Moderator Margee Posted July 1, 2011 Moderator Share Posted July 1, 2011 I've just made a terrible discovery. I have never really been a christian at all. I was a 'counterfeit christian' . People assume that all who bear the name Christian follow the beliefs, teachings and practices of Jesus Christ. But the Bible tells us that not everyone who accepts the name of Christ is really a Christian. Jesus warned: "Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied [preached] in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many great signs and wonders in Your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness! "' I just read this list and I guess I was destined to hell all along.............. I didn't even pass # 1...... I didn't pass 98% of them!! I don't need to be on this site at all, cause I wasn't a christian anyway!! but I really like you guys now.................. http://www.iinet.com...l-checklist.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Wow, with this huge friggin list of things a person is supposed to do and not do, sounds like they aren't allowed to be human! Once again glad I am NOT a Christian. Ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 "Methinks the lady doth protest too much". As I read that list I kept thinking to myself this was their personal dirty laundry list, that if they can air it by pointing it out in others it will purge themselves of all of its power in their own lives. The act of pointing out flaws in others, to assume a position of self righteousness, creates the illusion to themselves that to be able to see it and talk about how bad it is in others, somehow means they have control of it and are 'overcomers' in their own lives. I can pretty much guarantee you this person feels a slave to their own selfishness and pettiness, as anyone who has matured beyond all that laundry list doesn't condemn the immature, scaring and frightening others by saying they are in danger of hell. That tactic shows someone who externalizes the whole affair, believing you have to conform to a long list of do's and don't in order to define your status. This is someone who hasn't themselves found anything in themselves that naturally just doesn't act in all those ways because they have grown up. They are deluding themselves thinking if they can force-fit their actions, that this makes them 'saved'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Dunno AM, that's the categorical imperative of what Jesus said. This goes to what I wrote in a thread when asked why he's a dick, you have to cherry pick him or you end up with such lists among other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Dunno AM, that's the categorical imperative of what Jesus said. This goes to what I wrote in a thread when asked why he's a dick, you have to cherry pick him or you end up with such lists among other things. Ahh yes, I never got back to that. I was out of town at the time. In the three seconds of time I have right now I'll just toss this out there. I tend to think that as the Bible has Jesus pointing out all these 'flaws' of our humanity, it was to strip away the self-righteousness of those religious folk who thought that if they just external conform to the rules this sanctified them. Basically, cutting the religious snobs down to size showing their shit stinks too. As for this person, I sense the motive to be quite Pharisee like. Don't hold me to that, but I'll toss that out here for now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Well, far be it for me to get into a debate about scripture. There is really not much I hate more. I'll just say that my reading of the 4 gospels agrees with your assessment in part, but that he was pretty erratic, depending on the day I guess, because he was also as condemning or more so than the pharasees he condemned and he put an onus on believers that was impossible to live up to. It's my estimation that those passages I refer to are intentional as they feed the vicious cycle of dependency and guilt, which is why the religion survived two millenia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted July 1, 2011 Share Posted July 1, 2011 Well, far be it for me to get into a debate about scripture. There is really not much I hate more. I'm with you there. To argue a "proper" interpretation subtly offers it some sort of authority. I see it more as driven by human motives, which run the gambit from political to spiritual. I'll just say that my reading of the 4 gospels agrees with your assessment in part, but that he was pretty erratic, depending on the day I guess, because he was also as condemning or more so than the pharasees he condemned and he put an onus on believers that was impossible to live up to. It's my estimation that those passages I refer to are intentional as they feed the vicious cycle of dependency and guilt, which is why the religion survived two millenia. I can see both motives being present. I guess as a Christian I had found myself much more drawn to the Gospel of John, and some of Paul's writings, than the synoptic gospels. John is interesting in that it on the one hand extols an inner salvation, that "you are the light of the world", yet pays enough homage to Orthodoxy in placing the person of Jesus between man and God that the Church could control the masses through that dependency you mention. The Gnostics got tossed out because for one thing to say you essentially become Christ yourself pretty much makes the Church unnecessary! So in short they promise salvation, then make it inaccessible. You can only be one with God after you die physically. To me when I look at the texts of the Bible I see the influence of a lot of schools of thought, not just one. That it is presented as a continuous, consistent message is a created mythology about the message of Jesus. There was no such origin. Rather you have clear Eastern influences as well as Jewish, as well as Greek being added and blended over time and areas. I don't see parsing out things from that in a context of a created patchwork quilt to be 'cherry-picking'. It's actually far more rational to do that, than to try to make it one single message. But I agree that the myth as it is presented by the Catholic Church (and their children the Protestants), can and does very much create a viscous cycle of dependency on adherence to their rule-sets. And the result of that, is a spirit of slavery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts