Religious

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Overlay

It would depend on the attitude with which someone approached Jesus. Yes, Jesus accepted people whom society considered outcasts, but he did so on the basis of their repentance, their recognition of their need for a spiritual physician, and their faith in his ability to help them in that regard. The same would not apply to someone who was sinning deliberately and repeatedly, while failing to recognize his need for God's mercy and forgiveness (i.e., not realizing that he was spiritually "sick" to begin with), and even demanding that God accept his behavior before he would have anything to do with God, or believing that God was (or should be) perfectly satisfied with the way he was living or acting. That was why Jesus so strongly condemned the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees. (But even that condemnation was done in the hope that they would see their need for forgiveness and come to him in repentance, just as the tax collectors and other outcasts had.)

However, the condemned adulteress did not approach Jesus, he approached her and defended her to the angry mob.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

That's interesting.
I would have guessed that you would have been more drawn to Gurdjieff, but whatever whirls you around is okay by me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gurdjieff

In fact the Fourth Way group (yes, Gurdjieff)of which I was a member of had made an effort to re-connect with real schools- esoteric organizations-that had been lost after Gurdjieffs' death. Both the Mevlevi Order of Sufism and the Shankaracharya of northern India were found, and both influences supplemented Gurdjieff and Ouspenskis' teaching. The Shankaracharya was the root of Transcendental Meditation so popular in the 60's and the source for Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's teaching.

The Shankaracharya:

"According to Upasana Khand of the Vedas
we are told:- "yoga" is stopping the fluctuations of consciousness. The ultimate aim is this, that by the practice of having stopped the fluctuations of the inner self, to experience the Supreme form of the Self."

Calm without a ripple in any part of the pool of water,
that manner a person can see his own face.
That really is the method, stopping the fluctuatations of the consciousness is really giving a clear reflection of the imperishable Self in the instrument of inner vision. This indeed is "darshan" (sight) of the "atma" (self or soul).'

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

God wills all men to be saved. You always conveniently forget that plainly stated will of God.

Quote me chapter and verse on that, please.

Jesus came for the sinners not the righteous. Jesus healed people in the totality or the whole person.

Did Jesus fail or refuse to heal anyone?

You bet He did!

Matt 13:57-58
57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household." 58 And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.
NASB

Just remember: Without faith it's impossible to please God! Is it not obvious that Jesus was not pleased with the faithless people in his hometown!?

So I don't infer anything more into the Pope's statement than the above and a warning about being judgmental as to what God will do and on who he will show mercy to.

God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and compassion on whom he will (Rom 9:15). But also remember this: God will in no wise clear the guilty (Ex 23:7; 34:7; Num 14:18; Nah 1:3 and this):

Job 10:14
14 If I sin, then Thou wouldst take note of me,
And wouldst not acquit me of my guilt.
NASB

Tell me: When did homosexuality become a virtuous, righteous practice?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Light

Funny how you think you are right and the Pope is wrong.Because the Pope says the same things most of us here have been saying to you including that God loves everyone even Gays. That God loves us even if we don't love him, including atheists and sinners. So can you blame the majority of us who agree with the Pope? I mean that does give us some credibility in your eyes, does it not? That God might not be as depressing and rigid as you make him/her out to be.



You know, I have a neighbor just like you who is a literal Bible believer. I have asked him several times to validate some of your comments and he mostly agrees with you. He has all these quotes memorized. So I don't disagree with all these comments you make as to what is in the Book. But a lot of the times my answer to this neighbor of mine is "what would Jesus do" if he was right here? Do you really think if a Gay man approached Jesus he would condemn him? Mary Magdalene was condemned by the society of her times, but not by Jesus. Jesus would never condemn anyone.

There has been many psychological experiments with groups of people lined up where the first person read a statement from a note to themselves in private and whispered it in the next person's ear. By the time it reached the last person (in a 20 to 30 person group) the last person wrote down what they heard. The two notes would be compared and in most cases they are almost irrelevant to each other!

Consider that the first words of the Bible were not written till 50 years after Jesus's death. How accurate do you think the words in the Bible can be after 50 years of hearsay when relayed words are not accurate after 5 minutes in a group of 20! That is why (to me) you have to take the gist of what is in the Bible and separate the wheat from the chaff. That is why there are so many contradictions in the Bible. Common sense can help sort some of those contradictions out. The Pope's comments are more in line with that common sense.

How accurate is the bible? Quite accurate. There are no contradictions in it. There are no inconsistencies in it. I'd say that it's quite accurate.

And you say that you believe that God created the heavens, earth and all that is in it? Yet, a God with this kind of power and wisdom isn't capable of preserving his "letter" to his sons and daughters -- to his chosen ones -- to the ones He has adopted into his family?

And if God is really a Person as you seem to imply (since only a rational, moral person can love), then wouldn't that Person communicate his will to the objects of his love? Would a human parent not communicate his love toward his children? Wouldn't that communication include all manner of instructions as to what is best for their welfare? Well, then if an earthly father has this kind of love toward his own, why would you expect God to do anything less?

And if you truly believe that God created the Universe and Man, then surely you must believe God created the means to communicate, i.e. LANGUAGE. So, this God who created language in order for intelligent, rational, moral beings to communicate with one another isn't capable of communicating intelligently and rationally with his moral creation? This, too, is a difficult thing for God to do?

Boxcar
P.S. Be sure to PM TJ and tell him that you have found a real live human being who believes "just like me". He'll be tickled silly to learn this.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I have criticized those who take a literal interpretation of all religions. That includes Christians, Muslims and Jews. I only pick on fools like yourself who denigrate noble truths in all religions and are responsible for religious wars and many hundreds of years of superstition and ignorance. I would love to take all literal minded jackasses of all religions and let them battle it out with knives and clubs on some prophesied biblical Apocalyptic battlefield and leave the more rational to live in peace. Guys like you from all literally minded idiocy who promulgate hatred and each their own brad of fire and brimstone fortune telling.

Nice deflection, but literal interpretation of the scriptures was not the subject of the Kenyan thread. You have criticized non-Muslims on this forum for tar-brushing (stereotyping) the religion of Islam on the basis of the violence of a "few" Muslim extremists. Yet, this is very thing you have done in the past with professing Christians of previous times who have mistreated Jews. In fact, you have even demanded that I apologize on behalf of those professing Christians! Surely, you can see your own hypocrisy, can you not?

Boxcar

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Quote me chapter and verse on that, please.
.................................................. .............................................
Tell me: When did homosexuality become a virtuous, righteous practice?

Boxcar

Did I say it was virtuous, righteous practice? Did the Pope say that? No, so why the obfuscation?

1 Tm 2, 4 who wills every one to be saved

[nomad1102]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Quote me chapter and verse on that, please.



You bet He did!



God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and compassion on whom he will (Rom 9:15). But also remember this: God will in no wise clear the guilty (Ex 23:7; 34:7; Num 14:18; Nah 1:3 and this):

Job 10:14
14 If I sin, then Thou wouldst take note of me,
And wouldst not acquit me of my guilt.
NASB

Tell me: When did homosexuality become a virtuous, righteous practice?

Boxcar

Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud 5or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. 6It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out.

Put on then, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience,
Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

Go back and read your posted comments, not scripture, directed toward other God created human beings posting on this board. Ask yourself if you have attained the virtues posted above, spelled out in scripture on what it means to be a Christian.

26 If anyone thinks himself to be religious , and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart....

With loving kindness
Nomad


.

[Show Me the Wire]

You bet He did!

Matt 13:57-58
57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household." 58 And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.
NASB

Just remember: Without faith it's impossible to please God! Is it not obvious that Jesus was not pleased with the faithless people in his hometown!?

Not the same. They wanted proof from Jesus. They did not want to be healed. That is how free will works, Jesus honored their choice of not wanting to be healed.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Nice deflection, but literal interpretation of the scriptures was not the subject of the Kenyan thread. You have criticized non-Muslims on this forum for tar-brushing (stereotyping) the religion of Islam on the basis of the violence of a "few" Muslim extremists. Yet, this is very thing you have done in the past with professing Christians of previous times who have mistreated Jews. In fact, you have even demanded that I apologize on behalf of those professing Christians! Surely, you can see your own hypocrisy, can you not?

I have said many times only misguided literal minded fools like you and one of the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther promoted vile prejudices towards Jews and persecuted, TORTURED AND KILLED other faiths as well as Jews. You are as dense as mud and just about as funny. I have no doubt true Christians who practice what Jesus taught would never allow themselves to sink that LOW. BTW, the Catholics and some protestants did apologize.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And you say that you believe that God created the heavens, earth and all that is in it? Yet, a God with this kind of power and wisdom isn't capable of preserving his "letter" to his sons and daughters

Of course a God with that power is quite capable, If that was his choice.
But by your own admission in many posts, humans are fallible, and the multiple humans who passed on his message (if he ever gave it) were more than likely to screw it up.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

I have said many times only misguided literal minded fools like you and one of the founder of Protestantism, Martin Luther promoted vile prejudices towards Jews and persecuted, TORTURED AND KILLED other faiths as well as Jews. You are as dense as mud and just about as funny. I have no doubt true Christians who practice what Jesus taught would never allow themselves to sink that LOW. BTW, the Catholics and some protestants did apologize.

But that wasn't the issue over on the Kenyan thread. You accused people over there of using Islam (with no mention of how many or most Muslims interpret the Koran) as a scapegoat because of the actions of a few. Yet, you have done the same thing, you hypocrite. Because of the actions of a "few" professing Christians in the past, you have condemned all Evangelical Christianity -- when the vast majority of Evangelicals have done nothing wrong.

And by the way the people over on the Kenyan thread who don't speak well of the Religion of Pieces at least have grounds for doing so. The Islamists' precious Koran commands believers to murder unbelievers. Conversely, the bible never sanctioned Christians to kill Jews!

And I'm the dense one?

Boxcar

[chickenhead]

had to laugh when I check in after a year and this is still top thread, and you guys are still debating your points.

Hope everyone is well.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Of course a God with that power is quite capable, If that was his choice.
But by your own admission in many posts, humans are fallible, and the multiple humans who passed on his message (if he ever gave it) were more than likely to screw it up.

Evidently, it was his will; for scripture everywhere claims to be the Word of God.

But also by the bible's own admission, nothing is too difficult for God to accomplish. You really think an all-powerful and all-wise God is not capable of dealing with puny man's weaknesses? If God cannot preserve the integrity of his own scriptures, then what kind of god are we talking about?

Jer 32:26-27
27 "Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh; is anything too difficult for Me?"
NASB

Or

Gen 18:14a
14 "Is anything too difficult for the LORD?
NASB

The texts above are rhetorical questions, by the way.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by chickenhead

had to laugh when I check in after a year and this is still top thread, and you guys are still debating your points.

Hope everyone is well.

Chicken, good to see you back! Man...have you been away that long? I hope all is well with you.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Not the same. They wanted proof from Jesus. They did not want to be healed. That is how free will works, Jesus honored their choice of not wanting to be healed.

What part of "unbelief" didn't you understand in that passage? Their number one problem is that they did not want to believe!

Boxcar