[valinors_sorrow]

Gee, my "let's stick up for good manners" plug didn't get very far. :(

[talaniman]

Gee, my "let's stick up for good manners" plug didn't get very far. :(

Now, now, you no us guys are a speak it as you feel it bunch.

[valinors_sorrow]

Okay Tal, but its really is a matter of a person can think or feel and certainly post any belief they like, including ignorant, prejudicial, or even outright wrong stuff (so long as its not tangibly dangerous) so I take caution not to mix those up with the real objectionable stuff. And I am NOT saying any Christian's (or any other religion) view is that. I have never complained about anyone's belief here and I would recommend that to others too. In fact, I honor Starman and every single Christian here their right to their beliefs. I believe he and I had a really interesting discussion a while back (before I left and returned) about where the line is concerning impolite actions. If attempts are made to convert me that are not solicited, its over the line and he agreed, if I recall. Short of that, he can spout all he wants with my blessings. As strange as this may seem, I am sticking up for him here all the while as I disagree with a great deal of his beliefs and he with mine.

It's the actions that matter for only there can someone else be harmed. And it's the actions that laws addresses too. It's the same line that is set up in the rules of disparaging here at AMHD. Talk to the IDEA but leave the other person out of it. If you are going to talk personal, it best be about YOUR OWN STUFF. I have and will continue to object if someone gets personal about me and its derogatory, count on that. They will be dealt with by the moderators, I am also assured of that.

But beliefs, particularly religious ones, are quite a lot like that old childhood rhyme about "sticks and stones..." So I say believe anything you like about me or your fellow humans. Prejudicial thought, umm while I wouldn't recommend it, is still nothing in and of itself-- it takes an action to make it harmful.

And to be fair to the site, if you think an action is inappropriate, use the proper method for complaining about it and click that "Report Inappropriate" button or pm the person privately. It doesn't belong in a public post-- I think that's crappy and a really big lesson I learned here recently from the now removed "dead marine" thread.

If one does choose to question another here publicly, then something needs to be said for taking it at face value too, ie-- "Did you mean ill will with that?" "No I did not." -- equates to end of debate.

[NeedKarma]

Val,
Over and over again we read posts where Starman basically says that if you don't observe christianity the same way he does then you are on the wrong path. He further says that his way is the only way.

You'll have to forgive me if I just don't lay down, roll over and drink the Kool-Aid. I'll defend my beliefs as well.

Have a great day, I'm off to the Red Cross to donate.

[valinors_sorrow]

Yes he does. LOL It is his right to. As is yours about your beliefs. And you certainly don't have to drink any koolaid either NK. And none of us has to listen to any one person here too - I think a number of us have learned THAT lesson as well -- I know I have. Its wise to develop the skill of "selective post reading".

Heads off to the Lounge with a sudden thirst now. :D

[talaniman]

I name no names , but I think I am as entitled to voice my opinon as anyone and of course any one can agree or disagree, no problem as I really have NO animosity towards any one. For the record Starman is one of my favorites Its about the debate and okay I can get BLUNT but no harm intended and I will call names if namecalling is directed at me, personally. On the whole though I love a good debate. I'm human, sue me! Off topic a bit but I could use some kool-aid about now, er maybe I'll make my own.

[valinors_sorrow]

Well you do know, don't you, that there is a 12-step program for people who are addicted to endless debate?? :eek:

I think its called "On and On Anon :p Oh but wait, that's a whole n'uther forum!

[talaniman]

LOL sign me up.

[Morganite]

Val,
Over and over again we read posts where Starman basically says that if you don't observe christianity the same way he does then you are on the wrong path. He further says that his way is the only way.

You'll have to forgive me if I just don't lay down, roll over and drink the Kool-Aid. I'll defend my beliefs as well.

Have a great day, I'm off to the Red Cross to donate.

You donate Kool-Aid to the Red Cross?

:)

[valinors_sorrow]

LOL Morg, let's hope it was cherry.

[Thomas1970]

It is 100% Christian to believe that Christianity is the only path to salvation and that there is no other. As bitter as it might be for non-Christians to accept, Christians believe that the only way to be in good standing with God is to accept Jesus' Ransom Sacrifice for our sins.

I do not have a problem with you believing personally, that yours is the only right path. What I do find bitter, is saying that anyone who does not follow your particular brand of religion, or even Christianity, will be trod under the hobnailed boots of a celestial army.
My religion neither teaches or advocates bruised egos, nor vengeance.
I do accept Jesus sacrifice, which is why I feel we have the right to choose, as long as our hearts are pure. To discriminate against or exclude anyone, is to me, the ultimate insult and negation of that sacrifice.

True, there are other religions and their adherents feel they are the ones who have the truth. But that does not in any way obligate a Christian to discard his faith and agree with them-does it? A Christian is a Christian for the same reason that a Moslem is a Moslem, a Buddhist is a Buddhist. Because that's the religion a Christian has chosen to place his faith in.

Please cite one line in which I ever attempted to coerce you away from your faith, or suggested, no less enjoined you, to adopt mine. I am glad we can now agree about the freedom of choice thing, that was 50% of my inquiry. :)
The other 50% being, "What constitutes a false religion?"

It is also 100% Christian to tell others about Jesus' Ransom Sacrifice. Such a telling of others, of course can be interpreted as instilling fear or intolerance of other people's beliefs. But that telling of the Good News to others and that effort to bring them into the Christian fold is an assignment given us by Jesus himself and is an inseparable part of Christianity and will always be a part of Christianity despite vehement protests as the type you have just posted.

Which is why I have I have always politely respected the "proselytizing" of such denominations as the JW's, the "Moonies", and the Boston Church of Christ, even once having attended the services of the latter on the behest of a friend, despite some rather condescending remarks on their part priorly.
You are free to show up at my door any time, if it's in good faith, and on the basis of equality.
Vehement protests? I'm rarely vehement about anything. Honest intellectual inquiries coated with a liberal dose of my sometimes, admittedly obscure, even a bit off-color humor. Nothing more. ;)

It seems rather strange to expect a Christian to tell others that he doesn't have a reason to believe in what he believes and that any path is good enough. That sort of thinking is neither Christian nor logical.

I certainly do not expect you to tell me this. In fact, I'm glad you believe much of what you do so strongly. I have met far to many "Christians" for which it was nothing more than a birthright, given no more thought than the family name, if that.
Despite your beliefs though, that still doesn't necessarily mean that others beliefs are inherently wrong. Neither does it yet explain to me exactly what constitutes a "false religion." Many world faiths far predate the birth of Christ.

As for versions of Bibles and many reasons for versions of Bibles, that is really of no consequence from where I stand in the same manner that the practice of magic and worship of many gods is of no real consequence from where you stand. As for good reasons? I also have my good reasons I discourage others from practicing magic and worshipping many gods.

I would have to politely disagree with you here.
First off, you did appear to take great offense at Morganite's readings or interpretations of Biblical scripture. Teachings, that to me, seem far more in line with loving your fellow man.
Secondly, out of the hundreds of Tibetan Buddhist monastic precepts, "To not use psychic powers to burn down villages." is still on the books, so to speak. Among others, of course. :)

If you take umbrage with this despite the fact that I have my good reasons, then I guess that's your problem-not mine.

I take umbrage with little. But as a human being, I do admittedly get a bit frustrated from time to time. Call it a character flaw.
Chalk to the rest up to tough love, and trying to get people to think outside the box.

About choice, to choose all paths as equally viable is unbiblical.

Fair enough.

There is no middle ground just as there is no middle ground in reference to many other things which either are or are not.

Buddhism is often referred to as the "Middle Path." From my point of view, "are" and "are not" are false perceptions of a dualistic world view, based on cognitive discrimination.
Though this may in fact be your view, please don't assume it for all of us. To many of us, shades of grey are abundant. To me, there is little but shades of grey.

All choices by the very nature require an elimination of alternatives.

This is a very dangerous view. You fail to note the crucial distinction between respectfully "opting out" of "alternatives" and eliminating them.
Among the people who have shared this latter view: Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Pol Pot, Mao Tse-Tung...

That of course doesn't mean hating and disrespecting the right of others to choose.

But if you insist on "eliminating" the alternatives, we're back to the proverbial Hobson's choice. Though you may feel that you respect others, many will not overly respect you, if they feel that you impinge upon their fundamental human rights, regardless of whatever higher calling may impel you.

In fact, your vehement demand that I shut the hell up, accept your way of thinking and not speak my mind as I see fit is a disrespect for my right to choose and a demonstration of the animosity that you claim to condemn. Think about that.

If I wanted you to "shut the hell up", I would have ignored you! Seems only logical to me. :) Far less effort involved that way.
I don't feel that I've ever disrespected your right to choose, and all I ask is that you be careful not to disrespect such the right of others.
Nothing to think about, no animosity here. A bit of heated discussion maybe, other than that, nothing but tough love, and an encouragement to think outside the box.

BTW
Actually your presumptuous certainty that I am lying when I claim not hate people who worship differently than I do requires reading of hearts which only the creator is capable of-are you he?

Hate is a very strong word. Though, by comparison, I am capable of making a reasoned "assumption" as to when individuals likely are reasonably respecting others beliefs.
Am I the "Man" at the top? No, I'm far too humble for that; but I'm flattered that you asked. Though there were a few people, many years back on the psych ward... Never mind, you probably don't wish to know my past that well. :rolleyes:

Or is it that you belong to a religious group of people who feel they have attained such powers

Again, my religion has this whole thing regarding the proper usage of psychic powers... Best not to get into it. :)

As to degeneration to the status you mention? Too late! You already have. : )

Well, again, only trying to lighten it up with a little pseudo-intellectual humor. My reference to "those who do not bet on the horses", referring to the atheists among us, who incidentally, I do respect as well.
But perhaps you're right. Maybe this is turning into nothing more than a "bridge of fools." It's hard to span the knowledge gap when the building materials are being misused.

"You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." - Matthew 7:5

Now we are all learning.

[Morganite]

I name no names , but I think I am as entitled to voice my opinon as anyone and of course any one can agree or disagree, no problem as I really have NO animosity towards any one. For the record Starman is one of my favorites Its about the debate and okay I can get BLUNT but no harm intended and I will call names if namecalling is directed at me, personally. On the whole though I love a good debate. I'm human, sue me!!Off topic a bit but I could use some kool-aid about now, er maybe I'll make my own.

I agree that you should make your own and not drink any that Jimmy Jones brings round to you. He is too apocalyptic for my taste.

M:)

[Starman]

First, I apologize for being unable to tell whether you are calling me a fool with indirects or just jesting. I'm probably wrong with assuming that now you are calling me a hypocrite as well so since that is probably the case I will simply ignore your reference to hypocrites and attribute it to perhaps another way of jesting. In any case, I was wrong in
responding in kind and if that is the hypocritical part then I guess the shoe fits.

About the gray areas and middle grounds, as I previously stated, for a Christian there can be no compromise. You say I am condemning everyone who doesn't believe as I do to death. People who know me better would tell you that I have never made that kind of statement on this site. Actually, what I have said plain and simple is that God expects those who are to gain eternal life to accept Jesus as savior. I have also said that those presently not accepting his sacrifice based on ignorance, upbringing, or any other thing beyond their control will be given a chance to see clearly that Jesus is indeed the way to eternal life. However, if after this is done the persons knowing this full well insist on not accepting God's provision for salvation then God is definitely not to blame for their destiny since it will be an informed decision on their part and not one based on lack of knowledge, misinformation or ignorance. That is what I have posted repeatedly on this forum-nothing more and nothing less.


About my disrespecting others by telling them what I have learned and believe to be the truth as revealed via inspiration, that certainly can be viewed that way and is viewed that way by some as is evident by your reaction and the advice you give me to not do so again. But unfortunately the message God gave us is clear and has to be told regardless of how someone who thinks differently might interpret it.

And as I stated previously and continue to be ignored, I don't challenge any person's right to worship as he pleases. Neither has God given Christians the authority to challenge that human right which he gave them. What God does challenge as explained in the Bible is that humans DO NOT have the right to worship as they please in HIS universe and that he will not forever tolerate worship which he has not authorized. He also tells us that those who are informed of his displeasure and insist on doing things their way in HIS universe will have to be removed. That is also part of the message given us to tell others.

If indeed that comes across as hatred, or as an effort to take away people's rights,
perhaps it is because people's rights are not unlimited as they imagine them to be.

BTW

I commend you for accepting Jesus's ransom sacrifice. However, I'm not sure where you are deriving your concepts concerning the applicability of the ransom sacrifice from since your concept has no scriptural support. Jesus died for all, but not all would accept that sacrifice. Neither is the value of that sacrifice forced on everyone regardless of their attitude towards it. If the gift were were forced on everyone as you seem to imply, then that would be depriving them of their freedom to reject it-freedom of choice.

You Christians can believe whatever you want. No problem at all. But don't tell me you respect my beliefs and then rail on with that self-righteous dogma that you have the only way and I'm wrong because the bible says so. And you may think correcting ones false beliefs, because your bible tells you to is both condescending and an insult to my intelligence and a basic disregard for what I believe. YOU may be bound by and old history book that many have changed over centuries but I am not. Don't get me wrong, Their are some excellent examples of good humans who are Christians whom I have a great respect for but the one's that use the bible to justify bad manners and put any one different down, I truly think your paving your own path to hell. Just my humble opinion.

First, I don't believe in a hell created specially to torture people who sin and don't repent. Neither am I willing to worship a god who approves of such a thing. Second, Jesus did not tell his disciples to rail on as you say, despite a person's clear rejection of his message. What he told Christians to do when a person rejects the gospel is to symbolically wipe their feet and go elsewhere and leave the person alone. So if anyone has been railing on at you despite your rejection of the message it isn't because Jesus tells them to but simply because they mistakenly think they are supposed to.

Or perhaps you might feel Christians are railing on at you because you are associating with Christians who rail, or tuning in on certain denominational radio stations which are characterized by constantly railing followed by a fervent request for donations.
Interestingly, the only time any Christian has railed at me was when I was a kid and had no control over who entered our house or where I was take. After I became an adult I have had sufficient control over my immediate environment to prevent people from inflicting that sort of annoyance on me. Make sense?

As for your speaking disparagingly of what I and other Christians consider a sacred book, that's nothing new. So it has little shock value left and is only useful to those who are in need of blowing off some anti-biblical steam now and then and who perhaps believe that they are shocking the "hell" out of Christian. In any case, you have as much a right to your opinion about the Bible as I have a right to have an opinion about godless evolution theory which I consider tantamount to a mother goose father rooster tale despite other people's great belief and respect for those inanities.



BTW

I don't believe that a person is drawn to God simply because his or her religious beliefs are corrected.

[Thomas1970]

First, I apologize for being unable to tell whether you are calling me a fool with indirects or just jesting. I'm probably wrong with assuming that now you are calling me a hypocrite as well so since that is probably the case I will simply ignore your reference to hypocrites and attribute it to perhaps another way of jesting. In any case, I was wrong in
responding in kind and if that is the hypocritical part then I guess the shoe fits.

I apologize for not being more clear. Just another off-color attempt at humor, not aimed at anyone in particular. We're all hypocrites and fools at times. I'm very reluctant to trust anyone who isn't. As I did state, "Now we are all learning."

About the gray areas and middle grounds, as I previously stated, for a Christian there can be no compromise. You say I am condemning everyone who doesn't believe as I do to death. People who know me better would tell you that I have never made that kind of statement on this site. Actually, what I have said plain and simple is that God expects those who are to gain eternal life to accept Jesus as savior. I have also said that those presently not accepting his sacrifice based on ignorance, upbringing, or any other thing beyond their control will be given a chance to see clearly that Jesus is indeed the way to eternal life. However, if after this is done the persons knowing this full well insist on not accepting God's provision for salvation then God is definitely not to blame for their destiny since it will be an informed decision on their part and not one based on lack of knowledge, misinformation or ignorance. That is what I have posted repeatedly on this forum-nothing more and nothing less.

Well, there was this little, not very "religious" gem:

I also hope you realize that Jesus is described in Revelations and other parts of the NT as coming to earth with his heavenly armies to destroy those practicers of false religions who refuse to worship the only true God.

About my disrespecting others by telling them what I have learned and believe to be the truth as revealed via inspiration, that certainly can be viewed that way and is viewed that way by some as is evident by your reaction and the advice you give me to not do so again. But unfortunately the message God gave us is clear and has to be told regardless of how someone who thinks differently might interpret it.

I never told you not to do it. I'd never presume to tell anyone what is right for them. I did though conscientiously, and hopefully somewhat friendlily, advise you against summarily condemning others. I doubt you are any more the Creator than I, regardless of whether you feel you have a closer connection, or more spiritual brownie points.

And as I stated previously and continue to be ignored, I don't challenge any person's right to worship as he pleases. Neither has God given Christians the authority to challenge that human right which he gave them. What God does challenge as explained in the Bible is that humans DO NOT have the right to worship as they please in HIS universe and that he will not forever tolerate worship which he has not authorized. He also tells us that those who are informed of his displeasure and insist on doing things their way in HIS universe will have to be removed. That is also part of the message given us to tell others.

And as I have previously stated in other posts, it is my own personal belief, that we were created in God's image, not Him in ours. I believe God is essentially devoid of ego, and all the afflictions that come bundled with one.

If indeed that comes across as hatred, or as an effort to take away people's rights,
perhaps it is because people's rights are not unlimited as they imagine them to be.

I never said peoples' rights were unlimited. If nothing else, karma teaches me that.

BTW

I commend you for accepting Jesus's ransom sacrifice. However, I'm not sure where you are deriving your concepts concerning the applicability of the ransom sacrifice from since your concept has no scriptural support. Jesus died for all, but not all would accept that sacrifice. Neither is the value of that sacrifice forced on everyone regardless of their attitude towards it. If the gift were were forced on everyone as you seem to imply, then that would be depriving them of their freedom to reject it-freedom of choice.

Once again, I feel, in an effort justify your own proclivities, you accuse me of yet another act, I don't feel it can be reasonably surmised I committed. I don't feel Jesus ever forced anything upon anyone, least not me, and certainly not his death or resurrection. It is my opinion that you could do far worse than to follow his example.
Again, this is only my opinion.

[Starman]

I apologize for not being more clear. Just another off-color attempt at humor, not aimed at anyone in particular. We're all hypocrites and fools at times. I'm very reluctant to trust anyone who isn't. As I did state, "Now we are all learning."

Now you're speaking in oxymorons.

Well, there was this little, not very "religious" gem:

Perhaps a definition of the word "religious" is in order in order to avoid equivocation.
"Gem?" That's simple enough I suppose. Irony? Well, that's totally beyond my capacity I think.

I never told you not to do it. I'd never presume to tell anyone what is right for them. I did though conscientiously, and hopefully somewhat friendlily, advise you against summarily condemning others. I doubt you are any more the Creator than I, regardless of whether you feel you have a closer connection, or more spiritual brownie points.

I see nothing friendly in your manner of approach which ignores explanations concerning my motives as if they were drivel and cunningly propagates your own view of what I really feel and think-sorry. Didn't tell? Not necessary to tell-simply giving a general impression via criticism barbed with sarcasm suffices.

I feel I have a closer what? There you go again Jimmy! Are you sure you aren't HE?

[And as I have previously stated in other posts, it is my own personal belief, that we were created in God's image, not Him in ours. I believe God is essentially devoid of ego, and all the afflictions that come bundled with one.

This gets curiouser and curiouser! To me YOU come across as creating God in YOUR image since the ideas you keep repeating are your own.

I never said peoples' rights were unlimited. If nothing else, karma teaches me that.

Karma? Aha! Isn't that the idea of the cycle of reincarnation? For a person who claims to accept Jesus as his savior it seems a bit strange that you unconditionally accept a concept that has absolutely nothing to do with his teachings.

"This is my beloved Son; listen to him" (Mark 9:7).

Please try not to interpret the following as a savage attack on your right to believe anything you want. Thanks!


Excerpt:
In much of the Orient, this strict belief in karma has resulted in a hopeless, pessimistic view of life. Their lives are seen as dreary, endless cycles of suffering and rebirth. Because of this endless chain of karma, reincarnation does not resolve the problem of evil, but simply points toward the impossible goal of perfection and self-salvation, the ultimate freedom from reincarnation. In modern, western reincarnation, the objective is to join with "ultimate reality," merging with God and becoming God. Modern reincarnation often promotes the divinity of the soul and denies the biblical concept of a sovereign, personal God.

Author: Mark Van Bebber of Eden Communications.



http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-r009.html

If people are held unaccountable for their behavior by God then their rights are unlimited and self conceived. In short, man becomes his own god.

Once again, I feel, in an effort justify your own proclivities, you accuse me of yet another act, I don't feel it can be reasonably surmised I committed. I don't feel Jesus ever forced anything upon anyone, least not me, and certainly not his death or resurrection. It is my opinion that you could do far worse than to follow his example.
Again, this is only my opinion.

Justifying what? Proclivities?

With all due respect, bon ami, but I should not need to be justifying anything to anyone on this forum. All I did was give an opinion in response to a person who requested opinions and did so only after several other people had given their more extensive with which I disagreed. I remained silent because they are entitled to their opinions. My more extensive commentaries only surfaced after these same people took offense and began hurling a barrage of protests concerning my opinion in my direction. Since that is the case, I think that justification of proclivities applies more to you and them than it does to me.


About Jesus forcing? No, you don't directly say it in so many words-but your argument implies that by saying that his sacrifice applies to all without regard to beliefs, behavior-or any other criterion which he spoke about. Which of course amounts to the convenient creation of your own Jesus.


BTWI am an idiot

Acts 4
18Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. 20For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard."

[Morganite]

... Permitting a person to plough ahead in the wrong direction because one doesn't want to hurt his feelings by showing him the way isn't kindness. ...

In this post you hit on the crux of the problem of appropriate behaviour for those who believe that the religious truths and insights that light their personal world and spiritual quest are the only religious truth that matters and that, as a consequence, they are commissioned to knock down all other faiths and beliefs under the guise of 'steering them right to save their souls.'

It is this very attitude that fuelled the medieval inquisitions where the body of a 'heretic' was excoriated, scarified, torn, pulled limb from limb, and even burned “for the good of his soul.”

It is a view that is totally opposed by the teachings of Jesus and his ministers. Jesus nowhere gives sanction for either bitter argument or physical punishment, far less the killing of anyone whose grasp on his teachings is less than is, perhaps, should be.

Jesus saved his opposition for those of his own faith whose behaviour laid heavy and unjustified burdens on the heads of ordinary men and women who sought to follow the commandments of God.

We look in vain for Jesus advising his disciples to 'go after' those who did not strictly understanding or follow his teachings. Jesus knew that well a person follows his teachings is an individual matter and that those who strayed unwittingly answer to God.

It is sad state when someone assumes the role of Judge in these matters, as if they were arbiters of orthodoxy, or commissioned by God to fell strays.

Jesus told his disciples to let the Pharisees alone, and not bother them. He did not tell them that they should appoint themselves ministers to them, even though they might stand in need of ministry.

Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Paul gave similar advice to the saints who had been taught by … Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away many people after him: he also perished; and as many as obeyed him, were scattered.

And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

The apostles complained to Jesus that some men they did not know were … casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbade him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part.

If Christendom has gone astray in doctrine and dogma, those matters are of less consequence than the imposition of strictures on members of the Christian church by the church itself.

It is sad that an Inquisitorial spirit lives on in the minds of men who make stirrings to disturb the peaceful pursuit of faith by those designated as enemies of God, because they have chosen a different path through which to, exercise their faith in God and Christ.

What are we do to with such fellows? Had we their spirits in us, we would seek to harass, beat, scourge, them and make them as miserable as we would be, were we engaged in this same pseudo-religious sadism.

The systematic pursuit of heresy and the punishment of heretics is an Inquisition, which is the name given to the detection and punishment of perceived heretics and all persons guilty of any perceived offence against perceived orthodoxy.

Christian went on to recognise the evils of inquisitions, and this dawning horror played a major part in the reforming movement. Yet despite proclaimed repugnance at the practice, it soon adopted the same program through which to persuade men to be obedient to the doctrines it had lately fashioned, so that the reformers were no better than those they railed against and did not spare to torture and slaughter 'heretics.'

While such practices would be swiftly suppressed today, the spirit that gave rise to holy murder is still abroad in the land and manifests itself each time the self-appointed 'inquisitors' catch someone holding an 'illegal' and punishable opinion.

Bigots, when challenged over bitterness and polemic, claim to be following Jesus cleansing the temple, or rebuking the Pharisees. They have their Bible passages ready to invoke as the legality of their commission, and they are not slow to state that they are acting like dunderheads for the sake of the 'lost,' and those who are 'out of the way.' It is my position that 'showing someone the way' is not unkindness, but being bloody minded about the way you do it most certainly is.

If I ask you whether you would like a piece of cake, and you say you do, I can either smear it all over your face or else present it nicely on a bone china plate. Either way you get the cake, but the methods of presentation are different, and it is obvious that the method of presentation, whether of cake of faith, DOES matter.

The ultimate destination of bigotry is a narrow fundamentalism that brooks no rivals and must destroy all opposing or non-consonantal views without hesitation or thought. The main problem with such ideologues is that they cannot even consider that they can be guilty of irrationalism and uncritical scholarship just as easily as those whom they criticize. Indeed, having discerned error only on one side (his opponents'), he acts as if he was infallible, and omniscient, both of which are unattractively unpleasant.

It is utterly conceited for one person to believe that he knows what another person believes. When it comes to matters of my personal faith, for example, you must trust my word implicitly if we are to communicate about it, because that is the only access you have to the world I live in. Yet we find these harsh critics determining what each person who matches their inquisitorial designation of denomination and religion MUST believe, because they know better than the person under their scrutiny. That this position is an untenable nonsense is patent.

Therefore, because a person says they are Wiccan, it does not necessarily follow that they espouse, adhere to, follow, or even believe everything contained in a supposed description of “What Wiccans Believe,” especially if they do not. Having denied participation in what has been claimed, it is tragic to for 'know-it-alls' to jump on them and controvert them, claiming greater knowledge.

I read in a book written by former Jehovah's Witness, and now conducting a persecuting ministry against them she makes the statement of appropriate to the intelligence of the mental midget she is.

“Those who are not in the religion do not know anything about it, and those who are in the religion it cannot tell the truth about it.”

We should enjoy discussing godly and spiritual manifestations of the pathways of faith that are common to the endless variety of the human religious experience. Yet such discussions should not be harsh, but enlightened, having regard for the feelings and sensitivities of others who do not share our views, nor enshrine certain tenets as devoutly as we do, nor track the same markers to piety and holiness that seem proper to ourselves.

All should be done with kindness, sensitivity, and with due honour to our friends who, though they do not share our pews, are still our neighbors, and are the divinely appointed recipients of our love, however much a bad taste the devil might infuse into our mouths at having to be gracious towards them.

Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice, and know me, and follow me, and a stranger they will not follow, for they know not the voice of strangers."

If any do not come willingly to the fold of the Good Shepherd, they are not to be driven there with sticks, firebrands, thumbscrews, iron maidens, pillories, or stakes, nor with verbal equivalents of such cruel ungodly instruments.

The duty of Christians is to acquire knowledge and love so that everything they do is right and true, patterned after Jesus Christ, for "this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (John 17:3).

Paul reminds the Galatians to rekindle their love for him and live the Gospel, which he taught them. If the Galatians discover misconduct, they who are spiritual are to restore and correct in a spirit of meekness. They are to carry each other's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. Every man is to examine, or put to the proof, his own work or conduct (Gal. 6:1-5).

Jesus Christ transforms the lives of men and society by its principles. When shared in meekness and love the Gospel offers aid to all who seek to find light in a troubled world, it comforts those who need comfort, encourages those who need courage, guides those who need guidance, brings unspeakable peace for those in need of peace, and spiritual challenges for those who need such challenges to grow on their journey to spiritual maturity.

M:)RGANITE

[valinors_sorrow]

Much easier I think Morganite (and perfectly okay with God too, I bet) to consider everyone over the age of, oh say, 12 to be grow'd enough to be accountable for their beliefs and let sleeping dogs lie unless and until they ask you to comment. I cannot honestly see how spirtual maturity can leave out spiritual manners.

Belief does not do harm to anyone, action does. From the terrible Inquistion you mention to the tiny, personal, only slightly disrespecting sneer.

How easy it is for some to defend their belief with such fervor and never once consider their often offending actions. Like that is or ever will be sanctioned by the creator who made us all...

... the problem is I know better but I had to learn that for myself. And so will everyone else too. Or not.

[Starman]

In this post you hit on the crux of the problem of appropriate behaviour for those who believe that the religious truths and insights that light their personal world and spiritual quest are the only religious truth that matters and that, as a consequence, they are commissioned to knock down all other faiths and beliefs under the guise of 'steering them right to save their souls... ]

People who encouraged this fellow toward toward Wiccan, believe that their
encouragement is correct--right? The privilege to feel that way should not be limited to non-Christians.


Anyway--

"to knock down" = Tell others what Jesus told us to tell them.

"Personal world" = The world as the Bible describes it.

"Spiritual quest" = TO desire the eternal life promised us and tell others about it.

To try to live as Jesus and the rest of the scriptures tells us to do.

"Commissioned" = Told us to do.

"Guise" This word assumes maliciousness and requires omniscience.

"Insights" = Concepts-such as the resurrection of the dead, belief in the promise of God's kingdom on earth, realization that sin leads to death, appreciation of sacrifice for our sins,
acceptance of Christian duty to spread the gospel.

... Jesus saved his opposition for those of his own faith whose behaviour laid heavy and unjustified burdens on the heads of ordinary men and women who sought to follow the commandments of God.

Jesus' message by its very messianic sacrificial salvational nature set it in opposition to all other religions on earth. So those worshippers of others gods and adherents of other religions who are told about it will automatically perceive it as an opposition, just as you are seemingly doing, if they are not inclined to accept the gospel. That is a given and one which every Christian who preaches encounters sooner or later in the ministry. That it is a focus of controversy at this late stage of the game seems quaint.

We look in vain for Jesus advising his disciples to 'go after' those who did not strictly understanding or follow his teachings. Jesus knew that well a person follows his teachings is an individual matter and that those who strayed unwittingly answer to God.

Looking in vain and perhaps never will find because the sought is a figment of the imagination. Certain rhetoric here reminds me of the way people use language in devious ways in order to push their own propaganda in the hopes of fooling the simple-minded.

"friendly fire" "anti personnel mission" "police action" "demilitarized zone"


"Go after?"

There are so many other ways that this could be said:

"seek" "approach" "search for" But naturally, those won't do. So "Go after" with all its negative connotations is chosen. Very transparent.

It is sad state when someone assumes the role of Judge in these matters, as if they were arbiters of orthodoxy, or commissioned by God to fell strays.

Jesus told his disciples to leave the Pharisees alone, and not bother them. He did not tell them that they should appoint themselves ministers to them, even though they might stand in need of ministry.

The religious leaders were to be left alone because Jesus had read their hearts and knew they were beyond hope. The common people were to be spoken to and kindly informed.

As for the felling strays indirect, that's an accusation requiring the delusion of omniscience. Believe me, if there is one person who gives the impression on this forum of feeling a judge of orthodoxy you don't have far to look to find him.

Bigots, when challenged over bitterness and polemic, claim to be following Jesus cleansing the temple, or rebuking the Pharisees...

Bitter, polemical bigot, dunderhead, and feller of strays?

My response to this poster was neither bitter nor intended to be polemical.
It was mnerely a simple short response to his request for an opinion.
Polemical and bitter is just the way you chose to perceive.

The Christian attitude toward strays, by the way, is is to help them spiritually so thery can return to the fold--not to topple them into perdition:

It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found. (Luke 15:32, KJV)


BTW
Name-calling does very little to support arguments. All it does is indicate anger and a desire to offend-both which are unchristian conduct and which weakens any claim of favoring a non-belligerent approach to discussion.


Anyway -- The Christian commission to teach all nations about his message is clear and the only dunderheads are those who know about this commission and deny it based on some ulterior motive. Calling Christians who heed Jesus' command to preach the gospel bigots will only convince those who are ignorant of the Christian's duty. Those familiar with their Christian duty will immediately recognize the charade.

If I ask you whether you would like a piece of cake, and you say you do, I can either smear it all over your face or else present it nicely on a bone china plate. Either way you get the cake, but the methods of presentation are different, and it is obvious that the method of presentation, whether of cake of faith, DOES matter.

The personality uniformity you prefer is humanly impossible. Each Christian is different as every other human being is different. Because of this you will have variety of approaches to telling other about the glorious good news of God's kingdom.

Some will be a bit more forceful than others. Peter, for example, was different from Paul and Paul from John. So your requirement that everyone preach in accordance with YOUR particular preference is a bit unrealistic, and might verge on the dictatorial.

The ultimate destination of bigotry is a narrow fundamentalism that brooks no rivals and must destroy all opposing or non-consonantal views without hesitation or thought...

Now I am a non-thinking destroyer of all opposition! LOL

Anyway, a non sequiter and your slippery fallacy has reared its head here.
Just because a person is a bigot it doesn't mean that he will wind up being a fundamentalist.

Bigotry leads to fundamentalism
He is a bigot
He will wind up being a fundamentalist..

Valid conclusion but false.


There are millions of bigots who have been atheists, orthodox Christians, agnostics, deists, prior to being bigots. So it should be more than obvious that bigotry need not always precede and lead to fundamentalism. Perhaps what you meant was bigots are far more likely to become fundamentalists. But in order to extricate that from the area of mere opinion you need to provide acceptable non-biased, statistical data-- which you did not.


Anyway -- Fundamentalism today has many adherents with many different concepts and not all the concepts are in agreement. I for example do not believe in the young earth idea, the speaking in unintelligible tongues, the hellfire and brimstone fundamentalist ideas while other fundamentalists might. So viewing all fundamentalists as carbon copies of one another isn't really being fair, as a matter of fact, it borders oon the deceitful since I am sure that you are more aware of the differences within this category than anyone else on this forum.

It is utterly conceited for one person to believe that he knows what another person believes... Therefore, because a person says they are Wiccan, it does not necessarily follow that denied participation in what has been claimed,.

Strange, you claim to know what I really feel and believe despite my explanations
and proceed on that assumption. Is that conceit as well? If a person claims to be Wiccan on a posting board he will be assumed to be Wiccan. Not taking him at his word is disrespectful until you have proven otherwise.

As I previously have said, I never accused this fellow of following anything. I only said I agreed with the article he found to be wrong in its conclusions. Obviously that has almost caused you a cerebral hemorrhage for which I am truly sorry. But that is my opinion and I still stand by it regardless of your obvious distress Sorry!

BTW
It isn't "controvert" its "convert."

I read in a book written by former Jehovah's Witness, and now conducting a persecuting ministry against them she makes the statement of appropriate to the intelligence of the mental midget she is.

What does this have to do with this subject?

discussions should not be harsh, but enlightened, having regard for the feelings and sensitivities of others... All should be done with kindness, sensitivity,

Exactly the qualities that are missing in your name-calling, table palm-slamming, fist-pounding post.

If any do not come willingly to the fold of the Good Shepherd, they are not to be driven there with sticks, firebrands, thumbscrews, iron maidens, pillories, or stakes, nor with verbal equivalents of such cruel ungodly instruments.

Self-appointed judge, stick goader, cruel and ungodly dunderhead, conceited torturer, feller of strays, bitter, polemical bigoted, mindless destroyer of all opposiition. That's me? Shields up! Incoming! Yikes! Lol

To tell others about Jesus is not to "drive" that's just the way some people who are averse to the gospel perceive it. Neither can a Christian's telling a person he disagrees with worshipping many gods and the practice of magic after the person requests an opinion be compared to all the cruel savagery that you compared it with. Hyperbole
I suppose?