Originally posted by rwingettOK, Rob, we understand your feelings that some Christians perhaps present themselves in ways that you find offensive to your thinking and personhood. That's fine. I do as well. But you present so vehemently that your truth begins to sound as rabid as the ranting tv preachers. Is there anything positive that you have ever experienced from a person of "faith?" I think you have a valued point of view that might go farther if you were not into the "all or nothing" of it all. I would argue that many of the teachings of Jesus were somewhat of a poetic freethinker's response to the religious fundamentalism of his time. But that might be something we could discuss further.
Christmas has become increasingly secularized as the mention of "Christ" has become more of a liability in the public sphere. I have no problem with this. Quite the contrary, I endorse it wholeheartedly. If it bothers you to have Christmas with no Christ, then change the name of the holiday. Call it Yuletide, or something. For me, Christmas is about getti ...[text shortened]... teaching. They are, in effect, endorsing the entire rotten kettle of fish that Christianity is.
Originally posted by kirksey957I am beginning to see how this works. Pradtf can expect everyone to honor Jesus and allow his name to be invoked in the public sphere, and nobody bats an eyelash. But if I complain about being expected to listen to people prattle on about their beloved Jesus, then I am being rabid and nasty. It is true that I find Christianity to be repulsive. Furthermore, I make no distinction between Jesus and the institution of Christianity, they part and parcel of the same thing. Whether Jesus would have approved of modern Christianity is of no practical concern. That is why I reacted as brusquely as I did to Pradtf's initial post in this thread. The fact that he could see no reason why anyone would want to refrain from prostrating themselves before his Jesus struck me as being particularly offensive.
OK, Rob, we understand your feelings that some Christians perhaps present themselves in ways that you find offensive to your thinking and personhood. That's fine. I do as well. But you present so vehemently that your truth begins to sound as rabid as the ranting tv preachers. Is there anything positive that you have ever experienced from a person of ...[text shortened]... he religious fundamentalism of his time. But that might be something we could discuss further.
Originally posted by pradtfWhat I object to is your assumption that following Jesus will automatically make you a better person. You completely discount the possibility that it may have quite the opposite effect. After all, you freely admit that quite a lot of evil has been committed in his name throughout history. Also, while you admit it is possible for someone to lead an ethical life without Jesus, you seem to imply that they would have a much easier time of it if they just gave in and followed him. I reject that implicit assumption. Jesus may have had a good point here or there, but I think his teachings, on the whole, are negative and without merit. If you want to worship Jesus, then by all means do so. But do not be surprised when you find that there are many people who want no part of him.
[b]If it bothers you to have Christmas with no Christ, then change the name of the holiday. Call it Yuletide, or something.
that's fine - but until that happens i see nothing wrong keeping the christ in there
you may be as surprised as i was to learn about the historical 'origins' of christmas (see fjord's posts in what's this about christmas threa ...[text shortened]... of the 'preaching' we can indeed condemn much of the 'practice'.
in friendship,
prad
[/b]
By the way, I thought the "rotten kettle of fish" was a clever metaphor. Fish...get it?
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingetti know you are responding to kirksey but since my name appears here in vain, i thought i'd better get a few comments in and then take dancing lessons. you clearly have me at an advantage in that respect 😀
I am beginning to see how this works. Pradtf can expect everyone to honor Jesus and allow his name to be invoked in the public sphere, and nobody bats an eyelash. But if I complain about being expected to listen to people prattle on about ...[text shortened]... elves before his Jesus struck me as being particularly offensive.
to listen to people prattle on about their beloved Jesus
who's prattling on? i've only been responding to your statements.
Whether Jesus would have approved of modern Christianity is of no practical concern
i think it is of immense importance if you think that the religion has screwed up but the person hasn't. of course, if you think that they've both screwed up that's another story, i suppose.
... from prostrating themselves before his Jesus struck me as being particularly offensive
my jesus!! lord almighty!!! i ... i feel as if i've been born again!!!!
hmmm ... i don't know how those jehovah's people will take it when they stop by to deliver the watchtower 😀
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by rwingettYou sound like a teeny-weeny wicked little man...shame on you!!😲
I find it difficult to believe that someone of your presumed intelligence could make such a ridiculous post. The fact is that there are many of us who do not believe that Jesus was the paragon of wisdom. Nor do I believe that he has any "answer" at all. Your assertion that he redeems our species is pure conjecture, and for you expect everyone to "recogni ...[text shortened]... done well by banning his mention. It would do us great credit to make him an outcast everwhere.
5 edits
Originally posted by rwingetthow is committing evil in his name following him at all?
What I object to is your assumption that following Jesus will automatically make you a better person. You completely discount the possibility that it may have quite the opposite effect. After all, you freely admit that quite a lot of evil ...[text shortened]... he "rotten kettle of fish" was a clever metaphor. Fish...get it?
i have nowhere implied that anyone 'give in and follow' anyone to have an easier time. however, if you can even get a good idea here and there why not use it (and even give credit where due)?
i don't know why you are trying so hard to turn me into a 'jesus worshipper'. i happen to think that rwingett occasionally has good ideas, that people should listen to these, that may be they should even follow them. it doesn't mean i worship you - how can i ever since you have branded the cross onto my forehead!
the fish metaphor was indeed clever - i suppose (though i think it should be a kettle of rotten fish). i am again a believer of your wit, at least - since you have reminded me. however, there is a distinct possibility that those fish weren't really fish, but possibly a metaphoric representation. if this is true, then the fish in your kettle really can't rot and this could cause your original metaphor to be rotten ... but i choose not to see it that way.
in friendship,
prad
Originally posted by ivanhoeI think you'll find this is secularism, not paganism. The point of secularism is not to persecute Christians, but just the opposite: to make everyone, regardless of religion, feel included, and to stop one religious group having undue influence.
Like European politicians who continue to block any mention of Christianity in the draft of the continent's Constitution
As for real paganism, I am not overly concerned as to whether people follow Jesus or the Moon Goddess, if they're going to believe in something. What matters is how they interact with others.
Originally posted by AcolyteYou are right but the "christians" on this thread are not interested in equality -they want their point of view put forward by the state and other beliefs suppressed.
I think you'll find this is secularism, not paganism. The point of secularism is not to persecute Christians, but just the opposite: to make everyone, regardless of religion, feel included, and to stop one religious group having undue influence.
As for real paganism, I am not overly concerned as to whether people follow Jesus or the Moon Goddess, if they're going to believe in something. What matters is how they interact with others.
Wonder if any of them are pilots on American Airways?
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeYou are saying two different things. Are you suggesting a connection?
The Return Of Paganism
2004-02-08
February 07, 2004 — Like European politicians who continue to block any mention of Christianity in the draft of the continent's Constitution, public officials around the globe increasingly are adopting ...[text shortened]...
http://www.lifeissues.net/news.php?newsID=00005806&topic=
1. Opposition to mentioning Christianity in the European Constitution
2. Taking measures to favor pre-Christian paganism.
I agree with your first observation. And I think that is admirable. The Constitution should include the right of freedom of ALL thoughts and creeds as long as these don't oppress other thoughts and creeds.
But I wonder where you got your second observation. Can you give any link where you got that impression?
Personally I feel more worried about the propaganda for capitalism when I read the draft for the Constitution. Quite overtly there is stated that the European community should be based on economic competition. 😠
Fjord
Originally posted by fjord
You are saying two different things. Are you suggesting a connection?
1. Opposition to mentioning Christianity in the European Constitution
2. Taking measures to favor pre-Christian paganism.
I agree with your first observation. And I think that is admirable. The Constitution should include the right of freedom of ALL thoughts and creeds as long as thes ...[text shortened]... there is stated that the European community should be based on economic competition. 😠
Fjord
I'm not suggesting anything. I've found this interesting article on the site I've mentioned in my first post.
Originally posted by steerpikeat no point have any of them mentioned the fact that they want other beliefs supressed. infact I believe they're talking about the supression of all beliefs, even when that belief is inherant in the thing in which its being supressed. The Red Cross, was at one point a christian organisation. I have no idea if they still are... Christmas is the celebration of Christ's birth (well almost, I realise that the dates a bit out, but the meanings there.) To supress Christ from his own celebration is insane. Its also never been said that the state should promote the beliefs of christianity. But, that they shouldn't be removing these beliefs from things of a christian origin purely in the cause of political correctness.
You are right but the "christians" on this thread are not interested in equality -they want their point of view put forward by the state and other beliefs suppressed.
Wonder if any of them are pilots on American Airways?
Jim.