Religious

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

PA:

Basically, the empowered viewed, Jesus as a threat to these religious authorities structure and power and they feared the masses would rises up and declare Jesus the messiah, expecting him to defeat the Romans. So they organized the mob, like the Democrats do today to manipulate the viewpoint.

So now not only did "the Jews Kill Christ" , but so did the Democrats !!

BTW, who was the Rush Limbaugh of the Roman Empire at the time? Maybe you know how Rasmusen called the crucifixion as in for or against?

Inquiring minds want to know

[Show Me the Wire]

Yes, I certainly do not think Jews have disturbed minds.

[Show Me the Wire]

Ha,Ha hcap. I talked about a strategy that is used to manipulate perceptions. Which was meant to address PA's comment about boxcar alluding to modern liberals' strategies.

You are one funny guy, and I mean that in the strange way.

Strange you don't seem upset about Thaskolas saying the Jews have disturbed minds. Actually it is not to strange at all.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Thaskalos as to your suggestion, I do know how to read, and since I am made in the image of GOD, I have an intellect which allows me to think in the abstract and to compare and contrast, etc.

Your objection to the Christian belief came against the Deuteronomy. Books that were revered by the Jews and served as the basis of their faith. Therefore your statement saying: has to have a disturbed mind could ever believe that God would be capable of crimes of this magnitude applies to all practicing Jews.

All the Christians that persecuted Jews, scientists, conducted the Inquisitions and the Salem Witch trials were also created in the image of God.

Too bad you and box haven't the faintest notion what image means.

[Show Me the Wire]

Statman, nailed the theme of this thread a long time ago, whack a mole.

I ask for substance and you are quite, but then you pop up trying to imply some outrageous position that has no basis anywhere, except your imaginary world.

How about answering my earlier questions to you. Explain to me where I erred in saying you believe in your inner God and your interpretation about the Kingdom of Heaven is in is all. Truly, inquiring minds wish to know your stance.

[Show Me the Wire]

Best you can do eh. When I cited Constantine you all said it was about power. But you fail to see that the historical events you cited were really about power struggles. You could insert patriotism for religion as the motivating factor for the masses.

hcap do you want to discuss substance of faith or continue playing whack a mole?

[hcap]

Gus said this "I only stated that it takes a disturbed mind to think that God could be capable of heinous crimes like killing innocent children." He is correct

I did object to the anthropomorphism of God the father in HUMAN terms, demanding Abraham murder Issac. The problem , is your literal anthropomorphic interpretation and the failed analogy of God the human father. As I said I would be a pretty stupid Father (anthropomorphic God ) if I demanded my son kill his pet dog or cat to prove he loves me.

And if you are interested I will give you my take on killing the first born of Egypt, and Exodus for that matter. But it is certainly allegorical and if you are really interested in mysticism and want to know why your understanding of eastern thought is missing the mark, I will tell you. But it does mean speaking about the non literal.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by hcap

All the Christians that persecuted Jews, scientists, conducted the Inquisitions and the Salem Witch trials were also created in the image of God.

Too bad you and box haven't the faintest notion what image means.

Hcap...since it seems impossible to have a rational conversation with Boxcar...and SMTW seems to have nothing of substance to say...do you mind if I ask YOU a question?

Do you believe that "God" would be capable of the heinous crimes that the OT has him committing?

Does it make sense to you that a murderous God would send his Son to this earth...to teach us to love our enemies...and to turn the other cheek to those who slap us?

Does this seem as reasonable to you as it is to boxcar and SMTW?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I suspected that the real Boxcar was not the one who wrote post #2511...that was just an aberration. THIS is the real Boxcar right here...the one who rolls on the floor laughing when he talks about the religious beliefs of others.

I had no idea you were a card-carrying member of T.U.B. Please accept my apologies.

Tell me something smart guy...

You accuse me of blaspheming against God; haven't you noticed that the only person here who has used the words "liar" and "fool" when referring to God or Jesus...has been YOU?

But in what context? Context....something that isn't really important to skeptics, is it?

When did I blaspheme against God?

When I said that a benevolent and ever-loving God would never commit the heinous crimes that the Old Testament has attributed to him?

You want me to provide you with "genuine, logically sound criticisms or arguments against Orthodox Christianity"?

Okay...I'll accommodate you...

You expect me to believe that God is a killer...just because the bible tells me so?

No, I expect a little intellectual honesty, which would be a nice breath of fresh air for a change. How is it that you will glibly talk of a "benevolent and ever-loving God", while ignoring the inconvenient truth that he's also a righteous and holy God and, therefore, his Justice must be satisfied for sins committed against him? Don't you understand: The whole world stands condemned before this thrice holy God!? What do you think: That God is made in the image of a some Bill Clinton type and will render unrighteous judgments!?

Isa 6:3
3 And one called out to another and said,
"Holy, Holy, Holy , IS the LORD of hosts...
NASB

And,

Rev 4:8
8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say,

"Holy, holy, holy , IS the Lord God, the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come."
NASB

For all your thousands of religious books, you have never learned what the bible means when it says that God IS holy? You have no idea that the controlling attribute, above all others is, God's holiness, do you? That indeed, his very Name is Holy (Isa 57:15)? You don't have the first inkling that all human beings are profane moral creatures next to God, do you?

Lean what all this means and then come back to me and we can have a reasoned and rational discussion about what a wicked "killer" God was.

Is this argument of mine "logically sound" enough for you?

How could it possibly be when you have such a distorted, lopsided view of God?

Boxcar

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

Gus said this "I only stated that it takes a disturbed mind to think that God could be capable of heinous crimes like killing innocent children." He is correct

I did object to the anthropomorphism of God the father in HUMAN terms, demanding Abraham murder Issac. The problem , is your literal anthropomorphic interpretation and the failed analogy of God the human father. As I said I would be a pretty stupid Father (anthropomorphic God ) if I demanded my son kill his pet dog or cat to prove he loves me.

And if you are interested I will give you my take on killing the first born of Egypt, and Exodus for that matter. But it is certainly allegorical and if you are really interested in mysticism and want to know why your understanding of eastern thought is missing the mark, I will tell you. But it does mean speaking about the non literal.

Yes, I am interested. As a point of reference did you read my reply about Abraham killing his son? The act was not about loving God and ridding yourself about attachments. It is about the level of faith needed to enter into mysticism.

I am leaving now, so please don't expect an immediate reply.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

PA:

Overly gave you the abridged answer, which is sufficient for this forum. As you will recall in my post I stated it was not all of the Jews who welcomed him into Jerusalem actually called for his death.

I believe you know that Jesus came to Jerusalem while it was crowded with Jews from all over the known world, in order to, celebrate the killing of the Egyptian first born.

Basically, the empowered viewed, Jesus as a threat to these religious authorities structure and power and they feared the masses would rises up and declare Jesus the messiah, expecting him to defeat the Romans. So they organized the mob, like the Democrats do today to manipulate the viewpoint.

And to add to your good reply and to Overlay's, and even to my own posted earlier about spurious faith, there were other dynamics going on here as well.

First, we have the crowd psychology factor to consider. It only takes a handful of people to whip up frenzy or excitement in a crowd. So, we must consider this when Jesus entered Jerusalem. I believe many in that crowd were true believers and realized that Jesus was indeed the promised Messiah.
Perhaps these true believers managed to convince others of who Jesus was; however, these other people believed on Him for all the wrong reasons, which brings me to my second point. While they knew about the promise of a Messiah, they failed to connect the dots of the OT prophecies correctly. Because of the unenviable political situation, in which the Jewish nation found itself, I have to think that many in that crowd were fully expecting to see the Messiah who, in many of the OT prophecies, was portrayed as being the glorious, majestic reigning King who would vanquish all Israel's enemies and who would then usher in a glorious earthly kingdom and take his place on his father David's throne. To this Messiah, many of the "believers' gravitated because they failed to take into account numerous other OT prophecies that painted a very different picture of the coming Messiah -- one who could come into this world as a meek, humble and lowly servant of God, who would offer himself up as a living, atoning sacrifice for the benefit of his Father's people. This second group of people, therefore, would have a faith of a spurious nature and they would be quick to "fall away" or abandon their beaten, scourged, spat-upon, ridiculed "king" they so eagerly embraced just one week earlier in Jerusalem.

This second group would have been expecting a miraculous deliverance by their powerful King from under the yoke of the Roman Empire. How bitterly disappointed many of these professing believers must have been when they viewed their bloodied king one week later! (But of course, Jesus did teach that his kingdom was not of this world -- something which so many professing believers today within the Church have failed to grasp also, following in the same footsteps of the Jews.) The political environment of the day, therefore, in all probability played a major role in the "fickleness" of the people.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

All the Christians that persecuted Jews, scientists, conducted the Inquisitions and the Salem Witch trials were also created in the image of God.

Too bad you and box haven't the faintest notion what image means.

I'm open to learn. Teach away! This is your moment.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Hcap...since it seems impossible to have a rational conversation with Boxcar...and SMTW seems to have nothing of substance to say...do you mind if I ask YOU a question?

Do you believe that "God" would be capable of the heinous crimes that the OT has him committing?

Does it make sense to you that a murderous God would send his Son to this earth...to teach us to love our enemies...and to turn the other cheek to those who slap us?

Does this seem as reasonable to you as it is to boxcar and SMTW?

No. and in fact the model of spiritual development of the OT is along the lines of an eternal battle. Much different than the NT.

The Bhagavad Gita is close. Eknath Easwaran:"The Gita's subject is the war within, the struggle for self-mastery that every human being must wage if he or she is to emerge from life victorious. The language of battle is often found in the scriptures, for it conveys the strenuous, long, drawn-out campaign we must wage to free ourselves from the tyranny of the ego"

Mohandas Gandhi, on the Gita, "an allegory in which the battlefield is the soul and Arjuna, man's higher impulses struggling against evil.

Well, the OT is filled with instances of battle and struggle. But "God" is not meant to be taken as an angry old jealous wrathful guy in the sky. I hate to tell our friends, the Evangelicals, but God primarily is both an uncaring universe, and at the same time a way to develop one's inner spirit to perhaps understand it is not all uncaring. But that within the order of things there is a way to move beyond cause and effect, the wheel of life. Amidst all the tremendous distortion there are allegorical clues encoded by others who came before us, helping us to understand.

The most important thing to get IMHO, is that the OT is what Eknath Easwaran said about the Gita:The Gita's subject is "the war within, the struggle for self-mastery that every human being must wage if he or she is to emerge from life victorious.

It is an internal play, a battle for liberation of the Jews kept as slaves in Pharaoh's Egypt. With Moses as God's representative (shepard of the Israelites).

1-Egypt is our undeveloped state inwardly holding hostage the promise of growth

2-As represented by the Children of Israel.

3-Moses is te "Jesus Christ Factor" similar to the guide of the flock of the NT

4-Pharaoh is the chief personality and pinnacle of sloth, efo and everything that holds back spiritual growth in ourselves, one individual

5-In this case as it is in other "battles" God helps the Israelites to break free of slavery and in a sense is the higher being of ONE MAN. Who intervenes in this holy battle. That may be a true miracle.

6- In the middle of the night, God struck down all the firstborn in Egypt. Egypt as defined above, as an inner state and really nothing to do with a real Egypt or Pharaoh---- Although there might be a rough correspondence in the historical records. This is after a long struggle A cleansing INTERNALLY. Painful and difficult. The first born are all the little Pharaohs that are in line to take Daddy s place that must be removed or they will grow and there will be many more Pharaohs and Egypt's just waiting to enslave the Children of Israel all over again. The separation of the wheat from the chaff

[Show Me the Wire]

Okay hcap decent start. A little more detail please.

Where does the evil you speak of originate or come from? What does emerge victorious mean? What is the victory and what does it lead too.

[Show Me the Wire]

To clarify my question to you about victory. Separate rivers lead to the same ocean, which is the grave for man .

In this context what is the victory?


And to Thaskalos do you agree with hcap so far?