Christianity vs Paulianity

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

10 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Finding some kind of middle ground here is currently difficult for me.

Same here, I am completely against Abrahamic Religions now. I feel they do much more harm than good to the human psyche. The only good I can see in Christianity now is for those that are addicts and need that feeling of constant surveillance from the almighty to keep them on a path to recovery. 

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

44 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Finding some kind of middle ground here is currently difficult for me.

Often the difference between a "debate" and a "discussion" is simply how cordial the participants are toward one another.  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

2 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Often the difference between a "debate" and a "discussion" is simply how cordial the participants are toward one another.  

 

 

 

[RankStranger]

15 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

I do tend to give Jesus's teachings far more weight than Paul's.  Jesus is gospel.  Paul is history.

 

 

Could you please tell us how you arrived at this dichotomy, RS?

 

Is the weighting influenced by your belief that Jesus is god but Paul was just a man?

 

Or is there some emotional factor at work here because Jesus died for you whereas Paul did not?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

14 hours ago, Weezer said:

I have the same question.  

 

I'm not clear on what y'all are looking for.  Jesus is God... a bit oversimplified, but that's standard Christian theology.

 

And true enough- Paul didn't die for my sins.

[RankStranger]

14 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

Hmm, I don't understand. It is obvious that Jesus is pro-mosaic law. I don't see that reflected in progressive Christianity.

 

So what I see is What we were talking about before. "CHERRY PICKING". Progressive Christian seem to take the scriptures above from Paul saying that we are no longer under the law but under grace through faith in Jesus. Mix a little God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentence, and a pinch of For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life. 

 

See God loves everyone, He loves the homosexuals, the pan sexuals, those that give children up for abortion, just believe on Jesus because God loves you..... 

 

Nah.. that wasn't Jesus. He believed in the law, he was sinless through the law, and would never have condoned homosexuality. 

 

I don't know what the progressive Christians got going on. But it isn't biblical. I don't see how you can say in practice the progressives are more in tune with Jesus. Thats.... really hilarious. I'm sure they think they are closer just like any denomination thinks they are closer. But there is SOOOOO much bible you have to just chunk out the window.

 

The ruthless God of the old testament said he was the Lord thy God and he changed not. 

 

That is another reason that Paul changing the criteria for the law doesn't fit.

 

Jesus said that not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away until all be fulfilled. By all being fulfilled he wasn't talking about his death and resurrection. He was an apocalyptic Jew. He taught an Apocalyptic message. He was talking about God coming with his kingdom. Because when God came with his kingdom he would destroy wickedness and there would be no need for the law. 

 

God said he doesn't change. 

 

Progressive Christianity is a new thing. I don't think they "Got it right" 2000 years after Jesus. 

 

While progressive Christians like yourself are far more tolerable, less toxic, and accepting which I like. Don't fool yourself into thinking that that is what Jesus intended. 

 

You know enough to know better than that. 

 

DB

 

Have you ever been to a progressive Christian church?  Have you spent any time there to learn what they preach about, how they treat others, and why they believe the way they do?  I have.  You've got an awful lot of opinions about progressive Christians... who are not at all a monolith.  I hope your numerous opinions are based on some kind of first-hand experience.  If not, why should I give them any more weight than the fundamentalists whose theology you seem to share?

 

At this point I'm not sure how I feel about the collision of Christianity with our modern notions of homosexuality.  That's one reason (not the only one) I've been going to a United Methodist church lately- I want to know what they believe and why they believe it.  I want to know what their character is- how they treat people, and why they treat people the way they do.  Most Methodists I've known over the years have been good people.  Some of them great people.  I'd choose them any day over shitty self-righteous Baptists.  No question.  

 

You and I grew up in different branches of fundamentalist/evangelical Christianity.  So I understand your reservations here- I have them myself.  The Bible says what it says, and it's not ambiguous in its condemnation of homosexuality.  So I can totally understand why hundreds of Methodist churches are leaving the UMC over their tacit endorsement of a gay bishop, in direct violation of church rules and a plain reading of scripture.  I will be going to one of those recently split-off churches at some point... though I'm in no particular hurry.  I want to know what they believe and why they believe it.  I want to know how they treat people, and why.  

 

I agree that Jesus would not have explicitly condoned homosexuality.  But neither did He explicitly condemn them.  For me the question isn't whether or not homosexuality is a sin - clearly it is.  The question to me is whether or not homosexuality should be singled out and treated as being worse than all the other sins... while many MANY common sins within the Church are straight up ignored.

 

Fact is that homosexuals have been singled out and actively oppressed for much of human history.  In a lot of cases I'm not sympathetic to Wokey Oppression Language... but in the case of homosexuals it's just a fact.  They've been legislated against, shunned, and even actively hunted... in America and all over the world.  During my lifetime... and even now in many parts of the world.  

 

Matthew:

 

Quote

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

 

Now, we're talking about a subset of people who have been shunned, ridiculed, legislated against and actively hunted (Matthew Shephard being a quick example).

 

I'd say that qualifies as "the least of these".  Which is why shitty self-righteous Baptists and the like are in fact goats.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

46 minutes ago, RankStranger said:

 

 

I'm not clear on what y'all are looking for.  Jesus is God... a bit oversimplified, but that's standard Christian theology.

 

And true enough- Paul didn't die for my sins.

 

But how do you know that Jesus is god?

 

 

Are you simply taking the standard line of Christian theology?

 

And if so, why are you doing that when, as an Ex-Christian, you didn't do that?

 

There has to be a reason why you changed your mind and we'd like you to tell us what that reason is please.

 

 

Or, do you know that Jesus is god by faith?

 

Which means that you 'know' without the benefit of objective evidence.

 

Because, according to scripture, faith means belief without evidence, as per Hebrews 11 : 1.

 

 

Or has Jesus somehow imparted this knowledge to you via the holy spirit?

 

 

You see, RS?   That's three different ways by which you could 'know' that Jesus is god.

 

And right now, unless you explain further, we're none the wiser.

 

So please explain how you know Jesus is god.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

[RankStranger]

1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

Same here, I am completely against Abrahamic Religions now. I feel they do much more harm than good to the human psyche. The only good I can see in Christianity now is for those that are addicts and need that feeling of constant surveillance from the almighty to keep them on a path to recovery. 

 

DB

 

I used to feel exactly the same way.  Now I see this as tilting at windmills.

 

[RankStranger]

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

But how do you know that Jesus is god?

 

 

Are you simply taking the standard line of Christian theology?

 

And if so, why are you doing that when, as an Ex-Christian, you didn't do that?

 

There has to be a reason why you changed your mind and we'd like you to tell us what that reason is please.

 

 

Or, do you know that Jesus is god by faith?

 

Which means that you 'know' without the benefit of objective evidence.

 

Because, according to scripture, faith means belief without evidence, as per Hebrews 11 : 1.

 

 

Or has Jesus somehow imparted this knowledge to you via the holy spirit?

 

 

You see, RS?   That's three different ways by which you could 'know' that Jesus is god.

 

And right now, unless you explain further, we're none the wiser.

 

So please explain how you know Jesus is god.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

Yeah, I'm not interested in your input on that question.

 

Let's just stick to Christianity vs. Paulianity.

[walterpthefirst]

Have you ever been to a progressive Christian church?  Have you spent any time there to learn what they preach about, how they treat others, and why they believe the way they do?  I have.  You've got an awful lot of opinions about progressive Christians... who are not at all a monolith.  I hope your numerous opinions are based on some kind of first-hand experience.  If not, why should I give them any more weight than the fundamentalists whose theology you seem to share?

 

 

It's because Christian believers aren't monolithic and have such a wide spectrum of beliefs and umpteen different viewpoints on the same passages of the bible that we need to ask you searching questions, RS.

 

And the flip side of that is that for just the same reasons, you need to explain your beliefs and views fully to us.

 

Because we cannot possibly intuit your thinking processes or somehow magically know your thoughts.

 

You need to be less vague, answer questions more fully and explain more.

 

 

Please help us out here.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

2 minutes ago, RankStranger said:

 

 

Yeah, I'm not interested in your input on that question.

 

Let's just stick to Christianity vs. Paulianity.

 

Well, that's in keeping with your declared intent to only answer questions that interest you.

 

Thanks very much.

[RankStranger]

Just now, walterpthefirst said:

 

Well, that's in keeping with your declared intent to only answer questions that interest you.

 

Thanks very much.

 

You're welcome.  I'm glad we're coming to a common understanding.

[walterpthefirst]

Just now, RankStranger said:

 

You're welcome.  I'm glad we're coming to a common understanding.

 

So if I were to ask you if you considered my questions off-topic, would you be interested enough to answer that one?

[RankStranger]

8 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

So if I were to ask you if you considered my questions off-topic, would you be interested enough to answer that one?

 

I'd have to see the question before I'd know whether or not I'm interested.  You ask A LOT of uninteresting questions... but I'll give it a try 

 

Edit: I think I misunderstood you here.

[RankStranger]

8 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

So if I were to ask you if you considered my questions off-topic, would you be interested enough to answer that one?

 

No, I wouldn't necessarily consider your questions about my personal belief "off topic".  But we both know that you won't be satisfied with any answer I give.  And we both know that no minds are gonna be changed by going into that particular detail.  So why bother?

 

If I become interested in the input of X-Christians regarding my personal belief in Jesus Christ... I'll start a thread on that subject 

[walterpthefirst]

11 minutes ago, RankStranger said:

 

No, I wouldn't necessarily consider your questions about my personal belief "off topic".  But we both know that you won't be satisfied with any answer I give.  And we both know that no minds are gonna be changed by going into that particular detail.  So why bother?

 

If I become interested in the input of X-Christians regarding my personal belief in Jesus Christ... I'll start a thread on that subject 

 

That's an unwarranted and unsupportable assertion on your part, RS.

 

 

You can't know that I won't be satisfied with your answers any more than I can know how you know Jesus is god.

 

Both things are unknowable until either of us explains to the other.

 

And on the basis of that logic I'm going to ask you to retract your assertion.

 

You cannot know that I won't be satisfied with any answer you give.

 

All you can do is surmise that I won't be on the basis of what I've written before now.

 

And what you surmise and what you know are two different things.

 

 

So, please retract your assertion.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[RankStranger]

4 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

That's an unwarranted and unsupportable assertion on your part, RS.

 

 

You can't know that I won't be satisfied with your answers any more than I can know how you know Jesus is god.

 

Both things are unknowable until either of us explains to the other.

 

And on the basis of that logic I'm going to ask you to retract your assertion.

 

You cannot know that I won't be satisfied with any answer you give.

 

All you can do is surmise that I won't be on the basis of what I've written before now.

 

And what you surmise and what you know are two different things.

 

 

So, please retract your assertion.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

Sorry bud, I can see the future.  I don't need you to agree with me.

[RankStranger]

Did I not warn you that I would not be rational here?

[walterpthefirst]

Just now, RankStranger said:

 

Sorry bud, I can see the future.  I don't need you to agree with me.

 

And on the basis of that irrationality I hereby quit this thread.

 

 

[RankStranger]

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

And on the basis of that irrationality I hereby quit this thread.

 

 

 

I like this post

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

Well, Rank, since you and Walter have reached the proverbial 'standoff' stage, may we chat? Unfortunately, I don't know about the topic....

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

On the other hand, I'd LOVE to hear your take on my other thread "The Handmaid's Tale"

 

[RankStranger]

2 minutes ago, moxieflux66 said:

Well, Rank, since you and Walter have reached the proverbial 'standoff' stage, may we chat? Unfortunately, I don't know about the topic....

 

 

Sure- you don't need my permission.

 

 

1 minute ago, moxieflux66 said:

On the other hand, I'd LOVE to hear your take on my other thread "The Handmaid's Tale"

 

 

I haven't seen the show, but I'll have a look 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

Just now, RankStranger said:

 

Sure- you don't need my permission.

 

 

 

I haven't seen the show, but I'll have a look 

It's adapted from a book by Margaret Atwater. The book is also worth reading. 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

As for the series, probably only need to watch the first episode to watch where the film goes, more or less. 

[RankStranger]

Yeah, I can't really comment, not having seen it.  I remember my wife watched it a few years back.

 

Some branches/practices of Christianity (including but not limited to the FLDS) do look an awful lot like a fertility cult.