Passion of the Christian: Literal Thinking and Violence Portraye

» plox - Re: Re: Re: Re: More Spong and Borg

In response to message posted by Phil_J:

I like this site as well. Arthur is a very good communicater with the written word and that is not as common as one might think.

-- posted by plox

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Phil_J - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More Spong and Borg

In response to message posted by plox:

I agree.

-- posted by Phil_J

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» _Boanerges_ - Hello Arthur - my response

In response to message posted by ArthurCRuger:

Hello Arthur....
I have read all the messages now... Sorry for the late reply. I am a little taken back by some of your comments but such is life then. I understand your points.. We have not formally met and so I wish to say, greetings and nice to meet you Arthur. It is my hope we can have meaningful exchanges as we progress down the road of Suite101. Before I respond to your direct questions, allow me to point out that when I responded to the article it was in good review and was complimenting you on your good effort. I reread my message to your article and I copied this for a reminder. I have a closing comment on this as well.

Hi Arthur... This was a well written article. I found your thoughts interesting and should probably reread it again to absorb it. I am not sure what 'New Christianity' is but will look over more of your writings to get a better idea. I suppose that is why I have no comment one way or the other at the moment. As pertaining to the article itself, quite good. I will visit more often.

FYI>>> The sheriffs are being replaced by FEMA Federal officers! I would imagine in a few years you wont have to worry about the sheriff any longer!

So I ask you Brother Jones and Wendell: Since you offer doctrinal correction and scripture recitation quite freely.

Is not the same true for you Arthur?

Before you continue pointing out how far those who disagree with you have strayed from the narrow gate (you’ve expressed those points clearly) how about comments on the rest of what others have written?

If you would take the time to review any of my writings, you would find that I have. I agree with BroJo in that most have stayed from the Narrow gate. BTW>>> The correct wording is The Narrow Way and The Strait Gate. To be a sheriff you know! The doctrinal differences on these two subjects are as of night and day but that is another discussion I suppose...

Or are you merely sheriffs with shiny little badges?

haha... I don't recall disgracing your name anywhere. I wonder, why have you do this with me? I have never met you before..

Encouragement is the best motivator and acknowledgment a genuine Christian attribute.

You should follow your own advice. The bit about a sheriff is quite motivating. Actually, the best Christian attribute is acknowledgment of Jesus and His Passion to a lost and sick world. That is the attribute of a Christian. To go unto all the world and preach the Good News.

Knowing that Jesus admonished us not to judge, I nevertheless have judgmental thoughts, have expressed them before and am doing so now.

I disagree. Jesus says not to judge the heart! I have judged no mans heart. You are not my judge so I see no need to defend myself for my sake with any person. My words remain for all to view. They will be judged righteously. I pray I have been that which the Lord wants and desires of each of His Ambassadors and that is all that is important to me. I do not judge according to the way you have described yourself. Maybe that is one of your issues as a man in a sinful world. Mine is unrelated to this place or our conversations.

Now that I’ve admitted that we can’t drink my bathwater, I want to check out the bathwater of Bro’s Jones and Wendell.

Okie! I'm not sure what you mean but here we go!

I think it's pretty clear what fortress walls you want to defend. What interests me is where we find harmony.

It looks as so far we find harmony on being Suite members. As for Christianity, I am not sure of your teachings so, what can I say? I will ask some questions at the end of this message and that will give me a clue. Remember also that I have not be a frequent visitor to your site so I am not sure of all your articles and positions, as I have stated in my first message to your last article.

I'd like to read your responses to the following points expressed in these discussions: What is it about the language or what I call now "God talk" that serves more to disrupt than to unify? And I don't mean unify in a set of exact same beliefs, rather in a team building of the spirit of compassion as it seems to me Jesus attempted to teach?”

Compassion is tempered by judgment. If Jesus had no compassion for those who would suffer hellfire, His point of compassion is lost to humanism and the ultimate end, the grave. In other words, I am not understanding you question. Who says we have to be a team? The bible is quite clear to seperate from those who cause division and attempt to change the doctrine as set forth from the Apostles. So if you are on my team I know we have a good team because all on my team are for Christ and His word. That is how one comes to know God and he will only speak to you though His word. Otherwise, we have simply opinions. Who needs opinions?

If we were to learn that the Christ Story is myth, would that make the Sermon on the Mount, The Prodigal Son and the Good Samaritan less valuable? If so, why?

The Sermon on the Mount is God's divine laws. They cannot apply to you or me in this life. Good to know them, but we will never do them while we are mere mortals. So the answer to your question is simply Humanism. If it helps you get though life then read them. They were not written for that purpose nor were they spoken for that purpose. In short, God's divine laws will be something that we can look forward to when we are delivered from sin and death and enter His Kingdom and not living in Satan's defeated kingdom, this earth, with all its humanity and all its rejection of God and His will. A simple concept actually and a logical and reasonable thing to consider. What will be the difference betweens God's kingdom and our present world?

this act of sacrifice Jesus gave for redemption of mankind (women too?) is a message lost on us (generally speaking) when we still continue to insist on a "correct" dogma before we can benefit by the Jesus sacrifice.” Do you insist on a correct dogma before one can benefit by the Jesus sacrifice?

Yes. Strait Gate and Narrow Way is an example since we used it in this message. Strait Gate means that if one wishes to reach Christ (He is the end of the path) they will have to desire it so great and the entry is difficult to enter, that one must STRIVE to enter it. one must PRESS HARD to enter it.

As for the Narrow Way (the Path) Narrow in Greek means with obstacles. So the narrow way would read like this in modern days: Once you enter the path Jesus has chosen for us, your path will be filled with obstacles, persecution, difficulty, dangers, troubles and so forth. Not an easy road! Christ is at the end of the path bringing us towards Him! God finishes the Work He starts in each His own.

“The history of Cathars like much other history of persecution under Christianity that does not bear a likeness to the message and teachings of Jesus speaks to me of how permission is granted by the fact of the bible itself to act in discord to the message Jesus brought.

The History of church persecution is from a political/religious power grab of the Roman Catholic church, nothing but Satan filled monsters. That was the church of that day.

You have pointedly ignored this point which was one purpose of the original article.

???..... I only read the article last week and commented on it as a good article! So I am at a loss of what to say here. If your question resides on men killing in the name of Christ, then we know they are not of Christ for Jesus said Luke 9:56 For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. So I do not understand why people dwell on those who destroy in the name of God knowing that they cannot be of God. A redundant argument and useless to the power of the Gospel to change people's lives, the only true evidence of a child of God. A true regenerate believer will in no wise go out to destroy or kill, absurd. This verifies your logic as well and I would have to agree. Therefore, I do not understand the purpose of bringing up evil men and what 'they' did in the name of God. Men do all kinds of things in the name of God but it does not make it so. I think you can rationalize this and understand that their actions take nothing away from truth and the Word of God, as given this very day. It only causes these type of exchanges that do not dwell on the Word of God, which we are commanded to do! Dwelling on past history of wicked men has nothing to do with Truth and Salvation.

In the article itself one of my primary points is that portraying violence in a religious context to push a doctrinal point of view while failing to portray violence in another religious context that questions the behavior of those who professed to be followers of Jesus is hypocritical. Using violence as a motivator is a poor tactic.

The violence used upon Jesus was from human hands and we know for certain the Romans were excellent in their brutality. Do you disagree with what the hands of mankind can do? It truly is the opposite of compassion is it not.

The classic logical next question to ask upon hearing the question “What would Jesus Do?”

I cannot speak for what Jesus would do nor would I ever assume such. I know what He said and did, according to the texts we have today. I will agree with the many scholars who all agree that these texts we have today are authentic and that I have faith that God would see His words are delivered down through the centuries. God's word cannot be usurped by little ole man! If you use the argument of lost books, changed and edited texts and so forth, you have no confidence in God to deliver His word to generations far removed from the time of ancient history. When we think about how it is possible for man to hold back God's word it places God as a liar. What you have today in the KVJ is what they wrote! The argument is dead and buried. It is now down to interpretations. This is the difference between subjective talk and what they said in their words! A vast separation and this seems to be your contention with me and Brother Jones as a Sheriff or whatever you claim the fundamental student of the word of God to be. I have no issue with the comments of your 4 pals sitting in the front of the class looking like gnats. Who needs people such as those. We should reach out to them and help them. We all have our issues. A friend is the one who will help his friend to see, what he cannot! Simple really. Did you help those 4 or offer them any advice?

"Did the apostolic ancestors do what Jesus did when they burned heretics and falsely labeled women as witches and butchered them?

Those were Roman Catholics as mentioned already. Men chose what they do. If they claim to be of God and perform such works as torture and murder, in the name of God, then you can be certain that their judgment will be worse than had they chose not to use His name for their personal ends. These were men speaking from power and subjecting their authority. They could care less about witches and so forth! I am certain those men of that day were the preeminent Hitler's and Stalin's of their day! Nothing changes as men of history have all been such as those. We do know that all the Apostles were brutally and savagely murdered and tortured for Christ and that men, women and children of all ages have been killed for their belief in Jesus! I am probably certain that one day in the future I will be in their footsteps. I hope not and pray not. Yet our faith rests upon millions of martyrs who all were savagely destroyed by men of evil hearts and intentions. A simple reasoning process in the end.

They quoted the Bible, justifying torture and murder with Leviticus 20:27, Deuteronomy 13:3-5 and other “inerrant” verses.

Le:20:27: A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.
De:13:5: And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

The law was considered such because Christ had not satisfied sin. Therefore punishment. What you call murder was not murder in God's eyes, it was capital punishment. What you call torture was not, it is what God declares as justice. The same will be for all who die and have not Christ. They will have a punishment far worse than any bodily harm put upon them. This is to say, a man can only die once! You cannot re-kill a man over and again. Therefore, Hell is worse as it is complete and utter abandonment and grief of the heart, which all will have in an eternal hell!

Jesus quoted the Hebrew Scriptures but not those two verses.

Actually he quoted many verses. You should read the book of Revelation if you wish to review Jesus' words of punishment and justice to the wicked. Beside this, Jesus said:

Matthew 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

While picking apart posts according to your sense of doctrine, true faith and narrow gates, you have yet to speak of these issues.

Strait Gate! Narrow Way! Just so we understand the difference.

And I did not see either of you respond to these questions:

Here we go then. Sorry for my delay.

Rather than focus on correctness of how to read, interpret the bible and how to follow the Christian path, I wonder if the deeper meanings of the death scene of Jesus isn't lost on us when we try to put it in context based only on bible storyline.

I'm not really interested in introspective subjective thought. The words speak for themselves and all we do is give it out! Yes it is useful to demonstrate death and brutality. After all, the Romans were ruthless oppressors. Do you deny this simple fact?

Had he thought he could suffer this kind of death on behalf of mankind, as the divine Son of God and put right all that was wrong with mankind, there would not be the continuous aftermath in history of torturous violence mankind annihilating mankind.

Men will always kill men. Jesus laid down his life to satisfy sin. If you wish to be pardoned or your personal sin, then you must ask Jesus to forgive you. Otherwise, humanity will forever kill its own. That is the world in which we live and it has not changed since the beginning of time! It will end though one day soon.

If that is what is taught, does it make sense that the Divine, having insisted on Divine righteousness in the Sacrifice of his only Son (note the bible never says there might not have been daughters, but an only son, one male son) would be righteously satisfied that all was again well with the flawed world He, the Creator, created?”

Bad argument to say He created a bad place. the bible says it was GOOD and that man ruined it. That is why Christ died to retake the deed to the earth that Adam lost to Satan. Jesus will forever be a MAN in heaven! Male and female usually in the Biblical sense is used for authority. That is, someone has to be in the position at the head and this is why God is called, He.

Does it not It surely serve “to diminish the act of Jesus if, in fact, nothing was learned in his sacrifice except that there is a correct way to believe and only in so doing can one be a correct Christian.?”

A correct Christian is one who repents of sin and turns towards Christ. Nothing more. Faith plus nothing.

Is this not “borne out in the historical persecutions of Christians against other Christians for a perceived incorrect or heretical view of the "sacred text??”

Again same repeating argument. The RC church of that day was no different than Hitler or Stalin. Those of God will not kill in the name of God for their end and purposes.

Is it not true that “It was exactly the "sacred text" of the time and the manner in which it was dispensed that Jesus took exception to in his ministry and his willingness to die the torturous death to make his point?”

Jesus did not make any points. He willingly laid down His life as so to settle the penalty of sin. you are guilty of sin and so am I. Therefore Christ died to save those who are dead to sin. Are you dead to sin? Do you have Christ? That is the important question.

Do you think that part of Jesus’ intent was that if he did this act of sacrificing his own life with a recognition of knowing what he would have to endure - that the message for all time he hoped to convey was it never need be done again?”

No.... He hoped that all would come unto Him for payment of their persnal sins. That is truth. And so it is. Who has died for mankind besides Jesus?

We all seem to know where we disagree. What we don’t seem to know is whether we can learn from each other and grow from the experience.

Some questions......
was Jesus born of a virgin
was Jesus a man
did Jesus perform miracles
was Jesus put to death for His claim, as the son of God
did he rise from the grave
is Jesus seated at the right hand of God
will Jesus return in great power and strength to judge mankind
is Jesus the creator God of, Time, Space and matter
do you accept Christ are the atonement for your sins?

I finish this message with a request from you Arthur. I am not so sure why you came after me with such harsh rhetoric when all I did was respond to your article and complimented it. It would serve me best if you would just delete the message I wrote in response to your article. I gave you my heartfelt response and it supported you. Today you have hurled insults and accusations towards me and in truth, you have only done the things towards me as an individual, that you shout out against. While your at it, delete this message as well since I wrote it in the rhetorical and have no interest to continue with a man that comes at me with such a judgmental attitude. Indeed, I can see your issue now with judging people. you would do well to listen to yourself....

It was nice to meet you too Arthur... I suppose I will be on my way then. Thanks for the questions. I doubt what I have said to you means anything at all, but I could be wrong.

-- posted by _Boanerges_

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» plox - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More Spong and Borg

In response to message posted by Phil_J:

His wording is clear, concise, and unpretentious... a pleasure to read.

-- posted by plox

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» Phil_J - Just Short of 3,500 Words

.
I finished Wendell's thirty-five hundred word remarks in his attempt to belittle yet another person who speaks out on their own beliefs.

I was wondering if he would be more specific about this statement of his, "I have no issue with the comments of your 4 pals sitting in the front of the class looking like gnats. Who needs people such as those[?]"

How does that equate to the general statement about sherrif's with their shiney little badges, Wendell, that you seemed to have taken so personally?

-- posted by Phil_J

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» ArthurRuger - Re: Hello Arthur - my response

In response to message posted by _Boanerges_:

Wow!

Well, I asked for it and I got it. That is a very good post Wendell and I have no intention of deleting it.

I can see that I stand corrected about you and for my harsh sensitivity.

There are previous posts in this discussion referencing one-dimensional communications. Our postings are exactly that and leave us at a disadvantage.

We do not have a second dimension such as visual to reveal facial expression and gestures nor audio to reveal tone and manner of speaking. Hence we cannot control how our messages are received.

Trust me, Wendell. I am not hostile to you or anyone else and in fact am extremely grateful to anyone who takes time to participate here.

I owe you and Brother Jones (who BTW is less an old timer than I am. He's younger than me) an apology. Forgive me.

Your message (one-dimensional or otherwise) conveyed your sense of offense at the intensity of my writings. Discerning my own rhetoric is one of my challenges in that I seem to do it somewhat spontaneously and without considering how it "sounds" as much as what it "says."

My days as a verbal hothead are quite in the past. However as a writing hothead, I suppose that I find something about being anonymous and at a distance from others while composing without interfence that brings with it temptation to fire flaming arrows while hiding behind the rock of distance and anonymity.

The Peace of the Lord be unto all of us.

Especially if I am fortunate enough to have all of you respond to the article that publishes tomorrow.

Arthur

-- posted by ArthurRuger

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» BrotherJones - Re: Re: Hello Arthur - my response

In response to message posted by ArthurCRuger:

Hi Arthur,

No apology is needed for my benefit.

Wendell is working a lot harder these days to explain his views than you will probably find in my posts. My hat is off to you both. There is a lot of truth to the old saying about 'hanging together' or winding up 'hanging separately.' Most of my life I have gone at it alone in the field of Christian witnessing. It is so very easy for any folk to take a shot at any Christian witnessing, especially those who have never done a damn thing in their lives to share a good word about Jesus. It would be good to get on the same page, so that the unsaved will see why all this talk about the Saviour.

-- posted by BrotherJones

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» _Boanerges_ - Re: Re: Hello Arthur - my response

In response to message posted by ArthurCRuger:

Blessings Arthur...
Thanks for the speedy reply!

Trust me, Wendell. I am not hostile to you or anyone else and in fact am extremely grateful to anyone who takes time to participate here.

I feel likewise. I never thought I was a sheriff! (smile) funny analogy though I must admit..

I owe you and Brother Jones (who BTW is less an old timer than I am. He's younger than me) an apology. Forgive me.

Apology accepted. No need for forgiveness as I saw no harm done from you towards me. All is well. Thank you for not deleting those messages then as they were sincere.. I hope no offense was given to you from myself. If so, forgive me as well. I appreciate your thoughts and say thank you for being reasonable and inviting. I accept your honesty and appreciate your comments. Until your next article then! Look forward to it.

I agree with you, The Peace of the Lord be unto all of us No doubt...

-- posted by _Boanerges_

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» ArthurRuger - I've seen it.

We drove to Oregon and saw the film last night.
My uninformed review will publish tomorrow.

Watch out! It's not the condensed version.

Arthur

-- posted by ArthurRuger

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions

» badactor - Montsegur

Hello Arthur, I first heard of this episode a year or so ago in a new book "The Search for Zarathustra" or some such title. Fascinating read as the author slowly works back in time to uncover the origins of this dualist belief so abhorred by the orthodox church. There is a story in the section about Montsegur, I believe, where a couple of the representatives of the church, ie inquisitors, are waylaid and killed. The Cathar leader asks for the "cup" of one of the inquisitors and was answered that it was broken. Angrily the leader says it could have been bound with copper to serve as a useful drinking vessel. The cup being referred to was the inquisitors skull. The courage and determination of those burned at Montsegur was, in my humble opinion, exactly the courage demonstrated by earlier Christians when faced with persecution by Rome.

An earlier episode details the animosity between the Orthodox church of Constantinople and dualist Christians in the Balkans. Taken by surprise and captured by the orthodox, ten thousand prisoners were then blinded, except for one in a hundred to act as guides for the rest.

-- posted by badactor

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion Join the latest discussions