AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I wasn't talking about Jesus in church robes, but rather his followers. He created dishonesty by becoming The Truth.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Which of all churches on earth is the only true church?
- Thread starter docwholladay
- Start date
- Status
I wasn't talking about Jesus in church robes, but rather his followers. He created dishonesty by becoming The Truth.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
That would constitute "ignorance," then.
Well, I guess you could say that, although it seems a stretch to me. From your perspective and by your definition, everyone on earth is ignorant except those who see life as you see it?
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
When do you think that custom began?
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Jesus didn't "become The Truth." Jesus is The Truth. And how did that fact create dishonesty, do you think?
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
How does
not constitute ignorance?
It's not my perspective. That's the JWs perspective.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
Inquisition. One can't hunt down heretics if one doesn't know The Truth.
Or think about dog fights. Who's most likely to twist the truth or behave dishonetly -- one of the owners, or one of the (non-betting) bystanders?
Who is most likely to debate dishonestly here? A person protecting his truth or a person who is simply interested in learning?
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what you mean. But dishonesty can be brought on by the simple embrace of certainty.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
And how is Jesus culpable for any of those things? It seems to me those things are all instigated by people -- not by truth, itself.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The wearing of church robes. When did that custom begin?
"Dishonesty can be brought on..."
Are you certain?
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
Culpability seems to be your issue, not mine. I was just remarking about the irony of Jesus cursing the fundie religionists and then being the cause of a world overrun with fundie religionists.
I'm the guy who doesn't even believe that Jesus existed, remember? It would be hard for me to blame him for his behavior.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
It's a metaphor, sojourner. It means something like 'the priesthood.'
The priesthood is ancient. See last month's National Geographic. Some are now thinking that religion caused civilization rather than civilization laying the groundwork for religion.
Even primitive people have their holy guys.
Oh, sure. I'm certain that anything can be.
How could something not be?
Last edited:
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I edited my reply above to answer that.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
so... that's your faux-poetic way of saying that religious authorities are full of crap, right?
Shermana
Heretic
Nontrinitarian Messianic Judaism is the closest thing to the original Antioch and Jerusalem Church. I like the Dutch Radical Critic approach that the anti-Judaizing post Pauline culture is a 2nd century invention. There should be little dispute that the original Christians were a Torah obedient Jewish sect that was hardly distinguished by the Romans from standard Jews. "Qairites" would be the closest non-Christian way of regarding it.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
If that is so, then was the gentiles that were brought into Christianity in the begging Torah Observant Jews? I dont think so since there are verses from the Apostles that talked about if the Gentiles that they brought into the religion would observe the Torah or not, and the answer was no.
And it is still like that today. When Jews convert to Catholicism, they to sometimes keep some of the practices and traditions, but us that are not from a Jewish background or raising, have no need to imitate. Its not our culture.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
I have no idea what you're talking about.
And I continue to wonder at your hostility... at what might be driving that.
Anyway, here's what I wrote. You're welcome to address any or all of it directly:
The priesthood is ancient. See last month's National Geographic. Some are now thinking that religion caused civilization rather than civilization laying the groundwork for religion.
Even primitive people have their holy guys.
How you got from that to a 'faux-poetic' claim that religious authorities are full of crap... is way beyond my ken.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Double talk. You say that "Culpability seems to be [my] issue," then go right ahead to assert that Jesus was "being the cause of a world overrun with fundie religionists."
You seem to be the one for whom culpability is an issue. I wondered how Jesus could be held responsible for what you claim to hold him responsible for -- I don't hold Jesus responsible. You're engaging in nothing more than clever Xian-bashing.
but yet you say:
How can Jesus be a cause if he didn't exist?! That's just dumb!
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Here's your original quote:
You then claimed to have used the whole "priestly robes" thing as a metaphor. When you used that term, (which is faux-poetic) you were being derogatory toward Jesus and toward Christian authority. You hold Jesus accountable for some sort of abuse of power, but then claim that you don't think Jesus ever existed. It ****** me off because it's dishonest and a holier-than-thou position. it's obvious that you think religious authorities are full of crap - especially with your use of the derogatory, faux-poetic reference.
We'd all rather that you simply be honest. You don't have to continue to "wonder at what's driving my hostility," or wonder what I'm talking about. You don't get to make accusations and then back off, putting up a smokescreen by calling attention to my "hostility" (which is overblowing my stance, BTW), and hoping to make me look unbalanced. I don't like your tone and I don't care for your debating style. It's underhanded and dishonest. Just be honest: You don't think Jesus existed. You think that the religious authorities are full of crap. We can deal with that.
AmbiguousGuy
Well-Known Member
If you stub your toe on a rock, the rock was the cause of your pain.
And yet the rock was not culpable... yes?
Don't let language jerk you around, sojourner. Words don't mean things. Only people can mean things.
Well, OK. And I guess I'm engaging in clever rock-bashing when I observe that the rock caused you to stub your toe.
Whatever, I guess.
People jump from buildings over things which don't exist. The love of their sweetheart, for just one example.
Their decision to leap depends on their belief in the love, even if the love never existed, yes?
These are pretty obvious truths, aren't they? Why waste our time in chasing my words around. Why not think about the human who is sending you those words... his actual meaning.
- Status