I'm A Blasphemer- For Saying Christianity Isn't What Jesus Taught!

[Guest goodfaith]

My friends are starting to realise I am not going to church and I am no longer talking about religion, I got into a deep conversation with a friend on the weekend which I should have known better...I always think that people are open-minded and fair, that's one of the problems with me going to a church- I'm so naive, I accept it all on face value and am disappointed when it turns out to be b/s or empty words.

 

Anyway, my friend, if we can still be friends- I am trying to avoid people who tell me what to do/think, I told her I am waiting for the new christianity, that the religion needs another reformation, it's too much hypocrisy and theological nonsense for our time. I could sense she was getting angry- why I'll never know because if she hadn't told me once 'I believe in christianity' there is absolutely nothing in her lifestyle which suggests she does or that it is important to her, I guess that's why I spoke unguardedly.

 

She said I am a blasphemer and some other stuff and put the phone down on me.

 

Maybe when you change your life you have to leave most of the people behind...but I will not be a hypocrite. What I said was only what I thought- and no one has the right to tell me how to live or what to think, except we've been so brain-washed in the churches that someone does have that authority, for a few hours I felt like I was the one in the wrong...

 

*

 

I did enjoy not going to church and being exhorted to chant 'he is risen' though, that always felt so wrong to me, to put these stories and teachings into the present tense and take them literally. The Bible doesn't make any sense at all once you start down that road...

[MatG]

It's definitely tough, it's sad when you must reach the conclusion that most people who are christian/religious we can disregard as mutual ground for discussions. Maybe there is a christian god, probably not, but why does that have to end intellectual debates? Although, they do teach that any 'weak' or 'immature' believer shouldn't converse with non-believers about their faith because they lack the teachings and knowledge of 'the scripture'.

 

So, I wouldn't take what she did as a definition of 'who she truly is', rather, You already know who she really is -- except she has been conditioned to react when confronted with something she cannot defend/attack logically. You could let her know that you haven't been offended by her reaction, but rather intrigued by her 'level of faith' or some other madeup spittle.

 

I wouldn't question your unguarded interaction between people that you can honestly 'read into'. But understand that the reaction you recieve is not the reaction from that persons logical processes, but it is from their conditioned responses, and you can believe it because it bypasses all logical and reasonable responses.

Congratulations with your not-so-well interaction, and I hope you learn to continue seeing who people TRULY are, and what they are unnaturally responding as!

[Loren]

I find it extremely common for the very people who are least likely to take the responsibility for doing some research or thinking about their religion as though it was actually important to them are the most likely to vehemently denounce others for blasphemy.

 

Regardless of what they may claim about how devout their "faith" is, the complete lack of any effort to know their own religion shouts in a loud voice, "This stuff is truly not important to me."

[PandaPirate]

I find it extremely common for the very people who are least likely to take the responsibility for doing some research or thinking about their religion as though it was actually important to them are the most likely to vehemently denounce others for blasphemy.

 

Regardless of what they may claim about how devout their "faith" is, the complete lack of any effort to know their own religion shouts in a loud voice, "This stuff is truly not important to me."

 

Well said Loren!

[florduh]

By saying that Christianity isn't what Jesus taught, technically you are a heretic rather than a blasphemer. You are stating that you believe in Jesus and what he said, but others have gotten it all wrong because you know what he really meant.

[PandaPirate]

You are so astute Florduh!

 

Dats wy i lub u.

[hereticzero]

You are correct when you claim Iesus did not preach Christianity. Christianity is from the Apostle Paul's gospel. That is why Christianity is often called the Pauline Church. I believe that Iesus was directly referring to people like Paul when he said to beware the leaven of the Pharisee because you will not enter into heaven unless you are holier than they are.

[Guest goodfaith]

It's so silly- what I was trying to say to my friend was that I hadn't totally given up on Jesus, per se, I just haven't found any religions which represent the teachings of Jesus to me!

 

Everyone who has been brainwashed ever is anxious now, I am noticing that, losing their share portfolios and having to buy less and feeling poorer...I guess to a superstitious or immature person such things are 'punishment from God' or terribly unfair. Religion does not tend to prepare people for reality, does it...

 

I don't care if I am a heretic- that was Jesus only crime wasn't it?!

 

It was more surprising because of this particular friend, I had never seen this side of her. She lives a rather wild lifestyle and I never knew her go to bible study or church or profess any belief system, in fact she has always been quite mocking about my faith.

 

"I find it extremely common for the very people who are least likely to take the responsibility for doing some research or thinking about their religion as though it was actually important to them are the most likely to vehemently denounce others for blasphemy.

 

Regardless of what they may claim about how devout their "faith" is, the complete lack of any effort to know their own religion shouts in a loud voice, "This stuff is truly not important to me." "

 

I agree. In my experience so many americans have no real bible knowledge, just a particular set of apologetics they were taught at some point. In fact to even point out other interpretations and denominations gets some people furious, believing everyone else is wrong.

 

Th bit that's wrong for me about Jesus and US christian interpretations is the materialism- no way can anyone study the handed down teachings of Jesus and come to the conclusion he wanted his followers to be wealthy and have many possessions!

 

That's another thing I don't miss about going to church, the constant appeals for money for one thing or another, though I have noticed an interesting thing at my old church where I criticised roundly what the monies were taken up for and the lack of charity- they now give half their income to poor people!

 

Which is another thing my conservative friend and other friends don't agree with either- social medicine, helping the poor, breaking down racial inequality, religious freedom....

 

This is what I mean about turning Jesus' teachings upside down- I don't even think it's that I would have any better theology or religious practice than anyone else, but he definitely did say give your stuff away, help and serve people, even people who aren't like you, even people you don't like, and he definitely said there was no need for spiritual intermediaries between a person and God.

 

I don't even think I'm a heretic- it's all there in the darn bible if people wanted to look at it!

[hereticzero]

goodfaith: What handed-down teachings are you referring to? Cuz I do not know of any true teachings of Iesus, only the spin the babble gives us. Pick a denomination, every one of them has a different take on what Iesus' true teachings were.

 

If you do not believe in the resurrection, you are already ahead of the game. It shows you are thinking for yourself. Keep on burning the grey cells, that is the only way to start sorting things out.

 

Many denominations preach the accumulation of wealth is wrong (while they ask for your money is okay, ...) but Jesus did not preach that doctrine as part of his gospel. What the babble claims Iesus said was that it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man could go to heaven, or something close to that. Some denominations have taken that to mean it is impossible to go to heaven if we are wealthy. From what I have read, the translation of that passage is not quite correct. It should read that a camel cannot pass through the 'needle's eye', which is supposedly a gate to the city that was used for merchants and people who arrived after dark. The gate was so narrow that a burdened beast, such as a horse or camel, could not enter fully packed. They had to unpack their camels and pass through a narrow gate that would expose them to the guards if they tried anything foolish--sort of like a strip search before entering the city--everything you have is laid bare for all to see. It was Iesus' remarking that wealthy people had many encumbrances to shed, spiritually. It was not a declaration against the accumulation of wealth. Throughout the babble, god claims the wealth of the world belongs to those who follow him. he's our daddy and the world is his so he gives his kids the good things of the earth, including wealth.

 

Always room for another heretic at my table!

[Guest goodfaith]

'What handed-down teachings are you referring to?'

 

the very basic words of Jesus in the Bible and Nag Hammadi texts- the sermon on the mount was central to my first church I attended- primitive Methodism;

but actually my position isn't original, Elaine Pagels and others have concluded that the reason some of the gospels got discarded early on in christianity is because they stressed the teachings of Jesus rather than a saviour/ resurrection picture in which he becomes a God and we connect to him through church rituals and by following other men.

 

'easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man could go to heaven'

 

my understanding of this is that camel refers to coarse rope- which of course would be hard to thread; the word κάμηλον ( camel ) being similar to κάμιλον (rope )

 

But it is a metaphor, so it can have several interpretations and simultaneous meanigns of course.

 

*

 

My friend has not called again but the other friend who argued about politics wrote and apologised, which was nice. And having absorbed my christian teachings I forgive of course!