Jesus was a good con-artist..

[AV8OR]

Oh well.

 

[Birdstrike]

A Simple Plan, Really

God's plan reallly isn't difficult to understand if you uncouple it from all the man-made goop.

He wanted to reach men, the free-choice beings he loves and created who were making a mess of the world by their choices. But man's sin or rebellious nature presented a serious obstacle to any relationship. A debt had to be paid for all that rebellion and disobedience. So He became a man and paid the debt Himself on the cross for all men's sins in the past, present, and future. Now all men could have a new relationship with Him and eternal life. All they had to do was believe that their debt of sin was paid for by Christ.

That's it in a nutshell. You can believe what you want but in the end it was and is His own plan, He thought of it and implemented it. Then He validated it by raising Himself from the dead when Christ again walked the earth after being crucified so everyone would know He was who He said He was.

It's so funny when we hear ourselves pontificate, "Well I think this" or "How can God do that"...it doesn't really matter what you or I think in the end...if you hear the message, God gives you an opportunity to respond. You are free to accept it, reject it, look into it some more, whatever.

But that's the plan Jesus laid out. Nothing like it anywhere. It cost Him everything, costs us nothing... execept a willingness to accept His free gift.

And even the jungle heathen who never heard the name of Christ knew that they should be worshipping God - He put that in everyone's heart - and He will handle their situation individually, just like yours and mine I'd be more concerned about what we do with the message of Christ than throwing up smoke screens. He won't ask you to account for anybody but yourself in the end and how you responded to His invitation.

Lastly, make no mistake about it - Christ was crucified because He claimed to be God. Under Jewish law, that was blasphemy and He was executed according to that law. And it fit perfectly with God's plan for man's salvation. God did business with Himself on the cross.

 

[FSB99]

Birdstrike:

great post, you summed it up perfectly.
my problem is, why can't certain people keep that belief where it belongs, in their heart? if you live your life the way you believe God wants you to, you're living a good life. i have a problem when someone's perceived good life infringes on my perceived good life. we all have a moral responsibility to each other, after all, that's what a society is. in order to assure the basic morality of society is upheld, we create laws (can't kill each other, can't steal from each other, etc.) those civil laws aren't enough for some folks, they insist on enhancing those laws, with what they believe to be the right, true way to live, i.e., their self perceived good life.
if i did that, it would be illegal to eat meat on fridays, confessions every saturday to a priest, abortions would be illegal, and there'd be tons of unwanted children, since contraception is wrong. doesn't seem very attractive to those who aren't catholic, does it?
i'll keep my religion in my church, i just wish others would do the same.

 

[Birdstrike]

I understand where you're coming from FSB. You're talking about all that "man-man goop" also known as "religion". It's not supposed to be a list of do's and don'ts, it's about a relationship with our creator who has a personality, like we do.

Unfortunately, that simple message gets cluttered up with a lot of socio-cultural add-ons that we get caught up in but were never intended (like don't eat meat on Friday, etc).

Jesus saved some of his strongest criticisms for the so-called religious leaders of the day who He knew to be hypocrites. But that's not God's fault, His message as laid out and lived by example is intended to be simple enough for a child to respond to it; hear, believe, receive, and that's it.

Things can get out of hand also because Christ commissioned His followers to go spread the word. But it's supposed to be done in the spirit of one beggar telling another beggar where to find free bread. It's not supposed to be "in your face," I agree.

 

[AAsRedHeadedbro]

Good post FSB99.

And 100LL...believe what you want. Nobody is stopping you. Personally, I have chosen not to believe the message in the Bible. That's my choice. I was raised a Christian and knew the Bible fairly well. I think it's a very good history book in many ways because many of the events written of have been recorded in other texts of the day. However, there are too many inconsistencies in the Bible and in its message for me to believe that it is the word of God. I think it is the word of men only.

That goes for the Koran too.

 

[Satan]

As agents of Mr.Christ, you, the followers, are doing a piss poor job of advertising for the company
Sort of like telemarketing on god's behalf, and annoying the sh!t out of people on a daily basis

 

[Ivan Yankenoff]

Ultimately, God will judge all of his enemies

You would think something that would be labeled god would be above enemies.

I sincerely hope you find God before it is too late.

This is your whole problem. We don't need your pity. I feel completely in peace with my decision to defy and ignore all "gods." You can hope in one hand and sh!t in the other and then realize you now have sh!t in both hands.

All you creationist with your "helping, hoping, praying" is akin to constantly talking loudly with a blind person , it just ends up pissing them off. Religion, the next RIAA.

Like it has been said before keep your religion out of my face, gov't and schools and I'll keep paying taxes for your religious convenience.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

well, yea, church and RIAA do have something in common...
they both molest youngsters

 

[Pilot124]

I'm with AAsRedHeadedbro on this one too!!!!

 

[100LL... Again!]

You may not want my pity, but you have it nonetheless.

It does not affect me at all, but my faith requires that I continue to pray that you become saved. I am surprised that you cannot 'live and let live' on this issue.

Now, you would rightly accuse me of not being willing to 'live and let live', and you would be correct. Why am I not a hypocrite then?

Here's why:

"Live and let live" is not the Christian philosophy. We must continue to pray for the lost. What we are NOT required to do is impose our faith through legislation. That is really not the point of Christianity. However, my impression is that you are annoyed simply by my BELIEF that all people need to find God.

Even if I never attempt to 'push' my faith on you through legal or social means, you will still resent the fact that I know we all need to be saved. You are unable to get past this without anger, scoffing, or name-calling.

This means that you have given control of your emotional state over to me. How mature is that?

Point is, you bait and bait, but it is proof to me that you cannot let it rest.

You feel superior to me, which is obvious from the attempts at taunting.

I do not feel superior to you, but realize we are all sinners. Placing us all the the same plane offends YOU more than you putting me down offends me. Funny, and sad.

 

[Dizel8]

"but realize we are all sinners."

I am not, she was 18, I can prove it!

 

[Ivan Yankenoff]

100LL, that is the biggest load of back slapping rhetoric I have heard in a long time.

Point out where I called you a name.

I couldn't care less about your beliefs, so no I'm not annoyed by your beliefs because I haven't given it a thought. Your followers who push their beliefs into my life and wallet are the ones who annoy me. You may not do this but how about spending an equal percentage of your time educating your fellow creationists to not do this.

All religion is nastiest plague mankind has ever seen. This is a disease of the mind. No different than any other psychological disorder with the cure being a pill few want to swallow. Now don't turn this into a I think I'm better than you arguement because nothing is further from the truth. You believe I haven't seen the "light" and I believe you may need some spf30. Doesn't make one better than the other. The difference is I'm not obligated to try to help you not get melanoma because as I said earlier I couldn't care less as long as your religion stays out of my life.

You have no control over my emotions and I do not feel superior over any living thing, something that most creationist cannot.

You know what offends me? Having someone whom I just met ask what religion I belong to. Having someone look at me as if I just sodomized a 4 year old when I tell them none. Having to listen to them tell me that I'm going to "Hell." Having them then broadcast to everyone in a quarter mile radius that I'm a sinner. This really doesn't bother me but I really don't think it's someone I hardly know duty to spread personal information. I've never announced to anyone that "Bob" is a baptist. Having religious material posted throughout the workplace. I don't post my 4 year old sodomizing religion so I appreciate the same in return. Having to pay to provide police and fire protection for religious properties. Having another parent who forces my child to pray with them at the dinner table. Having no chance of ever winning a case in court because I have to affirm the oath and most judges and juries will rule based on this.

 

[100LL... Again!]

This is a nation founded on Christian principles. That is a fact, whether you want to believe it or not.

Your rage is understandable. It goes back thousands of years, and is similar to the rage that people feel over all who preach ethics based on "God". You probably have your own set of ethics that you would like to enforce upon me. Taxes, perhaps. Social engineering perhaps?

My ethics are based on God. I have enough proof of God's existence to satisfy my needs. And I am a skeptic.

Your ethics are based on your secular worldview.

Your lack of belief in diety does not trump my belief in same.

What if I were to 'push' my viewpoint on you from a purely secular point? Would you be more receptive to it? Doubtful.

Therefore, your rejection of God as a basis for disagreeing with me politically is a smokescreen.

Therefore, I must conclude you hate God. Really. This type of passion cannot be genereated over something that doesn't exist.

 

[Ivan Yankenoff]

It is impossible to hate something you don't believe in. Is it possible to hate that **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** snipe, hardly because it doesn't exist. Just like I can't love a women with 36D's, 5'5", 110#'s who loves to sip bourbon while debating the DH rule, the BCS or whether a 2 stroke or 4 stroke is better for hill climbing. They also don't exist.

I don't know why you take things so personal. I ask one simple thing, keep your beliefs to yourself.........

I don't remember discussing politics with you. If I would you would most likely be amazed at how much we agree on. Religion doesn't have the market cornered on ethics, morality, and general decency.

 

[incubus]

The problem with religous right is that they are gaining power thanks to a right wing friendly white house and house of reps. Not to mention some big business on their side. Namely companies like Clear Channel. Just follow the Howard Stern issue and you'll see that. The right needs to be knocked down a few levels so they are not so influential. This country is becoming more prudish by the day. It needs to stop.

 

[incubus]

What do you guys do? Tape limbaugh, hannity, and o'reilly and memorize it?!!

 

[100LL... Again!]

But it IS possible to hate something that you HOPE doesn't exist.

Here's my view on being a member of the religious right:

It does not matter in the long run if we prevail or not. I will be judged by God based on whether I TRIED, not whether I succeeded. One person alone cannot change the world, if it is hell-bent (no pun intended) on destroying itself. But I can be judged for trying to resist evil to the extent posiible. Either way, the Godly ultimately win.

 

[Snakum]

All religion is nastiest plague mankind has ever seen.

Agreed. Especially those d@mn pesky Buddhists.

And for the guy who posted verses from the Dhammapada ... I'd expect a better understanding of "enlightenment" from you than what you posted my brother.

Reverend Thich Minh Thong
Rinzai Monk(ey)

 

[Satan]

But it IS possible to hate something that you HOPE doesn't exist

whether it exists or not is not the question here, jesus was a swindler and you've been swindled, for 2000 years, nonetheless

 

[furloughfodder]

THE END IS NIGH! ALL YE SINNERS REPENT!!

First-Ever Hurricane Forms in South Atlantic
Reuters


By Patricia Zengerle

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The first hurricane ever reported in the south Atlantic swirled off the coast of Brazil on Friday, and forecasters said it could make landfall in the South American country during the weekend.



Although it was far outside their usual territory, forecasters at the U.S. National Hurricane Center (news - web sites) in Miami were helping the Brazilian Weather Service to track the unprecedented system.


"There's problems that happen when hurricanes occur in areas that we've never seen before," said hurricane center meteorologist Eric Blake.


The storm was a Category 1 hurricane -- the least powerful on forecasters' five-level scale -- with winds somewhere between 74 and 95 miles per hour.


"It's about 225 miles east-southeast of the Brazilian coast and it's moving westward at about 7 miles per hour," he said.


Blake said some of the forecasting computer models showed the storm turning away from the coast before making landfall, but he said it was too soon to say if that would happen.


"It has an eye and thunderstorms around the center, and we're looking at the possibility of (landfall in) southeast Brazil sometime tomorrow or the next day," he said.


The storm has not been given a name because it has formed in an area where meteorologists have made no provision for doing so. In parts of the world where storms usually form, forecasters assign men's and women's names in alphabetical order to help keep track of them.


It was too soon to say if the hurricane would break up before it made landfall.


"Right now it's too early to tell. There's nothing obvious to say this storm is going to weaken," Blake said. He noted that it is autumn in Brazil, an active time of year in regions that normally have hurricanes, such as the Atlantic Ocean off the U.S. east coast.


Ship captains have reported hurricanes for centuries and, since the 1960s, weather forecasters have used satellites to track storm activity around the globe.


But a hurricane has never previously been reported in the south Atlantic. Blake said there have been "questionable" tropical weather systems tracked in the area before, but none had developed into a hurricane.


"This one's broken all the rules," he said.