Jesus: A problem for the Christian Right

Top 64. Jan 23, 2005 12:44 PM

» Pinky102 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote...

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote... posted by _Boanerges_:

Always the big guy.

-- posted by Pinky102

Top 65. Jan 23, 2005 1:09 PM

» _Boanerges_ - The Middle East and the New World Order

One more... Then, maybe you will understand my position.... But then, maybe not...

What did Noam Chomsky really say in his 1995 Macquarie University lecture on "The Middle East and the New World Order"?

The Middle East and the New World Order
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/...

"However, as John Lyons reminds us, Chomsky's work has been of such a polemical character that he cannot be "written off as a woolly minded liberal...his arguments may be accepted or rejected: they cannot be ignored"

-- posted by _Boanerges_

http://www.jmu.edu/madison/center/main_p...

Top 66. Jan 23, 2005 6:17 PM

» hawknut - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote...

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote... posted by _Boanerges_:

But, I am afraid it is too late to do anything other than submit to the world order and become slaves..

Not while I'm still breathing, Wendell. It is my DUTY as an citizen to voice my opposition to the illegal and immoral things government leaders do, both on US soil and off. If I fail to do that, I indeed am nothing more than a submissive slave.

It will not come about by civil protests.

I bet our forefathers would disagree with that statement. We'd still be colonies of England, France, and Spain with that attitude. Every liberty we enjoy today came about through civil protests, some even led to war.

Our nation choose God, in the beginning, and we were blessed.

God certainly did bless us with progressive, liberal leaders...

Bill of Rights speech, James Madison, June 1789
"The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext infringed"

-- posted by hawknut

Top 67. Jan 23, 2005 6:51 PM

» Pinky102 - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote...

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote... posted by hawknut:

"Never doubt that a few dedicated people working together cannot change the world. In fact, that's the only way major change ever comes about."
Margaret Meade made that statement or something very close to it.

-- posted by Pinky102

Top 68. Jan 23, 2005 7:08 PM

» _Boanerges_ - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote...

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote... posted by hawknut:

Hawknut, hope your battle with that storm proved successful...

While I agree with your message, in spirit.. I do however, find the practicality of such... well.. only time will tell...

God certainly did bless us with progressive, liberal leaders.

While I agree that, with law, liberty is the essence of liberal[ity], I do find that your attempt to place the blood, sweat and tears of a great nation on that of a term which has been denigrated, especially within these sites, that of 'liberal'.. to be, a nice attempt, but fool hearty, to say the least smile ...

Concerning Madison:
In Congress, he helped frame the Bill of Rights and enact the first revenue legislation. Out of his leadership in opposition to Hamilton's financial proposals, which he felt would unduly bestow wealth and power upon northern financiers, came the development of the Republican, or Jeffersonian, Party.

Yep, the very Liberal you quote, indeed, was the founder of the beginning Republican party... But, not to be confused with the modern day Republicans. Indeed, these Democratic-Republicans opposed 'federalism'... It appears to me that in the 21st century, our 'federal Republic' has turned into THE 'federal' government, with the seat of power in DC and not in the hands of the people. Something has gone wrong, and we cannot just pin it on Bush.. We now have Federal Police, which is a direct violation of the Constitution.

James Madison
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presid...
Federalist party
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presid...
Jeffersonian Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffersonia...
Democratic-Republican Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stat...
Republican Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stat...

Maybe one day soon, the Democratic party will get back to it's traditional roots of representing the American people, as it once was.. But, as of this day, it is a wasteland in dissary, because of their [modern] progressive liberalism, which may be good for and benefit Europe.. but has found no place here in the USA, at least as of this day. As you have clearly seen.. the vast majority of Americans prefer, traditional values than that of progressive liberalism...

Liberal, indeed... Liberals? Well, that is another subject altogether... Both parties are involved, as the people have been, removed... If you want to do soemthing, NOW would be a good time to start offering some suggestions..

Has Congress Created 'Federal Police Power'?
January 02, 2005
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1430...

...W

ps>> you may want to read the articles in my Daily News Thread.... but, I know....

-- posted by _Boanerges_

Top 69. Jan 23, 2005 8:38 PM

» plox - Re: Hates Bush's actions and policies but voted for him anyway

In response to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Arthur wrote... posted by hawknut:

...because Bush will save him from gays and abortionists.

My oh my, what a confused mind!
And no, we cannot pin it just on Bush. The blame must be shared by every informed person who voted for him.

-- posted by plox

Top 70. Jan 24, 2005 5:58 AM

» Pinky102 - Time For A New Thread

.
These questions cannot be handled well in the context of this thread which is about the problem the Christian Right has with Jesus and his Gospel.

In the early days of "churched" gatherings people were led by bishops and other leaders who had their own separate versions of what it meant to be Christian. They used various "gospels" written by various leaders of the day. And, Marcion was one of the strongest. He claimed that the god of the Old Testament could not be the same god of Jesus. But, Constatine called a conference for the specific purpose of doing away with the confusion by the method of producing a "bible" upon which all people would base their faith. It was a necessary act in order to do away with the separate gospels that didn't always agree with each other.

The uncovering of such historical documents as the Gospel According to Thomas have, once again, brought questions in to the area of conformity to one set of books. Literacy is so much more advanced these days than it was in the dark and middle ages that individuals use the brains they were given to make decisions that go beyond what our would be leaders have to say. We think for ourselves--at least some of us do. I know there are many who make a confession of faith based 100% on the Cannonized version of the Scriptures as the Holy Bible, the unwavering Word of God as it is written, word by word, line by line and precept by precept. Cannonization means that scholars read and ferreted out every last thing that came into conflict with every other last thing so that every thing was in agreement with everything else. It was a major and scholarly event.

This discussion that is drifting away from the purpose of the thread could be held much more productively. It is time for a new thread that would deal more directly with the emerging issues. The site is a good site, "Liberal Christianity In The 21st Century," as it certainly is the issue with which we are now faced. And, contrary to the Evangelical/Fundamentalist mind set, it is not going away!! It's here and it is the single force that can defeat the conservatives. Pretty much, it emanates from the concepts raised in the article this thread in that Jesus is a problem for the Christian Right. Deep down in the Evangelical/Fundamentalist's heart of hearts, they know it is the truth. And, that is precisely what scares them--the exposure of their hypocracy. It cuts them to the quick!

-- posted by Pinky102