Religious Double-Standard

[Dave Schwartz]

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/003957.htm

[JustRalph]

The water is getting deeper.................we are truly drowning in diversity

[PaceAdvantage]

Is it April already?

[Bobby]

I agree. Its one thing to learn about it and a completely different thing to practice it.

[kenwoodallpromos]

From the teacher to the "Circus" court they are all idiots.
Byron is a predom white middle class rural/suburb community.
The teacher should have told the kids to give up drugs and sex with teachers insread!

[Turntime]

I agree with Dave. It certainly appears that they have gone beyond being "instructional" and are promoting a particular religion (even if that was not their intention). I'm surprised by the court's decision.

[GaryG]

I would like to know how all of this came to be in the first place. Did this teacher just decide this needs to part of her curriculum? You can be pretty sure it originated with a camel jockey somewhere. Looks like another attempt to subvert our way of life. The parents just shouldn't allow it.

[JustRalph]

I would like to know how all of this came to be in the first place. Did this teacher just decide this needs to part of her curriculum? You can be pretty sure it originated with a camel jockey somewhere. Looks like another attempt to subvert our way of life. The parents just shouldn't allow it.

Gary, you insensitive SOB! ;) Robots could not have originated the idea :D

Camel Jockey? They did away with those...........dontchaknow........:lol:

[DJofSD]

And, at the same time, the schools deny any teaching about Christianity, do not allow any "educational activity" pertaining to Christianity and claim that even uttering phrases like "Merry Christmas","Easter break/vacation", etc., is a separation of church from state issue, claiming that it is a promotion of religion.

Do you not see the hypocritical nature of these so called educators, the lap-dogs of the communist ACLU and their ilk?

[GaryG]

A child can get in more trouble for mentioning Jesus in class than cussing the teacher. Outspoken Muslims or Buddhists are free thinkers and we sure love diversity, but an outspoken Christian is a right wing evangelical nut.

[Tom]

I have a tape of the towers beinghit on 9-11-2001.
This is all I need to know about islam.

Diversity, to me, means having missles, uzi's, land mines, and napam.

[46zilzal]

folks can converse about ANY religion, anywhere till the cows come home....just don't try to sign folks up, or try to make the beliefs held up to be the ONLY ONES . If others find your choice is attractive, they will head your way.

NEVER once had a Jewish fellow, a Hindu woman or Buddhist child try to force feed me their view of the world....have had many UN-invited evangelicals tell me I was going to hell if I didn't believe JUST the way they did. No wonder they get a bad rap, kind of akin to a real estate salesman.

[twindouble]

I have a tape of the towers beinghit on 9-11-2001.
This is all I need to know about islam.

Diversity, to me, means having missles, uzi's, land mines, and napam.:lol:

Your probably the only guy on this board that has a water pistol and a Pug for a watch dog. :lol:

[DJofSD]

folks can converse about ANY religion, anywhere till the cows come home

That's all well and good. But that's not the point of this thread. Your either side stepping the issue or ignore the point.

[46zilzal]

no one is talking about religion in a school?

[PaceAdvantage]

NEVER once had a Jewish fellow, a Hindu woman or Buddhist child try to force feed me their view of the world....

Really? Where the hell do you live? In a cave?

[boxcar]

NEVER once had a Jewish fellow, a Hindu woman or Buddhist child try to force feed me their view of the world....have had many UN-invited evangelicals tell me I was going to hell if I didn't believe JUST the way they did. No wonder they get a bad rap, kind of akin to a real estate salesman.

A couple of bitter facts for ya, 46er:

1. Those other religions are spiritually bankrupt, and, therefore, have nothing to offer in terms of genuine spiritual truth, which is why their adherents don't bother to proseltyze.

2. Conversely, biblical Christiantity is entirely unique from those man-made religions in these ways:

a) Biblical Christianity is monotheistic in nature and teaches that there are three distinct but equal persons in the one Godhead; whereas all other religions either teach unitiarian aspect to monotheism, pantheism or polythiesm, etc.

b) Christians' spiritual leader Jesus Christ is alive, whereas all other religious leaders are dead.

c) Spiritual salvation is an act of God's grace; whereas all other religions teach that salvation is to be worked for and earned by living a good life in this age.

d) Christians who have been born again by the Spirit of God do and will live godly lives -- not perfectly, but substanitally and essentially by the power of God's grace because they have already been saved; whereas all other religions, again, teach that salvation must be basically be earned through our good works in this world.

e) The warp n' woof of eternal life is knowing God, therefore, since Christians know him in a real and personal way, we can know with certaininty in this age that we're his children -- part of his family.

f) Christians are charged with and have the great privilege of preaching the gospel (i.e. good news) of Christ to the lost in a dark, dying world -- simply because bibical Christianity is the only religion that really does have good news to offer; whereas all other religions at best can only hold out some vague prospects of salvation because when it comes down to it, no one really can really know in this world if he lived his life good enough to merit salvation.

These are some of the major distinctives that put bibical Christianity heads and shoulders above the rest. Simply no comparison.

Hope this brief explanation helps you to understand the spiritual poverty of all those other nice, unintrusive, and the take-it-or-leave-it attitude of those still in the state of their own spiritual death.

Boxcar

[Indulto]

46,
In my experience, the pressure to get one to “opt-in” is nothing compared to the pressure to prevent one from “opting-out.” The series of actions triggering this thread should turn everyone off, but IMO those who think the school was right should still demand equal time for each religion represented in the student body. Sometimes all that can be done is to make everyone equally unhappy.

Boxcar,
Are liberals permitted to be Christian? Would Jesus have been considered a liberal by today’s standards? If not, then what?

[ljb]

And the holy wars continue. This world would be a better place if we could get rid of the religious fanatics.

[GaryG]

A couple of bitter facts for ya, 46er:

1. Those other religions are spiritually bankrupt, and, therefore, have nothing to offer in terms of genuine spiritual truth, which is why their adherents don't bother to proseltyze.

2. Conversely, biblical Christiantity is entirely unique from those man-made religions in these ways:

a) Biblical Christianity is monotheistic in nature and teaches that there are three distinct but equal persons in the one Godhead; whereas all other religions either teach unitiarian aspect to monotheism, pantheism or polythiesm, etc.

b) Christians' spiritual leader Jesus Christ is alive, whereas all other religious leaders are dead.

c) Spiritual salvation is an act of God's grace; whereas all other religions teach that salvation is to be worked for and earned by living a good life in this age.

d) Christians who have been born again by the Spirit of God do and will live godly lives -- not perfectly, but substanitally and essentially by the power of God's grace because they have already been saved; whereas all other religions, again, teach that salvation must be basically be earned through our good works in this world.

e) The warp n' woof of eternal life is knowing God, therefore, since Christians know him in a real and personal way, we can know with certaininty in this age that we're his children -- part of his family.

f) Christians are charged with and have the great privilege of preaching the gospel (i.e. good news) of Christ to the lost in a dark, dying world -- simply because bibical Christianity is the only religion that really does have good news to offer; whereas all other religions at best can only hold out some vague prospects of salvation because when it comes down to it, no one really can really know in this world if he lived his life good enough to merit salvation.

These are some of the major distinctives that put bibical Christianity heads and shoulders above the rest. Simply no comparison.

Hope this brief explanation helps you to understand the spiritual poverty of all those other nice, unintrusive, and the take-it-or-leave-it attitude of those still in the state of their own spiritual death.

Boxcar

great presentation Box!

[JustRalph]

And the holy wars continue. This world would be a better place if we could get rid of the religious fanatics.

it takes all kinds to fill the freeway........there is room for all..........

[wes]

Originally Posted by ljb
And the holy wars continue. This world would be a better place if we could get rid of the religious fanatics.



if we could get rid of the fanatics it would make a lot more sense. There are no laws against doing what is right where it be man made or god's law.

wes

[lsbets]

I have to jump in here Boxcar - based on your "presentation" it is clear to me that you do not have much of an understanding of "those other religions", which leads me to doubt how well you truly understand yours, despite your supreme confidence that you do.

[boxcar]

I have to jump in here Boxcar - based on your "presentation" it is clear to me that you do not have much of an understanding of "those other religions", which leads me to doubt how well you truly understand yours, despite your supreme confidence that you do.

Okaaay...I'll bite on the bait offered by our resident Agnostic. Since it's so "clear" to you, please give me a specific example or two of what I'm not understanding.

Boxcar

[GaryG]

As I remember, the 9/11 hijackers that flew those planes into the WTC were promised unlimited sex with 72 virgins in "heaven". This supposedly came from one of their religious leaders. Bet they got a rude surprise....:eek:

[lsbets]

Okaaay...I'll bite on the bait offered by our resident Agnostic. Since it's so "clear" to you, please give me a specific example or two of what I'm not understanding.

Boxcar

Resident agnostic - where the hell did you come up with that one?

[RXB]

I'm the resident agnostic... but I'll let lsbets take care of this one.

[lsbets]

Thanks for the clarification RXB, and jump in if you want to. I have zero interest in getting into a debate with boxcar about religious philisophy, that would be akin to arguing politics with Secretariat, and frankly arguing politics is much more fun. However, since there are many folks here who like to try and lump me in with the so called religious right, I felt the urge when I read Boxcars rather lenghty post to point out my feelings regarding it and his view of other religions. I've said many times there are several issues out there where my positions would surprise people, and two have popped up in this thread. I've only discussed one, I'm waiting to see if anyone brings the other one up before I touch the other subject.

[JustRalph]

I'm the resident agnostic....

No you're not! I am!

[RXB]

Damn, and you've been a member of this board longer than I have... the title is yours.

"Always the bridesmaid, never the bride..." :D

[chickenhead]

I'm so agnostic, I'm not sure whether I'm agnostic.

[lsbets]

I'm so agnostic, I'm not sure whether I'm agnostic.

I'd say that's pretty agnostic!

[boxcar]

Resident agnostic - where the hell did you come up with that one?

Oops, sorry. Should I have said Atheist? But whatever you are...you seemed to imply in your post to me that you have a better understanding of spiritual matters than I do -- at least pertaining to non-Chrisitan religions. Therefore, I await further elaboration from you as to how I'm lacking in understanding -- which you apparently have.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

Oops, sorry. Should I have said Atheist?
Boxcar

Okay - where did you come up with that one? Apparantly, if someone does not fall into line with your religious views, you seem to think they must be either an atheist or an agnostic. Interesting, and not surprising.

[Indulto]

Is there any way to tell whether someone has placed you on Ignore? Is there a way to automatically ignore anyone who is already ignoring you? Knowing that someone won’t or can’t respond seems preferable to wondering whether one’s post has the effect of a tree falling in the forest.

On the other hand, it is not unheard of for primates with unimpaired ability to express evil to be audio-visually challenged in their receipt of antidotal information.

[JustRalph]

Is there any way to tell whether someone has placed you on Ignore? Is there a way to automatically ignore anyone who is already ignoring you? Knowing that someone won’t or can’t respond seems preferable to wondering whether one’s post has the effect of a tree falling in the forest.

On the other hand, it is not unheard of for primates with unimpaired ability to express evil to be audio-visually challenged in their receipt of antidotal information.

Sorry, I would help you out here, but you are on ignore :lol:

[46zilzal]

Hope this brief explanation helps you to understand the spiritual poverty of all those other nice, unintrusive, and the take-it-or-leave-it attitude of those still in the state of their own spiritual death.

Boxcar
wow and I can't wait for the RAPTURE either

[boxcar]

wow and I can't wait for the RAPTURE either

Trust me on this: All unbelivers will want to wait and wait and wait some more on that event.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Okay - where did you come up with that one? Apparantly, if someone does not fall into line with your religious views, you seem to think they must be either an atheist or an agnostic. Interesting, and not surprising.

Only because you have historically been overtly hostile or intolerant toward Christianity -- or at least that's how it has seemed to me. However, if you're a religious person or are of some particular religious persuasion, then I apologize for the misread.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for you to enlighten me as to what I don't understand about other religions. Or did you just "jump" into this thread to cast a gratuitous insult my way?

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

all those free clothes!

[hcap]

Originally posted by lsbets in response to the reverend.
Okay - where did you come up with that one? Apparantly, if someone does not fall into line with your religious views, you seem to think they must be either an atheist or an agnostic. Interesting, and not surprising.As someone once observed about the famous Russian psychologist Pavlov-"Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?"

Does the word sanctimonious ring a bell?


Mark Twain:

“a solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious old iceberg that looked like he was waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity”

[hcap]

Speaking about vacancies.

http://raptureletters.com/

"After the rapture, there will be a lot of speculation as to why millions of people have just disappeared. Unfortunately, after the rapture, only non believers will be left to come up with answers. You probably have family and friends that you have witnessed to and they just won't listen. After the rapture they probably will, but who will tell them?

We have written a computer program to do just that. It will send an Electronic Message (e-mail) to whomever you want after the rapture has taken place, and you and I have been taken to heaven."

[lsbets]

Only because you have historically been overtly hostile or intolerant toward Christianity -- or at least that's how it has seemed to me.
Boxcar

Please provide one example of anyting that even resembles your assertion.

[betchatoo]

I'd like to address the original topic. At the risk of being flogged by the rest of the board I don't see what was wrong with the concept of learning more about Muslims and their religion. The teacher didn't encourage them to convert, just play-act and learn. Knowledge is power. If all Muslims are our enemy (something I don't embrace) isn't understanding the enemy the first step to defeating them?

If what they do and believe actually has something to offer, shouldn't we learn about it? I have personally taken cursory glances at several religions and it has neither harmed me nor converted me.

As to Boxcar, arguing with him is useless. When you are fanatical about a belief things like logic and reason don't stand a chance. My only question to him is why have a religion that says that all those who don't embrace it are damned, when 3/4 of the world will never be exposed to its' teachings? Is your God that unkind?

Finally, if there is going to be an agnostic cult here, I'd like to join. But no Kool-Aid!

[JustRalph]

I'd like to address the original topic. At the risk of being flogged by the rest of the board I don't see what was wrong with the concept of learning more about Muslims and their religion. The teacher didn't encourage them to convert, just play-act and learn. Knowledge is power.

Take the same tact as a classroom project, except replace Muslim with Heroine Junkie, Bank Robber, Charles Manson, Homosexual, AIDS Victim, Rape Victim, Porn Star, etc, etc.

I believe that parents may want to impart their own values or lessons if you will, when it comes to these issues. I believe what they have done here is outside the purview of the school system. This has another facet to it that is unique in the annals of our history. Except maybe to the WWII generation. As a parent do you want to teach your children that Muslims are an enemy of our country? Are you going to provide shades of grey to the issue? how are you going to handle it? I may not trust the local school system to impart what I think are appropriate values (a matter of considerable discussion) and the complex nature of some of these issues. The facts are, when it comes to doing the right thing, our government has shown from the top down that they are inept. I believe the same applies to many local school boards.

Betchatoo makes an interesting point about how understanding muslims can be a tool in defeating them. I agree. The problem is that very few will need these skills unless they learn it from an advanced military or covert ops instructor. We can leave that up to the United States military and CIA. Not the most popular head of the PTA who finally got elected to the school board after ten attempts.

[46zilzal]

http://raptureletters.com/

We have written a computer program to do just that. It will send an Electronic Message (e-mail) to whomever you want after the rapture has taken place, and you and I have been taken to heaven."
funny stuff..Don't they also have a rapture clock somewhere telling all those CLONES how close it is??


will there still be e-mail after all those empty suits and dresses are laying about??

[boxcar]

Please provide one example of anyting that even resembles your assertion.


Sure. That's easy. How' bout the last gratuitous insult you hurled at me when you "jumped into" this thread?

Boxcar

[GaryG]

funny stuff..Don't they also have a rapture clock somewhere telling all those CLONES how close it is??


will there still be e-mail after all those empty suits and dresses are laying about??
Looks like hcap actually has a friend...I would have bet against it. :lol:

[46zilzal]

the ENTIRE idea about the rapture gets me laughing EVEYRTIME anyone talks about it.

[betchatoo]

Take the same tact as a classroom project, except replace Muslim with Heroine Junkie, Bank Robber, Charles Manson, Homosexual, AIDS Victim, Rape Victim, Porn Star, etc, etc.
.

JR:

I can't equate being a Muslim with the above. It doesn't (to me) fit in the same moral circle. As a student I did projects on the Jewish and Hugonaut contributions to history. As an actor I have played aethiest and priest. None of these have done much to change my religious values. They have simply increased my awareness and knowledge of the subject

[lsbets]

Sure. That's easy. How' bout the last gratuitous insult you hurled at me when you "jumped into" this thread?

Boxcar

So "insulting" you is being hostile towards Christianity. I never realized you represented all of Christianity Boxcar. I'm sure that hundreds of millions of believers will be somewhat suprirised to find out that you are Christianity's designated representative on earth.

[46zilzal]

I can't equate being a Muslim with the above. It doesn't (to me) fit in the same moral circle. As a student I did projects on the Jewish and Hugonaut contributions to history. As an actor I have played aethiest and priest. None of these have done much to change my religious values. They have simply increased my awareness and knowledge of the subject

Of course it makes you more aware: the more you know about something, the better society is

[boxcar]

So "insulting" you is being hostile towards Christianity. I never realized you represented all of Christianity Boxcar. I'm sure that hundreds of millions of believers will be somewhat suprirised to find out that you are Christianity's designated representative on earth.

Now you're putting words in my mouth. Also, I did say "hostile" or "intolerant"

But thank you for admitting that you did insult me for no apparent reason other than for the sake of taking a cheap shot at a Christian.

Boxcar

[lsbets]

Now you're putting words in my mouth. Also, I did say "hostile" or "intolerant"

But thank you for admitting that you did insult me for no apparent reason other than for the sake of taking a cheap shot at a Christian.

Boxcar

If you notice boxcar, insulting was in quotes - meaning your word, not mine. I don't believe I made an insult before, but I am sure you will take the following as one:

Your oversensitivity in this thread causes me to wonder if you are really a closet liberal.

I wasn't taking a cheap shot at a Christian - I was disagreeing with someone who I perceive to be narrowminded and quite often bigotted - two things that most people would not equate with Christian values.

[JustRalph]

Of course it makes you more aware: the more you know about something, the better society is

now that is funny.....!!

[Indulto]

Boxcar,

Congratulations. Your post claiming that lsbets insulted you “. . . for no apparent reason other than for the sake of taking a cheap shot at a Christian” is the winning entry. You have now qualified as the most justifiable insult target of the week -- not as a Christian -- but as an insufferable individual whose only intention seems to be to interfere with legitimate debate by deploying outrageously bigoted statements designed to distract, divide, and disgust.

Please consider the above as a compliment as you have indeed achieved that apparent objective in spectacularly successful fashion.

[46zilzal]

bravo!

[46zilzal]

for all those MILLIONS awaiting the time they can just leave their clothes behind, just set your clocks and sit by..
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-armageddon2.html

[GaryG]

for all those MILLIONS awaiting the time they can just leave their clothes behind, just set your clocks and sit by..
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-armageddon2.html
Give it a bleeping rest...:rolleyes:

[Tom]

How many muslems are learning about Christianity?

If I were going to live in a muslem country (:eek: ) I would learn someting about their religion/customs.
But they are coming to predominatly Christian society and expecting US to understand THEM.

Sorry, Charlie,

Our military has gone way out of its way to repsect muslems during a war (very BAD idea) and not bomb mosques, even though the so-called holy palces were being used the muslems to hide weapons.
Guess what would have been my first targets?

You want to live in peace with me? One simlle rule: don't try to kill me and I will be a good neighbor.

Screw this liberal nonsense about understanding everyone else. Diversity sucks. Diversity is the reson we have wars. God had the good sense to put us all on different continents in the beginning. Trouble started as soon as we started mingling.

[Bobby]

. . . Scary stuff

I got scared at a young age. The preacher talked about "Revelations." Had all us 13, 14 yr olds shitting in our pants: the end was near. Time to accept JEsus in your heart before its TOO LATE. ;)

[46zilzal]

ah the eugenics again.

Have a spare white sheet around?

[boxcar]

I'd like to address the original topic. At the risk of being flogged by the rest of the board I don't see what was wrong with the concept of learning more about Muslims and their religion. The teacher didn't encourage them to convert, just play-act and learn. Knowledge is power. If all Muslims are our enemy (something I don't embrace) isn't understanding the enemy the first step to defeating them[?

Very good. Then you’ll be contacting the ACLU and other secular, godless organizations to encourage them to adopt your open-minded view when it comes to learning about and acting out various historical characters in Christianity, right? (Make sure you lay enough stress on just how important and benefical this kind of knowledge is.)

If what they do and believe actually has something to offer, shouldn't we learn about it? I have personally taken cursory glances at several religions and it has neither harmed me nor converted me.

In other words, you’re a person with no real, substantive convictions, as evidenced by your unwillingness to take more than "cursory glances" at things.

As to Boxcar, arguing with him is useless. When you are fanatical about a belief things like logic and reason don't stand a chance.

You say, “fanatical”? Do you equate fanatical with deeply held convictions – something you, evidently have never experienced for yourself? (Of course, believing strongly that you shouldn’t get too involved with any philosophy religion doesn’t count. Nor does believing that every philosophy or religion is as good or as poor as the next.)

My only question to him is why have a religion that says that all those who don't embrace it are damned, when 3/4 of the world will never be exposed to its' teachings? Is your God that unkind?

Another straw man objection to Christianity – and not a very original one. Betcha, why do you feign concern about “3/4 of the world” and its exposure to Christ’s teachings when the entire sinful world is in open rebellion against God, and is hell-bent and cares not a whit about its eternal destiny?

In fact, sir, you are a great case in point, if you don’t mind me saying. You live here in America – a relatively free land wherein we are free (currently) to practice our religion, and where we have free access to all the bibles and bible study aids we want. But have you taken advantage of them? If you’ve ever picked up a bible and read any parts thereof, what good did it do you? Did you not freely choose to thumb your own nose at the God of Heaven, at his gospel message, and the offer of eternal life?

You, sir, have your priorities all backwards. You’re supposedly concerned about a sick, dying world (spiritually) that won’t get to “see” a Physician, as it were, when you yourself are in dire need of one, and have free access to him in this Land of Freedom through his Word and through his church. You, being part of this world, are living proof that you hate God, his Christ and his message because you think that you’re not in need of a Physician. You’re too good to accept the free gift of salvation. And so you go along your merry way dreaming up lame excuses for not believing.

Your objection also implies moral deficiency lies with God if he chooses to not reach out to people, or to even save everyone. You apparently have no understanding of what “grace” means. Once again, you have things all backwards. The moral deficiency lies with Mankind, not with the Creator and Sovereign King of the Universe. A Righteous King can do as he pleases with his Sinful Subjects – rebellious subjects who reject his Lordship. The Righteous Judge of the earth can justly condemn all, save all, save some, condemn many. But whatever he sovereignly chooses, he’s under no moral obligation to have his gospel preached anywhere, let alone save anyone. (You might want to read the Book of Romans sometime in the NT – particularly chapter 9 which deals with God’s sovereign grace. )

Moreover, your feeble objection further betrays your ignorance of another teaching in scripture that deals with Christ’s own promise about the geographical extent to which his gospel will be preached. In one of the central eschatological passages in all of scripture, Christ promised that his “gospel of the kingdom” would be preached throughout the world as a “witness to all the nations” (Mat 24:14). The text doesn’t say that each and every individual would hear the gospel – just that the message would be preached throughout the world. And that preaching started almost immediately after Christ’s ascension – has continued all these many centuries throughout the earth, and it’s still being preached -- and it will continue to be preached until all his elect are brought into the kingdom of heaven.

Now that I’ve shared these important spiritual truths with you and have obliterated your objection, what’s to prohibit you from believing the gospel?

Boxcar

[46zilzal]

believe what you want to. If someone disagrees and does not believe that way, they are not thumbing their nose to anything, just having a differing perspective.

You really remind me a lot of my evangelical friends who can never leave it alone: "I HAVE TO CONVERT YOU .......I HAVE TO CONVERT YOU," is the mantra. It is akin to an assault everytime I walk through the door.

On the other side of the coin is my brother in law who provides such an attractive example that it makes people ASK him about what makes him so happy and secure in his life/beliefs because he lives them, he doesn't boast about them. I really respect his religon so much more for it's being his without knocking people over the head with it.

[Tom]

I don't want to convert you, 46.

YOU in Hell is MY Heaven! :D

[Indulto]

Boxcar,

You wrote, “Now that I’ve shared these important spiritual truths with you and have obliterated your objection, what’s to prohibit you from believing the gospel?”



Thanks for providing some alliteration with the illumination, but consider that your “upbeat, positive, happy” non-liberalism might have a prohibitive effect on convincing non-believers.

BTW does your particular brand of non-liberalism have a label? If not, would you care to provide your definition of a “Liberal” which -- absent your response -- you appear to equate with "non-believer"?

[boxcar]

If you notice boxcar, insulting was in quotes - meaning your word, not mine. I don't believe I made an insult before, but I am sure you will take the following as one:

I wasn't taking a cheap shot at a Christian - I was disagreeing with someone who I perceive to be narrowminded and quite often bigotted - two things that most people would not equate with Christian values.

Now, we’re starting to get somewhere. I like it when people let their hair down and display a little honesty for a change. It’s refreshing.

But before I respond to your newest “wrinkle” I must say that you did more than disagree, sir. You hurled an unsupported, unsubstantiated, unconstructive criticism at me. You criticized for the sake of criticism. You banged your cymbals together to listen to your own cacophony. Have I not repeatedly requested that you provide a specific example or two of what you think my misunderstanding of other religions are? Have you bothered to comply with my reasonable requests? For something that you claim was so “clear” to you, you surely have been reluctant to share you clear, incisive insights into those other religions with me. Perhaps, LS, your Thought Bank is as impoverished as I believe (for good reason) other religions are?

And why you may not have intended to insult me, you nonetheless insulted my intelligence with your bit of sophistry when you initially wrote:

…it is clear to me that you do not have much of an understanding of “those other religions’, which leads me to doubt how well you truly understand yours, despite your supreme confidence that you do.

There is a logical disconnect here. It may come as a surprise to you, but from a logical standpoint I don’t have to know diddly-squat about other religions to have a very good understanding of my own! Biblical Christianity is self-contained, standing on its own fours, and requires no validation or affirmation from outside itself. Your disconnect is analogous to saying that in order for me to know and ply my trade as bricklayer, for example, I’d have to have a good working knowledge of all the other construction trades.

Your further insulted my intelligence by presuming to know what I know or don’t know – either about other religions or biblical Christianity – when in fact you don’t have the first clue as to the extent of my knowledge in either area. It’s one thing, sir, to legitimately question someone’s knowledge on a subject viz-a-viz constructive criticism, but something else entirely to emphatically declare that I “do not have much of an understanding…”, most especially when such a declaration goes unsubstantiated.

But now you’ve gone to “narrowminded and quite often bigoted[i]” from… “[i]it is clear to me that you do not have much of an understanding of ‘those other religions’, which leads me to doubt how well you truly understand yours, despite your supreme confidence that you do.” It’s no wonder at all now that you have steadfastly refused to provide me with a couple of specific examples of my lack of understanding of “those other religions”, even though I have repeatedly asked you to do so. But quite frankly, LS, I smelled a stinking red herring from the beginning due to the aforementioned sophistry.

What you really don’t like about me is what you unwittingly pointed out in your initial post, i.e. my “supreme confidence”. But my supreme confidence is not in my own knowledge or understanding but in my Heavenly Father (Prov 3:5), the integrity and truthfulness of his Word, and the spiritual state of my own soul. Permit me to expand just a bit on this.

I have a personal relationship with my Heavenly Father through Christ. I know who I have entrusted with my spiritual well being – keeping in mind that the essence of eternal life is knowing God and his Christ (Jn 17:3), according to scripture and my personal experience.

I know from the bible and my personal relationship with God that this wretched, underserving sinner is a forgiven and redeemed sinner.

I know that even in my current state of spiritual sanctification, I will still sin – but because I have trusted Christ for my salvation, my Heavenly Father has imputed his Son’s righteousness to me once and for all, so that on the last day when I stand before the Great White Throne of Judgment he will pronounce me justified – not guilty of my sins. In fact more than this: I will be declared “righteous”(Rom 4:3ff; 10:3ff; 1Cor 1:30, etc.).

I also know that, as a child of God, I am a joint heir with Christ (Heb 1:2; Gal 4:7. And that that everything he will inherit in the next age (the Realized Kingdom of his Father), I, along with all the rest of the God’s family, will also inherit. In fact, the finite mind cannot even begin to imagine what God has prepared in his eternal kingdom for all those who love him (1Cor 2:9).

Having said all this, let’s assume for the sake of this discussion two things: a) the truthfulness of all that I have said in these last few paragraphs pertaining to my relationship with God, my current standing before him, and my eternal reward which would make me immeasurably wealthy (spiritually) beyond all finite comprehension; and b) that I don’t know the first thing about any other religion. My questions to you, then, are these: What can any other religion, or belief system or worldly philosophy offer me that I don’t already have many times over? Is there anything out there that I don’t know about that can trump what I have in Christ? Have I been so narrow-minded (worse yet, “close-minded”) that I have missed some great, unsurpassable spiritual wealth contained in some other religion or philosophy? If you answer “yes” to any of these questions, please provide the name brand of that religion or philosophy, and the specifics on what I’ve been missing out on all these years.

Once you answer these questions, then I can address the issue of dogma, for which you're confusing bigotry.

Finally, you wrote:

Your oversensitivity in this thread causes me to wonder if you are really a closet liberal.

Shirley U. Jest. But you just had to take another cheap shot (just “coincidentially”, of course, at a Christian) that contributes nothing constructive to the discussion, didn’t you? But if I’m a liberal then Hillary Clinton is a conservative. Moreover, you make another logical disconnect, since people of all political ideologies can be oversensitive on some issues (of which I'm not on this particular issue!).

But perhaps your irrational overreaction (in the absence of any constructive criticism) to my “presentation” lifted the veil a bit off your own bigotry?

Boxcar

[lsbets]

Boxcar, I stand by what I said - my "attack" on you has nothing to do with you being a self professed Christian, but it has everything to do with the clear pattern of bigotry and intolerance which you have displayed in numerous comments on this board over the years and your attempt to color those as conservative ideals. You can have all the mighty visions of yourself being the embodiment of Christianity, but I don't think anyone here gives much credence to your inflated sense of self importance. You can try to come up with all the reasons in the world for why I might not approve of many of things you say, but the fact is there is only one real reason - you're a narrowminded, bigotted man - and I do not need any more reasons than that.

[Indulto]

Boxcar,

You wrote,”… hurled an unsupported, unsubstantiated, unconstructive criticism at me.”

I have discovered that pontification and alliteration are frequent bedfellows, especially in my own posts.

“But if I’m a liberal then Hillary Clinton is a conservative.”

Does reading the Bible exclude one from reading a dictionary? You’re making it very difficult to translate your scripture.

[hcap]

Box There is a logical disconnect here. It may come as a surprise to you, but from a logical standpoint I don’t have to know diddly-squat about other religions to have a very good understanding of my own! Biblical Christianity is self-contained, standing on its own fours, and requires no validation or affirmation from outside itself. Your disconnect is analogous to saying that in order for me to know and ply my trade as bricklayer, for example, I’d have to have a good working knowledge of all the other construction trades.Having a good working knowledge of other construction trades would not necessarily improve your ability with bricks-although it certainly could help. But what it would do unquestionably is give you a much greater understanding of building the house.

[boxcar]

Boxcar, I stand by what I said - my "attack" on you has nothing to do with you being a self professed Christian, but it has everything to do with the clear pattern of bigotry and intolerance which you have displayed in numerous comments on this board over the years and your attempt to color those as conservative ideals. You can have all the mighty visions of yourself being the embodiment of Christianity, but I don't think anyone here gives much credence to your inflated sense of self importance. You can try to come up with all the reasons in the world for why I might not approve of many of things you say, but the fact is there is only one real reason - you're a narrowminded, bigotted man - and I do not need any more reasons than that.

Just as I figured -- another blowhard when push comes to shove. You start off by presuming to tell me how much I don't know about this and that and some other thing, and then when I respectfully challenge you to back up your unsupported criticism, you back down and get off on another tangent. And what makes this little experience so interesting is that it takes us full circle back to my initial post wherein I spoke to the spiritual bankruptcy of other religions. Your persistent silence and unwillingness to engage me in a civil, intelligent conversation even (not a debate) speaks volumes. It tells me, sir, that your belief system, your worldview -- whatever it is that makes you tick -- is not even worthy of discussion. I liken this whole experience to you bragging (implicitly) as to what a great house you live in (i.e. how much you know about other religions in order to tell me how much I don’t know) but when I want to come over and look at your house (examine your claims), you find all manner of excuses to put me off because your home is built out of crude materials in a less-than-desirable neighborhood.

And for your info, an intolerant person is someone who is unwilling or unable to endure -- someone who is unwilling to grant equal freedom of expression, especially in religious matters -- but not limited thereto. But "equal freedom of expression", sir, does not mean that I have to accept anyone's philosophy, or religious faith or worldview as being equally as good, legitimate or valid as mine. Even so, I'm all for having people of different faiths express those beliefs openly and without fear of reprisal or recrimination. I've long been an advocate of freedom of religion -- all religions! And this fact, LS, hardly characterizes a “bigot”.

Furthermore, a "bigot" by definition is “one who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ". I’m sure you have very strong feelings and opinions about many things in this life, as I do. That fact, in and of itself, doesn’t make either one of us a bigot. What it makes us is “dogmatic”! And this is precisely what you don’t like about me. I am dogmatic, and I make no apologies about it. I have strong convictions about God, his revelation, my faith, etc. And the megabytes of irony is that I didn’t attain to these kinds of convictions by being “narrow-minded”, as you claim. I was “open-minded” enough to do my own bible and theology research and homework – but most importantly, I was critical-minded. I was analytical. I questioned everything at every turn – to get to where I am today. (In fact, these qualities largely accounted for my success in past years at the track.)

And the real super megabytes of irony in all this is that years ago when the good Lord started tugging at the strings of my heart, I didn’t want to believe! It was a long, hard, uphill battle, spiritually speaking. I didn’t enter the kingdom of God quietly. He pulled me in, as it were, kickin’ and screamin’. I didn’t want to enter in because I was too content with my sinful lifestyle and easy living at the time.

And I tell you all this – even publicly on this forum -- knowing all too well that you and virtually everyone else here can’t even begin to relate to what I just stated. I might as well have typed this out in some little known, exotic foreign language insofar as any unbeliever getting anything remotely resembling a real handle on what I just related. And that, sir, saddens me deeply.

Go in peace,
Boxcar

[boxcar]

Hey, Indulto, are you a reincarnation of Chuckles the Clown, and a re-reincarnation of Equineer? Just wonderin’ ‘cause you’re writing style is virtually identical to those two characters. But let’s see if I can address your questions.

Sometimes all that can be done is to make everyone equally unhappy.

Whaddya know? I’ve been saying essentially the same thing now for a long time. I’ve been tellin’ folks around here that a liberal’s idea of leveling the proverbial playing field is to get everyone to share each other’s misery equally. Glad to see that you, too, recognize that this is Liberalism’s grand solution to all social problems.

Are liberals permitted to be Christian?

Good grief…I don’t see why not…providing they see themselves as wretched, miserable, filthy sinners in need of God’s forgiveness and are willing to repent of their sins, and put their trust in Christ for their salvation and to live under his lordship. Anyone who recognizes his dire spiritual need in this manner, whether he or she be a DemRat, a Repub, a Conservative, a Lib, a “neo-con” a Libertarian,, an apolitical, a prostitute, a homeless person, a homosexual, a corporate exec, a thief, a drug dealer, a car mechanic --whatever kind of sinner of any social or political stripe is welcome to humbly seek out Christ for his forgiveness and implore him for his tender mercies (Mat 11:28-30; Lk 18:16, 17; Jn 6:35; 7:37, etc.). Why do you ask, by the way?

Would Jesus have been considered a liberal by today’s standards? If not, then what

The way you have phrased this question leads me to believe, that you’re not very familiar with the attributes of God. But the one in particular I have in mind is immutability. Christ is the same ‘yesterday, today and tomorrow”, therefore, there is no need to artificially place him in any particular historical time frame.

And would Jesus be considered a liberal by whom . By you? By me? By the mainstream media? By American society at large? By the world? Your question is a wee bit ambiguous. But since we have very good and reliable historical records of Christ in the Four Gospels, and since he is immutable, we can go back to his day, read his words, and study the overall reaction of the nation of Israel to her Messiah’s first advent. For this purpose, I’ll simply cite several passages for your consideration in which Christ is the speaker: Mat 7:13,14; 10:33-37; 11:27; Lk 12:49-53; Jn 7:7; 8:19; 10:30; 12:26 14:6,7; 9-15;15:10,18, 23, 24.

Now, Liberals pride themselves on their “open-mindedness” and their “tolerance”. These are the two yardsticks by which many liberals measure the level of their liberalism. Therefore, I ask you, after looking up all the above citatations, if you think Christ was an open-minded, tolerant sorta guy? Or do you think he was an ego-maniac? Delusional? Narrow-minded? Bigoted? Schizophrenic, perhaps? Did he stir up controversy? Did the nation of Israel, overall, reject or accept him and his message? Was he a real popular guy with the elite and intelligentsia of his day? Or, for that matter, with the religious and political leaders? Was he very popular with the world super power of his day, i.e. Rome?

I will leave you to your own devices to sort all this out for yourself.

Boxcar

[Indulto]

Boxcar,

Obviously you haven’t placed me on Ignore, yet, but I will have to employ that device if you keep responding with references to biblical passages -- or quotes from them -- instead of expressing your own thoughts or interpretations.

As far as I am aware, I am not the re-incarnation of anything. I use the same pseudonym whenever and wherever I post.

As you have avoided responding directly to all my questions, I will assume that you were unable to understand them. For the benefit of others, what I am trying to understand is a) your use of the word, “Liberal”, b) your objections to those that you categorize using that word, and c) whether or not there is a religious as well as a political component to that categorization.

BTW, do you consider yourself upbeat, positive, and happy? Do you think that’s the way you come off?

[boxcar]

Box Having a good working knowledge of other construction trades would not necessarily improve your ability with bricks-although it certainly could help. But what it would do unquestionably is give you a much greater understanding of building the house.

As it would if one were "constructing" a thesis on comparitive religions or some other closely related subject. But in the absence of this, such knowledge of other religions would be entirely superfluous to understanding my own.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Obviously you haven’t placed me on Ignore, yet, but I will have to employ that device if you keep responding with references to biblical passages -- or quotes from them -- instead of expressing your own thoughts or interpretations.

Why would I place you on “Ignore”? Are you suffering from a chronic low self-esteem problem or something?

Now, as to whether or not you place me on “ignore”, I’m not sure if you’re, issuing a threat or a promise. But in either case, – whichever way you decide -- please be advised that your decision, as monumental as you may think it is at the time, would be about as significant to me as would a flea occupying space on an elephant’s rump.

Also, I clearly expressed my “own thoughts” in answering your first question which I understood perfectly. By way of reminder, here was your first question:

Are liberals permitted to be Christian?

I devoted several lines to a paragraph in answering that question directly, and provided scripture citations that supported my answer. But you failed to answer my question at the end of that paragraph.

As to your second set of questions, which were:

Would Jesus have been considered a liberal by today’s standards? If not, then what?

Since you worded the first question the way you did, expecting me to speak on behalf of___________________(fill in the blank), the bestI could do was to allow Christ to express some of his own thoughts about himself, sin, sinners, his law, etc. and let you draw your own conclusions by your standards.

As you have avoided responding directly to all my questions, I will assume that you were unable to understand them. For the benefit of others…

I understood them fine, and answered accordingly. The only thing I’m not understanding is how you missed them. But rest assured that I certainly won’t be losing any sleep tonight over your “mysterious” oversight.

what I am trying to understand is a) your use of the word, “Liberal”, b) your objections to those that you categorize using that word, and c) whether or not there is a religious as well as a political component to that categorization.

Oops, time out, doc. You need to respond to my first set of answers before we move on to new material. Now, if you don’t like my answers, then that’s your problem. Your little game will come to an abrupt halt in that case.

BTW, do you consider yourself upbeat, positive, and happy? Do you think that’s the way you come off?

The answer to your first question is “yes”. The answer to your second is that I don’t concern myself with what other people think about me. Some people “love” me, some “hate” me. But I’m very comfortable with myself; I’m self-confident and self-assured. My life doesn’t revolve around what other people think of me; for if I worried about such things, I wouldn’t have time to be myself – but most importantly I wouldn’t have time for self-examination to see if I’m pleasing to the most important person in my life --my Redeemer.

And now I have a question back at ya, if you don’t mind: Are you concerned about “global warming”? If so, you might want to set stricter limits on the amount of “hot air” that you send over this bandwith by actually reading people’s posts rather than needlessly complaining about supposed lack of answers to your questions.

Ciao,
Boxcar

[Indulto]

Boxcar,

First of all let me say that I thoroughly enjoyed the style and content of your excellent “ticket to success" post. Sans avatar, it belies the danger posed to progressive-thinking porpoises by the faith-based Killer Whale lurking in the shark-infested, off-topic waters.

Your thoughts on weight as an indicator of intent are similar to my own. As the relevance of weight in racing continues to be challenged in the press as recently as the Fall Highweight Handicap, I welcome any discussions shedding light on the significance of weight-based handicapping factors.

As retired veterans of the horseplaying wars, we may have more in common than I first suspected, and so I will attempt to re-synchronize questioning in order that we may continue on the same page if you are willing.

Regarding the Ignore facility, my wife will find your comments amusing as she regards my problem to be excessive self-esteem. There is no threat or promise intended, just reality. At this stage of my life, I am not interested in re-attending Sunday School and as all your posts today prove you to be an articulate communicator, there is no need to complicate conversations with coded citations.

The purpose of all my questions to you (so far) which contain the words “Christian”, “Christ”, and/or “Liberal” is to ascertain why you appear to embrace Christianity while also appearing to denigrate Liberals. Assuming your self-confidence and self-assurance may not have reached the level of arrogance, consider the ball to be in your court.

[boxcar]

Indulto, this is a very busy time of the year for me. I live in the subtropics, and this annually draws friends and relatives from cooler climes down to stay with my wife and I as houseguests. Therefore, I'm under some serious time contraints.

I have in mind to start another thread dealing with some issues that have been raised in this thread. Perhaps in that topic, you'll be able to find some answers to your questions.

Very briefly on your handicapping remarks -- I'm glad you enjoyed my post.

As far as actual weight was concerned in my handicapping methodology, I gave little credence to it -- within reason, of course. But what I did give considerable weight to (forgive the pun) was how a horse's actual impost can tip a selector off as to what a weight-conscious trainer's intentions are in today's race. In this sense, then, the weight factor became a legitimate handicapping factor for me.

I must run. Hopefully, sometime this week, I'll be able to address some important issues. Thanks again for your gracious compliments. Such encouraging sentiments, coupled with the nice reception I have received "over there", will serve to motivate me to post my next longshot method in a timely manner.

Take care,
Boxcar

[lsbets]

Boxcar -

Let me eat a little crow (which I don't do often). This seems like a more appropriate thread than the one on the other side. In reading your thread and the way I you come across there, I will say that it seems that I have misjudged your passion on this side for things you deeply believe to be something else, and I apologize for that. That doesn't mean I agree with the way you characterize many things, but like I said, I think I judged those chracterizations to be something else.

[chickenhead]

enough with the love fest already....I'm gonna gag.

Boxcar, Sir, in my book you still remain a scoundrel, and an old so-and-so. I alone apparently still remember your curmudeonly ways.