A lesson for Christians on Judging and Hypocrisy

[MQTA]

Then I will leave because I am not doing any good.  I hope that diggin has the truth, I'm not sure that you will have a second chance but perhaps you can continue to explore that to ensure you are right.  I will do that myself and if I find I am in error, I will do what I can to change what is taught by others, too.  Thank you for allowing me to visit.  See you on the other side.

103551[/snapback]

 

Since we probably won't cross paths again easily, let me suggest two things:

 

1. Assume that most things you learn in church or from Christian leaders are wrong.... and the way you'll know is by attempting to use evidence and logic and a fresh reading of the Bible to PROVE ALL THINGS.

 

2. Assume that if God is real, he must WANT the world the way it is for now. The big mistake of mainstream Christianity is trying to redefine the world, rather than facing facts. My take on why things are the way they are is at www.whyjesusdied.com and www.happygod.blogspot.com

 

When your faith is big enough to face the cold brutal facts of reality and still believe in God, you'll also be able to sit down and have a beer with these thoughtful folks here in the Lion's den....

 

Hang in there, Bro., but remember... Jesus got along much better with "sinners" who could carry on a real conversation than with religious, pious types.

105634[/snapback]

 

Whoa!

 

 

gotta abord this one.

 

Is this UU in nature?

[diggin]

The more a person commits adultery, say, or lies to himself or his family, the more his character will be damaged, and the more judicial judgment he'll have to undergo to be cleansed as it is promised he will be cleansed during the time of Messiah's rule.

 

So people deserve to burn in hell for all of eternity for finding love? What if their spouse is abusive towards them, and they are afraid to divorce them for fear of their lives, but by some lucky chance they find someone else while they are still married? They still deserve eternal torment for THAT? You are still being judgmental.

103558[/snapback]

 

Hey, Amethyst,

I know that my post was really long-winded, but what you missed in this reply to my comments, and the one above this, is that I was writing to Daniel 12:10, a Christian, to tell him not to be so judgmental.

 

Having said that, let me point out that I am NOT saying that anyone deserves to burn in hell. Period. Burning hell, in my view, is not what the lurid language of the Bible is teaching (though obviously God would have expected a lot of folks to get that idea from the book -- so I can't be too hard on them for taking those words at face value).

 

What I'm saying in what you quoted above is that I think Paul in Romans 1 and 2 is saying that folks whose characters are damaged by bad choices throughout their lives -- lying, cheating, stealing, adultery, whatever -- will have to retrace those steps in the future age. I suppose that is judgmental in the sense that I'm saying there IS an objective standard of morality, and that God intends to teach people how to observe that standard freely and of their own volition, if they want to coexist with other intelligent beings in the unlimited future. But it's not being judgmental the way I define the term.... to mean pointing fingers at this or that defective behavior. The clear point of Romans 1 and 2 (to me) is that EVERYBODY is damaged and breaks the laws they recognize as good guidelines for behavior. So if anyone thinks they are better than others because they do different stuff, or believe better stuff, or whatever, they have missed what they should have learned in spiritual kingergarten: that everyone is guilty at some level of disregarding righteous authority.

 

Of course, the larger question, often debated here, is whether there is such a thing as righteous authority or objective standards of right and wrong. But this thread is trying to call Christians to account for their chronic pattern of inconsistency on this "judgmentalism" issue.

[diggin]

I will tell you about hell, because it is real. I will tell you about God's judgment, because it is real.

 

First, prove it. Then prove that ordinary people who aren't thieves or ax-murderers deserve to burn for ALL OF ETERNITY, simply for the reasons I mentioned earlier and any others you would care to dish out that basically add up to us not being good enough for you or anyone else.

104130[/snapback]

 

Here I completely agree with you , Amethyst, and disagree with the Christian you are quoting.

[Ouroboros]

When your faith is big enough to face the cold brutal facts of reality and still believe in God, you'll also be able to sit down and have a beer with these thoughtful folks here in the Lion's den....

105634[/snapback]

Diggin. Here's to ya'. Let's get the party started!

[diggin]

That will be a "day" -- actually a millennium -- of time when all of the people who have ever lived will be introduced to God's wisdom and love and justice in a plain, instructive way -- and when that happens the vast majority of people will be mighty happy.

<snip>

I think you should pray for the Christians. It's the Christian church that is really a mess, and in danger of some serious retribution from God for its crimes.  :-)

103133[/snapback]

I appreciate your intentions in saying we should "pray for the Christians” It makes me smile in a way to hear that, even though of course I don't believe in prayer. Thanks for defending our dignity in the face of the Great Inquisitors of God, so to speak.

 

One note to the above millennial reference: I've never spent the time really researching it, but prior to my leaving Christianity it had occurred to me that that 1000 year of peace was actually referring to what is to us today, essentially a total dictatorship with absolutely no freedoms whatsoever. Rev.19:15 "And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16: And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS." Note: rule with a rod of iron?

 

It is peace, but not because of love, but because he will militarily destroy any and all who oppose him. No more war because of strength. Sounds like the promises of many despots, only with flaming angels and whatnot. It was just a thought. I think the promise of clouds and pink teddy bears in heaven sounds better then living under a religious dictatorship.

103217[/snapback]

 

Good points, Antlerman, and thanks for your kind words in a more recent post.

 

The intensity of the metaphor is softened considerably when you look up the greek words used. Rule - first definition is, "feed, shepherd". Rod - first definition = staff, shepherd's crook.

 

The idea I get is that the rulership of earth will be firm but gentle, corrective and instructive. Isaiah 26:9 The positive spin is that it is a big change from the past, in that instead of just ignoring people and letting them go over the cliff into self-destruction or oppression of others, people will be corrected and kept on a good, positive path by merciful leaders.

 

Now, who is supposed to be doing this ruling? (see Rev 2:27) The strong men like Hitler, Saddam, Stalin, or Genghis Khan? No, people who have been burned at the stake for what they believed, or have spent their lives in obscurity, oppressed by strident, arrogant leaders. These folks will have learned how to be wise and patient and optimistic under trying circumstances, and will be very sympathetic of all the difficulties that will be faced by folks who are trying to learn a whole new way of thinking and acting. So the "overcomers" of the Christian age -- and they are mighty few, I'm sure, are spoken of as being involved in this work among the nations. (Luke 12:32)

 

The sword is metaphorical, too. It is not a destructive, harsh weapon but an incisive scapel that can discern thoughts and heart intentions and nuances of behavior, and help people get real about discerning what it is that they need to address if they want to be truly loving, unselfish, and yet fully self-actualized at the same time.

 

One more thing about this "city" or government that fuses heaven and earth (reading on into chapter 21) -- the gates are made of pearl. The gates are clearly the same people who do the ruling and make up the streets that people walk on. Just different descriptive elements of each. They use a corrective authority, they allow themselves to be walked on or, we could say, to be themselves the pathways or models of conduct... and they also are gates that stand open, welcoming new people into the city. Why the choice of "pearl" to describe the gates, not glass or diamond or emerald? Because, I think, pearls are a perfect illustration of what a REAL Christian is -- a hunk of dirt that happens to be built up over long years, exposed to influences that coat them with this soft, white mineral. They're, unique, pure white with all these colorations of personality and experience. Folks like that are like a breath of fresh air to be around -- and I think groups of them in positions of authority will make the "gates" of the new city of God dwelling with men.

 

The lesson seems to be that folks that want to be a prick, selfish and arrogant, will have to face some stiff resistance, while folks who are malleable, teachable, will be pretty darn happy.

 

Another thing in the Bible that seems to support your view that it won't be all sweetness and light ... in the immediate aftermath of Armageddon as described in Revelation 16:21 -- it says people blasphemed God because of the plague of hail. Now, I don't think any of this stuff is literal -- it's metaphorical of geopolitical events -- realistic, rational things, and not fantastic things. I find a thread in the Bible that water means truth, and hail means hard, destructive truth. The thing that is hard on any organization right now is the truth.

 

Anyway, at the end of the time of human troubles described in many places, there is a hailstorm. If it is hard truths coming God, then understandably there will be a shocking loss of freedom for people when suddenly God steps from the shadows and says, "it's time to pay attention now, class." It seems to me there would be a short-lived period of anger and outrage on the part of some. Perhaps "Joe sixpack", will be upset that he can't download his porn any more. But I think most of the "cursing" will be from folks who are accustomed to power and supremacy. The truth is that those people who now run the corporations, and make the laws, and use the world for their own profit, will be the ones who do most of the cursing of God, when the truth of their behavior is made public.

[Fweethawt]

 

Hang on... My uncle has faith but also needs WORKS.

Microsoft WORKS, that is.

105499[/snapback]

 

I have no faith in WORKS so I use the Word.

 

It's not perfect but it does Excel over Works.

 

When it crashes, it does it with Grace.

 

Sometimes it has a Will of it's own.

I'm not quite understanding the Power of your Point.

[Amethyst]

Having said that, let me point out that I am NOT saying that anyone deserves to burn in hell. Period. Burning hell, in my view, is not what the lurid language of the Bible is teaching (though obviously God would have expected a lot of folks to get that idea from the book -- so I can't be too hard on them for taking those words at face value).

 

Perhaps not, but that is what my Lutheran church taught and it's what I grew up with. Now, even if we take the hell myth and toss it out the window like Universalism does, you still have to prove the historical existence of Jesus. That has never been done, and I'm not going to waste my life in a cult that I already wasted 20+ years in, especially when there is zero proof for its authenticity.

 

What I'm saying in what you quoted above is that I think Paul in Romans 1 and 2 is saying that folks whose characters are damaged by bad choices throughout their lives -- lying, cheating, stealing, adultery, whatever -- will have to retrace those steps in the future age. I suppose that is judgmental in the sense that I'm saying there IS an objective standard of morality, and that God intends to teach people how to observe that standard freely and of their own volition, if they want to coexist with other intelligent beings in the unlimited future. But it's not being judgmental the way I define the term.... to mean pointing fingers at this or that defective behavior. The clear point of Romans 1 and 2 (to me) is that EVERYBODY is damaged and breaks the laws they recognize as good guidelines for behavior. So if anyone thinks they are better than others because they do different stuff, or believe better stuff, or whatever, they have missed what they should have learned in spiritual kingergarten: that everyone is guilty at some level of disregarding righteous authority.

 

Doesn't matter to me what the Bible says anymore. IMHO, it's all fiction, and plagiarized fiction at that. Most Christians are judgmental, hateful, and prejudiced. I don't want to be part of a group that is known largely for being prejudiced, even if not everyone is like that. Can you understand that at all?

 

But it's not being judgmental the way I define the term.... to mean pointing fingers at this or that defective behavior.

 

Oh, so now you're twisting meanings of words again and saying it's not in the Bible. Most Christians are like this, and this is what the entire thread has been talking about, or haven't you been paying any attention at all? You can use the Bible to justify any sort of behavior, even killing people you don't like because "god" told you to do it. I've known many, many Christians in my former Lutheran church, including my mother, who justified their criticism with the Bible. So don't tell me it's not possible. They do it.

[D. Paul]

It applies to you because you believe in its authority.  It does not apply to us because we do not.  What is so illogical about that?

 

Can I hold a police officer to the standard of serving and protecting me even if I'm not a police officer myself?  Sure I can.  That's in the job description.

 

Can I hold a Christian to obeying the rules of the bible even if I'm not a Christian?  Sure I can.  That's in YOUR job description.

105125[/snapback]

It applies because it is authoritative whether you like it or not. Your choosing to "disbelieve" it does nothing to it's authority. But we've been here before and gone round and round...

105477[/snapback]

The Quran is authorative whether you like it or not. Your choosing not to believe it does nothing to it's authority.

That means we should all be held to the authority of the Quran as well.

 

The Tanach is authorative whether you like it or not. Your choosing not to believe it does nothing to it's authority.

That means we should all be held to the authority of the Tanach as well.

 

 

 

That exact same argument works with every single religion. Why don't you try an argument that WORKS?

105480[/snapback]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

[D. Paul]

It applies because it is authoritative whether you like it or not. Your choosing to "disbelieve" it does nothing to it's authority. But we've been here before and gone round and round...

105477[/snapback]

 

Daniel, could you please show me scriptures and references where the bible says that unbelievers (other than who choose biblegod) are under it's authority? I'd really love to see that. I see nowhere in the bible where the entire world is to be a theocracy....until that is the "real" messiah is flesh and blood visible to all.

 

Titus 3

 

1 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and to show true humility toward all men.

 

1 Peter 2:12-14

 

13 Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, 14or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

 

 

As shown above, I can find verses that say you are to submit to human authority, but not one verse in favor of a theocracy....not ONE. Unless one joins themselves to your beliefs, we are not subject to a thing from your bible.

105510[/snapback]

Daniel? I'm not Daniel.

[D. Paul]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

105821[/snapback]

 

As you are required to substantiate your claim that your book is authoritive. What a hypocrite!

105826[/snapback]

Precisely (as to your first sentence, that is). Now we can get somewhere.

 

As for your second editorial comment, please tell me how this is even remotely hypocritical.

[Dhampir]

The simple fact that you require substantive evidence for the authority of other so-called holy books, yet require none for your own.

[crazy-tiger]

The Quran is authorative whether you like it or not. Your choosing not to believe it does nothing to it's authority.

That means we should all be held to the authority of the Quran as well.

 

The Tanach is authorative whether you like it or not. Your choosing not to believe it does nothing to it's authority.

That means we should all be held to the authority of the Tanach as well.

 

 

 

That exact same argument works with every single religion. Why don't you try an argument that WORKS?

105480[/snapback]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

105821[/snapback]

I have given the EXACT same substantiation of their authorativeness as you have for the Bible.

 

Is that substantiation sufficient for the Bible? Then it is sufficient for the Quran and Tanach.

Is that substantiation insufficient for the Tanach or Quran? Then it is insufficient for the Bible.

As you are required to substantiate your claim that your book is authoritive.  What a hypocrite!

105826[/snapback]

Precisely (as to your first sentence, that is). Now we can get somewhere.

 

As for your second editorial comment, please tell me how this is even remotely hypocritical.

105836[/snapback]

Making the demand for substantiation of such a claim while making no sunstantiation for you own identical claim is hypoctritical...

[All Gods Fail]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

105821[/snapback]

 

Well, there's always the point that none of them are authoritative based on the wild, unsubstantiated claims they all make. I could just as easily say 'The Wizard Of Oz' is true as any of them.

 

Can you prove there wasn't a real Dorothy that rode a twister into Oz?

[crazy-tiger]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

105821[/snapback]

 

Well, there's always the point that none of them are authoritative based on the wild, unsubstantiated claims they all make. I could just as easily say 'The Wizard Of Oz' is true as any of them.

 

Can you prove there wasn't a real Dorothy that rode a twister into Oz?

105852[/snapback]

Good point...

 

Twisters exist, houses exist, dog's exist, people called Dorothy exist, Kansas exists... that's historical proof that the Wizard of Oz is a true story.

 

 

According to D.Paul's logic, that is...

[Guest Guest_serenitynow_*]

As for your second editorial comment, please tell me how this is even remotely hypocritical.

105836[/snapback]

 

Remotely hypocritical? You are joking, right? Because "the bible tells me so" is not good enough. Many religious books "tell people so" in regards to the "truth" of god. Quran can be made to look "true" with "proofs" too, are you under it's authority? If you can reject the Quran's authority, I can reject the Bible's.

[Amethyst]

Can you prove there wasn't a real Dorothy that rode a twister into Oz?

 

Or a real Gandalf, Frodo, Bilbo, Sauron, Arwen, Aragorn, etc.? Or how about Clark Kent and Lex Luthor? Peter Parker, Mary Jane, Harry and Norman Osborn, Harry Potter, Dumbledore, the list of myths goes on and on. Yet none of the ones I have listed claim to be true, and there's the difference. Christians lie about their myth being real because they want it to be real, but wanting something to be real, and having it be real, is completely different.

[Vigile]

1. Assume that most things you learn in church or from Christian leaders are wrong.... and the way you'll know is by attempting to use evidence and logic and a fresh reading of the Bible to PROVE ALL THINGS.

105634[/snapback]

 

 

Great advice.

 

My father once gave me that advice. It probably led to my eventual deconversion, but he doesn't know that.

[Vigile]

Fine. Only now you are required to substantiate your claim that these others are authoritative. Don't pass this off.

105821[/snapback]

 

You are hilarious. You refuse to substantiate your own claim other than "the bible says so," yet you hold other religious works to a higher standard?

[Purple]

BTW...one of my favorite members isn't here right now and hasn't been for awhile, Purple Rhino. He is a gay exchristian who is very busy with a fundraiser, he and his partner have a child also. See there, a homosexual who loving, kind and selfless

 

I miss the other Purple one, any idea when he'll be back.

[MQTA]

[SkepticOfBible]

 

Well, the verse is already self explaining.  Jews are God's people... always have been.  They are not a race of people.  Real Jews, are God's people, which are Christians.  John refers to us, Christians, as real Jews.  I'm not researching it for the purpose of removing it's error or something, that much is done.

105285[/snapback]

 

Do you mind telling me what is the difference between the following

 

a fake jew

A real jew

A christian

 

 

Off course it is a race of people. God choose Abraham over others, remember. It is talking about the descendants of Moses, Aaron and the other king.

 

Even Jesus identified the Jews as a seperate race (remember the caanite women coming to Jesus and he called her a dog)

 

There were no christians back then when this verse was written

 

Do you consider yourself a jew?

[pug]

 

Hang on... My uncle has faith but also needs WORKS.

Microsoft WORKS, that is.

105499[/snapback]

 

I have no faith in WORKS so I use the Word.

 

It's not perfect but it does Excel over Works.

 

When it crashes, it does it with Grace.

 

Sometimes it has a Will of it's own.

I'm not quite understanding the Power of your Point.

105688[/snapback]

 

You will...in a Flash.

[pug]

 

Well, the verse is already self explaining.  Jews are God's people... always have been.  They are not a race of people.  Real Jews, are God's people, which are Christians.  John refers to us, Christians, as real Jews.  I'm not researching it for the purpose of removing it's error or something, that much is done.

105285[/snapback]

 

Do you mind telling me what is the difference between the following

 

a fake jew

A real jew

A christian

 

 

Off course it is a race of people. God choose Abraham over others, remember. It is talking about the descendants of Moses, Aaron and the other king.

 

Even Jesus identified the Jews as a seperate race (remember the caanite women coming to Jesus and he called her a dog)

 

There were no christians back then when this verse was written

 

Do you consider yourself a jew?

106244[/snapback]

 

All non Jews are just Gentiles.

[Ouroboros]

 

Hang on... My uncle has faith but also needs WORKS.

Microsoft WORKS, that is.

105499[/snapback]

 

I have no faith in WORKS so I use the Word.

 

It's not perfect but it does Excel over Works.

 

When it crashes, it does it with Grace.

 

Sometimes it has a Will of it's own.

I'm not quite understanding the Power of your Point.

105688[/snapback]

 

You will...in a Flash.

107725[/snapback]

I guess I have to Explore this issue a bit further. But I think the Outlook is really good, especially when you look out the Windows.

[Checkmate]

AAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!

 

<<<<<<Grinch falls over dead from punnish-ment!>>>>>>>