CE 7

[chrisfan]

NymphoFantasia said:

Chris wasn't that what I was doing when I refered to the thief on the cross? Is that not part of the Bible or am I just imagining things? Wasn't that a personal interaction between Jesus and the thief? Do you honestly think God has changed this rule now?

What is a shame is that you would disenfranchise the ones that cannot possibly join a church or gather with a friend or relative to study Christianity (can we say communism in it's worst form?) Or those that on their death bed convert.

I don't need Rick Warren to tell me that the reason people don't go to church is because of the leaders. I can read that in the Bible as well. By telling a person they MUST attend church or they are not a Christian would surely turn many away from the concept.

NF, I am not disenfranchising people who cannot get to a church! And I"m not ignoring the story of the thief on the cross. The thief on the cross speaks to an entirely different concept. It teaches us that God NEVER gives up on a person. It teachesthat God will always leave open the opportunity to accept Christ and to BECOME A CHRISTIAN. That in no way speaks to people who ARE Christians. From Acts, through to Revelations, we are given the guidelines for forming the church, and living Christian lives. Once you have become a Christian, you are supposed to follow those guidelines. If I'm wrong, find me the scripture that says that Christianity is just a personal relationship between you and God, and no one else. And if that is the case, please help me to understand WHY Christ felt it necessary to have disciples. And help me to understand WHY Paul and others devoted their lives after Christ died to spreading the word, and helping in the formation of CHURCHES.

I will readily admit that i do not follow all that the bible tells me to do. I will readily admit that i fail to be a "by the book" Christian. But I am humble enough to admit that when I'm not doing what Christ taught me to do, that I am the one falling short. I don't try to pretend that the bible really isn't telling me that.

[chrisfan]

NymphoFantasia said:

Another large group of people that gets disinfranchised with the "you aren't a Christian if you don't go to church"is the many that have never laid eyes on a Bible or heard of Jesus Christ. Or those that were raised in another religion from the time they were young children. Are all of these people going to fry like a piece of bacon in hell?

Those that practice what is natural and within the law but have never heard of the law, are a law unto themselves. And God is fair to them. This IS a Biblical concept as well, it can be found in the book of Romans.

Kiddo, you're arguing things here that i"ve never said. But I will confirm one thing you've said -- if a person does not accept Christ as his savior, then you're right, he's not a Christian.

[chrisfan]

Pissin2 said:

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Law and how to follow them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not to Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that, even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there "degrees" of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Two answers for you. One, MORT KONDRACKE. Second, I apologize for not being able to cite the exact passage for you here, but I don't carry my concordance with me to work -- All of the rules and laws that you cite here are taken from the Old Testament, and early in the Old Testament. In the gospels, Christ does tell his people to drop the old laws, and listen to him. Please don't mis-interpret this to mean I'm saying Christ says "Throw out the Old Testament, it doesn't matter, I"m here now". What I AM saying is that he taught that many of the old ways of that were taught for worshiping God, sacrifices would be another example, did nothing to honor and glorify God, and that people should instead focus on worship. Just another fascinating fact -- there is not a single passage in all of the bible where Christ says ANYTHING about homosexuality.

[Thorngrub]

Chrisfan said:

I do not believe that it is twisting at all Thorn. I simply believe that you and I (and perhaps John Kerry) have very different interpretations of how faith is practiced. You appear to believe that it can be practiced internally, never "forcing" it on other people. I do not. BECAUSE I do not, I simply do not believe that it is possible to practice your faith all the time, and not force it on other people. And I tend to think that I"ve had enough to say on the whole forcing your beliefs on others topic, that I should not have to elaborate further.

DUH. and DUH and DUH and DUH etc etc et all yadda yadda yadda yadda until the cows come home.

HA! Once again, you didn't answer the question, nor acknowledge the distinction being made.

I take back that you are "brilliant" at avoiding questions posited at you. That's not exactly it.

What it is, is that it must be second nature to you. And not at merely avoiding questions. It appears to be second nature to you to avoid refutations of things you have stated. You don't seem to be capable of acknowledging your mistakes, when someone else points them out. You just deflect the issue and cite the same old stuff, about how we're "different", well tweedle dee dee and tweedle dee dum, as if we didn't already know that.

All I am trying to do with you Chrisfan is achieve some form of progress in our understandings of each other. And once again, it seems that this endeavor of mine is rooted in futility.

At least I tried.

[Thorngrub]

Pissin2 said:

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Law and how to follow them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not to Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that, even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there "degrees" of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Hey! I just posted that very thing over on JAC's Spirituality board. Is that where you got it, or is this some sort of parallelism . . .a sign . . .

[theladyofthelake]

As far as the going-to-church argument, the Bible does say for Christians not to forsake the assembling of themselves together, as is the manner of some (Hebrews 10:25).

It's one thing if you *can't* go to church, but don't purposely abandon the practice.

[chrisfan]

thoRny said:

DUH. and DUH and DUH and DUH etc etc et all yadda yadda yadda yadda until the cows come home.

HA! Once again, you didn't answer the question, nor acknowledge the distinction being made.

I take back that you are "brilliant" at avoiding questions posited at you. That's not exactly it.

What it is, is that it must be second nature to you. And not at merely avoiding questions. It appears to be second nature to you to avoid refutations of things you have stated. You don't seem to be capable of acknowledging your mistakes, when someone else points them out. You just deflect the issue and cite the same old stuff, about how we're "different", well tweedle dee dee and tweedle dee dum, as if we didn't already know that.

All I am trying to do with you Chrisfan is achieve some form of progress in our understandings of each other. And once again, it seems that this endeavor of mine is rooted in futility.

At least I tried.

I don't know how I can answer the question as you believe it must be answered. You and I do not agree on the premise of the question. Wihout that agreement, I cannot give you the answer you expect. I could lie to you and give you what you want, but that's not my style.

[chrisfan]

TheLadyOfTheLake said:

As far as the going-to-church argument, the Bible does say for Christians not to forsake the assembling of themselves together, as is the manner of some (Hebrews 10:25).

It's one thing if you *can't* go to church, but don't purposely abandon the practice.

Some times I wish these boards had the "yeah that" emoticon.

[Thorngrub]

Chrisfan said:

I don't know how I can answer the question as you believe it must be answered. You and I do not agree on the premise of the question. Wihout that agreement, I cannot give you the answer you expect. I could lie to you and give you what you want, but that's not my style.

You just don't get it. I want you to see for yourself how you misunderstood what John Kerry meant when he said he leaves his "faith" behind a closed door at church. You insinuated that he was guilty of some liberal twatmire of "having his cake and eating it too", and you are simply flat wrong, and you can't admit it, you won't admit it, and I'm beginning to feel sorry for trying to communicate with you. Go ahead and keep deflecting the issue, as far as I'm concerned everyone else here who can read English and tell their ass from their elbow got what they needed out of our encounter.


You see, my aim is to eliminate the yawning gulf, the divide so to speak, between Chrisfan and mine's understandings. That is because I am truly a Christian at heart, and only wish to eliminate the misunderstanding that causes one such as Chrisfan and myself to not see eye to eye.

I am openly willing to be shown how I have perceived something incorrectly, or otherwise been misguided. Yet Chrisfan does not seem to share this quality of reaching across the divide between us. Yet obviously she would want to make converts to her religion. Perhaps she sees that I am a Christian, and feels what is the point in preaching to the choir -? Ha! If only that were the case; obviously we'd get along much better than we do. So that has to be ruled out. No, I just feel that Chrisfan exemplifies the tenacious "hanging tight" to her understanding of what it means to be a Christian, and to hell with me or anyone else here for that matter who doesn't get where she's coming from.

Well I'll always be around wanting to be shown the error of my ways. Because why on earth would I want to cling to my ways if they ended up being wrong? Fuck that shit.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Melon:

I've completed "Book One" of Mere Christianity, and am eagerly devouring the second book. Man is this ever a treasure trove of clearly presented reasoning and insight into what it means to be a "mere" Christian. For that is precisely what I am: reading C.S. Lewis's transcripts here, I am constantly reminded how much we see eye to eye, how much I fervently believe in what he is writing. It is an absolutely essential book for every one in the least concerned with Christianity -- even its detractors -- to read carefully and absorb every word and its meaning. The value I place on what it clearly illustrates is measureless. I can easily see why you were so psyched about it! I'll have the whole thing finished by tonight, most likely (and at the very least, by this weekend). Once you start it, it's difficult to stop until you're all the way through to the end.

If you haven't read it Chrisfan -- I urge you to do so. You will find that you must be in agreement with most (if not all) of what C.S. Lewis is saying, I would think. Just as I am in agreement with most of it.

There's parts of it I want to highlight, but don't wish to mar your book, Melon, so I'm going to simply make notes on post-its or something and leave them for you to examine when you get it shipped back.

Once again, thanks very much for sending it to me.

[Thorngrub]

TheLadyOfTheLake said:

As far as the going-to-church argument, the Bible does say for Christians not to forsake the assembling of themselves together, as is the manner of some (Hebrews 10:25).

It's one thing if you *can't* go to church, but don't purposely abandon the practice.

You know Lady, the more I think about it, the more that passage makes sense when you consider the alternative: to NOT assemble together periodically as a group means to strengthen, or encourage, the scattering or alienation of individuals who might begin to think contrary to the tenets preached about in the Church. food for thought

[chrisfan]

thoRny said:

You just don't get it. I want you to see for yourself how you misunderstood what John Kerry meant when he said he leaves his "faith" behind a closed door at church. You insinuated that he was guilty of some liberal twatmire of "having his cake and eating it too", and you are simply flat wrong, and you can't admit it, you won't admit it, and I'm beginning to feel sorry for trying to communicate with you. Go ahead and keep deflecting the issue, as far as I'm concerned everyone else here who can read English and tell their ass from their elbow got what they needed out of our encounter.


You see, my aim is to eliminate the yawning gulf, the divide so to speak, between Chrisfan and mine's understandings. That is because I am truly a Christian at heart, and only wish to eliminate the misunderstanding that causes one such as Chrisfan and myself to not see eye to eye.

I am openly willing to be shown how I have perceived something incorrectly, or otherwise been misguided. Yet Chrisfan does not seem to share this quality of reaching across the divide between us. Yet obviously she would want to make converts to her religion. Perhaps she sees that I am a Christian, and feels what is the point in preaching to the choir -? Ha! If only that were the case; obviously we'd get along much better than we do. So that has to be ruled out. No, I just feel that Chrisfan exemplifies the tenacious "hanging tight" to her understanding of what it means to be a Christian, and to hell with me or anyone else here for that matter who doesn't get where she's coming from.

Well I'll always be around wanting to be shown the error of my ways. Because why on earth would I want to cling to my ways if they ended up being wrong? Fuck that shit.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Melon:

I've completed "Book One" of Mere Christianity, and am eagerly devouring the second book. Man is this ever a treasure trove of clearly presented reasoning and insight into what it means to be a "mere" Christian. For that is precisely what I am: reading C.S. Lewis's transcripts here, I am constantly reminded how much we see eye to eye, how much I fervently believe in what he is writing. It is an absolutely essential book for every one in the least concerned with Christianity -- even its detractors -- to read carefully and absorb every word and its meaning. The value I place on what it clearly illustrates is measureless. I can easily see why you were so psyched about it! I'll have the whole thing finished by tonight, most likely (and at the very least, by this weekend). Once you start it, it's difficult to stop until you're all the way through to the end.

If you haven't read it Chrisfan -- I urge you to do so. You will find that you must be in agreement with most (if not all) of what C.S. Lewis is saying, I would think. Just as I am in agreement with most of it.

There's parts of it I want to highlight, but don't wish to mar your book, Melon, so I'm going to simply make notes on post-its or something and leave them for you to examine when you get it shipped back.

Once again, thanks very much for sending it to me.

Thorn, I believe that you are talking out of your ass here. The reason that I believe this is that I believe that if your motiations were truly that of Christian love, then you'd recognize that it is not your job to judge me, therefore, not your place to determine whether or not I have the ability to admit when I've perceived something incorrectly or have been misguided. So I'm not going to play these games with you anymore. Not because I'm admittinganythng, and not because you have proven anything. Simply because you're acting like a jackass.

[Thorngrub]

Chrisfan said:

Thorn, I believe that you are talking out of your ass here. The reason that I believe this is that I believe that if your motiations were truly that of Christian love, then you'd recognize that it is not your job to judge me, therefore, not your place to determine whether or not I have the ability to admit when I've perceived something incorrectly or have been misguided. So I'm not going to play these games with you anymore. Not because I'm admittinganythng, and not because you have proven anything. Simply because you're acting like a jackass.

Chrisfan, all I can do is thank God that you are not a representation of all Christians, because then there would truly be no hope of us ever reaching each other. You go your merry way, and I'll go on braying in my jackass fashion.

If you would ever concede just one millimeter, you'd stand a chance at reaching a compromise with those you might think are different from you but who are in actuality quite the same. From what I understand about Christianity, that is at the heart of the matter, that we are all essentially the same, as brethren so to speak. Yes, even our extreme Islamic fundamentalists -- and any of you die-hard Christians who think otherwise can go hump your bibles and give 2 Hail Marys for all I care. We are only going to solve the world's problems through love, care, compassion, and an effort at understanding. But you got to want to make the effort. That is why John Lennon said "Give Peace a chance" -- we was being a tad wry, there. A bit cynical, and for good reason: there are too many fundamentalists out there who won't even consider giving the Peace Process a fucking CHANCE.

"People are people so why should it be that you and I should get along so awfully"

[Thorngrub]

By the way, don't get the idea that I am getting frustrated. Although our clashing is not without its degree of frustration, I must say that I am cheerfully only getting started in my quest to bridge the divide between those of us who feel we are so god damn "different". Because that is all it is -- a matter of perception that we don't see eye to eye on, even if in the long run we happen to be in agreement.

Sometimes in order to make progress one must realize they have embarked down the wrong path. To stolidly go forward is not progress whatsoever, it is just digging ourselves deeper. Sometimes going back and finding the original pathway we disembarked from and starting all over again is the only progress left that is available.


There is a method by which differing peoples and cultures can be made to see "eye to eye", and yet retain their distinct dressings and customs and rituals and symbology and mythologies, as different as they may appear on the surface.

Why those allegedly "true" Christians who stand behind our president waving the flag and urging us to "kill em all" don't see that the muslim's "Allah" and the Jews "Jehovah" and our "God" and the Amazonian tribe's "Maninkari" all are references to one and the same principle meaning that you are ALL RIGHT, I'll never figure out. It just doesn't seem very authentically "Christian" to me.

Since I believe that dropping bombs on other countries is not very Christian regardless of the situation, and I also happen to believe that WORDS THEMSELVES are in fact stronger than all the atomic bombs put together on this earth, then it easily follows that it is my self-proclaimed duty as a fellow Christian (regardless of how far I may have strayed from the fold) to make sure and begin implementing this power of words so that someday there may stand a chance of the significanse behind the words to unsettle and eventually upset the entire old paradigm/regime of military force and war tactics.

So I'll tell you what: you go ahead and keep on waving your flags and reading your bibles and going to church and urging the killing of our enemies. I'm going to take my own path in the opposite direction, by believing that I can literally do my part to plant the seeds necessary to engender the beginnings of a new direction in UNlearning all the bullshit they taught you in school so that we can begin to regroup, rethink, react and redraw the lines of our own defense, take responsibility for ourselves, especially since we're the #1 Superpower on earth, it is our duty as such to wield a mature responsibility and SET AN EXAMPLE of true Christian virtues which in no way, shape, or form include the killing of others, we merely need to spread the word that CHANGE is necessary for us to be able to backtrack from the advanced stage of this wrong path we have taken for GENERATIONS, but that doesn't mean it's IMPOSSIBLE, it just means that it will be, as always, a long and difficult road ahead.

If you can't see why flagwaving, shallow-patriotic fervour and bible-thumping-backing-Bush in his War Effort makes me sick to the core of my soul, then I haven't the foggiest notion what the fuck you're doing professing being a "Christian" in the first place.

[chrisfan]

Thorn, here's a little thought for you to ponder. Perhaps one of the very large barriers keeping you from your quest for us to see eye to eye is that you don't understand where I'm coming from. Reading over your last post, I see all sorts of things that it appears you think that I believe, that in fact, I don't believe. Why not try just listning to what people you disagree with say. Rather than deciding why they think it, or assuming that if they think X than they must also think Y, just accept what is said for what it is. Don't fill in the blanks on your own. Ask the person you're trying to see eye to eye with to fill in the blanks.

Just one more thought on the topic -- I think another obstacle in achieving your goal is that you're trying to achieve it with people who don't share your same goal. As an example, I'd throw out for you the quesiton about overturning Roe that I asked Mary a couple of days ago. I asked a question to understand her perspective, and she explained it. My motivation was not to get her to see it my way. I would assume that her motivation in answering was not to get me to see it her way. It is ok, IMO, for people to NOT see eye to eye. There's not a thing wrong with it. So, if your goal here is for us to see eye to eye, and it requires BOTH of us to do that, you're not going to achieve your goal, because you've never convinced me that it's a goal worth working towards.

[strat-0]

Peterson guilty!

Damn, they deliberate for 5 days, then bump 2 (one the foreman), and bam - they come in straightaway with a verdict!