|
Post by Miles Lewis on Apr 11, 2006 0:34:34 GMT -5
I am a former feminist, adulteress, fornicator, blasphemer, murderer (had an abortion in 1992), thief, liar, drunkard, covetous woman who worshiped at the altar of higher education (shortly before I left teaching, I had accumulated more than 170 credit hours, and was 4 classes short of my master's.). I say this not to boast, but to point out that I was chief amongst sinners. I had a 'conversion' experience at 16 (which was false - proof being a continuance of living in sin for the next 24 yrs), and dabbled in satanism, the occult, and eventually New Age. I WANTED to believe in reincarnation, crystals, astral projection, etc. However, as I was studying all of this, one little thought kept popping up. Where is the authority in all of this? It appeared that one could basically pull a philosophy out of one's hat, and poof! It was truth. However, when I began to employ logic, I realized that truth, by the very nature of its definition, is exclusive. Meaning that not everything can be true. I began to look at the claims of Christ when God brought a born-again believer to teach at my school. We began to pray together each morning (I believed in prayer, tho I considered my beliefs diametrically opposed to hers). It wasn't long before I realized that she KNEW God. I, on the other hand, was merely handing Him my laundry list of requests. Long story short? Two years later, I realized that I had broken every one of the Ten Commandments, and that I had sinned against the most Holy Being to exist. I cried out for mercy, and Jesus gave me a new heart, new desires, and washed me clean. It sounds crazy, but ask anyone who knew me B.C. I am not the woman I once was, praise God. I didn't come to Jesus for a 'better life'. I had attained many of my personal goals, was making more money than my husband, and life was good. I, however, realized that I was NOT. I came to Him because I came to understand that He deserves the reward of His suffering, that He truly is the way, the truth and the life, and I believed Him when He said, "No man comes unto the Father except by Me." Wow. I just gave my testimony. Now I am sure I have opened up myself to some mean-spirited comments. But you know what? I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thanks mom! See, I told you guys that my mom by her own admission was a femist. I say feminazi in the open air. Miles
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 11, 2006 5:17:10 GMT -5
I am a former feminist, adulteress, fornicator, blasphemer, murderer (had an abortion in 1992), thief, liar, drunkard, covetous woman who worshiped at the altar of higher education (shortly before I left teaching, I had accumulated more than 170 credit hours, and was 4 classes short of my master's.). I say this not to boast, but to point out that I was chief amongst sinners. I had a 'conversion' experience at 16 (which was false - proof being a continuance of living in sin for the next 24 yrs), and dabbled in satanism, the occult, and eventually New Age. I WANTED to believe in reincarnation, crystals, astral projection, etc. However, as I was studying all of this, one little thought kept popping up. Where is the authority in all of this? It appeared that one could basically pull a philosophy out of one's hat, and poof! It was truth. However, when I began to employ logic, I realized that truth, by the very nature of its definition, is exclusive. Meaning that not everything can be true. I began to look at the claims of Christ when God brought a born-again believer to teach at my school. We began to pray together each morning (I believed in prayer, tho I considered my beliefs diametrically opposed to hers). It wasn't long before I realized that she KNEW God. I, on the other hand, was merely handing Him my laundry list of requests. Long story short? Two years later, I realized that I had broken every one of the Ten Commandments, and that I had sinned against the most Holy Being to exist. I cried out for mercy, and Jesus gave me a new heart, new desires, and washed me clean. It sounds crazy, but ask anyone who knew me B.C. I am not the woman I once was, praise God. I didn't come to Jesus for a 'better life'. I had attained many of my personal goals, was making more money than my husband, and life was good. I, however, realized that I was NOT. I came to Him because I came to understand that He deserves the reward of His suffering, that He truly is the way, the truth and the life, and I believed Him when He said, "No man comes unto the Father except by Me." Wow. I just gave my testimony. Now I am sure I have opened up myself to some mean-spirited comments. But you know what? I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thanks mom! See, I told you guys that my mom by her own admission was a femist. I say feminazi in the open air. Miles Alright Miles... I said I was leaving, but I MUST say this. The definition of feminism, as according to dictionary.com: Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.Who in their right mind would disagree with that? Are women second-class citizens? Wait... you probably shouldn't answer that question, as I have a good idea I won't care for your answer.
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey Olver on Apr 11, 2006 8:58:44 GMT -5
Of course women are not second-class citizens. The Bible commands that husbands love their lives as Christ loved the church. Don't worry, we'll be coming out with the Lewis-Morrell Colleigiate Dictionary soon enough.
Don't be so legalistic.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 11, 2006 9:20:46 GMT -5
The Morrell-Lewis Collegiate Dictionary will have a different definition for "Femimist".
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Apr 11, 2006 9:39:02 GMT -5
I seen a girl waring a shirt today that promoted feminism. It said something to the effect, " Women can do anything a guy can do, but women do it better."
|
|
|
Post by victorialewis on Apr 11, 2006 11:16:08 GMT -5
It's funny, I almost typed in feminazi, cuz that's what I usually use to refer to my former self.
I personally know what feminism stands for (I was literally a card-carrying member of NOW). That was a 'cleaned up' definition, if I ever saw one. (equality, social, political, etc., etc.)
No longer do I have the desire to outdo my husband, or any man for that matter. It's such a radical viewpoint, this submission to authority, that I doubt our new friends will be able to understand it as God intended.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Apr 11, 2006 22:37:08 GMT -5
I seen a girl waring a shirt today that promoted feminism. It said something to the effect, " Women can do anything a guy can do, but women do it better." Uhgh.... that is just awful. Yeah, you might not like my answer. I don't think of you as a second class citizen. You are of great value and you are created in God's image with purpose and design. (see the "SINNING RULES" thread to see just what that purpose may be... Of course, it is all in good humor)
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 11, 2006 23:00:34 GMT -5
Of course women are not second-class citizens. The Bible commands that husbands love their lives as Christ loved the church. Don't worry, we'll be coming out with the Lewis-Morrell Colleigiate Dictionary soon enough. Don't be so legalistic. Oh yeah? Well it also forbids women to hold authority positions in the church, holds them to higher standards of sexual purity than men (man commits adultery he gets a slap on the wrist, woman commits adultery she gets stoned to death), oh and I almost forgot, BLAMES US FOR THE DOWNFALL OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE. Not only that, but women have practically NO voice in the Bible. The entire book is written by, narrated by, and viewed through the eyes of men. It is disputed among theological and historical circles as to what Mary Magdelene's true story was and many theorize she may have been a strong spiritual leader in the community... but the Bible portrays her as a prostitute and a w*hore. She probably knew Jesus as well or better than any of his disciples but did her version of the gospel make it into the New Testament? Of course not. Why? Because she had a vag instead of a peen. Yeah. I'm valuable for cleaning house and cooking meals... and I'm designed to mass produce babies for my husband. After all, wasn't it you who referred to us as "vessels" for your "passions" the other day? In that view, I'm basically a holding jar for semen. Oh yes... Those are some GREAT aspirations in life. I live only to please. Good grief, what is this... Leave it to Beaver? Oh and as to your snide little comment over at the "sinning rules" thread, you can f*ck yourself Miles. Oh and ABOUT that!!! WTF man?!!? You guys deleted my LEGITIMATE DISCUSSION about masturbation because it was "too graphic." (We were discussing healthy body functions, things everyone should know about their bodies and how they work... I COULD have posted a giant photo illustration of the clitoris... but I refrained... ) but you allow THAT worthless sh*t to stay up?! Seriously... WHAT THE HELL?! Oh PS: I agree about that girl's tshirt. That's unfair. The goal of REAL feminism is not to gain rights above and beyond men, but EQUAL to men. I don't think women are better than men... that's stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Apr 11, 2006 23:16:19 GMT -5
No, no... I don't believe I ever said anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by Juli on Apr 11, 2006 23:30:28 GMT -5
Yeah. I'm valuable for cleaning house and cooking meals... and I'm designed to mass produce babies for my husband. After all, wasn't it you who referred to us as "vessels" for your "passions" the other day? In that view, I'm basically a holding jar for semen. Oh yes... Those are some GREAT aspirations in life. I live only to please. Good grief, what is this... Leave it to Beaver? Oh and as to your snide little comment over at the "sinning rules" thread, you can f*ck yourself Miles. Oh and ABOUT that!!! WTF man?!!? You guys deleted my LEGITIMATE DISCUSSION about masturbation because it was "too graphic." (We were discussing healthy body functions, things everyone should know about their bodies and how they work... I COULD have posted a giant photo illustration of the clitoris... but I refrained... ) but you allow THAT worthless sh*t to stay up?! Seriously... WHAT THE HELL?! Oh PS: I agree about that girl's tshirt. That's unfair. The goal of REAL feminism is not to gain rights above and beyond men, but EQUAL to men. I don't think women are better than men... that's stupid. Morluna, if you won't show some respect for the men onthis board, then show some for the women on this board. I don't appreciate your foul language, even if you do use asterisks. Everyone on this board has been kind to you, respectful of your differing opinion, and has been willing to openly discuss things in love with you. While you don't have to agree with everything said here, as a woman myself, I must say I am ashamed that I used to believe just as you. If you consider yourself open minded, then LISTEN. Don't assume or presuppose - if you really want to learn once and for all why all the "Chrisitan men" beat their wives into submission of whatever screwed up view you may have been taught by the world, this board is the BEST PLACE to learn it! These men are godly, and love and honor women as God says to. Please, refrain from profanity and personal insults and LISTEN AND READ. You'll either walk away stronger in your own convicitons, or you'll walk away knowing which areas you have possibly been deceived in. I'm praying for you sister.
|
|
|
Post by victorialewis on Apr 12, 2006 9:35:56 GMT -5
Thank you, Juli. I second your sentiments. Morluna, were you raised in such a home that would allow you to degrade yourself with filthy language? Would you speak to your mom or dad, or brothers or sisters as you do to the people on this board.
I sense, amidst all of your posturing, that you are coming under conviction. Otherwise, you would simply become bored with us, and leave. Praise God, do you realize how many people have been praying for your TRUE conversion since you joined us? You are not bigger than God, my dear.
I once believed all the lies that you do about submission. That is, until I submitted myself to God and His design. Wow. I am no longer the angry (unless it falls under righteous anger - read about Jesus and cleansing the Temple), bitter, and stressed out to the max because I am finally in God's will for my life. What an awesome place to be.
BTW, one of my psych classes at a local university here in Syracuse made a claim that angry people demonstrate their anger by using curse words. Why are you so angry?
We do have a God-given love (agape) for you, Morluna, and I personally wish that I could show you that love.
|
|
Websters 1828 Dictionary
Guest
|
Post by Websters 1828 Dictionary on Apr 13, 2006 12:52:04 GMT -5
FE'MALE, n. [L. femella. See Feminine.] 1. Among animals, one of that sex which conceives and brings forth young. 2. Among plants, that which produces fruit; that which bears the pistil and receives the pollen of the male flowers. FE'MALE, a. 1. Noting the sex which produces young; not male; as a female bee. 2. Pertaining to females; as a female hand or heart; female tenderness. To the generous decision of a female mind, we owe the discovery of America. 3. Feminine; soft; delicate; weak. Female rhymes, double rhymes, so called from the French, in which language they end in e feminine. feminism could not be found in the dictionary.FEM'ININE, a. [L. femininus, from femina, woman. The first syllable may be and probably is from wemb or womb, by the use of f for w; the b not being radical. The last part of the word is probably from man, quasi, femman, womb-man.] 1. Pertaining to a woman, or to women, or to females; as the female sex. 2. soft; tender; delicate. Her heavenly form angelic, but more soft and feminine. 3. Effeminate; destitute of manly qualities. 4. In grammar, denoting the gender or words which signify females, or the terminations of such words. words are said to be of the feminine gender, when they denote females, or have the terminations proper to express females in any given language. Thus in L. dominus, a lord, is masculine; but domina, is mistress, a female. Milton uses feminine as a noun, for female. CORRUPTRESS, n. A female that corrupts others. FORN'ICATRESS, n. An unmarried female guilty of lewdness. GEN'TLEWOMAN, n. [gentle and woman.] A woman of good family or of good breeding; a woman above the vulgar. 1. A woman who waits about the person of one of high rank. 2. A term of civility to a female, sometimes ironical. HORE, n. A woman, married or single, who indulges unlawful sexual intercourse; also, a prostitute; a common woman; a harlot; a woman of ill fame. [This word comprehends adultress and fornicatrix, and all lewd women whether paid for prostitution or not.] HORE, v.i. To indulge unlawful sexual commerce, as a male or female; to be habitually lewd. WOMAN, n. plu. women.
1. The female of the human race, grown to adult years.
And the rib, which the Lord god had taken from the man, made he a woman. Genesis 2.
Women are soft, mild, pitiful, and flexible.
We see every day women perish with infamy, by having been too willing to set their beauty to show.
I have observed among all nations that the women ornament themselves more tan the men; that wherever found, they are the same kind, civil, obliging, humane, tender beings, inclined to be gay and cheerful, timorous and modest.
2. A female attendant or servant.
|
|
luvofchrist
Full Member
"Gibson" the wonder pup
Posts: 233
|
Post by luvofchrist on Apr 14, 2006 9:28:16 GMT -5
Dear Morluna Diredesmensongesilian, Valetine, Wanderingtrekker and any other heckler who stumbles in,
A. Morluna, sorry to burst your bubble but you are not an orator of the truth. (For the rest of you, that is what she claims to be in French under the John Lennon picture). Rather you speak the language of your father. Therefore your name has been changed to reflect your heritage.
B. If all your questions were answered to your intellectual satisfaction would you then consider surrendering your life to Christ?
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 14, 2006 11:33:33 GMT -5
Dear Morluna Diredesmensongesilian, Valetine, Wanderingtrekker and any other heckler who stumbles in, A. Morluna, sorry to burst your bubble but you are not an orator of the truth. (For the rest of you, that is what she claims to be in French under the John Lennon picture). Rather you speak the language of your father. Therefore your name has been changed to reflect your heritage. B. If all your questions were answered to your intellectual satisfaction would you then consider surrendering your life to Christ? Who is this father of Morluna's of whom you speak? And yes, if my questions were answered to my intellectual satisfaction, I would consider surrendering my life to Christ. As it were, my questions are almost always answered with something to the effect of "the Bible says so, I know because God said it in the Bible, I know that God said it because the Bible said that God said it, so turn to Christ and repent becuase the Bible says that it is true when it says that God says that it is true in saying that you should repent." It does not help if you leave the caps lock on. I once read in Readers Digest that when you encounter someone who does not speak english, shouting it will not make it any easier to understand. The same could be said about the terrible logical (or lackthereof) and grammatical arguments. Shouting your gibberish manaically does not make it any more likely to convince me. Thank you for your concern. If you are offering to use logic to convince me, bring it on! I welcome a fair debate.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 14, 2006 11:36:56 GMT -5
Luvofchrist, I was not referring to you specifically with the gibberish comment. You seem fairly well versed in English.
|
|
luvofchrist
Full Member
"Gibson" the wonder pup
Posts: 233
|
Post by luvofchrist on Apr 16, 2006 10:41:33 GMT -5
Who is this father of Morluna's of whom you speak? And yes, if my questions were answered to my intellectual satisfaction, I would consider surrendering my life to Christ. Thank you for your concern. If you are offering to use logic to convince me, bring it on! I welcome a fair debate. Answer to the first question: Who is Morluna's father? John 8:42-45 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies . 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! NIV On the second part, thank you for being honest. So I can at least view your input here as sincere. Morluna has stated on another thread that no matter what she is shown she will not change her mind. Therefore I view her posts merely as antagonistic and insincere.
|
|
luvofchrist
Full Member
"Gibson" the wonder pup
Posts: 233
|
Post by luvofchrist on Apr 16, 2006 10:55:42 GMT -5
I have good news for you Trekker! There have been others who have had the same burning questions as you. Hardened skeptics that felt and thought the same way. They were also sincere seekers of the truth about this Jesus fellow, so they investigated the claims. Here are some great books written by these men.
"Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Vols. 1 and 2" by Josh McDowell
"The Case for Christ" and "The Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel.
FYI: Mr. Lee Strobel has a Masters of Studies in Law degree from Yale University, an investigative reporter and award-winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune. The questions he asks in these books are hard-hitting, no holds barred, in-your-face questions.
His books are where I recommend you start. They are less cumbersome than the "encyclopedic proportions" of the "Evidence" books all the while not skimping on the essentials.
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 16, 2006 13:49:10 GMT -5
Who is this father of Morluna's of whom you speak? And yes, if my questions were answered to my intellectual satisfaction, I would consider surrendering my life to Christ. Thank you for your concern. If you are offering to use logic to convince me, bring it on! I welcome a fair debate. Answer to the first question: Who is Morluna's father? John 8:42-45 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies . 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! NIV On the second part, thank you for being honest. So I can at least view your input here as sincere. Morluna has stated on another thread that no matter what she is shown she will not change her mind. Therefore I view her posts merely as antagonistic and insincere. Wait. When did I supposedly say that? As to my new name... that's rather impossible to pronounce... but thanks?
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 17, 2006 23:57:51 GMT -5
Ok, I still have questions regarding this thread that I don't feel were addressed. I have reposted one of my earlier posts. If anyone would like to address this, please feel free to do so. Thanks! When a person realizes by the grace of God that they are a wretch and that there is nothing good in them, and that they deserve to go to hell, only then will God's mercy and grace through the Cross become amazing. Wretch, n. 1) a miserable, unfortunate, or unhappy person. 2) a person regarded as base, mean or dispicable. You seem to regard humanity as worthless. You regard yourself as also worthless, if I understand you correctly. The only reason that you even consider yourself redeemable is because an act of compassion was performed on your behalf by Jesus of Nazareth. That is not healthy. If you truly believe that your own being is so dispicable, that the only way you can possibly live is because someone died for you, that you have no fundamental self-worth as an individual, your sense of being, of self will never be fully and healthily developed. If humans are indeed only worth something when they believe in the remission of sins through the blood of Jesus of Nazareth, that means that those who lived before him and those that live now are all worthless. WORTHLESS. NOT WORTH ANYTHING. When they die, there is no reason to pity them, becuase there was nothing that they could do to contribute to the world positively (other than by increasing your numbers, which they didn't do, so it's immaterial). If these are your beliefs, I can understand why wretch is an applicable definition. If you believe that you have no self-worth, I can understand why you'd be a miserable, unfortunate, or unhappy person. And if you believe that no one else has worth, I can see why they might understand you to be a person regarded as base, mean or dispicable. I take a different stance. I believe that all humans have fundamental worth. I wish I could feel compassion for each and every one of them without any effort, but compassion is perhaps the hardest thing to give. Everyone on this planet is capable of improving the quality of life of both they and others. We can truly help out our neighbors. Every time you love someone, you are displaying both your and their fundamental worth. You don't have to believe that Jesus was the messiah in order to gain worth, because you already have it. If you believe that humans have no fundamental worth then there was no reason for Jesus to die anyway. Perhaps you will say that Jesus died for us anyway because "God so loved the world," but God wouldn't have loved the world if humans didn't have some worth to him, and even that is some kind of worth. If you raise a child to believe that they are worthless, you can have your children removed for their protection. If you always tell your child that they can't do anything right, that they will never live up to your image, that even when they try, they fail, your child will grow up with serious emotional issues. That is because humans need to feel as if they are worth something--it's called self-esteem and it is the quest of every middle and high school student in the United States (and everybody else, too). Coming to terms with your self-worth is integral to becoming completely human. It is also important in the way in which you relate to those around you--you can't love others if you don't love yourself. Tony, I don't care if you hate yourself and think yourself worthless--although I reccomend against it for your health, but you cannot claim that others have no self-worth. I refuse to embrace the theology that says that the only reason for Jesus of Nazareth's life was for it to end. No, the compassion of Jesus of Nazareth was the capstone of his teaching, his doctoral thesis if you will; the time in his life when he had to walk the walk, but you don't complete your doctorate merely by completing a thesis; no, there is much more involved, like all of the course work beforehand, but more importantly, the changes that occur to oneself during the process. I like Barbara Ehrenreich's example, myself: "The preaching goes on, interrupted by dutiful 'amens.' It would be nice if someone would read this sad-eyed crowd the Sermon on the Mount, accompanied by a rousing commentary on income inequality and the need for a hike in the minimum wage. But Jesus makes his appearance here only as a corpse; the living man, the wine-guzzling vagrant and precocious socialist, is never once mentioned, nor anything he ever had to say. Christ crucified rules, and it may be that the true business of modern Christianity is to crucify him again and again so that he can never get a word out of his mouth." Indeed, Jesus never said that humans were worthless without him. That would be totally out of character for this Jesus of Nazareth fellow. He was very humble. For him, salvation lay not in awaitng God's final act of genocide, but rather in loving our neighbors as ourselves. He did things with those who were outcasts, those to whom society gave no value. He tells them that they are not valueless, that they are the ones who will inherit the kingdom of God. As Kierkegaard said, "truth always rests with the minority, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion." Your theology also devalues Jesus of Nazareth. Had Jesus not been crucified, if he had lived as he did, preaching the gospel of compassion, but then died of old age, we would all be worthless still, and I doubt you'd pay any attention to his teachings then either. If all that was important was the death of Jesus, God could have let Herod murder him along with the other male babies of Bethlehem. After all, wasn't he the perfect sacrafice (without sin) whether he was an infant or an adult? No, it was important for Jesus to live into adulthood, primarily becuase he was the first person to be fully human. He had the courage to be himself and nothing--neither great adoration nor absolute betrayal--would sway him from his mission. It is the message of Jesus that we all have fundamental worth, and that our world and our individual lives will be better off if we seek to always understand the fundamental worth of our neighbors--and especially our enemies.
|
|
|
Post by wanderingtrekker on Apr 18, 2006 0:00:58 GMT -5
Jesse, you replied to this post with a link. I appreciate that, but this post was specifically aimed at a previous post of yours. I would appreciate an answer in your own words. Thanks! God will judge all men according to the knowledge that they had. All men, whether African, Chinese, American, Canadian, Australian, etc etc all have a conscience. If a man has ever stolen, committed adultery, murdered, lied, etc then he will be punished for his sins. The basis for condemnation is SIN. But the basis for salvation is JESUS CHRIST. Christ alone died for the sins of the world and so grace and mercy come through Christ alone. If ignorance were a free-ticket to heaven, if people go to Heaven because they have never heard about Jesus Christ, then we need to stop sending missionaries to foriegn countries and also burn all the bibles and Church that are in our own so that the upcoming generation never hears about Jesus Christ. Ok, so let me see if I understand you correctly. And do correct me if I am wrong. So we have consciences which tell us what is right and wrong. These consciences are programmed by God's moral code, so even if we have never heard of God, we still know what is right and wrong. If, at any point, we sin (that is, I am assuming, violate what our conscience says), we will be forced to suffer the consequences. So the consequences of sinning mentioned above are condemnation by God. So then, through Christ, one is forgiven for their iniquities. So, one can only be forgiven of their sins through the grace and mercy of Christ. I understand this statement to mean that if people who are ignorant of Christ can get into heaven, we should not spread the message of Christ because by spreading it we change the dynamics of the situation. Once they have been told of Christ, then they have to uphold a righteous life in order to get into heaven, which is a task at which they can fail. Therefore, I believe you to mean that the sole purpose of Jesus of Nazareth is to get people into heaven. His intent was not to improve the life of anyone, only the death. Ok, if I understood you correctly, I disagree. If God's law is really written on our hearts, then we can be good people without ever hearing the name of God, or knowing of God's existence. Therefore because (would this be the holy spirit?) God is within us, we have the capability of living good lives. Of course some people do have their iniquities. They therefore sin, which is the basis for condemnation, but Christ is the basis of salvation. Could the spirit of Christ not be in everyone regardless of whether they have heard the name? Did Christ not die for all of us? I belive that John's Gospel says that "God so loved the world." Perhaps then, Christ's "salvation" is poured out on everyone. (Not saying Christ is not the only way, just saying that you can follow that way without knowing that you are doing so.) Regardless of the above, however, I take issue with your use of missionaries. The sole purpose of missionaries, it seems, is to get people into heaven. The real job of missionaries should be to spread the good news of Jesus of Nazareth so that people's lives can be improved now, not after they are dead. Jesus of Nazareth himself did not avoid this task, even he worked for social justice in the world when he lived in it. If his sole purpose was to die for the absolution of sins, why did he think it important that compassion be propogated? If that was such an important part of his mission, why is it not an important part of ours? As Hopefulheart has said in other threads, the reasons that we should follow the life of Jesus of Nazareth is not because we want to get into heaven, but rather because we are interested in being compassionate beings not only for our own benfit, but primarily for the benefit of our neighbors. We should not, therefore, prosteletyze so as to improve the after-life of others, but rather to improve their actual lives, yes?
|
|
|
Post by dmclayton on Apr 18, 2006 14:17:37 GMT -5
morluna, christian extremists like jesse cannot comprehend the nature of anthropology (the ojective study of peoples and cultures), and so they make irrational judgments about people in foreign countries. this is why you see christians hating muslims, muslims hating jews and etcetera. what i am trying to say is that jesse has grounded himself in a belief that he sees to be universal. he is no better than a muslim terrorist. so, not only would he press his religion on people of other cultures, but his culture as well.
everyone should be like him. everyone should speak his language, and everyone should beieve in his god. or else.
it is this intolerant attitude that causes such grotesque death and dismemberment. look at the old testament. god even commits abortion by commanding his followers to rip open the bellies of pregnant women and not let one unbeliever live. if you would like to discuss the bible with me feel free to contact me via email: dmclayton@bama.ua.edu or through AIM at HSTN2983. i am a student of religion at the university of alabama. i am agnostic, and have studied christianity for approximately ten years.
|
|
|
Post by Morluna on Apr 18, 2006 15:04:51 GMT -5
Wow! It's great to meet you Clayton, and welcome to the boards. ^_^
I agree concerning the cultural implications of religion... it is unfortunate that so many become so invested in their own culture and way of seeing the world that they cannot conceive of the importance of any other world view.
I'll definitely be contacting you on AIM. ^_^
|
|
|
Post by dmclayton on Apr 19, 2006 8:21:19 GMT -5
thank you for the kind welcome. jesse and i met a few years ago at a starbucks in tyler, tx. he was with a group of teenmania kids, standing outside a car, holding up signs that read something to the extent of, "you are all going to hell." this alone led me to confront him. he is not a big fan of my criticism of him because he knows it is is all true, so if i am removed from this board know that he did so because he doesn't want his intentions revealed. see my new thread on circular argumentation and hypocrisy to get a feel for jesse's character.
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 23, 2006 21:28:33 GMT -5
Wow. That really wasn't the response I was expecting to be honest. I have heard many many Christians say that the people who are never exposed to the Gospel and therefore have no opportunity to make that choice, are exempt from the wrath of God and go to Heaven. You guys are even more radical than I thought. ;) Thank you for your response. So correct me if I'm wrong: Your god is going to torture, for eternity, people who have never heard of him for breaking a set of rules that no adult human has ever been able to keep, that they've never even heard of... Hitler wasn't that bad. How can you call such a god good, and worship him? Do you do so out of fear of torture?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 21:32:17 GMT -5
God will punish all those who have willingly sinned against Him. All men, regardless of their country or race, have the testimony of nature and the truth of conscience. God will hold all men accountable to the knowledge that they had.
How much of a worse punishment do you suppose you will recieve who have heard the name of Christ and have heard of his wonderful salvation through the cross and yet continue in sin and unbelief?
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 23, 2006 21:40:22 GMT -5
thank you for the kind welcome. jesse and i met a few years ago at a starbucks in tyler, tx. he was with a group of teenmania kids, standing outside a car, holding up signs that read something to the extent of, "you are all going to hell." this alone led me to confront him. he is not a big fan of my criticism of him because he knows it is is all true, so if i am removed from this board know that he did so because he doesn't want his intentions revealed. see my new thread on circular argumentation and hypocrisy to get a feel for jesse's character. Ok lets validate this claim. JESSE, JESEEE! If god came down and made himself apparent to you, and then told you to kill some people, would you do it. If he comanded you to strap on a bomb and blow yourself up in the middle of some school full of kids/young infidels...would you do this? This visit from god includes all the special effects you would need to confirm it's validity, including a special tingleing feeling. Now remember that commandment about bearing false witness when you answer.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 21:48:12 GMT -5
jobafunky,
Morality is based on the never changing character of God. The ancient question, is it wrong because God says it or does God say it because it's wrong? If you say something is wrong because God says it's wrong then that is being arbitrary. If God later changed his mind and said "thou shall murder" then that becomes morality. If you say God says it is wrong because it is wrong then morality exists outside of God.
However, morality is based on the never changing character of God. God would never change his mind regarding morality because God is the same yesturday, today, and forever.
So the answer is that God would never command someone to do that. Those who believe God has told them to do such things are decieved by the devil.
But again, you are taking something for granted here. You are automaticly assuming that blowing up innocent children is wrong. And indeed it is wrong. However the believer has reason to believe it's wrong - The Bible declares it. And also the believer has a reason to acknowledge that he inherently knows these things are wrong - he was created in God's image and was given a conscience.
However an unbeliever has no logical reason to say blowing up anybody, whether child or not, is wrong. You are showing that you were created in God's image and also that God has given you an internal conscience by your post while you deny this foundation which your arguement even comes from. How can you account for this internal knowledge that murdering innocent children is wrong?
On what grounds do you say this is wrong? What outside ethical system are you trying to use against the bible?
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 23, 2006 22:32:00 GMT -5
God will punish all those who have willingly sinned against Him. All men, regardless of their country or race, have the testimony of nature and the truth of conscience. God will hold all men accountable to the knowledge that they had. How much of a worse punishment do you suppose you will recieve who have heard the name of Christ and have heard of his wonderful salvation through the cross and yet continue in sin and unbelief? You're avoiding the questions Jesse. Why do you worship a god that is worse than Hitler? Why do you call that which is evil good and then resort to threats of physical violence (or metaphysical violence if you want to be technical). There is nothing good about any of that. And I'm pretty sure the comandment to hold the sabbath sacred is not somehow geneticaly inscribed on our DNA, at least I'v not felt any more inclined to dodge work on Saturdays than other days. So don't try to rationalise the nonsense by saying that we all have some kind of ingrained knowledge of right and wrong. We don't! If we did then parent's wouldn't have to spend so much time teaching it and children that weren't raised by people would have better morals than animals.
|
|
|
Post by jobafunky on Apr 23, 2006 22:45:02 GMT -5
jobafunky, Morality is based on the never changing character of God. The ancient question, is it wrong because God says it or does God say it because it's wrong? If you say something is wrong because God says it's wrong then that is being arbitrary. If God later changed his mind and said "thou shall murder" then that becomes morality. If you say God says it is wrong because it is wrong then morality exists outside of God. However, morality is based on the never changing character of God. God would never change his mind regarding morality because God is the same yesturday, today, and forever. So the answer is that God would never command someone to do that. Those who believe God has told them to do such things are decieved by the devil. I'm sorry I thought you had read the bible. Because there are many places where A. God murders and B. God has angels murder for him and C. God asks people to murder and they carry it out. If you need scripture quotes I can provide. So back to you dodgeing the question, would you follow god's command to kill a school full of children? A command that would not be strange for Yawhe to make? Before I address the rest I'll need an answer from you Jesse. I'm not going to allow you to weasel out or distract.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 23, 2006 23:22:44 GMT -5
The answer to your question, "if God said blow up innocent children would you do it" my answer is no. Because God wouldn't command that because morality is based on His never changing character. God already said, "thou shall not kill" and He does not contradict Himself. Only someone decieved by the devil would believe God told them to do such things.
But again, you are taking something for granted here. You are automaticly assuming that blowing up innocent children is wrong. And indeed it is wrong. However the believer has reason to believe it's wrong - The Bible declares it. And also the believer has a reason to acknowledge that he inherently knows these things are wrong - he was created in God's image and was given a conscience.
However an unbeliever has no logical reason to say blowing up anybody, whether child or not, is wrong. You are showing that you were created in God's image and also that God has given you an internal conscience by your post while you deny this foundation which your arguement even comes from. How can you account for this internal knowledge that murdering innocent children is wrong?
On what grounds do you say this is wrong? What outside ethical system are you trying to use against the bible. You said God is worse then Hitler. But by what moral principles do you even use to judge Hitler let alone God?
|
|