which are rampant in the bile) become good morals that are part of a sturdy ethical code?

Atheists, in general, support object secular humanism, social justice, equal rights, and environmentalism.

The sins you mentioned are Gods way of explaining and teaching about what is right and wrong. They are recorded in the Bible for the same reason cancer is included in anti-smoking advertisements.

And by 'equal rights' you mean having the federal goverment force religious groups to abandon their traditions because of some homosexuals who don't want to go through the trouble of rewriting civil union laws?

Gee, thats 'social justice'.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by ExoticSpotting

The sins you mentioned are Gods way of explaining and teaching about what is right and wrong. They are recorded in the Bible for the same reason cancer is included in anti-smoking advertisements.

Cancer is mentioned in anti-smoking ads because it is a consequence of smoking. To cite just one example, the Bible supports the slaughter of all the people in a town, followed by the kidnapping, forcible marriage, and rape of hundreds of innocent women. (Judges 21:10-24) So are you saying that this should be used a guideline for how to act morally? That innocent women deserve to be kidnapped and forced into marriage and then repeatedly raped for no other reason than they happened to be conveniently located relative to the aggressors?

And by 'equal rights' you mean having the federal goverment force religious groups to abandon their traditions because of some homosexuals who don't want to go through the trouble of rewriting civil union laws?

Gee, thats 'social justice'.

Well, I do agree that the homosexual community needs to consider making concessions in with respect to civil unions as opposed to marriage, but at the same time this is eerily similar to the problem of separate but equal entities, which everybody knows is one of the greatest civil rights failures in our country's history.

Either way, homosexual couples should be granted the full legal and social privileges enjoyed by their heterosexual counterparts, including adoption rights. Anything else is blatant discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is strictly forbidden in our constitution. As a moral Christian, you don't believe in discrimination, right?

[ExoticSpotting]

Originally Posted by thrasher

Well, I do agree that the homosexual community needs to consider making concessions in with respect to civil unions as opposed to marriage, but at the same time this is eerily similar to the problem of separate but equal entities, which everybody knows is one of the greatest civil rights failures in our country's history.

Either way, homosexual couples should be granted the full legal and social privileges enjoyed by their heterosexual counterparts, including adoption rights. Anything else is blatant discrimination based on sexual orientation, which is strictly forbidden in our constitution. As a moral Christian, you don't believe in discrimination, right?

Do homosexuals have the right to be legally classified as a couple? Yes.
Do they have the right to adopt a child? Yes.
Do they have the right to the same benefits (Inheritance, Helthcare benefits, etc.) heterosexuals have? Yes.

The issue for christians isn't all of that, we would love to see homosexuals get the rights you listed above. The issue is that marriage is a religious institution, and we don't want the goverment butting in and creating regulations and such that would force churches to marry gays under the threat of a discrimination lawsuit (that seems to be a common tactic, note the Eharmony case).

We are worried that the goverment is going to get involved with religion, and begin scraping away at our traditions.