A very beautiful poem.

The Hebrews finally inherit the kingdom of their God.

Sweet ending.

I've always enjoyed stories that end happily ever after.

This is the typical lie put forth by religious proselytizers.

I do indeed "question" the belief, and I have questioned it for many years. I have also come to many "conclusions" concerning the questions that I've had.

You totally LIE when you imply that I "jump to conclusions over one or two verses". That a total misrepresentation of what I do. I point out huge contradictions with the overall big picture of the entire cannon of stories.

I point out why it clearly makes absolutely no sense to believe that the things held out in many of the biblical stories could not possibly have come from any all-wise, all-powerful, omniscient being because they simply are neither wise, powerful, nor suggest that any omniscience is involved.

I also DO NOT "refuse to listen" when other people claim to have explanations for my objections. I simply don't accept their explanations and I even point out why their explanation have no merit.

~~~~

This claim that people are "refusing to listen" when they don't buy into religious proselytizing is itself just yet another technique that the proselytizers use in an attempt to make it appear that they actually have valid explanations, when in fact they don't.

~~~~

You yourself tried to "explain" to me how blood sacrifices were required by God as a means of people "proving their sincerity" to God, because you claim that words are cheap, and people need to prove themselves to God via actions.

Well, on the surface that might sound good, but with just a very slight bit of analysis that "explanation" can easily be shown to have absolutely no merit at all.

First off, a supposedly omniscient God who knows what's in the hearts and minds of men would have absolutely no need to require people to "prove their sincerity" via any physical actions or rituals.

Such an omniscient God would already know whether a person is sincere of heart or not.

So you're so-called "explanation" already falls apart and cannot possibly have any validity.

Moreover, when applied to the crucifixion of Jesus as the sacrificial lamb of God to end all sacrifices it fails again.

What sense would it make for Jesus to be the sacrifice to end all sacrifices if the whole idea of a sacrifice was for the purpose of having men prove their sincerity to God?

~~~~

The bottom line for me Cowboy is that your so-called "explanations" for these ancient superstitious beliefs never make any sense, and can never hold up to even the slightest analysis.

So it's not that I'm "not listening". I hear your excuses for these fables, I just don't see them as having any merit.

If anything, all you continually do is prove to me that even the believes of this religion have no clue how to explain the contradictions and absurdities that it is riddled with.

~~~~

So your "accusation" that I refuse to listen is baloney!

I just don't by into your explanations. They simply don't hold water, IMHO.

Like I say, I truly can't believe how blind people can be when it comes to proselytizing their religion.

They can't see the forest for the trees.

It's makes no sense to scream "foul" or proclaim religious prosecution in reverse, when people point out the obvious flaws in a religious doctrine.

My favorite cartoon says it all:



Let me spell it out for you:

The first guy is accusing those who do not believe in Christianity of being unholy. That's criticism, judgment, and emotional persecution of others in the name of Christianity.

The guy who is attempting to break the cross over his knee merely symbolizes the rebuttal argument that the Christian doctrine has no merit and is full of absurdities and contradictions. (i.e. the questioning of the merit of the Christian Doctrine)


Then the Christians scream FOUL ("Let's have a little respect!)

Why?

The Christians clearly do not offer anyone else this kind of respect. They constantly accuse people of "rejecting Christ as the son of God" as though that accusation has some sort of merit.

So the Christians are only getting back precisely what they DISH OUT - disrespect for the beliefs of others!

How can you not see that Cowboy?

It's a plain as DAY.

Your constantly proselytizing of the religion toward other people causes them to question the validity of the doctrine of your religion, and when they do that you act like they are attacking your beliefs.

But they wouldn't be doing that if you weren't already attacking them by demanding that "Jesus is the only way to God".

And that's PRECISELY WHAT YOU DO CONSTANTLY!

It's hypocritical for you to say that you aren't attacking their beliefs when you are constantly in their face screaming, "Jesus is the only way!"

Like I say, you can't see the folly of your own ways.

To proclaim to people that your religion is the "only way to God" is no different at all from proclaiming that their religion is totally meaningless gibberish.

Pretending that this is not what is being implied is the great Christian Proselytizing fallacy.

It's a lie.

When you tell people that your religious beliefs are "The only way to God" you are absolutely insulting their religious beliefs as being "NOT the way to God".

If you think otherwise you're only kidding yourself.

Well, if persecution simply means to criticize and judge another person's spirituality and that is considered "causing them to suffer", then having Christians been "persecuting" all non-Christians since the dawn of Christianity?

I'm mean, that's all Christians ever do is criticize other for not believing in Christianity and judging them to have chosen to "reject God" by refusing to accept Jesus as "The Christ".

By your very definition MorningSong you have just confirmed that Christians (at least in the sense of an organized religion) have been "persecuting" people of all other faiths, as well as atheists for millennia.

This is one thing that I'll never understand.

How can Christians be so BLIND?

They constantly accuse (i.e. criticize and judge others) as having "turned from God" for not believing in Christianity, and they somehow to recognize or acknowledge that as persecuting the other person.

But as soon as the other person challenged the Christian accusation (i.e. their criticism and judgment of others) the Christians scream that they are the ones who are being "persecuted".

It's truly disgusting MorningSong when you stop and think about it.

A Christian basically accuses me of refusing to accept God, and that's supposed to be OK.

But if I turn around and question the validity of their accusations toward me, they accuse me of persecuting THEM!

That is what makes the whole thing so utterly disgusting.

Christian: "Believe like me or I will judge you to be turning from God".

Non-Christian: "I'm sorry but I can't believe in your religion because from my point of view it has no merit"

Christian: "HOW DARE YOU PERSECUTE ME AND MY RELIGION!"

What?

I mean, seriously MorningSong that's precisely how I see it. The Christians constantly accuse other people of 'rejecting God' and inflict them with "the suffering of having been persecuted" (i.e. criticized and judged for their beliefs)

But then when the Christian accusations are challenged, the Christians scream "FOUL" and act like they are the ones who are being persecuted.

That's nonsense.

As long as the Christians are going to constantly accuse, criticize, judge, and persecute other people on charges of "rejecting God" if they refuse to accept Jesus as "The Christ", then they have absolutely no right whatsoever to scream foul when people point out the utter absurdities in the Christian doctrine.

I just can't believe how BLIND Christians are concerning this.

You can't go around accusing others of "rejecting God" and pretending like you aren't "persecuting" them, if you are going to simultaneously claim that they are "persecuting" you when they challenge your beliefs.

The only reason that Christians are 'persecuted' is because they are getting back precisely what they DISH OUT.

They are the ones who cause the whole mess by accusing everyone else of "rejecting God" in the first place.

The Christians cast the FIRST STONE to be SURE!

They have absolutely no justification for screaming foul when those very same stones are tossed back at them.

That's what I'm having today.

Seriously. Um cook'in up a spaghetti dinner today, and I've actually been looking forward to this all last week. I've been too busy to take the time last week, and I promised myself that I'll take Sunday off as a day of rest and labor in the kitchen all day instead of chopping firewood.

Please bless our Pasta.

In Noodle's name we pray.

Pass the Parmesan please.

Exactly.

I don't really care what people think about me today. I know who I am.

Like Jeannie, as a young person I had faith in people who lied to me. Moreover, I personally feel that the religion in general had a negative and harmful affect on my life back at a time when that had a major impact on how my future would unfold.

So, as far as I'm concerned the religion (and more correctly, the social affects of the religion) had a quite negative impact on my life which I could have done without, thank you very much.

~~~~

So I speak out on behave of people, who today, are in the position I was in many years ago.

I have since learned why the lies hold no truth. So I'm in a position to point that out. Something I didn't have the ability to do when I was younger.

For me, that's the single most annoy negative aspect of religious proselyting and "evangelism".

It's really not about higher moral values at all. Not in the least.

All it's about it degrading and refusing to respect the moral values of other people simply because they haven't officially joined and supported a specific religious cult.

"What? You haven't acknowledged that Jesus is Lord and Savior and that our interpretations of what that entails are correct? You are a sinner and the scum of the Earth!"

I mean really. These religious sects feel that way about each other. The Christians, Muslims, and Jews love each other about as much as Dogs, cats, and mice love each other.

The Catholics and Protestants fight like rabid wolves. And Protestants renounce each others interpretations.

All it basically comes down to are haughty religious zealous accusing everyone who doesn't support their version of a religion as being "immoral".

And they even "harass" highly moral people simply because they those people are either atheists, or view spirituality in a totally different way.

It's basically comes down to, "If you don't accept my religion I judge you to be ungodly".

That's all truly amounts to.

There is no such thing as "Christianity", or "Islam" or "Judaism" for that matter. All that exists are human opinions and views that people attach to these labels and then use these labels to judge the morality of others.

When will this ever stop?

Aggressive Spiritual Predation should truly be recognized as emotional terrorism. Freedom to believe in a religion is one thing, freedom to emotionally terrorize other people with it is a totally different matter.

The proselytizing of religion by accusing people of being "sinners" or implying that some God will reject them or harm them in any way if they fail to succumb to the religion should be outlawed.

Invitations to be "evangelized" are one thing. But aggressive plots designed to evangelize unsuspecting people is nothing short of an ambush of emotional terrorism.

Inviting people to "come" to a religion is ok. But trying to coerce people to join a religion by threatening them that some God will ultimately harm them if they refuse to join, is truly nothing less than mental and emotional coercion.

It doesn't do anyone any good and is a detriment to humanity in general.

Even if the so-called "Christians" managed to convert the entire world to "Christianity", that would only be the start of the real Holy Wars.

We already see this in the huge disagreement between Protestantism and Catholicism. Neither one of them consider the others to be "True Christians".

And just look at all the different Protestants denominations. You'll never get the Southern Baptists to agree with the Northern Amish, etc.

There are huge, and often quite drastic differences between the beliefs of various Protestant faiths.

If the whole world became "Christians" they wouldn't solve anything. All we would see at that point is all these so-called "Christians" pointing fingers at each other proclaiming that only one of them has the "True Interpretations" of scriptures and the other one is confused.

People have truly got to be kidding themselves if they think that there even is such a thing as "True Christianity".

All that exists are a myriad of disagreeing interpretations of extremely confused, obscure, and ambiguous ancient fables.

There truly is no such thing as "Christianity" really.

If there were, it would have to be Catholicism. All the Protestants have done nothing more than PROTEST against the "TRUE Christianity" of Catholicism.

"True" in the sense that it's the only form of Christianity that has any historical merit at all. Not "true" in the sense that it has any genuine truth to it in a cosmic or spiritual sense.

But trust me on this,.... if the whole world were converted to "Christianity" that would just become DAY ONE of the "Protestant-Catholic" holy wars.

And if the Protestants managed to win that battle the next war would be the Protestants versus the Protestants.

It would have to come down to the last man standing. And he would be standing there screaming to a DEAD PLANET,....

"My interpretations WIN!"

I personally think Slowhand exaggerates a bit.

If you can't access the song MorningSong consider that to be a blessing from God.

The archangels are protecting you from melodic evil.

Here's a song I wrote in the bathroom:

Slowhand

Ok, I'm off to take a shower now and rinse myself of the whole affair.

Well, unfortunately the discussion got side-tracked into a proselytizing agenda for supporting the "Christ" of "Christianity".

Which is pretty much the way things always go around here.

Note to MorningSong:

I have a really great song in my mind that I've been singing all day as I was doing carpentry work this morning. Getting it out into the real world is a whole other story. Especially if I wanted it to sound like it does in my head.

Anyway, I'm working on it.

The topic of this thread is:

Christ without Christianity

I pointed out quite early on that it should have been entitled:

Jesus without Christianity

Because the very claim that Jesus was "The Christ" is basically what Christianity is all about.

So if we want to consider Jesus without Christianity, then there's no longer any need to retain that title of "Christ".

Jesus without Christianity requires no virgin birth, no resurrection after death. No need to believe that the authors who wrote the New Testament were "divinely inspired" or that their writings are anything more than superstitious rumors about Jesus.

~~~~

Not only have I considered this scenario, but I'm also personally convinced that this is indeed far more likely to be the reality of history.

Some would say that this reduces Jesus from the status of being a demigod to the status of being a mere mortal man. But for me, it actually elevates the stories from being nothing more than superstitious myths and rumors to being a quite important and serious historical and social event.

This scenario more is more in line with my "beliefs" in Jesus.

I also personally like this view of Jesus far better than the Christian picture.

In this view there is no need to believe in a God who is appeased by blood sacrifices. There is no need to believe that the Old Testament was an actual description of the commandments or directives of any God. There is also no need to give any merit to the writings of Paul. And there isn't even any need to give verbatim merit to the writings of Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John.

Once I view Jesus as a mortal man, I look at the New Testament scriptures in a whole new light to see if I can make out what Jesus himself might have actually been trying to accomplish and teach.

In that view of Jesus, I like what I see. I see someone who has moral values very much akin to mine. I see someone who spoke out against religious hypocrisy, very much as I do. I see someone with whom I can identify very closely on a very deep psychic level.

I much prefer the view of Jesus without Christianity and if a religion could be built upon that foundation, I'd be all for it.

However, it is also my own personal view, that such a religion already exists. It's called Buddhism.

Not so much the modern form of Buddhisms, such as Zen Buddhism, but more closely aligned with more spiritual forms of Buddhism such as Mahayana Buddhism, or even modern day Tibetan Buddhism practiced by the Dalia Lama. I personally feel that these are closer to the teachings of Jesus than Christianity is.

Just my views on the topic suggested.

That is absolute utter baloney Cowboy.

You aren't pulling the wool over anyone's eyes except perhaps your very own self.

When we have different views on religious scriptures, beliefs and interpretations, it's only you who continually demand that we seek a "mutual agreement" and see the "errors" in someone's views.

I do not seek your approval or agreement on any religious scriptures or views. I have absolutely no need for your approval, agreement, or consensus about anything.

If you want to believe that you need to be "saved" from a God who would otherwise hurt you MORE POWER TO YOU!

How many times do I need to say that?

I don't believe that I need to be "saved" from a divine holy being in the first place.

Sorry if that offends you.

But I certainly don't need your approval, consensus, or mutual agreement on anything.

Apology accepted.

However, if you're going to converse with someone in an argumentative way you need to start paying closer attention to their position on things.



You can rest assured that everyone understands what you believe. You have a very orthodox fundamentalist view of Christianity.

You believe that all men are sinners, all are in need of salvation, Jesus is "The Christ",the sacrificial lamb of God, who was sent by God via a virgin birth to make salvation possible for mortal men.

It is your firm belief that no one can "get to God" without acknowledging Jesus as Lord, accepting him as their "savior" and obeying his commands and directives. Which ultimately means that they must also accept that the entire biblical cannon is the "Word of God" which you have also expressed as a major part of your belief.

~~~~~~

In addition to your fundamental belief, you also vehemently argue against alternative interpretations of the biblical writings that might in any way conflict with your hardcore beliefs.

As an example, I have pointed out that even with those scriptures Jesus is attributed with having said that he did not come for the righteous, but for the sinners. And that the righteous have no need for a spiritual doctor.

I hold that this implies that Jesus was not supporting the idea that all men are sinners, or that all men would need to be 'saved' by him. He only came for 'sinners' not to help healthy righteous people who can obviously take care of themselves.

You are extremely argumentative against any interpretations along these lines.

By why? Why do you feel that you need to argue with other people about their interpretation of these ancient scriptures?

Religious Insult and Injury

Moreover, if you are going to be strongly "in the face" of others venomously arguing for you hardcore fundamentalist interpretations of these scriptures, where does that leave you with being able to claim insult and injury just because they hold alternative views?

After all, if you consider it to be insult and injury to you because other people don't agree with your interpretations of ancient stories, then surely it must also be insult and injury to them when you do the same to them?

How could it not be?

If I tell you that from my perspective, my understandings of these scriptures is that Jesus clearly stated that he will judge no one for not believing in him or his words, and that he only came for sinners, thus righteous people have no need to seek salvation.

Why would you argue with me about my beliefs?

More to the point, if you do argue with me about this, why is it that YOU should consider that argument to be insulting and injurious to YOU, yet not insulting and injurious to me?

We simply have different beliefs and views on what some ancient stories have to say. It would be utterly foolish for either of us to claim insult and injury simply because someone else has a different interpretation.

Or even if they hold entirely different views altogether.

If I tell you that from my perspective the entire Old Testament appears to be nothing more than Greek-like fables. Jesus appears to have been a Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva. And the New Testament appears to me to be a total fabrication of superstitious men who had an agenda to support specific superstitious rumors:

Why should you consider that to be insult and injury to your beliefs?

Your claim that just because someone else holds different beliefs and views from yours that this somehow equates to "bashing" your religion is utter nonsense.

If I believe that the Old Testament is fables, and that Jesus was a mortal man, and that the New Testament is outrageous exaggerated superstitions, and you DEMAND that I'm wrong about that, then are YOU not "bashing" my beliefs?

This claim to insult and injury just because other people don't believe the things you believe has no grounds at all.

And this is especially true if you continually harp at them that they need to believe like you lest some almighty God will hurt them or kill them.

I'm truly sorry that you have been convinced to believe in such a threatening picture of a god. But if that's your belief, so be it.

There's no need to try to ram that belief down the throats of others and scream insult and injury when they give you reasons in return for why they feel that such a belief is totally unacceptable from there perspective.

If you are insulted by people giving reasons why they don't believe in your way of thinking, then the solution for you is extremely simple. Just quit trying to convince them of your beliefs, and you will no longer need to hear why they don't believe like you.

What could be easier Cowboy?

You never upset me MorningSong. I understand that you're stuck with the belief that Jesus is the only way. You do the best you can within the confines of that belief system.

Although, in truth, there are scriptural verses that Christians could use to acknowledge that non-Christians can indeed have a totally healthy relationship with God without any need to believe in Jesus or even be 'saved' by Jesus.

They just refuse to allow for those interpretations.

So even the doctrine itself allows for non-Christians to get to God. Christians don't need to insist that everyone must accept Jesus as their savior. It's just not something that needs to be shoved onto people. There is plenty of scripture to allow for non-Christians to be accepted by God.

All that's truly required is for the Christians themselves to start acknowledging that.

You crack me up MorningSong.

You're going to make darn SURE that I have enough food for thought to inspire me to run off and writing a song.

Ok, I think I can find some inspiration in there somewhere.

Truly, and I most certainly never suggested that my spiritual views are the only true views.

I don't even think that way, why would I proclaim that to be the case?

That's as far from the truth as anything can get.

You don't need to tell me that MorningSong. I'm fully aware of this.

In fact, if a religious proselytizer is bringing people down, they are clearly not from God. Even many of the authors of the Bible have recognized this and written that we can tell false preachers by the stench of their rotten fruit. (they didn't put in exactly those terms, but that's what they meant. )

Cowboy's preaching is rotten fruit to be sure. No question about that.



Cowboy isn't upsetting me. He's just being rude and making up lies about me.

I don't hold that against him. He's either trying to be mean, or just doesn't know any better. If he's trying to be mean, then he's pathetic and I feel sorry for him. If he doesn't know any better then he can't be blamed.

So what's to get upset about?



Don't worry MorningSong, I never once suspected that Cowboy speaks for God, or that God should be held responsible in any way for Cowboy's actions or speech.






I agree with all of that.

Don't worry MorningSong, I don't make any connection at all between Cowboy and God.

We're discussing religions here, and social issues.




I'm currently working on an instrumental called "Gaia's Fire".

It's Guitar, Drums and Saxophone.

But it's going to be quite some time before I'll be ready to record it. I'm learning all three parts myself, and the drum and saxophone parts are going to require quite a bit of practice on my part.

But now that you've mentioned it I might write up a little song with just vocals and guitar. Care to suggest a subject or title for inspirational food for thought. Can't say I'll go with it, but who knows? I tend to do my best work when hit with some external inspiration.