Anti-Christian website

[Postmaster]

I wasn't implying that formed religions can leave a mark on genes by the way, I ment phychological mark.

Although what you say is true indeed why don't you flip the coin. How else would the great truths in the bible have spread, so far and so fast without political intervention or without the buzz you get from evangelising? I wonder if history unfolded the way you perceive it should have, how things would turn out today. One could turn round and say they disagree with pregnancy because its painful.

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

I wasn't implying that formed religions can leave a mark on genes by the way, I ment phychological mark.

Although what you say is true indeed why don't you flip the coin. How else would the great truths in the bible have spread, so far and so fast without political intervention or without the buzz you get from evangelising? I wonder if history unfolded the way you perceive it should have, how things would turn out today. One could turn round and say they disagree with pregnancy because its painful.

I believe personal spirituality to be so powerful and universal as to contend that that in itself is indeed a genetic commonality among all peoples. Faith and belief of one kind or another are present in us all and most people find, or are given some way to express it. I would argue that children should be free to find it for themselves. Very few reject it altogether.
Politics,or more accurately Political Elites have always tried to use this universal need to their advantage, taking control of peoples 'souls' to form their armies and their tax payers. These elites are invariably minorities and are self serving to the detriment of the wider community. You may take a 'no pain - no gain' philosophy to this but in doing so you relinquish the singular message of Jesus himself, that one should do unto others as they would have done unto themselves. Well the Elites do not, it's 1 law for them and another for the rest of us. I am a bit of an idealist I admit, but so was Jesus. Seems to me like so many Christians forget what the Christ story is really about, loving ALL mankind.
Basicly what you will find consistant in all my arguments is the idea that religion should have no politics in it. You may well cite a number of examples now on moral issues where the overlap into politics seems unavoidable. Well I will disagree with every one of them. And I will base this on one fact: Nobody knows the will of God. The issues you might raise should be argued for politicaly or moraly without recourse to unconfirmable higher authority. Faith is emotive not rational. Politics should be rational not emotive. If all mankind could keep to this separation the world would be a much nicer place to live.

TE

[Postmaster]

Interesting.. It seems to me that humanity has 2 separate courses running one political and the other religious, which somehow always tend to intertwine each other. If you look at Islam politics is an integral part of the faith. Maybe religion is made to compliment politics. Jesus himself said he was king of the Jews, maybe politics and religion are one and the same just depends which end you pick. Seems you pick the ultra spiritual or passivist which we can't live on alone. Governing a mass amount of people will never be easy, especially when they can turn on you at any time and it has to be done.

Christianity was heavily rejected by the Romans at first, read some accounts that sword blades would go blunt from killing Christians.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Edit: And I add, I see evangelising as a political strategy. If people have faith they will seek out those to share it with. They do not need it shoved down their throats.

And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. MATTHEW 24;14 the goodnews about Gods established heavenly kingdom goverment, is the means to bring peace to the earth Daniel 2;44 and it is for a witness or to put people on notice , so it serves Gods purpose . the end means the end of manmade goverments not the end of the planet .
(Mark 13:10) Also, in all the nations the good news has to be preached first. ..................and yes ,there is great opposition to this purpose of God. but at the end of the day when the great day of Jehovah arrives, people can never say that they did not have the witness given to them. but as Jesus said , His sheep listen to his voice. so the witness is to be heralded to all the nations , and to all different religions . and then these ones who decide to go along with Gods purpose become a great crowd from all nations revelation 7;9-10

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by mee

And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. MATTHEW 24;14 the goodnews about Gods established heavenly kingdom goverment, is the means to bring peace to the earth Daniel 2;44 and it is for a witness or to put people on notice , so it serves Gods purpose . the end means the end of manmade goverments not the end of the planet .
(Mark 13:10) Also, in all the nations the good news has to be preached first. ..................and yes ,there is great opposition to this purpose of God. but at the end of the day when the great day of Jehovah arrives, people can never say that they did not have the witness given to them. but as Jesus said , His sheep listen to his voice. so the witness is to be heralded to all the nations , and to all different religions . and then these ones who decide to go along with Gods purpose become a great crowd from all nations revelation 7;9-10

I was under the impression that it was most impolite here to repeatedly use only cut and paste quotes? Quite frankly Mee, unless you can use your own voice to communicate you are wasting you time with me. As soon as I see the quote I switch off.

regards

TE

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Interesting.. It seems to me that humanity has 2 separate courses running one political and the other religious, which somehow always tend to intertwine each other. If you look at Islam politics is an integral part of the faith. Maybe religion is made to compliment politics. Jesus himself said he was king of the Jews, maybe politics and religion are one and the same just depends which end you pick. Seems you pick the ultra spiritual or passivist which we can't live on alone. Governing a mass amount of people will never be easy, especially when they can turn on you at any time and it has to be done.

Christianity was heavily rejected by the Romans at first, read some accounts that sword blades would go blunt from killing Christians.

On this highlight: This is where religion, as in religious movements, part from the spiritual. As long as they try to do 2 things they will do neither well.
On this highlight: This is why I see Islam as a threat to global stability. That and its inherrant intollerance of all outside of the Abrahamic faiths.

I dont pick a pacifist ideaology at all. I just think that understanding spirituality is ethereal and politics are practical. Trying to combine the two just leads to confusion, false claims of higher authority and gross abuses of power.

Regards

TE

[ardenz]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

Maybe religion is made to compliment politics. Jesus himself said he was king of the Jews, maybe politics and religion are one and the same just depends which end you pick. Seems you pick the ultra spiritual or passivist which we can't live on alone. Governing a mass amount of people will never be easy, especially when they can turn on you at any time and it has to be done.

Excuse me for joining in .

What does this mean? That religion is just for social control?

I am of the similar view as Equus and I find this attitude shocking. What was Jesus' life for? what our lives for?
If this is religion you can all have it.

[Postmaster]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

I dont pick a pacifist ideaology at all. I just think that understanding spirituality is ethereal and politics are practical. Trying to combine the two just leads to confusion, false claims of higher authority and gross abuses of power

I can understand your point of view. But what I really want to say is, I don't think (especially in past human history) there was any other way. The course had to be taken as so.

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

I can understand your point of view. But what I really want to say is, I don't think (especially in past human history) there was any other way. The course had to be taken as so.

And if we dont learn from our mistakes then we are condemned to repeat them. Humanity, especialy with the advent of the internet, now has the power of vast informational resources. Lets all hope we use it on a progressive journey of enlightenment that divorces the power hungry from power. I dont see any sign of it....but I hope.

[Postmaster]

You know what I find... that the imperfections of the ancients are being compared to today. It's almost like an adult giving a child tough because he can't pick up the same weights. I think we should respect the bible for its theological essence and seen as a lesson so that its negative aspects are not repeated, as Tao Equus points out.

[mee]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

I was under the impression that it was most impolite here to repeatedly use only cut and paste quotes? Quite frankly Mee, unless you can use your own voice to communicate you are wasting you time with me. As soon as I see the quote I switch off.

regards

TE

do you not like the bible then?

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by mee

do you not like the bible then?

Bits of it are full of wisdom. Bits of it are entirely nonsense. Bits of it are socio/political tools for our collective good. Bits of it are socio/political tools for the powers to keep power. The Bible cannot be defined as good or bad. It is a collection of historical essays, sayings, musings and laws. I do not believe it to be the word of God. It was badly translated by the greeks from ancient Amaraic and Hebrew, which was then translated to latin and then eventualy to english. Each translator had his particular perseuasion, or angle. Some books are clearly re-hashing of others. Some ancient books are entirely missing. In the NT none of it was written by anybody that new Jesus except maybe Matthew and that is in doubt. No absolutely authenticated text appears untill 130 years after the death of Jesus. So the bible is a bit complicated. Am I happy that it has brought great comfort to people in distress? Of course I am. Am I happy that it has been used as justification for war and murder? Of course I am not. Would I choose it as the guiding principles of my own life.... well I think I am more Christian than many christians.... but I would not use the bible as a life guide. And based on the Jesus story I dont think Jesus would either.

So....hope that answers your question.

[mee]

[quote=Tao_Equus;107664] Each translator had his particular perseuasion, or angle. quote]
very true indeed, but no worries in the last days true knowledge has become abundant Daniel 12;4 some translators are only after the pure word of God with no traditions of man to cloud the thought of the bible, and believe it or not, Jehovah has blessed these ones that are only after truth and purity matthew 24;45-47 and the blessing is this New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures
The Bible enables us to get to know and love God.