Atheistforums.com

Humanities Section => Philosophy & Rhetoric General Discussion => Topic started by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 12:40:31 PM

Title: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 12:40:31 PM
The common actions, traits, and teachings of the alleged prophets, messiahs, avatars, gurus, yogis, shamans, and saints represents an archetype that changed humanity in some way for the better. They represented humility, equality, generosity, and wisdom.

Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions. We have gained a lot of ground, though, and I think it's wise to recognize that.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 12:52:23 PM
As a fan of comparative religion ... I would reply ... shamans are for the long haul ... they are the "real thing" not Coca Cola.

All people are to some degree, mentally ill.  And most of us are recovered ... so most of us match the definition of a shaman ... we just don't rattle human bone rattles in public ;-)
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 10, 2015, 12:55:29 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 12:40:31 PM
The common actions, traits, and teachings of the alleged prophets, messiahs, avatars, gurus, yogis, shamans, and saints represents an archetype that changed humanity in some way for the better. They represented humility, equality, generosity, and wisdom.

Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions. We have gained a lot of ground, though, and I think it's wise to recognize that.

Not for me, they always require me to suspend my doubt to follow them, and that intellectual suicide costs far more than any benefit they have ever offered.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 01:07:09 PM
Yes, do what is right for you ... mostly.  This is why I can't get into proselytizing ... even if I thought the world was coming to an end, like Paul of Tarsus ... I am not sure that is a bad thing, and I am not sure you aren't going to get what you have richly earned ;-)
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 01:10:50 PM
Quote from: jonb on October 10, 2015, 12:55:29 PM
Not for me, they always require me to suspend my doubt to follow them, and that intellectual suicide costs far more than any benefit they have ever offered.
I believe you can be skeptical without being doubtful, and being doubtful can make you susceptible to placing limitations on your perspective. Reason isn't the only reason atheists defend reason on the internet. Ego is obviously in play. I think that striving for understanding rather than being satisfied with our level of enlightenment could actually have the core results we all hope for. We have to be skeptical, but we have to be curious too.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 10, 2015, 01:33:08 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 01:10:50 PM
I believe you can be skeptical without being doubtful, and being doubtful can make you susceptible to placing limitations on your perspective. Reason isn't the only reason atheists defend reason on the internet. Ego is obviously in play. I think that striving for understanding rather than being satisfied with our level of enlightenment could actually have the core results we all hope for. We have to be skeptical, but we have to be curious too.

The realisation that we are inherently susceptible leads it seems to me, for most to the desire for control, often to control others, or by being part of something bigger than themselves. I find it quite easy to doubt and be curious at one and the same time.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Hijiri Byakuren on October 10, 2015, 01:39:37 PM
How did Moses' detailed instructions on how to sacrifice animals better humanity?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: CrucifyCindy on October 10, 2015, 02:18:49 PM
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 10, 2015, 01:39:37 PM
How did Moses' detailed instructions on how to sacrifice animals better humanity?

Well before Moses they were doing it wrong.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 02:48:46 PM
Quote from: jonb on October 10, 2015, 01:33:08 PM
The realisation that we are inherently susceptible leads it seems to me, for most to the desire for control, often to control others, or by being part of something bigger than themselves. I find it quite easy to doubt and be curious at one and the same time.
The ease of a perspective says nothing of its merit.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 10, 2015, 02:56:48 PM
Merit: the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit)

Praise and reward are not things I strive for.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 03:48:55 PM
Quote from: jonb on October 10, 2015, 02:56:48 PM
Merit: the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit)

Praise and reward are not things I strive for.

It takes all kinds.  I am like you, I have never understood how anything beyond me knowing my faults or me knowing the satisfaction of something accomplished ... can be bettered by having other people get involved.  But then I will never be a salesman or a politician.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 03:49:02 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 12:40:31 PM
The common actions, traits, and teachings of the alleged prophets, messiahs, avatars, gurus, yogis, shamans, and saints represents an archetype that changed humanity in some way for the better. They represented humility, equality, generosity, and wisdom.

Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions. We have gained a lot of ground, though, and I think it's wise to recognize that.
Yeah, well maybe.  You are assuming that they all actually lived.  If so, why do you make that assumption?  And was that change for the better?  And by whose standards?  Like you I used to think this:"Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions."  But I don't think they lived.  You see, I was curious and skeptical and did some research.  I could not find any evidence that they lived.  So, who then, created them?  And for what purpose?  I also don't think we, as a species, are better off for having those 'avatars' created and foisted upon us. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 03:52:23 PM
Yes and no.  Whatever one might think of the ontology of such people ... are they just ordinary people, are they something more than ordinary people ... such people existed, exist now, and will continue to exist.  They may or may not gather followers, just like my couch gathers dust bunnies.  But for me it is part of "what is", nothing to get worked up about.  Now if I suddenly woke up and I was in the body of a Siberian shaman from 200 years ago, and he had stolen my soul ... well then that would need attending to, but it hasn't happened and I don't worry about such things ... though fiction writers do.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 04:18:13 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 03:49:02 PM
Yeah, well maybe.  You are assuming that they all actually lived.  If so, why do you make that assumption?  And was that change for the better?  And by whose standards?  Like you I used to think this:"Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions."  But I don't think they lived.  You see, I was curious and skeptical and did some research.  I could not find any evidence that they lived.  So, who then, created them?  And for what purpose?  I also don't think we, as a species, are better off for having those 'avatars' created and foisted upon us.
It is irrelevant whether they literally lived as individual humans, but who exactly are we talking about because we can disprove one or even some, but not all. However, what makes you think they didn't have any positive impact that benefited humanity? A bias perhaps?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 04:24:06 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 03:52:23 PM
Yes and no.  Whatever one might think of the ontology of such people ... are they just ordinary people, are they something more than ordinary people ... such people existed, exist now, and will continue to exist.  They may or may not gather followers, just like my couch gathers dust bunnies.  But for me it is part of "what is", nothing to get worked up about.  Now if I suddenly woke up and I was in the body of a Siberian shaman from 200 years ago, and he had stolen my soul ... well then that would need attending to, but it hasn't happened and I don't worry about such things ... though fiction writers do.
You're marginalizing revolutionaries because of your beliefs, and not because they weren't important.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 06:41:03 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 04:18:13 PM
It is irrelevant whether they literally lived as individual humans, but who exactly are we talking about because we can disprove one or even some, but not all. However, what makes you think they didn't have any positive impact that benefited humanity? A bias perhaps?
Of course, I'm bias.  But that bias came from study.  I am specifically speaking of Jesus.  I don't see how anybody who reads the evidence about Jesus' 'life' can really think he was an actual person.  So, to say that he 'taught' peace is simply putting your own wishes or spin on it.  Jesus can be made to say many things, some of which is not peaceful.  So, those who crafted the life of Jesus were skillful, I will admit.  But not as skillful as some may think.  The only 'witness' for Jesus and his teachings is the bible.  And the bible is not one book, but a collection of writings.  Who chose what writings to make up the bible is a convoluted history (which is what makes it interesting).  And there is a huge body of writings that was left over, some of which is still in existence and some we know of by name only.  And the 'bible' even now is not one set collection of writings.  There are many different versions, all of which are different, for different denominations.  This all really suggests politics and control--which leads to riches for the few.  For me, I think our history would have been gentler and kinder without  Christianity being in existence at all.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 07:38:29 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 06:41:03 PM
Of course, I'm bias.  But that bias came from study.  I am specifically speaking of Jesus.  I don't see how anybody who reads the evidence about Jesus' 'life' can really think he was an actual person.  So, to say that he 'taught' peace is simply putting your own wishes or spin on it.  Jesus can be made to say many things, some of which is not peaceful.  So, those who crafted the life of Jesus were skillful, I will admit.  But not as skillful as some may think.  The only 'witness' for Jesus and his teachings is the bible.  And the bible is not one book, but a collection of writings.  Who chose what writings to make up the bible is a convoluted history (which is what makes it interesting).  And there is a huge body of writings that was left over, some of which is still in existence and some we know of by name only.  And the 'bible' even now is not one set collection of writings.  There are many different versions, all of which are different, for different denominations.  This all really suggests politics and control--which leads to riches for the few.  For me, I think our history would have been gentler and kinder without  Christianity being in existence at all.
You can't truthfully perceive what the past might have been without Christianity or without Christ, which are two different things. Either way we have a religion where they praise a man, but forget the power he said we have as well. Whether you believe or not, you can read the teachings of Christ and see the merit in being like him. For most people's ultimate wish of peace, we should praise those who do their path justice by way of righteousness. I don't think you need religion to be righteous or even God, but it isn't righteous to condemn the path because the path is just the vehicle and the individual drives. With that said, righteousness is telling the individual to watch the damn road.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 07:56:25 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 07:38:29 PM
You can't truthfully perceive what the past might have been without Christianity or without Christ, which are two different things. Either way we have a religion where they praise a man, but forget the power he said we have as well. Whether you believe or not, you can read the teachings of Christ and see the merit in being like him. For most people's ultimate wish of peace, we should praise those who do their path justice by way of righteousness. I don't think you need religion to be righteous or even God, but it isn't righteous to condemn the path because the path is just the vehicle and the individual drives. With that said, righteousness is telling the individual to watch the damn road.
I'm happy that you have found a way to pave a path for yourself.  But that is a path of your own construction.  Others can read the bible and get a different way of reading it.  To tell the truth, I have read the bible and the 'message' of Jesus and found it totally mixed.  Yes, there are good things there--in Jesus' teachings and the bible.  But there are horrid things as well.  Plus, you 'righteous' act may not fit what I think of as 'righteous'--in other words that is a self defined term--each of us defines it differently.  There is no universal 'righteous' act.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 08:19:31 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 07:56:25 PM
I'm happy that you have found a way to pave a path for yourself.  But that is a path of your own construction.  Others can read the bible and get a different way of reading it.  To tell the truth, I have read the bible and the 'message' of Jesus and found it totally mixed.  Yes, there are good things there--in Jesus' teachings and the bible.  But there are horrid things as well.  Plus, you 'righteous' act may not fit what I think of as 'righteous'--in other words that is a self defined term--each of us defines it differently.  There is no universal 'righteous' act.
His teachings are not mixed if you have an open mind to what is being said. Most Christians overlook or misunderstanding the messages.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 08:38:54 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 04:24:06 PM
You're marginalizing revolutionaries because of your beliefs, and not because they weren't important.

Generally speaking, revolutionaries are bad people, including American ones.  Just ask King George.

And no, I am not marginalizing.  Actual shamans are incredibly important people, bearers of magic ... though they often go by other names now, like politician, psychologist and economist.  The most powerful of all people, are fictional people, because historical or not ... people project their hopes and fears onto them, just like in Freudian psychology.  Dr Freud got part of his ideas from Jewish exorcism.  Great religious prophets are just such shamen.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 10, 2015, 09:16:20 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 08:19:31 PM
His teachings are not mixed if you have an open mind to what is being said. Most Christians overlook or misunderstanding the messages.
well you have to admit that when the grand creator of the universe cannot get simple minded humans to understand a rather simple book…..well there are only a few obvious conclusions.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 10, 2015, 09:32:14 PM
Quote from: aitm on October 10, 2015, 09:16:20 PM
well you have to admit that when the grand creator of the universe cannot get simple minded humans to understand a rather simple book…..well there are only a few obvious conclusions.

Now don't tell me I am sure I can get this one if I think. . . . .










Is it that the one with the mind open enough to understand it is-. . . .erm. ... give me a moment. . . . . .








The Chosen One?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 09:36:33 PM
That is a pretty good answer ... if you are Elmer Gantry.

In Kabbalah it is taught that G-d messed up ... there wasn't supposed to be any creation in the first place, but G-d had a senior moment (stinks when you are infinity old yes?).  And any concept that G-d will use monkeys as the chosen mammal ... is only true if you worship Hanuman.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 11:50:00 PM
Quote from: aitm on October 10, 2015, 09:16:20 PM
well you have to admit that when the grand creator of the universe cannot get simple minded humans to understand a rather simple book…..well there are only a few obvious conclusions.
My belief is that there is no actual separation between creation and the creator, and that "we are the eyes and ears of God". Therefore, our interpretation of this reality is a fragment of universal understanding, and to see more, we must look, listen, and think in all directions. In that search, common trends emerge like adaptation, duality, and harmony. The potential of humanity is crippled by a lack of acceptance that these natural trends are ruling factors for our behavior as well, or at least how we should try to be. Harmony is one of the worst because we tend to want it on our terms rather than taking it as it comes. In my search for higher understanding, I came back to the bible which I learned to despise and was able to see new truths I hadn't allowed myself to see before. Everyone can do this, but it is a matter of choice.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:09:28 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 12:52:23 PM
As a fan of comparative religion ... I would reply ... shamans are for the long haul ... they are the "real thing" not Coca Cola.

All people are to some degree, mentally ill.  And most of us are recovered ... so most of us match the definition of a shaman ... we just don't rattle human bone rattles in public ;-)
It's funny that you mention mental illness. It is my understanding that when the illusions of our world fall away, it's common to lose your head. In other cultures they nurture and guide the mad because they believe they are waking up to a new and beneficial realization. It is no surprise to me that deprivation and suffering are used as tools for higher understanding because of the havoc they cause on perception. Hallucinogenics also alter perception, and therefore, can be beneficial if used appropriately.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:13:15 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 01:07:09 PM
Yes, do what is right for you ... mostly.  This is why I can't get into proselytizing ... even if I thought the world was coming to an end, like Paul of Tarsus ... I am not sure that is a bad thing, and I am not sure you aren't going to get what you have richly earned ;-)
Not only do people believe the end is near, but also they want it. I would Argue that many atheists want it too, but what if that focus is exactly what causes our demise? What if we chose to focus on improvement rather than destruction?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:19:12 AM
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 10, 2015, 01:39:37 PM
How did Moses' detailed instructions on how to sacrifice animals better humanity?
Yes, there are errors along the way, but not without improvements along the way. Christ said nothing foul about homosexuals, never encouraged slavery, and commanded the abolition of animal sacrifice.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:24:46 AM
Quote from: jonb on October 10, 2015, 02:56:48 PM
Merit: the quality of being particularly good or worthy, especially so as to deserve praise or reward.
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=merit)

Praise and reward are not things I strive for.
It says "deserving of", not "requiring". The reference is to the acquisition of badges like in the boy scouts or military, but merit often goes without "praise or reward".
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:26:29 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 03:48:55 PM
It takes all kinds.  I am like you, I have never understood how anything beyond me knowing my faults or me knowing the satisfaction of something accomplished ... can be bettered by having other people get involved.  But then I will never be a salesman or a politician.
The feedback, good or bad, helps us grow.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 12:38:20 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2015, 08:38:54 PM
Generally speaking, revolutionaries are bad people, including American ones.  Just ask King George.

And no, I am not marginalizing.  Actual shamans are incredibly important people, bearers of magic ... though they often go by other names now, like politician, psychologist and economist.  The most powerful of all people, are fictional people, because historical or not ... people project their hopes and fears onto them, just like in Freudian psychology.  Dr Freud got part of his ideas from Jewish exorcism.  Great religious prophets are just such shamen.
Who says revolutionaries are bad? It's possible, but certainly not a requirement. The middle east was revolutionized in many ways by the Christ archetype by the same methodology that scientific revolutionaries use. It's a matter of broadening one's perspective to allow new information in, and then sharing that information for the sake of mass enlightenment.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: drunkenshoe on October 11, 2015, 02:28:58 AM
Just the title chosen for the thread...
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 06:45:58 AM
Keep it up ;-)  I sometimes won't agree with you, but I can tell anyone, whatever path you are on, you are on the right one for you.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 11, 2015, 08:48:49 AM
QuoteIn my search for higher understanding, I came back to the bible which I learned to despise and was able to see new truths I hadn't allowed myself to see before.

If you think that "higher understanding" can be found in the babble, you must have started out underground. Keep climbing, there is reality up here, common sense and knowledge. You seem stuck in the gibberish and illusion area.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:23:55 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 11:50:00 PM
My belief is that there is no actual separation between creation and the creator, and that "we are the eyes and ears of God". Therefore, our interpretation of this reality is a fragment of universal understanding, and to see more, we must look, listen, and think in all directions. In that search, common trends emerge like adaptation, duality, and harmony. The potential of humanity is crippled by a lack of acceptance that these natural trends are ruling factors for our behavior as well, or at least how we should try to be. Harmony is one of the worst because we tend to want it on our terms rather than taking it as it comes. In my search for higher understanding, I came back to the bible which I learned to despise and was able to see new truths I hadn't allowed myself to see before. Everyone can do this, but it is a matter of choice.
I remember sitting in a campground one day, years ago.  (I used to love camping and still love 'nature').  I was in the middle of my most serious 'searching' phase.  I was alone and all was as quiet as nature ever gets.  I watched a spider eating a fly, while the fly struggled.  Then I really turned my attention to 'nature' and began the process of understanding the alarming aspect of it.  It is all predicated upon death and savage death.  That fly was alive and was being eaten.  The antelope suffers horribly while being killed by the lion.  It's not the lion's fault, for that is what the 'creator' wanted--that is what the 'creator' crafted.   All animals must gather energy to live.  Which means all of them must kill.  Even the cow, who eats no meat, must kill plants to live.  Life feeds upon life for it's energy.  Plants don't have to do that, for they get their energy from minerals and sunlight. (Yes, I am aware that another natural system exists in which sunlight plays no part.)   this is the system the 'creator' built.  Why this system?  It makes no sense, for I could have crafted a much better and compassionate system.  I don't see your creator as possessing love, compassion or mercy.  The 'natural trends' that I see, are death and destruction, pain and suffering.  And that point of view makes no sense if there really is a creator.  For a being or presence to be so powerful to be able to create a universe and all it contains, to be so devoid of the basic human goodness, compassion or love is nonsensical.  There is no room for such a creator.  So, I simply see a universe that is, and the process that brought it into being, as being always there.  And that system is totally neutral.  Whatever meaning is in that universe, we, as individuals, must supply.  So, your meaning is different than mine.  So, my observations have brought me to a point that is just about opposite from yours.  And I arrived at mine through stopping, looking and listening and simply following what is and not what I wish it to be. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 10:45:13 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:23:55 AM
I remember sitting in a campground one day, years ago.  (I used to love camping and still love 'nature').  I was in the middle of my most serious 'searching' phase.  I was alone and all was as quiet as nature ever gets.  I watched a spider eating a fly, while the fly struggled.  Then I really turned my attention to 'nature' and began the process of understanding the alarming aspect of it.  It is all predicated upon death and savage death.  That fly was alive and was being eaten.  The antelope suffers horribly while being killed by the lion.  It's not the lion's fault, for that is what the 'creator' wanted--that is what the 'creator' crafted.   All animals must gather energy to live.  Which means all of them must kill.  Even the cow, who eats no meat, must kill plants to live.  Life feeds upon life for it's energy.  Plants don't have to do that, for they get their energy from minerals and sunlight. (Yes, I am aware that another natural system exists in which sunlight plays no part.)   this is the system the 'creator' built.  Why this system?  It makes no sense, for I could have crafted a much better and compassionate system.  I don't see your creator as possessing love, compassion or mercy.  The 'natural trends' that I see, are death and destruction, pain and suffering.  And that point of view makes no sense if there really is a creator.  For a being or presence to be so powerful to be able to create a universe and all it contains, to be so devoid of the basic human goodness, compassion or love is nonsensical.  There is no room for such a creator.  So, I simply see a universe that is, and the process that brought it into being, as being always there.  And that system is totally neutral.  Whatever meaning is in that universe, we, as individuals, must supply.  So, your meaning is different than mine.  So, my observations have brought me to a point that is just about opposite from yours.  And I arrived at mine through stopping, looking and listening and simply following what is and not what I wish it to be.
I appreciate your words and your attempt at a deeper understanding. Typical hippies do the same, yet tend to intentionally ignore the darker side of reality. With all due respect, I think you and the hippies miss out on the value of the less than desirable. Plant life is not without its dark side as well, however, and some is defensive like poison and thorns while some is offensive like the plethora of carnivorous plants. Did you know that flies are trapped by the sticky secretions of the tomato plant and when they die they are dropped into the soil below for nourishment? Instead of coming to the conclusion that there is no god because there is suffering, I considered that suffering could have a reason for existence. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned there, and because our most effective educator is hardship, I imagine that the role of the negative is simply that--a means to make us adapt and grow. If you can bare it, consider the unlikely tale of the garden of Eden. On the surface, it's rubbish, but we know it's been altered, which has likely convoluted the point. Still, just think about life in a place where we know nothing of discomfort and hardship. Think about how you took electricity for granted as a child until you experienced an outage. A "perfect" existence enables stupidity, laziness, and a lack of appreciation. It is arguable that overcoming chaos is the fundamental cause of our progress, and because progress is a core factor of life, one could conclude that chaos is a necessary evil rather than a force in opposition of God. Please forgive me for this, but as a seeker named Michael, I hold reverence for the stories about Michael. One in particular made me question the roles of good and evil. There's this character named Joshua who is supposedly confronted with the presence of the archangel, but he questions the motives of Michael, asking him whose side is he on. The archangel answers, "Neither, but as commander of the army of the Lord, I have come." Almost everyone blows this story off today, but what if there is a good reason for such a tale? I believe there is, and it is to highlight the CURRENT need for both good and evil. It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out. Therefore, the very father that Christ served and defended was the one who made sure he died a brutal death. That lesson is insinuated by the question, "Father, why have you forsaken me?" Why indeed.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 11:05:09 AM
Sometimes trying to understand a story better, is a good way to understand ourselves better.  Living people are unfinished stories.  The historicity is a red herring.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 11, 2015, 02:27:50 PM
The vastness of the universe is such that were it a human, it would consider the atom and our entire solar system to be about the same size. Our insignificance and for some a self imposed misery that demands they create a god for themselves so they can have a better standing in the vastness. This god they created, is brutish and cruel beyond understanding, so cruel that even though it could wave its hand and make humanity disappear chooses to torture the several million men women and children by drowning to death. Then this most magnificent of gods cannot quite grasp the power of his "wand" and loses battles to humans who have the audacity to have iron wheels on their chariots and then to top it off, is stymied to the point of embarrassment over a woman's menstrual cycle that he created to the point where he damns they be banished for being icky.

That is your god in a nutshell, and you call other people hippies? Your reverence for such blathering stupidity renders anything else you propose as ludicrous as your god. Try religion-r-us….they got lots of bonafide nut jobs over there. You'll fit right in.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 02:33:59 PM
There are two kinds of people, those who divide people into two kinds of people, and those who do not ;-)

One can find solace in one's unimportance ... inferiority complex.

One can find solace in one's importance ... superiority complex.

I vote with Nietzsche ... justifiable superiority complex.  But democratic.

We are all uber-menschen, but no two are alike, like snowflakes.  Or just flakes ... your call ;-)
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 11, 2015, 02:44:24 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 10:45:13 AM
It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out.

So you are saying his message is not as strong as that of Buddha's then?
(http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/24/2458/3K6KD00Z/posters/jochen-schlenker-laughing-buddha-tanzhe-temple-beijing-china-asia.jpg)
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 02:55:24 PM
A few inter-related points ...

If Socrates hadn't been martyred, his freethinking cause would have died in obscurity

If Christianity hadn't been useful to the Roman State, it would have died in obscurity

If Jews hadn't been stiff necked, we would have either been assimilated or have died in obscurity ... this is still an ongoing choice

If Buddha hadn't been useful to the Indian States, and other places farther East, it would have died in obscurity

I agree, that even a fictional Jesus, is better dead than alive ... even to pre-Constantinian Christianity.  A living Jesus would have confounded everyone with his BuJew sensibility ;-)  His bohemian similarity to Socrates was helpful to his disciple's cause ... and the stiff neck of Gentile Christianity helped it survive until it could be coopted by the Roman State.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 03:00:31 PM
Quote from: jonb on October 11, 2015, 02:44:24 PM
So you are saying his message is not as strong as that of Buddha's then?
(http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/24/2458/3K6KD00Z/posters/jochen-schlenker-laughing-buddha-tanzhe-temple-beijing-china-asia.jpg)
That's a fine point. Siddhartha is believed to have lived a long life, but the culture he existed in was dramatically different. India promoted spiritual discovery and meditation in his time while Christ's middle east was oppressive and information was hoarded by the elite class. It's believed that young Christ was well traveled, and may have studied in places like India and Tibet, which could have offered him the enlightenment he was unlikely to receive at home, and more so, his perspective would be harder to receive at home, requiring tactics that were unnecessary for the Buddha.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 03:05:59 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 02:55:24 PM
A few inter-related points ...

If Socrates hadn't been martyred, his freethinking cause would have died in obscurity

If Christianity hadn't been useful to the Roman State, it would have died in obscurity

If Jews hadn't been stiff necked, we would have either been assimilated or have died in obscurity ... this is still an ongoing choice

If Buddha hadn't been useful to the Indian States, and other places farther East, it would have died in obscurity

I agree, that even a fictional Jesus, is better dead than alive ... even to pre-Constantinian Christianity.  A living Jesus would have confounded everyone with his BuJew sensibility ;-)  His bohemian similarity to Socrates was helpful to his disciple's cause ... and the stiff neck of Gentile Christianity helped it survive until it could be coopted by the Roman State.
I would argue that the Roman state was in a tight spot because of Christ. They had to find a way to incorporate him in or they risked a declination of control. Pilate was merciless, but we're led to believe that he gave Christ a way out and it was ultimately the fault of the Jews that he died rather than the governmental body he threatened. This is clearly propaganda.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:52:37 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 10:45:13 AM
WW---I appreciate your words and your attempt at a deeper understanding. Typical hippies do the same, yet tend to intentionally ignore the darker side of reality. With all due respect, I think you and the hippies miss out on the value of the less than desirable. Plant life is not without its dark side as well, however, and some is defensive like poison and thorns while some is offensive like the plethora of carnivorous plants. Did you know that flies are trapped by the sticky secretions of the tomato plant and when they die they are dropped into the soil below for nourishment? Instead of coming to the conclusion that there is no god because there is suffering, I considered that suffering could have a reason for existence. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned there, and because our most effective educator is hardship, I imagine that the role of the negative is simply that--a means to make us adapt and grow.

Mike--I don't know where hippes come in here.  But I appreciate your attempt at a deeper understanding as well.  I am well aware of the 'darker' side of plants.  But I only scratched the surface on the death and destruction your creator has created.  What of the misformed babies that are born--without all sorts of body parts or parts of their brains or altered chemistry.  Is that for learning a lesson?  What lesson?  How about disformed puppies (and all other creatures), are they to learn a lesson too?  Your creator seems so shallow that that is all it can think of for learning lessons.  And what purpose are these lessons?  consider that all creatures are born imperfect--why is that?  Does each one mean a different lesson?  That simply does not make any sense.

WW--If you can bare it, consider the unlikely tale of the garden of Eden. On the surface, it's rubbish, but we know it's been altered, which has likely convoluted the point. Still, just think about life in a place where we know nothing of discomfort and hardship. Think about how you took electricity for granted as a child until you experienced an outage. A "perfect" existence enables stupidity, laziness, and a lack of appreciation. It is arguable that overcoming chaos is the fundamental cause of our progress, and because progress is a core factor of life, one could conclude that chaos is a necessary evil rather than a force in opposition of God.

Mike--Adam and Eve are rubbish--of course it is; it's fiction you realize.  And it is a fictional place that a sadistic creator created.  A perfect existence does not enable anything but perfection.  That has never existed and never will.  But your creator could have created it from the get go.  Your creator could have created humans who knew what perfection was and how to attain it.  Instead, your creator created death, destruction, suffering;why?  To teach humans lessons?  What lessons?  It seems more likely your creator simply likes to look in on his creations to see how they cope--or don't cope.  It is a sociopath.  As for chaos, it is indeed, part of life and the universe.  But the chaos of the universe is neutral--the universe cares not a whit about you or I--or of anything else.  Yes, overcoming problems is what propels us forward as individual and as a species.  Chaos is not evil--it just is. 

WW-- Please forgive me for this, but as a seeker named Michael, I hold reverence for the stories about Michael. One in particular made me question the roles of good and evil. There's this character named Joshua who is supposedly confronted with the presence of the archangel, but he questions the motives of Michael, asking him whose side is he on. The archangel answers, "Neither, but as commander of the army of the Lord, I have come." Almost everyone blows this story off today, but what if there is a good reason for such a tale? I believe there is, and it is to highlight the CURRENT need for both good and evil. It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out. Therefore, the very father that Christ served and defended was the one who made sure he died a brutal death. That lesson is insinuated by the question, "Father, why have you forsaken me?" Why indeed.

Mike--I hope you do realize that the Arch Angel Michael, Joshua, and Christ are all fiction.  They are tales (whether you call them legends, myth, or allegory) crafted for a purpose.  What you term good and evil is not god made but man made.  What is good and evil is totally in the eye of the beholder.  The 'Christ archetype' was martyred--and he was martyred in dozens and dozens of different names and cultures.  The christian tale is not unique.  So, you are moved by the fictional Father killing his fictional self or son, and he did so in a brutal fictional way?  Wow!   You quote--"Father, why have you forsaken me?"  So you have your fictional god asking why it is forsaking itself?  Schizoid, I'd say.  Why, indeed!!

Maybe you can take a hippie to lunch some day and ask what he/she thinks.  And listen.  Provided there are hippies around.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:59:15 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 10, 2015, 12:40:31 PM
The common actions, traits, and teachings of the alleged prophets, messiahs, avatars, gurus, yogis, shamans, and saints represents an archetype that changed humanity in some way for the better. They represented humility, equality, generosity, and wisdom.

Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions. We have gained a lot of ground, though, and I think it's wise to recognize that.
To return to the original post.  I will discuss Jesus, since I am most familiar with that fictional tale.  I would suggest that Jesus can be made to 'teach' opposite points.  For example:

Does Jesus teach peace?
Yes.
Blessed are the peacemakers. Matthew 5:9
One of them ... drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus ... Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:51-52
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. Luke 2:14
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. John 14:27
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. John 16:33
The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ. Acts 10:36
No.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Luke 12:51
He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

So, the answer to the question I guess is yes--and no.  Depends upon what you want to believe in.

Consider this about Jesus, as well.

What did Jesus teach about the Old Testament?
by Ryan Turner
Many people today do not believe in the authority of the Old Testament as Scripture. However, Jesus had some quite different things to say regarding the Old Testament. Here is a brief list of some of what Jesus taught about the Old Testament:
1.Source of Authority
1.When confronted by Satan, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament as a source of authority by stating, "It is written," (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10).
2.Imperishability
1."For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished," (NASB, Matt. 5:18).
1.Unbreakability
1."The Scripture cannot be broken," (NASB, Jn. 10:35).
1.Source of Doctrinal Authority
1.Jesus appealed to Scripture when correcting false doctrine stating, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God," (NASB, Matt. 22:29).
1.Truthfulness
1."Your word is truth," (NASB, Jn. 17:17).
1.Historical Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed the historical existence of Jonah (Matt. 12:40), Noah (Matt. 24:37-38), and Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4-6).
1.Scientific Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed that God created the world (Mk. 13:19, cf. Matt. 19:4).
1.Old Testament Canonicity1
1.Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
2.Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
3.Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).2
What does this mean?
Since Jesus is God in flesh, performed a life of miraculous healings, died on the cross, and was miraculously resurrected three days later, what He taught on issues of doctrine are vastly important. Since He was God in flesh, whatever He taught is true. This means that we can trust the accuracy of the Old Testament Scriptures on issues of history, science, and moral instruction.

The Old Testament is a collection of fictional stories detailing a horrid, evil god, with horrid evil, commandments to follow.  And Jesus thinks that's really great.  Jesus thinks the OT is accurate in the areas of history, science and morality.  That Jesus is an idiot and willfully stupid.  He can be your avatar if you'd like--I want nothing to do with him or his fictions.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:08:22 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:52:37 PM

You have a lot of animosity toward a god you don't believe in, don't you? Deformities are mutations, and I'm sure that as an atheist, you're well-versed in evolution science and the need for mutations.  Also, you curiously expect me to have every answer for you. What exactly do you think I am? Now, since you've picked my words apart so well and I'm using this rather simple app, I'll have to end here and go back to your post before preceding.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:19:25 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:52:37 PM

I hope you can consider autism as a mutation that doesn't always work out well, but works extremely well on occasion. Many autistic people have been able to revolutionize the field they choose to pursue, and probably so because of how their brains work differently allowing for a unique perspective. It's even arguable that the quirky personalities of people like Einstein and Tesla could hint that they were autistic.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:26:18 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:52:37 PM

You're quite dismissive of many things. I find that interesting from someone who gives the subject so much attention. It's humorous that you denounce not divinity in general, but the supposed magical super hero version of God. You realize that I am not a Christian, don't you?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:08:04 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:26:18 PM
You're quite dismissive of many things. I find that interesting from someone who gives the subject so much attention. It's humorous that you denounce not divinity in general, but the supposed magical super hero version of God. You realize that I am not a Christian, don't you?
I don't care what label you apply to yourself.  What things are I dismissive of?  Yes, I do denounce divinity in general.  I just know more about christianity since I was born into a society in which that is the most accepted form of religion and divinity.  Personally, I don't 'denounce' any of the chaos or mutations or mutilations that show up in nature.  That would do no good, since there is nothing to denounce but nature.  And that is simply what is.  I do, however, have great compassion for those who suffer from any disease or malformation or handicap.  To ascribe these things to any god or divinity makes me question the sanity of that god or divinity. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:11:19 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:19:25 PM
I hope you can consider autism as a mutation that doesn't always work out well, but works extremely well on occasion. Many autistic people have been able to revolutionize the field they choose to pursue, and probably so because of how their brains work differently allowing for a unique perspective. It's even arguable that the quirky personalities of people like Einstein and Tesla could hint that they were autistic.
Of course not all mutations are good; they come in three flavors I suspect.  Those that are all good, all bad or a mixture of the two.  Autism is neither good nor bad--it just is.  We are the ones who apply the labels.  But to suggest that is god's will, is in my estimation, insanity.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:12:56 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:52:37 PM

I've taken many hippies to lunch, in a manner of speaking. I know a lot about "new age" spirituality and the focus they put on "love and light" and bliss. I am well aware that the Genesis account of creation doesn't make literal sense, but I do see it as a lesson about merely following your bliss compared to the merits of a more challenging life. I agree that the line between good and evil is less defined than most tend to think. The yin yang represents the play between the two rather well and the story I shared about the archangel highlights that point as well, but you missed it because you're dismissive. Moreover, I don't draw a separation between God and creation, or more specifically, God and self. You seem to give God much credit, but what about us? We are in control here more than any other creature. Why expect God to fix what we have done to ourselves? Better still, what if we are the means for which God makes things better?

The defining difference between you and I is that you come off as having the answers while I come with questions and proposals. Chances are, I'll tire of this game long before you do, and you'll come away with one of those false senses of victory we spoke of before, but honestly, I hear you saying stop, the path you've chosen isn't worth it. I disagree, and it's for reasons you can't get your head around because you've not allowed yourself to go there. Congratulations, great victor.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:15:10 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 07:08:22 PM
You have a lot of animosity toward a god you don't believe in, don't you? Deformities are mutations, and I'm sure that as an atheist, you're well-versed in evolution science and the need for mutations.  Also, you curiously expect me to have every answer for you. What exactly do you think I am? Now, since you've picked my words apart so well and I'm using this rather simple app, I'll have to end here and go back to your post before preceding.
My questions and observations seem to have made you rather uncomfortable--why?  Who do I think you are?  A theist of some sort, I suppose.  But when I question you about your 'creator' you get rather defensive.  How come?  I'm glad you think I have picked your words apart.  I'm curious in what way did I do that?  I await your reply.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:23:30 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 06:59:15 PM
To return to the original post.  I will discuss Jesus, since I am most familiar with that fictional tale.  I would suggest that Jesus can be made to 'teach' opposite points.  For example:

Does Jesus teach peace?
Yes.
Blessed are the peacemakers. Matthew 5:9
One of them ... drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus ... Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:51-52
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. Luke 2:14
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. John 14:27
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. John 16:33
The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ. Acts 10:36
No.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Luke 12:51
He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

So, the answer to the question I guess is yes--and no.  Depends upon what you want to believe in.

Consider this about Jesus, as well.

What did Jesus teach about the Old Testament?
by Ryan Turner
Many people today do not believe in the authority of the Old Testament as Scripture. However, Jesus had some quite different things to say regarding the Old Testament. Here is a brief list of some of what Jesus taught about the Old Testament:
1.Source of Authority
1.When confronted by Satan, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament as a source of authority by stating, "It is written," (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10).
2.Imperishability
1."For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished," (NASB, Matt. 5:18).
1.Unbreakability
1."The Scripture cannot be broken," (NASB, Jn. 10:35).
1.Source of Doctrinal Authority
1.Jesus appealed to Scripture when correcting false doctrine stating, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God," (NASB, Matt. 22:29).
1.Truthfulness
1."Your word is truth," (NASB, Jn. 17:17).
1.Historical Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed the historical existence of Jonah (Matt. 12:40), Noah (Matt. 24:37-38), and Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4-6).
1.Scientific Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed that God created the world (Mk. 13:19, cf. Matt. 19:4).
1.Old Testament Canonicity1
1.Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
2.Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
3.Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).2
What does this mean?
Since Jesus is God in flesh, performed a life of miraculous healings, died on the cross, and was miraculously resurrected three days later, what He taught on issues of doctrine are vastly important. Since He was God in flesh, whatever He taught is true. This means that we can trust the accuracy of the Old Testament Scriptures on issues of history, science, and moral instruction.

The Old Testament is a collection of fictional stories detailing a horrid, evil god, with horrid evil, commandments to follow.  And Jesus thinks that's really great.  Jesus thinks the OT is accurate in the areas of history, science and morality.  That Jesus is an idiot and willfully stupid.  He can be your avatar if you'd like--I want nothing to do with him or his fictions.
Your attack on the tales of one character from a bias perspective and out of context, and we can both agree that the particular context is one of the most altered collections of literature in human history. Therefore, it's not a strong position. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:31:53 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:12:56 PM
I've taken many hippies to lunch, in a manner of speaking. I know a lot about "new age" spirituality and the focus they put on "love and light" and bliss. I am well aware that the Genesis account of creation doesn't make literal sense, but I do see it as a lesson about merely following your bliss compared to the merits of a more challenging life. I agree that the line between good and evil is less defined than most tend to think. The yin yang represents the play between the two rather well and the story I shared about the archangel highlights that point as well, but you missed it because you're dismissive. Moreover, I don't draw a separation between God and creation, or more specifically, God and self. You seem to give God much credit, but what about us? We are in control here more than any other creature. Why expect God to fix what we have done to ourselves? Better still, what if we are the means for which God makes things better?

The defining difference between you and I is that you come off as having the answers while I come with questions and proposals. Chances are, I'll tire of this game long before you do, and you'll come away with one of those false senses of victory we spoke of before, but honestly, I hear you saying stop, the path you've chosen isn't worth it. I disagree, and it's for reasons you can't get your head around because you've not allowed yourself to go there. Congratulations, great victor.
Sarcasm does not become you.  Let me approach you and this subject in a different way.  I have searched for god or divinity for most of my adult life.  I tried everything from astrology to full blown christianity.  I was even a board president and vice president for a local church for 3 years.  I have done academic research and emotional involvement.   I can't say I've tried it all, but I have given various approaches my full attention.  As for the answers, I have my own.  But they are not etched in cement.  I am still searching and hope to be open to other possibilities until the day I die.  I suppose I have been a bit forward with my 'stop' message--but that is because your path is a 'stop' for me--because I've been on it for awhile and it was not a good fit.  You may think I can't get my head around your path; I don't really know what the full extent of your path is, so you may be correct--or not. 

Look, at best I see theism as a helpful crutch to get one through life.  At worst, I see it as a tool used by the few to control the many for the benefit of the few.  I have seen theism as the worst much, much too often.  I do subscribe to following your bliss to get through this life and to give your life meaning.  But by bliss I do not mean the airy fairy bliss, the bliss that means mindless pleasure.  I mean the bliss that drives you to do something well, that feeds you emotionally, that drives you to be the best you can be.  Don't need god for this. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:52:35 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:08:04 PM
I don't care what label you apply to yourself.  What things are I dismissive of?  Yes, I do denounce divinity in general.  I just know more about christianity since I was born into a society in which that is the most accepted form of religion and divinity.  Personally, I don't 'denounce' any of the chaos or mutations or mutilations that show up in nature.  That would do no good, since there is nothing to denounce but nature.  And that is simply what is.  I do, however, have great compassion for those who suffer from any disease or malformation or handicap.  To ascribe these things to any god or divinity makes me question the sanity of that god or divinity.
Back in my twenties when I first got high-speed internet, I saw the creation vs. evolution "debate" and while I assumed evolution was true, I couldn't argue against creationism very well because I didn't have the knowledge. So because I was passionate about the subject, I did my homework.

The Christian dogma alone doesn't actually do so well to portray divinity, and so having that (and a limited perspective of that) as your sole argument makes you like I was back in my twenties.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:58:02 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:11:19 PM
Of course not all mutations are good; they come in three flavors I suspect.  Those that are all good, all bad or a mixture of the two.  Autism is neither good nor bad--it just is.  We are the ones who apply the labels.  But to suggest that is god's will, is in my estimation, insanity.
What bubble are you living in? The whole world is insane, and you are no exception.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:01:52 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:58:02 PM
What bubble are you living in? The whole world is insane, and you are no exception.
Yeah, I guess you could say that all is insanity.  Must be god's will, eh? 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:03:52 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 08:15:10 PM
My questions and observations seem to have made you rather uncomfortable--why?  Who do I think you are?  A theist of some sort, I suppose.  But when I question you about your 'creator' you get rather defensive.  How come?  I'm glad you think I have picked your words apart.  I'm curious in what way did I do that?  I await your reply.
I used to be atheist. I was for nine years and agnostic before that. Before high-speed internet. I changed my mind.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:04:10 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:52:35 PM
Back in my twenties when I first got high-speed internet, I saw the creation vs. evolution "debate" and while I assumed evolution was true, I couldn't argue against creationism very well because I didn't have the knowledge. So because I was passionate about the subject, I did my homework.

The Christian dogma alone doesn't actually do so well to portray divinity, and so having that (and a limited perspective of that) as your sole argument makes you like I was back in my twenties.
Well, then, maybe you should go back to the way you were in your twenties.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:04:56 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:01:52 PM
Yeah, I guess you could say that all is insanity.  Must be god's will, eh?
What if our will is God's will?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:05:27 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:03:52 PM
I used to be atheist. I was for nine years and agnostic before that. Before high-speed internet. I changed my mind.
Most interesting.  Would you mind sharing why or what moved you to change?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:05:46 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:04:10 PM
Well, then, maybe you should go back to the way you were in your twenties.
No, I'm only going one direction.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:07:04 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:04:56 PM
What if our will is God's will?
Interesting.  How would that work?  I think I kind of understand what you mean--but not clearly. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:07:16 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:05:27 PM
Most interesting.  Would you mind sharing why or what moved you to change?
That is a very long story.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:11:15 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:07:16 PM
That is a very long story.
Okay.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:37:03 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 11, 2015, 09:07:04 PM
Interesting.  How would that work?  I think I kind of understand what you mean--but not clearly.
We are creators and we have a gift for creating whatever we care to dream up. The trick is to turn an idea into a belief, and for every believer, the possibility increases. This is an observable phenomenon that threatens to call propaganda and prophecy one in the same. What if there was a way to let everyone have their cake and eat it too? All you have to do is respect the path, but judge the behavior. Even Christ called for fair judgment. Ghandi was a successful judge for his people as well. These pathways people choose for their ascension are not the point. We're all hoping to move up in one way or another. That's what matters, and so I believe anyone can get behind the idea of continuing the course but trying to go about it better. All you have to do is know how to plant that seed, and I assure you it won't be by calling people insane.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: jonb on October 11, 2015, 10:06:11 PM
QuoteHer wings would scarcely carry her now, but in reply she alighted on his shoulder and gave his nose a loving bite. She whispered in his ear "You silly ass," and then, tottering to her chamber, lay down on the bed.
His head almost filled the fourth wall of her little room as he knelt near her in distress. Every moment her light was growing fainter; and he knew that if it went out she would be no more. She liked his tears so much that she put out her beautiful finger and let them run over it.
Her voice was so low that at first he could not make out what she said. Then he made it out. She was saying that she thought she could get well again if children believed in fairies.

https://youtu.be/OFX7bA5jc58
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 11, 2015, 10:10:15 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 03:05:59 PM
I would argue that the Roman state was in a tight spot because of Christ. They had to find a way to incorporate him in or they risked a declination of control. Pilate was merciless, but we're led to believe that he gave Christ a way out and it was ultimately the fault of the Jews that he died rather than the governmental body he threatened. This is clearly propaganda.

The Pauline message, more so than that of James ... was profoundly subversive of Roman political-economics.  It still is, that is why it had to be destroyed or co-opted.  Similarly for other great religions like Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam.  All religions are political accommodations to realities that are too painful or disruptive to be dealt with directly.  An oyster generates a pearl to avoid the irritation of a grain of sand.  Hence the appropriateness of the Hellenistic gnostic parable of The Pearl .. which is probably what is elliptically referred to in the Gospels.  The generations after any religious founding, have to accommodate political reality.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:05:25 AM
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 10, 2015, 01:39:37 PM
How did Moses' detailed instructions on how to sacrifice animals better humanity?

They were sacrificing humans, in most cases, young virgins.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:10:21 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 08:52:35 PM
So because I was passionate about the subject, I did my homework.



Apparently, not very well.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 07:11:09 AM
Sacrificing young people is still popular, but it goes by another name ... perpetual war of the NWO.

I agree that people like the Aztecs were practicing particularly vile acts of human sacrifice ... but if one gets into their mentality, one eventually sees oneself looking back, only not speaking Nahuatl.  It is easier for a Spaniard to relate to a Portuguese of course, but it is still possible to relate to far stranger cultural differences.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:17:21 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 07:11:09 AM
Sacrificing young people is still popular, but it goes by another name ...


Well, they're paid a salary. Wouldn't you agree that's an improvement...
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 12, 2015, 08:50:45 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:37:03 PM
We are creators and we have a gift for creating whatever we care to dream up. The trick is to turn an idea into a belief, and for every believer, the possibility increases. This is an observable phenomenon that threatens to call propaganda and prophecy one in the same. What if there was a way to let everyone have their cake and eat it too? All you have to do is respect the path, but judge the behavior. Even Christ called for fair judgment. Ghandi was a successful judge for his people as well. These pathways people choose for their ascension are not the point. We're all hoping to move up in one way or another. That's what matters, and so I believe anyone can get behind the idea of continuing the course but trying to go about it better. All you have to do is know how to plant that seed, and I assure you it won't be by calling people insane.
I see a little better where you are coming from.  But from my point of view, while I agree that we, as a species, are 'creators' and we do dream.  The trick is to take that dreamed up or imagined idea and turn it into something material.  Everything that is man-made in this universe started out as an idea.  And then was made manifest by somebody.  The Trick, as I see it is to turn every idea into a thing--not a belief.  I see a belief as simply thinking something is without any proof.  So, I agree, that for a belief to grow, every new believer increases the possibility that that belief will grow.  And yes, that is an observable phenomenon, for we have seen it time and time again.  Christianity grew in that fashion.  When you bring Christ into the picture, I must disagree.  When you say 'Christ' I must assume you mean Jesus.  Okay--Christ was not Jesus' last name.  It is the name of an office and there were many Christ's prior to this Jesus and after, as well.  The name Jesus means savior (as does Joshua), and that alone should give a thinking person pause. 

You say "These pathways people choose for their ascension are not the point."  Pathways up to what?  I did not say the pathway isn't important--the journey and what you make of it, is all important to you--the destination, not so much, since everybody's destination is death.  You refer to 'moving up'--what does that mean to you?

This sentence "All you have to do is know how to plant that seed, and I assure you it won't be by calling people insane.", puzzles me.  When I plant a seed in the garden, I know what it is I'm planting.  What seed is it that you want to plant--from where does the seed come and for what is it supposed to grow into? 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 09:20:22 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 11, 2015, 09:04:56 PM
What if our will is God's will?

What if it's not!
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:25:37 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 12, 2015, 08:50:45 AM
I see a little better where you are coming from.  But from my point of view, while I agree that we, as a species, are 'creators' and we do dream.  The trick is to take that dreamed up or imagined idea and turn it into something material.  Everything that is man-made in this universe started out as an idea.  And then was made manifest by somebody.  The Trick, as I see it is to turn every idea into a thing--not a belief.  I see a belief as simply thinking something is without any proof.  So, I agree, that for a belief to grow, every new believer increases the possibility that that belief will grow.  And yes, that is an observable phenomenon, for we have seen it time and time again.  Christianity grew in that fashion.  When you bring Christ into the picture, I must disagree.  When you say 'Christ' I must assume you mean Jesus.  Okay--Christ was not Jesus' last name.  It is the name of an office and there were many Christ's prior to this Jesus and after, as well.  The name Jesus means savior (as does Joshua), and that alone should give a thinking person pause. 

You say "These pathways people choose for their ascension are not the point."  Pathways up to what?  I did not say the pathway isn't important--the journey and what you make of it, is all important to you--the destination, not so much, since everybody's destination is death.  You refer to 'moving up'--what does that mean to you?

This sentence "All you have to do is know how to plant that seed, and I assure you it won't be by calling people insane.", puzzles me.  When I plant a seed in the garden, I know what it is I'm planting.  What seed is it that you want to plant--from where does the seed come and for what is it supposed to grow into?
You miss the point because of, I suppose, your issue with belief. Before an idea can become material, you have to believe it a possibility.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:31:16 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 12, 2015, 08:50:45 AM
I see a little better where you are coming from.  But from my point of view, while I agree that we, as a species, are 'creators' and we do dream.  The trick is to take that dreamed up or imagined idea and turn it into something material.  Everything that is man-made in this universe started out as an idea.  And then was made manifest by somebody.  The Trick, as I see it is to turn every idea into a thing--not a belief.  I see a belief as simply thinking something is without any proof.  So, I agree, that for a belief to grow, every new believer increases the possibility that that belief will grow.  And yes, that is an observable phenomenon, for we have seen it time and time again.  Christianity grew in that fashion.  When you bring Christ into the picture, I must disagree.  When you say 'Christ' I must assume you mean Jesus.  Okay--Christ was not Jesus' last name.  It is the name of an office and there were many Christ's prior to this Jesus and after, as well.  The name Jesus means savior (as does Joshua), and that alone should give a thinking person pause. 

You say "These pathways people choose for their ascension are not the point."  Pathways up to what?  I did not say the pathway isn't important--the journey and what you make of it, is all important to you--the destination, not so much, since everybody's destination is death.  You refer to 'moving up'--what does that mean to you?

This sentence "All you have to do is know how to plant that seed, and I assure you it won't be by calling people insane.", puzzles me.  When I plant a seed in the garden, I know what it is I'm planting.  What seed is it that you want to plant--from where does the seed come and for what is it supposed to grow into?
I grow very tired of this game, always trying to explain the minor points to someone who is a cocoon of bias and self-righteousness. You gotta know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em. As predicted, I fold. Again, congratulations.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 12, 2015, 09:43:08 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:31:16 AM
I grow very tired of this game, always trying to explain the minor points to someone who is a cocoon of bias and self-righteousness. You gotta know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em. As predicted, I fold. Again, congratulations.
I would suggest you fold time and again is because your ideas are as solid as Swiss cheese.  And I am the one who is in a cocoon of self-righteousness?  Okay.  Maybe you should stand in front of a mirror when you say that.  You have airy-fairy beliefs and because I cannot see them as you do, you get angry.  And you don't seem to be able to articulate them very well, and you get defensive because of your failure.  Okay.  Many, many theists are like that.  The majority that come through here are like that.  You believe in puff and smoke and become indigent when others cannot see anything solid.  That's okay.  Go play in another sandbox.  BTW, what did you expect from an atheist forum?  Do you think we are simply misguided and are awaiting a silver-tongued one such as yourself who can pull our blinders off?  Might I suggest you take your blinders off first.   
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 12, 2015, 11:03:01 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:31:16 AM
I grow very tired of this game, always trying to explain the minor points to someone who is a cocoon of bias and self-righteousness. You gotta know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em. As predicted, I fold. Again, congratulations.

You are arguing in favor of stupidity and wonder why we refuse to agree? You fold again, because stupidity has no foundation but ignorance. And ignorance will always wilt in the face of knowledge and reason.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 12, 2015, 11:10:17 AM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:25:37 AM
You miss the point because of, I suppose, your issue with belief. Before an idea can become material, you have to believe it a possibility.
That is what I said.  Are you blind as well as willfully ignorant????!
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 12:48:23 PM
Quote from: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:17:21 AM
Well, they're paid a salary. Wouldn't you agree that's an improvement...

World leaders have always been well compensated ;-(  Every military has had at least subsistence ... and usually better.  A Roman legionary was paid twice what a regular laborer was paid.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:17:40 PM
Quote from: WanderingWonderer on October 12, 2015, 09:31:16 AM
I grow very tired of this game, always trying to explain the minor points ...

Oh poor you, just when we were having fun kicking your ass. Now go to mommy and cry me a river.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 12, 2015, 07:21:24 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 12:48:23 PM
World leaders have always been well compensated ;-(  Every military has had at least subsistence ... and usually better.  A Roman legionary was paid twice what a regular laborer was paid.

In pre-historic times, the leader would wear a hat, or some kind of ornaments that distinguished him from the other members of the tribe. It came with the territory of being the boss.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 07:23:30 PM
... the rest of the story.  The rank and file suggested that hat ... so that the first casualty might be the boss ;-)  Generally the second in command was most enthusiastic ... and short sighted ;-))
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 07:13:05 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 12, 2015, 07:23:30 PM
... the rest of the story.  The rank and file suggested that hat ... so that the first casualty might be the boss ;-)  Generally the second in command was most enthusiastic ... and short sighted ;-))

So you're saying that the rank and file acted cowardly...
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Baruch on October 13, 2015, 07:21:55 AM
Quote from: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 07:13:05 AM
So you're saying that the rank and file acted cowardly...

No, just disloyal to asshats.  Stone Age fragging.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 13, 2015, 07:21:55 AM
No, just disloyal to asshats.  Stone Age fragging.

Being disloyal isn't cowardly if you say that you are disloyal openly. If you keep that as a secret agenda, it is cowardly.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 09:17:08 AM
Quote from: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 08:22:11 AM
Being disloyal isn't cowardly if you say that you are disloyal openly. If you keep that as a secret agenda, it is cowardly.
Or maybe smart.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 09:22:59 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 09:17:08 AM
Or maybe smart.

Not really. Smart is the ability to see the threshold between brave/reckless and coward/prudent.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 09:33:25 AM
Quote from: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 09:22:59 AM
Not really. Smart is the ability to see the threshold between brave/reckless and coward/prudent.
Isn't there such a thing as biding your time?
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 09:53:24 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 09:33:25 AM
Isn't there such a thing as biding your time?

It's one factor out of many.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:19:32 PM
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on October 10, 2015, 01:39:37 PM
How did Moses' detailed instructions on how to sacrifice animals better humanity?
It was misconstrued. Sacrifice is to be of want for self(sin/greed). Killing innocent things for the actions of the guilty was never the right way.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 13, 2015, 12:24:26 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:19:32 PM
It was misconstrued. Sacrifice is to be of want for self(sin/greed). Killing innocent things for the actions of the guilty was never the right way.


Yeah, right, that's why there was such detailed instruction in the babble......
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:25:13 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 10, 2015, 06:41:03 PM
Of course, I'm bias.  But that bias came from study.  I am specifically speaking of Jesus.  I don't see how anybody who reads the evidence about Jesus' 'life' can really think he was an actual person.  So, to say that he 'taught' peace is simply putting your own wishes or spin on it.  Jesus can be made to say many things, some of which is not peaceful.  So, those who crafted the life of Jesus were skillful, I will admit.  But not as skillful as some may think.  The only 'witness' for Jesus and his teachings is the bible.  And the bible is not one book, but a collection of writings.  Who chose what writings to make up the bible is a convoluted history (which is what makes it interesting).  And there is a huge body of writings that was left over, some of which is still in existence and some we know of by name only.  And the 'bible' even now is not one set collection of writings.  There are many different versions, all of which are different, for different denominations.  This all really suggests politics and control--which leads to riches for the few.  For me, I think our history would have been gentler and kinder without  Christianity being in existence at all.
Most records were burned long ago. Any other records could be hidden intentionally by the same principalaties that swayed most from the right teachings.

All teachings of Christ are of peace. All fighting is of a spiritual nature and not physically violent in anyway.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: aitm on October 13, 2015, 12:24:26 PM
Yeah, right, that's why there was such detailed instruction in the babble......
If you read the new testament more closely you will see that it states that the teachings of Moses where misconstrued. There is a unified theme of all peaceful Faith. It is of sacrifice. Sacrifice can only be done by self as klingon other life isn't sacrifice it is murder.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:31:43 PM
Woe... Killing, not klingon😊

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 13, 2015, 01:11:51 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:30:47 PM
If you read the new testament more closely

Oh yeah, you're one of those guys that takes a yellow highlighter and highlights every fourth, twelveth, sixteenth word or so to make a "surprise" message from god. Yeah, we already know you pick and choose and make up shit.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 12:25:13 PM
All teachings of Christ are of peace. All fighting is of a spiritual nature and not physically violent in anyway.

These are the teachings of a man of peace?
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Luke 12:51

He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

Couple those with the fact that Jesus did not disagree with any of the OT, and you have a man who maybe mouthed peace in certain times, but not all times.  And the fact that Jesus is a fiction, the authors and editors of that fictional character can, and did, put words into the cartoon's mouth that fit their agenda.  That the fiction making and the editing happened over a large time period made the cartoon support just about whatever stance you want to take.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 05:23:20 PM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 01:22:37 PM
These are the teachings of a man of peace?
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Luke 12:51

He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

Couple those with the fact that Jesus did not disagree with any of the OT, and you have a man who maybe mouthed peace in certain times, but not all times.  And the fact that Jesus is a fiction, the authors and editors of that fictional character can, and did, put words into the cartoon's mouth that fit their agenda.  That the fiction making and the editing happened over a large time period made the cartoon support just about whatever stance you want to take.
The sword is the word of God. It is part of the full armor of God. All ancient scripture goes back to a way of being. That tranquility is through peace. There is a consciousness that one can attain through absolute truth with one's self. We are to be giving without selfish want. We are to do for others without expecting them to do the same. There is much fighting, of a spiritual sense. When the time comes we may be called to fight in a physical sense. This is a whole different scenario from the end though. We are to unify under true Faith and sacrifice of sin under God. We are to be and preach peace and and help to all at this time by way of salvation through Christ. There will be division, but it will be 3 that make 1, against the 2 headed. It will be division within family and friends unfortunately. But now is the time to bring as many in to the folds of peace and unity and salvation under the one God. The division isn't here just yet, not in a violent sense anyway.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Unbeliever on October 13, 2015, 05:41:27 PM
Quote from: CrucifyCindy on October 10, 2015, 02:18:49 PM
Well before Moses they were doing it wrong.

Well, after Moses they still did it wrong.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 13, 2015, 05:43:12 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 05:23:20 PM
The division isn't here just yet,


of course not cause in your addled brain "this generation" is as of right now about 1980 years overdue. But rest assured he will come " like a thief in the night"  LOLOLOLOL…what bullshit must be packed in that can atop yer shoulders.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 13, 2015, 05:54:38 PM
We've seen all kinds on this forum, but pops has to be one of the biggest screw-ups in a long time.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 09:26:18 PM
Would either of you care to explain what your problems are with me? How did I offend you? Did I do something to either of you or are you just haters just for the sake of negativity?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: aitm on October 13, 2015, 09:51:37 PM
I don't hate you, please, get a grip. You are a typical whack-job christian. You ignore the parts of the babble you don't like, espouse the parts you do like, and make up shit about other parts that you want to use if they sounded like what you want them to say. So,,,typical cherry picker who willingly ignores what the babble really says in favor of what you want it to say.

And of course, to top it off, you attempt to present yourself as an honest intellectual. Ha, dat some funny shit there.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 10:02:45 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 05:23:20 PM
The sword is the word of God. It is part of the full armor of God. All ancient scripture goes back to a way of being. That tranquility is through peace. There is a consciousness that one can attain through absolute truth with one's self. We are to be giving without selfish want. We are to do for others without expecting them to do the same. There is much fighting, of a spiritual sense. When the time comes we may be called to fight in a physical sense. This is a whole different scenario from the end though. We are to unify under true Faith and sacrifice of sin under God. We are to be and preach peace and and help to all at this time by way of salvation through Christ. There will be division, but it will be 3 that make 1, against the 2 headed. It will be division within family and friends unfortunately. But now is the time to bring as many in to the folds of peace and unity and salvation under the one God. The division isn't here just yet, not in a violent sense anyway.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
You do like to create stuff out of whole cloth, don't you.  As a typical christian, lying is not below you.  Fiction is your stock and trade.  That's cool.  Whatever gets you thru the long cold night.  Reason and you are not friends. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 10:05:48 PM
On the contrary; we are well known to one another. Others reasoning doesn't generally allign with mine though.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 10:17:15 PM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 13, 2015, 10:05:48 PM
On the contrary; we are well known to one another. Others reasoning doesn't generally allign with mine though.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.
No kidding.  What you call reasoning is simply belief.  So, you can't align with something you don't do. 
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 14, 2015, 11:00:57 AM
Quote from: Mike Cl on October 13, 2015, 10:17:15 PM
No kidding.  What you call reasoning is simply belief.  So, you can't align with something you don't do.
Hey, cool, more baseless assumption. Great. Are you ever gonna give an example of a fact that I refute by way of spiritual belief or are you just go no keep lying about someone you don't know based on things you don't grasp? Just curious.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: josephpalazzo on October 14, 2015, 11:47:11 AM
Quote from: popsthebuilder on October 14, 2015, 11:00:57 AM
Are you ever gonna give an example of a fact that I refute by way of spiritual belief or are you just go no keep lying about someone you don't know based on things you don't grasp? Just curious.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.



You're joking?!? You claimed that "All teachings of Christ are of peace" (post91). Mike quoted you several passages of the NT that shows you are wrong. Your reply (post 96) was full of spiritual bullshit. And now you have the gall to say, "give an example of a fact that I refute by way of spiritual belief". You are in every sense a total fraud.

Be thankful you haven't been banned so far.
Title: Re: Don't Crucify the Messenger
Post by: popsthebuilder on October 14, 2015, 08:50:13 PM
Quote from: josephpalazzo on October 14, 2015, 11:47:11 AM
You're joking?!? You claimed that "All teachings of Christ are of peace" (post91). Mike quoted you several passages of the NT that shows you are wrong. Your reply (post 96) was full of spiritual bullshit. And now you have the gall to say, "give an example of a fact that I refute by way of spiritual belief". You are in every sense a total fraud.

Be thankful you haven't been banned so far.
Woe, woe, woe buddy. If the bible is Bs to you then it can't be fact too. I ask again. What "facts' do I deny because of my Faith?
Please put up or shut up. I get tired of dealing with fools who think they know something. So prove me wrong. You said it, not me. So are you an assuming ass, or is there a fact that I refute?

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.