OT: this is a response to doodleboodle post#2581
I realize that this is off topic. If you see that you are offended please do not read further. The first thing I do NOT want to do is offend someone here. The reason I am posting this today is that it is Sunday and we are in the middle of a three day weekend. I am not sure if ‘doodleboodle’ will see this today or tomorrow. Therefore after our holiday I may post a reference ONLY. To my knowledge there is no off topic site on IHUB. If it appears that much discussion will occur I will recommend we go back to the CS off topic board.
So…
"You ain't gonna win these arguments so you might just as well quit and save your breath."
Response:
There should never be arguments. It should be intellectual discussions just like in any other discipline. And out of it you believe what you wish to believe and accept whatever comes as a result of your decision.
"The religious right have an answer for everything. 'Why did God allow this to happen?' They will answer, 'God moves in a mysterious way.' They say, 'If I am attacked I will strike back! An eye for an eye!' They choose to forget the 'Turn the other cheek,' advice. I could go on for pages about biblical 'opposites'."
Response:
I am not sure who or what is this religious right. Some say it is those that are conservative politically and also religious. Others say it is those that want to create a theocracy here and put themselves or others like them at the top. I probably fall into the first category if any. But I do know that this religiosity is not necessarily only Christian as the last presidential election proved, but it is becoming more and more world religions within our country’s borders. I suppose that some day we will say, ‘world religious right’. And I suppose this would be the opposite of those that are politically liberal and claim no allegiance to religion. Answers. Sometimes I do not know the answer and it may be a worse fallacy to come up some platitude that ignores the other person’s thoughts or feelings, even if it has truth to it. Opposites. We will talk of the human side below. But what about opposites within the bible. Oh, this is quite true. A better word is paradox. Jesus was both human and divine. Christianity is monotheistic but believes the theology of the trinity. Faith is the substance of that which is unseen. There is the Law and then there is Works and then there is Faith. If what you see as opposites within the bible itself could be proven with empirical evidence then it would not be what it is. I think I hear wires shorting out in my own brain as well.
"The bible is basically a nice book of fairy tales."
Response:
A fairy tale is an imaginary story taking place in imaginary places performed by imaginary characters and its author(s) claims nothing true to reality regarding the story. The bible stories are surrounded by historical places within historical events and involving historical characters and witnesses. It is a written record of God’s progressive revelation to mankind; first in the natural world, second by the prophets and third by Jesus the Christ. It was canonized by the early church to include certain Jewish writings and the writings of those who saw Jesus, including Paul due to his witness of Jesus on the Damascus road (Acts 9). But then some of the witness writings were excluded as they did not seem consistent with the bulk of the others writings, i.e. the gospel of Peter. Could some of this be proven in a court of law? No. But then other legal claims are not proven either due to the standards regarding evidence, discovery, witnesses and court procedures, and the threshold of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. It is this last point regarding reasonable doubt that you can begin to see the elements of Faith.
"Christ (who was a Rabbi (teacher) and probably a good man with good values which were TOTALLY the opposite of what you see in America today (and I do mean TOTALLY), who headed up a cult which took off. Just another case of right place at the right time."
Response:
Jesus (the Christ, Messiah) never claimed to be a ‘rabbi’ or even a ‘good man’. However, the doctrine of Christ is the basis for the Christian faith. The centrality of Christ was an issue included in the first four ecumenical church councils ranging from 325 to 451AD. What we see today in Christology was affirmed in those councils and in the times surrounding them; i.e. his humanity, his divinity, his pre and post time existence. All the counter claims and issues that were raised then and since then were addressed back then; e.g., subordination, substitution, adoptionism, atonement, trinity, etc. There are two events, which are lodged in our finite time frame, that are considered to be pillars of the faith. These are that he was “born of a virgin” and “resurrected from the dead”. No other person claims this combination. Many do not spend effort disputing the virgin birth. However, the resurrection is highly disputed, most likely due to its biblically claimed implications regarding atonement and salvation. As such, let us examine those claims against the resurrection and determine if they can be valued as a claim against the resurrection. Central to the resurrection is the “empty tomb”. Now what do detractors say about this? One, the body was stolen and did not resurrect. But who stole the body? The disciples? Then they suffered and died for a lie, and they all did except the disciple John who was exiled to an island. The Jews? That would have only compounded their problems and they would have produced the body in light of the disciple’s claims for a resurrection. The Roman’s? And why would they do that, they were very ready to be finished with this ‘political-religious’ issue of their occupied people. Two, the wrong tomb (an empty one) was visited by his followers. The women (first arrivers) and others went to the wrong tomb? But they saw where he was placed and they made sure by asking directions. Three, Jesus passed out and later recovered. This is the most ridiculous in light of Roman crucifixion methods. No, Jesus was who he said he was or he was insane, and so were many thousands of people in the early church days, especially those of the early persecutions by the Romans. Each individual has a choice as to what to do with this ‘empty tomb’.
"There have been hundreds of cults and most simply fade away but before this one could, the christians formed a very organized church."
Response:
Christians did not form the church. The word church is from the Greek word ‘ecclesia’ which denotes ‘fellowship’. This ecclesia was formed as the bible states, by the Comforter (Holy Spirit) that came after Jesus. However, most persons see the buildings and doctrines and budgets and denominations which is the religion of it all. There is a great distinction between the two. The early believers died within the ecclesia, not the religion. John Foxes’ book, Foxes book of Martyrs and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s book, Cost of Discipleship, are very good reading for this distinction. And by the way Christianity is becoming the most persecuted religion on the earth, if not already so. So newcomers should count the cost beforehand.
"If you want to read horror stories get a few books on church history and their long list of dirty deeds over the centuries."
Response:
Mankind’s inhumanity to mankind is well documented over history. History seems to be a record of our human failures. Religion (as mentioned previously), economics and social differences are the basis for much of our world’s conflicts, both on an individual basis and on a group to group basis. Religion, as is any other organism of humankind, is not exempt from humanity. The bible intentionally does not leave out our humanity. There is a reason for that, to show our need for something that we cannot attain for ourselves in our human state. Since you mention reading, I would recommend Emil Brunner’s book, Man in Revolt, which explains this condition very well.
"If the church gave away every dime they have they couldn't wash the blood of their hands."
Response:
Money or any other physical practice cannot achieve atonement for any wrong doing within the realms of eternity. And that is the point of the Christ’s atonement. And yes there is much to atone for by ALL individuals. Wouldn’t you agree?
"Also, the American religious right have re-invented (a fake) Christ to suit their agenda. In the greediest country in the world they have to because the religious right, in no way, shape or form practise the teachings of the "real" Christ in thought or action."
Response:
Here I will make a point of the human opposites that I mentioned above. We have much agreement here and you would be surprised at who all agrees with you INSIDE the church. Over the centuries the bible, faith, Jesus, doctrine, etc have all been used at many times or another for the personal agenda of individuals or groups. This is true in any of the world’s religions and in any culture. There are many who have come into the door as disciples but do not reflect the ‘fruits of the spirit’ (Galations 5:22,23). I honestly believe it is because we are caught up in the religion of it all and not the ecclesia. When Peter and John went to the (Jewish) temple to pray (in the name of Jesus) they met a lame beggar outside. They said, “silver and gold have we none but what we have we give you in the name of Jesus so rise and walk” (Acts 3:6). The religion now has silver and gold but not near enough Jesus. Six quick points. One, time will determine the fruits of these efforts you speak of. Two, things such as this of the past have passed away, “the Egyptians you see today you will see no more” (Exodus 14:13). Three, today’s church would do well to read Charles Sheldon’s book, In His Steps; or on a lighter side, Barbara Robinson’s book, The Best Christmas Pageant Ever. Four, anyone can stand outside of any situation or organization and be critical. Five, if the church actually moved as Jesus there would be a current persecution to cause the previous periods of persecutions to pale. Maybe that’s an answer to the question, 'why?'. Six, did you know that Jesus was also very critical of the religion of the times?
"I sometimes get "pulled in" by ignorance (which I shouldn't) but I've discovered it isn't worth it"
Response:
I do not know what you mean by this. Apparently you have had some difficult experiences, and as well do not care for the American society. Perhaps I could be an intermediary with you and our little friend who was raped three times and had her life threatened by a church deacon that many thought was great. She is now in college. He is now in jail for another multiple rape. Pedophile. She could help you understand faith better than I. One day she will do much for others.
Conclusion. Ultimately the choice in these matters is yours alone.
Respectfully submitted, Wayne
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
