The death of Judas Iscariot

[BluePhantom]

Those are not your exact words, but that's what you implied. .

Bullshit. Again I stopped right there and read no further. In other words "ok Phantom you never said that". Yeah no shit. You interpreted what you wanted to based on a desire to defend what you assumed was an attack, but yet you concede I never said what you accuse me of.

Never said you did not say it, I said its what you implied. Most likely because you are to much of a coward to say it out right because you have spent all this time denying what you meant. I am not defending shit. Just calling a wannabe history expert on there lies. Your implication was Christianity has killed more innocents then any religion on Earth. you then back peddled from it like a coward when you got challenged. Dont be scared, own it.

Look I am about done with you 'cause you are cluttering up what would normally be a worthy topic of discussion with complete bullshit at best and flat out lies at worst.

You have made the statement presented as fact:

Compared to other civilizations, the dark ages with the inquisition thrown would not even stack up side to side in comparison to the blood shed in the name in religion. Wouldn't even be close.

You STILL have provided absolutely no documentation to support your statement. You said:

Your point was that only Christianity has a history of this.

I challenged you to find anywhere on this or any other thread where i said anything of the sort. You have provided nothing except: "well that's what you implied". No it fucking wasn't asshole. You made an ignorant assumption and now you are trying to cover your ass. You stated:

Well you stated a few times in the last couple post that no theology has out killed Christianity.

Quote me. Go fucking find where I said that and quote me. I will save you the time. You can't 'cause I never said anything of the sort. So what i am seeing from you, pal is some fucking jack ass that likes to make a lot of asinine statement but can't seem to back any of them up with any documentation. So provide the fucking evidence or shut the fuck up and go debate TM or rdean who might be a little easier for you to deal with.

 

[earlycuyler]

Ok. Sorry your feelings were hurt.

 

[BluePhantom]

Ok. Sorry your feelings were hurt.

Feelings bullshit. This is the last thing I am saying to you. I will respond to you again once you start providing links to documentation that supports your statements and/or start producing the quotes where I said what you accuse me of saying. If you can't produce them, then shut the fuck up so I can have a discussion with people who can carry on a legitimate discussion.

Now that's it. I'm done. Provide links/quotes or I don't respond to you.

 

[earlycuyler]

Ok. Sorry your feelings were hurt.

Feelings bullshit. This is the last thing I am saying to you. I will respond to you again once you start providing links to documentation that supports your statements and/or start producing the quotes where I said what you accuse me of saying. If you can't produce them, then shut the fuck up so I can have a discussion with people who can carry on a legitimate discussion.

Now that's it. I'm done. Provide links/quotes or I don't respond to you.

Your butt feel better ? Read from post 200 down.

 

[koshergrl]

Bullshit. Again I stopped right there and read no further. In other words "ok Phantom you never said that". Yeah no shit. You interpreted what you wanted to based on a desire to defend what you assumed was an attack, but yet you concede I never said what you accuse me of.

Never said you did not say it, I said its what you implied. Most likely because you are to much of a coward to say it out right because you have spent all this time denying what you meant. I am not defending shit. Just calling a wannabe history expert on there lies. Your implication was Christianity has killed more innocents then any religion on Earth. you then back peddled from it like a coward when you got challenged. Dont be scared, own it.

Look I am about done with you 'cause you are cluttering up what would normally be a worthy topic of discussion with complete bullshit at best and flat out lies at worst.

You have made the statement presented as fact:



You STILL have provided absolutely no documentation to support your statement. You said:

Your point was that only Christianity has a history of this.

I challenged you to find anywhere on this or any other thread where i said anything of the sort. You have provided nothing except: "well that's what you implied". No it fucking wasn't asshole. You made an ignorant assumption and now you are trying to cover your ass. You stated:

Well you stated a few times in the last couple post that no theology has out killed Christianity.

Quote me. Go fucking find where I said that and quote me. I will save you the time. You can't 'cause I never said anything of the sort. So what i am seeing from you, pal is some fucking jack ass that likes to make a lot of asinine statement but can't seem to back any of them up with any documentation. So provide the fucking evidence or shut the fuck up and go debate TM or rdean who might be a little easier for you to deal with.

Inquisition deaths numbered in the thousands, but there's no absolute count. And they were almost all (there were multiples) instigated by political figureheads. Royalty. Who would employ the church to help them with a POLITICAL issue. Often the church objected. In one case, the church (aka, a pope) instigated, and that was the Roman Inquisition. YOu probably haven't even heard of it, because it wasn't one of the worst.

"King Ferdinand II of Aragon and Queen Isabella I of Castile established the Spanish Inquisition in 1478."
It was by Royal, and not religious, decree. Almost without exception.

 

[Intense]

Absolute Power corrupts absolutely.

 

[Intense]

Joe... perhaps in 50 or so years from now we will be looking back to today's favored 'American Arrogant' clothing line and see things through different spiritual eyes than the one's we seem to be using today as a society.

Not my point at all.

My point was that KosherGirl was trying to once again try to claim that Christians haven't murdered people over a sky pixie recently, when in fact, they were doing it within the last century.

The Nazis invoked God to justify what they were doing, and God didn't do a damned thing about it. It took the Godless Red Army to put a stop to that shit.

And what did the USA do in the mean time? How many lives did we lose in WWII? Too insignificant for you?

 

[BluePhantom]

Inquisition deaths numbered in the thousands, but there's no absolute count. And they were almost all (there were multiples) instigated by political figureheads. Royalty. Who would employ the church to help them with a POLITICAL issue. Often the church objected. In one case, the church (aka, a pope) instigated, and that was the Roman Inquisition. YOu probably haven't even heard of it, because it wasn't one of the worst.

Yes, that's true about the Spanish Inquisition. Yes, I am familiar with the Roman Inquisition. But I am not sure what your point is.

 

[koshergrl]

I think my point was that in Inquisition wasn't an example of religion gone rampant, but of government controlling religion.

 

[Intense]

Let's also distinguish between God, and Man or Institution trying to play God. God gave us Free Will, to use it, for better or for worse, with Cause and Effect, Consequence, both Good and Bad, each proportioned to exact degree. We create the Chaos, by not centering and acting on purpose.

So what do we say to God? Thank You for the Gift you gave us, Fuck You, It's Your Fault that we misuse it, It's even Your fault for what We blindly have done and still do, especially in your name, without your consent? Not Exactly.

Or do We Reconcile, and reexamine Our Motives and Intent. Do We seek to Conform or Break Away? Individual Choice. Where does True allegiance lie?

 

[Intense]

I think my point was that in Inquisition wasn't an example of religion gone rampant, but of government controlling religion.

The Catholic Church is a Government, a Monarchy. For better or worse. Back in the Day you speak of, It was a Major Power, with control over even Life and Death.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh please.

You realize that the Roman Catholic Church was Rome's response to Christianity, when they found they couldn't wipe the movement out?

It's just another example of what happens when secular bodies decide to control the faith of the people.

 

[BluePhantom]

I think my point was that in Inquisition wasn't an example of religion gone rampant, but of government controlling religion.

Oh well I agree with that completely but I would say that about most situations where a slaughter has taken place in the name of religion. Again, my point is not necessarily that "Christianity kills". It's that governments have used Christianity (as well as many other religions) as an excuse to kill and that does include the Vatican. In that regard the Vatican is no different than any other central government. But this really supports my point don't you think? I mean basically all I am saying is:

Christianity (or any religion): Good. Go for it. Embrace it. Live it. Let it wash over you and soothe your aura. Become one with the creator (V'ger needs the information ).

Organized Church (of any religion): Bad. Corrupt. Political. Power hungry. Uses spirituality as a tool to achieve financial and political goals. Booo organized church.

I mean that's really all I am getting at.

 

[koshergrl]

I think that's too generalized a statement though. All religion/all churches aren't bad. I mean, they reflect people, and people are sinful, and of course terrible things are done in the name of religion. I think non-believers think the object of church and religion is to create perfection, and they mistakenly think when they don't see perfection that the church and the faithful have failed.

But that hasn't ever been the stance of the faithful. Their stance is that they AREN'T perfect, and need the grace of God. Not that accepting God makes them perfect.

I don't know if that makes any sense.

 

[BluePhantom]

I think that's too generalized a statement though. All religion/all churches aren't bad. I mean, they reflect people, and people are sinful, and of course terrible things are done in the name of religion. I think non-believers think the object of church and religion is to create perfection, and they mistakenly think when they don't see perfection that the church and the faithful have failed.

But that hasn't ever been the stance of the faithful. Their stance is that they AREN'T perfect, and need the grace of God. Not that accepting God makes them perfect.

I don't know if that makes any sense.

It does and I would certainly agree that there are "good" people and "bad" people in the church just like anywhere else. And certainly there have been some "good" Popes...or at least some better than others. John Paul II one might generally think of as a "good Pope" but you will find plenty of people that will say he was a disgrace. However, he was a lot better than Innocent VIII, Sixtus IV, or the increasingly infamous Alexander VI.

But I think it's fair to reiterate Intense's point that "absolute power corrupts absolutely". History has shown this to be true and the Popes are no exception. Additionally, in any hierarchy the one at the top usually clawed his/her way there and employed some morally questionable tactics along the way. Popes are like the heads of any other government or corporation. They are usually wildly ambitious men, natural politicians, usually don't have much of a problem smacking around someone that is in their way. They are after all, men and subject to the same desires and ambitions as anyone else.

So I guess what I would say is just like in a corporation, the closer you get to the top the more corrupt and fucked up it becomes and the more the focus is on money and political standing. The closer you get to the bottom the more the focus is on the quality of the goods and services offered (in the case of the church: religion). So an individual priest is probably far more focused on spirituality, but the Popes and the College of Cardinals....they are the CEOs and Board of Directors and they act pretty much the same whether their commodity is God, government, or pizza. But of course...the little guy always is forced to take marching orders from those at the top.

 

[koshergrl]

Well the Roman Catholic church is just a reincarnation of the Roman Empire. People think the Christian religion began and ends with them, and that they are the "purest" form of Christianity, which of course is patently untrue.

I get tired of fighting battles against ignorance. I can handle the differing opinions...but when you have bigotry coupled with an abysmal lack of understanding of history and the very topics you (not you, but general, anti-Christian "you") opine loudly about, it's impossible to even know where to begin. People won't even take the time to google the topics they rant on.

 

[BluePhantom]

Well the Roman Catholic church is just a reincarnation of the Roman Empire. People think the Christian religion began and ends with them, and that they are the "purest" form of Christianity, which of course is patently untrue.

Well...Catholics certainly tend to think that. Yes, I would agree with you largely. Prior to Constantine endorsing Christianity most people don't understand that while there were Popes there wasn't "one unified church" like there was in the Middle Ages. There were tons of different sects of Christianity. All held different beliefs, they all used different books to make up their "Bible", and quite frankly they really didn't like each other very much. Very similar to protestants and Catholics today. But under Constantine it all got organized, because as I have said several times: he was a Roman and he wanted order. So at the Councils of Nicaea Christianity was defined according to what Constantine would go for. The Nicaean Creed was developed which stated "this is what a fucking Christian believes, end of damned story". The Biblical Canon that had been established at the previous Council of Carthage was adopted and so we had "these are the books you will use for the Bible, end of damned story. Throw all the other ones away."

So what we saw was a real "Romanization" of Christianity and it became politicized. You are absolutely correct. All of these other sects conformed to what was laid out, or they died off, or they were killed (not immediately of course but over time). Then after the Western Roman Empire fell the church stepped in and really took over. So it was really this period between the fall of Rome and the Reformation were the Vatican was pretty much the only game in town and they very ruthlessly wielded the absolute power they had in Europe and as we said before, it eventually corrupted them ridiculously.

After the Reformation the Vatican begins to lose power, they suddenly have competitors in the spiritual market so to speak, and as you might expect the degree of corruption begins to slowly decline as well. In some ways it's kind of like we have come full circle because again we have all these different sects of Christianity and once again they even use different books in the Bible. The Catholic Bible includes the books of Tobit, Judith, 1st and 2nd Maccabees, as well as a couple others while the protestant versions do not. eastern Orthodox uses 1 Esdras and 3rd and 4th Maccabees while the Catholics and protestants do not.

So it's really interesting to look at Christianity from a historical perspective and recognize this kind of "organization, rise to power, and split", but of course when you do that, as a believer, ultimately some very uncomfortable spiritual questions begin to arise.

I get tired of fighting battles against ignorance. I can handle the differing opinions...but when you have bigotry coupled with an abysmal lack of understanding of history and the very topics you (not you, but general, anti-Christian "you") opine loudly about, it's impossible to even know where to begin. People won't even take the time to google the topics they rant on.

Oh I completely understand your frustration. Not with YOU, but also in general.

 

[Intense]

Oh please.

You realize that the Roman Catholic Church was Rome's response to Christianity, when they found they couldn't wipe the movement out?

It's just another example of what happens when secular bodies decide to control the faith of the people.

Catholic doctrine teaches that the Roman Catholic Church was founded by Jesus Christ at the Confession of Peter. It interprets the Confession of Peter as acknowledging Christ's designation of Apostle Peter and his successors to be the temporal head of his Church. Thus, it asserts that the Bishop of Rome has the sole legitimate claim to Petrine authority and the primacy due to the Roman Pontiff.[1] The Catholic Church claims legitimacy for its bishops and priests via the doctrine of apostolic succession and authority of the Pope via the unbroken line of popes, claimed as successors to Simon Peter.[2][3][4][5]

In 313, the struggles of the Early Church were lessened by the legalisation of Christianity by the Emperor Constantine I. In 380, Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire by the decree of the Emperor, which would persist until the fall of the Western Empire, and later, with the Eastern Roman Empire, until the Fall of Constantinople. During this time (the period of the Seven Ecumenical Councils) there were considered five primary sees according to Eusebius: Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria, known as the Pentarchy.

After the destruction of the western Roman Empire, the church in the West was a major factor in the preservation of classical civilization, establishing monasteries, and sending missionaries to convert the peoples of northern Europe, as far as Ireland in the north. In the East, the Byzantine Empire preserved Orthodoxy, well after the massive invasions of Islam in the mid-7th century. The invasions of Islam devastated three of the five Patriarchal sees, capturing Jerusalem first, then Alexandria, and then finally in the mid-8th century, Antioch.

The whole period of the next five centuries was dominated by the struggle between Christianity and Islam throughout the Mediterranean Basin. The battles of Poitiers, and Toulouse preserved the Catholic west, even though Rome itself was ravaged in 850, and Constantinople besieged.

History of the Catholic Church - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[earlycuyler]

I think my point was that in Inquisition wasn't an example of religion gone rampant, but of government controlling religion.

Oh well I agree with that completely but I would say that about most situations where a slaughter has taken place in the name of religion. Again, my point is not necessarily that "Christianity kills". It's that governments have used Christianity (as well as many other religions) as an excuse to kill and that does include the Vatican. In that regard the Vatican is no different than any other central government. But this really supports my point don't you think? I mean basically all I am saying is:

Christianity (or any religion): Good. Go for it. Embrace it. Live it. Let it wash over you and soothe your aura. Become one with the creator (V'ger needs the information ).

Organized Church (of any religion): Bad. Corrupt. Political. Power hungry. Uses spirituality as a tool to achieve financial and political goals. Booo organized church.

I mean that's really all I am getting at.

That is not what you implied.

 

[Abishai100]

Vigilantism: Judas or Jesus?


It seems to a lot of people that the message of Judas was essentially that defending Jesus was too difficult and such difficulty deserved an empathetic voice. Judas was not wrong, technically, which is why so many modern cynicism-celebratory American rock bands refer to him and why Bob Dylan sang about the complex spiritualism associated with Judas' betrayal.

However, Jesus never said, "Following me is without complication!" It seems he simply said, "I offer you a way to celebrate pity!"

I'd like to ask what the connection between Judas Iscariot and modern age vigilantism is. Many American comic book characters such as Two-Face (DC Comics) and the Punisher (Marvel Comics) are re-presentations of the efficacy of vigilantism. Is vigilantism (i.e., Hell's Angels) something Judas would have endorsed, or is it something Jesus would have endorsed?






Judas Iscariot (Wikipedia)