Rejecting the Bad Parts

[ding]

Jesus, if he truly existed at all, was just the world's first recorded Hippie

He is coming back as Patton. He is going to win this battle for our souls....

.

He is coming back as Patton. He is going to win this battle for our souls....

.
no one is coming back, admission to the Everlasting requires an accomplishment by the individual rendering purity to their spirit to attain judgement for admission or that of all humanity accomplishing the feat together and becoming one in the same - for final judgement.

no one will do that for anyone - including a christian ram. .no sinners are allowed.

ummmm.... it's the exact opposite of that. No one is worthy on their own.

.

ummmm.... it's the exact opposite of that. No one is worthy on their own.

.
the individual is capable of certain objectives, such as becoming sinless however and from antiquity the emphasis is humanity not the individual and certainly a sinless humanity would be more conducive for the individual to follow in that guidance.

what's odd is how christianity has it so wrong and has been allowed to survive as long as it has - the vindictiveness of christian congregations is overwhelming to the point of disbelief - as in hope for the future as long as they are allowed to muddy the waters. unrepentantly since the 4th century.

There have only ever been two people that were sinless and one of them was fully God and fully human.

What's odd is your conclusion and your concern over a religion that is not your own.

.

There have only ever been two people that were sinless and one of them was fully God and fully human.

What's odd is your conclusion and your concern over a religion that is not your own.

.
really, who was that and who was the other one - and why do you believe you are unable to stop sinning - and why is that not everyone's goal. im not disputing your two only your inability to do so yourself or your condemning those that try. and succeed. no, there are no sinners in the Everlasting -

that's the point - from antiquity - your "religion" purposefully misconstrues - is the concern - christianity is not a religion but a political pariah disguised to appear differently than its true context for nefarious purposes.

Jesus and Mary

.

Jesus and Mary

.
both born that way, surly your patronage has an answer and you are aware of marys accomplishment can you share that or is it your secret. how she triumphed over evil. she's surly no christian, then. one of ours. and you did not have time to crucify her.

You already answered your question. Mary was born that way. The beliefs that Mary was without sin and bodily assumed were beliefs held by the early Christians which the Church has stayed true to even when it was challenged by others within the Church.

 

[ding]

Not sure about something in the Bible? Here's an idea. Ask a search engine. As you did to make that previous post. Really doesn't take "years and even decades to devote to study and research." Stop torturing yourself.. and others..

My research started before the advent of the Internet. Even now, I prefer primary sources. Sometimes one has to look outside the net.

By the way, it was never torture. Some people naturally enjoy research, and I happen to be one, a fine trait in a journalist. Genealogy is great research, but I imagine you view that as torture as well?

If my posts torture you, they are incredibly easy to skip past without reading.

As are mine, snookums. And I was likely researching before you were born. It's far easier these days. "Primary sources" galore just a few clicks away.. Stop kidding yourself. You certainly aren't fooling anyone else.

She fooled me.

You don't. I see right through you, snookums.

 

[ding]

There are people out there that believe the Bible is the word of God. These people live in constant self torture. Certain personalities cannot reconcile the difference between rhetoric and sincerity.

Since you seem to think that suffering in the Christian faith is something to be avoided like some other faiths teach - notably Hinduism and Buddhism - this is as good as a place as any to bring up the what I see are the key differences between eastern and western religions. Both eastern and western religions teach to die to self. And for good reason too, this is the only way to see reality and God is reality. In the eastern faiths suffering is to be avoided at all costs. To do so requires one to reach a spiritual enlightenment whereby they rise above the material world so the material world holds no sway or attraction to them. To do this requires one to die to self. In Christianity, suffering is supposed to be embraced which is why so many people have a problem with suffering. Core to the Christian belief that Hinduism and Buddhism do not profess is that everything works for good. So even when bad things happen, good will eventually come from it. Mind you Christians are not taught to celebrate suffering for suffering's sake, we are taught to celebrate suffering for practicality sake. Here's why... it cannot be avoided in the material world. Even dying to one's self will not make one immune to the effect of mourning. In and of itself mourning is good as it provides a reminder for why we loved something and what it meant to us. And does so on a deeper level that nothing else can approach. It is not something that is to be avoided. Mourning is something to be embraced as it allows closure to occur. Additionally suffering is meant to serve as a prompt for self reflection and evaluation. It is an opportunity for learning and new growth. And lastly suffering is used to see how everything works for good which is not always self evident but it is nonexistent for those who don't look for it.

So... what you intended for evil, God is using for good.

 

[ding]

Funny how I go all of this ^^^^ from the bible that according to Donald H and vasuderatorrent I don't believe in.

 

[Donald H]

Funny how I go all of this ^^^^ from the bible that according to Donald H and vasuderatorrent I don't believe in.

You may find it a good idea to proofread what you're trying to say before you post ^^^^ that makes no sense.

Otherwise, all we need to know is that you are a self-proclaimed backslider who pretends to be a christian when it's convenient for you.

 

[ding]

Funny how I go all of this ^^^^ from the bible that according to Donald H and vasuderatorrent I don't believe in.

You may find it a good idea to proofread what you're trying to say before you post ^^^^ that makes no sense.

Otherwise, all we need to know is that you are a self-proclaimed backslider who pretends to be a christian when it's convenient for you.

Most people on this board know that "^^^^" means to look at the post above, dummy.

 

[ding]

Funny how I go all of this ^^^^ from the bible that according to Donald H and vasuderatorrent I don't believe in.

You may find it a good idea to proofread what you're trying to say before you post ^^^^ that makes no sense.

Otherwise, all we need to know is that you are a self-proclaimed backslider who pretends to be a christian when it's convenient for you.

Here... let me make this easier on you.

Since you seem to think that suffering in the Christian faith is something to be avoided like some other faiths teach - notably Hinduism and Buddhism - this is as good as a place as any to bring up the what I see are the key differences between eastern and western religions. Both eastern and western religions teach to die to self. And for good reason too, this is the only way to see reality and God is reality. In the eastern faiths suffering is to be avoided at all costs. To do so requires one to reach a spiritual enlightenment whereby they rise above the material world so the material world holds no sway or attraction to them. To do this requires one to die to self. In Christianity, suffering is supposed to be embraced which is why so many people have a problem with suffering. Core to the Christian belief that Hinduism and Buddhism do not profess is that everything works for good. So even when bad things happen, good will eventually come from it. Mind you Christians are not taught to celebrate suffering for suffering's sake, we are taught to celebrate suffering for practicality sake. Here's why... it cannot be avoided in the material world. Even dying to one's self will not make one immune to the effect of mourning. In and of itself mourning is good as it provides a reminder for why we loved something and what it meant to us. And does so on a deeper level that nothing else can approach. It is not something that is to be avoided. Mourning is something to be embraced as it allows closure to occur. Additionally suffering is meant to serve as a prompt for self reflection and evaluation. It is an opportunity for learning and new growth. And lastly suffering is used to see how everything works for good which is not always self evident but it is nonexistent for those who don't look for it.

So... what you intended for evil, God is using for good.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

Rejecting the Bad Parts​

this thread does disservice to it's title ... nothing new for the atheist / christian.
.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

.
the 4th century christian bible deliberately circumvents the prescribed religion of antiquity and uses the 1st century events as the above forgery exemplifies to promote their corrupt version - primarily political to foster discourse and division in order for allowance of their primary nefarious selfserving motivations. bing meriweather. vasuder, the imposter.

 

[Donald H]

.

Rejecting the Bad Parts​

this thread does disservice to it's title ... nothing new for the atheist / christian.
.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

.
the 4th century christian bible deliberately circumvents the prescribed religion of antiquity and uses the 1st century events as the above forgery exemplifies to promote their corrupt version - primarily political to foster discourse and division in order for allowance of their primary nefarious selfserving motivations. bing meriweather. vasuder, the imposter.

Visit my thread meant to bring out solid christian believers who don't fall short on their beliefs as are written in their bibles. Meriweather states clearly that he considers atheists to be good people. The reason why modern christians are making that compromise is no mystery.

True and solid belief in their bibles has become socially unacceptable now. 100 years ago he would have been firmly chastised by the catholic church for that which the church would consider blasphemy!

 

[Grumblenuts]

She fooled me.

You don't. I see right through you, snookums.

You mean he fooled you. Pretty sure Donald's right. Meriweather's a he. Always just sounds amusingly feminine to me so I poke fun. Meri and the jackass.. You two should really get a room!

 

[Meriweather]

You mean he fooled you. Pretty sure Donald's right. Meriweather's a he. Always just sounds amusingly feminine to me so I poke fun. Meri and the jackass.. You two should really get a room!

I am a she. Ding and I agree on many things, disagree on others. There is always room for more than one view, different approaches, and different perspectives when it comes to religion and ethics.

 

[Donald H]

She fooled me.

You don't. I see right through you, snookums.

You mean he fooled you. Pretty sure Donald's right. Meriweather's a he. Always just sounds amusingly feminine to me so I poke fun. Meri and the jackass.. You two should really get a room!

I had never given any thought to Meriweather's sex. The issue had never entered into any conversations between us.

Would his catholic church recognize any distinction in the sense of what he/she has to say?
Ding does appear to consider it important for some reason.

 

[Donald H]

You mean he fooled you. Pretty sure Donald's right. Meriweather's a he. Always just sounds amusingly feminine to me so I poke fun. Meri and the jackass.. You two should really get a room!

I am a she. Ding and I agree on many things, disagree on others. There is always room for more than one view, different approaches, and different perspectives when it comes to religion and ethics.

Does ding agree with you that atheists are good people?
There's no way he wouldn't have seen the question being put to him!
It seems to me that would be a pretty fundamental question to ask of christians, considering that finding any completely loyal and true christian believers is proving near impossible so far.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

Rejecting the Bad Parts​

this thread does disservice to it's title ... nothing new for the atheist / christian.
.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

.
the 4th century christian bible deliberately circumvents the prescribed religion of antiquity and uses the 1st century events as the above forgery exemplifies to promote their corrupt version - primarily political to foster discourse and division in order for allowance of their primary nefarious selfserving motivations. bing meriweather. vasuder, the imposter.

Visit my thread meant to bring out solid christian believers who don't fall short on their beliefs as are written in their bibles. Meriweather states clearly that he considers atheists to be good people. The reason why modern christians are making that compromise is no mystery.

True and solid belief in their bibles has become socially unacceptable now. 100 years ago he would have been firmly chastised by the catholic church for that which the church would consider blasphemy!

.

Visit my thread meant to bring out solid christian believers who don't fall short on their beliefs as are written in their bibles. Meriweather states clearly that he considers atheists to be good people. The reason why modern christians are making that compromise is no mystery.

.
well, not sure you have a grasp of history or an understanding for the events of the 4th century disconnect from the actual 1st century events related by forgeries and fallacies used in the 4th century to create an entirely madeup and corrupt religion. than that of the religion of antiquity. and used to persecute and victimize the innocent from the 4th century to the present day.

* not sure why it might make a difference but if merriweather is a guy - they are a coward.

distinct, as the true religion of antiquity can be both secular and sectarian without a slight deviation in its meaning - the triumph of good vs evil - but not christianity or the other desert religions.

 

[Donald H]

.
well, not sure you have a grasp of history or an understanding for the events of the 4th century disconnect from the actual 1st century events related by forgeries and fallacies used in the 4th century to create an entirely madeup and corrupt religion. than that of the religion of antiquity. and used to persecute and victimize the innocent from the 4th century to the present day.

* not sure why it might make a difference but if merriweather is a guy - they are a coward.

distinct, as the true religion of antiquity can be both secular and sectarian without a slight deviation in its meaning - the triumph of good vs evil - but not christianity or the other desert religions.

Were you trying to say that some teaching in some period of time was flawed?
It seems to me so far that you're saying that either the 4th. century teaching or the 1st. century teaching are contradictory?

I make no distinction because I have no need or interest in knowing. My starting point is in saying that all christianity is nonsense, and then work back from there.

I'm only trying to ferret out some true believers, as opposed to the backsliders.

 

[GreatestIam]

These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring.

They are not horrible nor disgusting. That you think they are is what makes you different from Christians.

Anything is better than a genocide lover and hates women and gays enough to be homophobic and misogynous.

Christianity is disgusting and morally satanic.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible

I would like to see more atheists do some in depth study on the Bible.

Why?

So they can lower their moral standards to the genocidal god lover level?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

I guess I am just thinking out loud. I was hoping Christians could embrace the identical ethics of their atheist counterparts by embracing things that are good and rejecting things that are bad.

If atheists could see that the bad parts of the Bible can be rejected freely by Christians then atheists could view Christians as intellectual and moral equals. For example: Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek, Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future, the description of homosexuals in Romans Chapter 1, and even teachings to pray nonstop. These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring. It would be good to see atheists and Christians agree that Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor. That’s just bad for society. Christians should ignore the Bible on that aspect and be able to enjoy the luxury to keep some of their belongings.

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things and hold steadfast and fire on the good aspect of the Bible. You know, like atheists do. I guess in essence that would make the Christians atheists too. Oh well. Nobody said philosophy wasn’t complicated. I guess they just have to decide how bad they need to be labeled as “Christian”. If you need that label real bad you might want to go ahead and turn that other cheek.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

By the way, turning the other cheek is an act of defiance, not a sign of submission.
Maybe Jesus isn't the dumb one after all.....

Does that include the scriptures that say if we wish to perfect our wisdom, we have to reject Christian dogma and tradition?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Jesus, if he truly existed at all, was just the world's first recorded Hippie

He is coming back as Patton. He is going to win this battle for our souls....

I like a battle of words.

Armageddon and genocide is winning by force because of lack of good debate points.

Only immoral religions use inquisitions and jihads and lust after a genocidal prick of a god.

Yahweh and Jesus are vile immoral entities.

Not that Christians care about morals.

Regards
DL

 

[Meriweather]

Christianity is disgusting and morally satanic.

Okay. Then don't practice Christianity.