Would Jesus go to Church?

[mar]

#$%, I'm really wound up today!!

I even went to the gym and had a killer workout but it still hasn't taken the edge off.

I feel like I wanna choke someone!

You know what TB? You're gonna be the proverbial 'One Bad Apple' that ruins it for everyone.

We have had numerous discussions on this board about exactly where politics, religion, sex and everything else not related to aviation fit in.

The bottom line--ALWAYS--is "If you're not interested, don't read it."

And more to the point: The moderators at flightinfo have given us the liberty to use this forum to discuss anything we wish (within certain limits).

You, sir, are pushing the limits of good taste.

That's right.

You may think you're spreading "The Good News" but in reality you're just disrupting the peace--just like the guy on the corner screaming about End Times.

I would expect you, a mature gentleman with a varied background, to have the perspective and the good sense of timing and discretion necessary to contribute to a sensitive topic like one's personal beliefs.

So far you have demonstrated none of that.

I remind you: I'm an atheist so I have no dog in any fight about whose God is the true God. But I must say that I find your presumptive smugness offensive.

I find your stance on how Jesus would think or feel offensive. Some might even say blasphemous.

Sadly if you had used a modicum of judgement; of discretion. If you had any sense of timing or proportion I would've never had to write such a distasteful 'attack'.

I'm sorry. But there's a time and a place.

Every now and then would've been tolerable.

But I'm pretty sick of reading self-righteous, dogmatic, doctrinaire rhetoric.

I mean, you hardly contribute anything towards aviation discussions anymore.

Finally, the moderators have given you the freedom to post as you like but I'm to tell you: Don't be the Bad Apple.

Don't abuse your freedom.
Think about it.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Standing ovation out here in cyberspace!

 

[Timebuilder]

Well, first I have to recognize that you don't indeed have a "dog in this fight." It is not a fight, and I have not attacked anyone.

I have, however, been attacked. Not hurt. Not damaged. Not daunted.

Maybe you missed that part.

I have responded with an uncommon level of decorum in responding to these attacks, and have modelled Christ in response: to teach and lead.

I didn't start this discussion, but I am duty bound to inject some truth into it, even when faced with the abjectly absurd. Some people consider the truth to be an unwelcome attack, but that is a response not supported by the Bible OR human logic.

It's just the right thing to do.

 

[Timebuilder]

Oh, one more thing, Hugh.

247 times today, just one day, people have found this important enough to read.

The thread about the Passion now has over 3,500 posts.

Think they are all applauding Mar's position?

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

I'd say mostly, yes. A few no, but mostly yes. Purely out of voyeurism, maybe. Most, regardless of beliefs, would agree that this forum, much like the cockpit isn't a very good place to climb onto a pulpit. I think people are somewhat interested in the subject of such things, but really don't care to hear one persons' beliefs stated rather condescendlingly as fact.

 

[Timebuilder]

I'm stating that God's views are fact. Mine are irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[mar]

You're not Jesus Christ

TB You cannot save someone over the internet.

Certainly not me.

Cease and desist.

Talk airplanes. It's fun.

 

[Timebuilder]

I have an idea.

Start a thread about that airplane in the avatar.

I, for one, would like to hear all about it.

I'm serious.

 

[Dubya]

Mowing lawns?

So do you think He will help me clean out my garage?

W

 

[Timebuilder]

I can sell you a dandy John Deere garden tractor...

Oops! Someone might ask what kind of garden tractor Jesus would use.

 

[dash8driver]

wait, you said jesus was god... but i thought he was the son of god.

btw, the keyword was used earlier... that word is FAITH. which means to believe in something as being true without having proof.
so, just because you believe something is true, doesnt mean its fact. the only fact here is that you have faith and believe that its true.

its one thing to believe that your belief system is fact and 100% correct. its another thing to tell someone else that it is. there are countless different religions and viewpoints out there and telling someone something that is oppressive. its taking away their option to choose what they want to believe in. which i believe is the way god wanted it, did he not? if god refuses to dictate to humans what is the true religion, why should you?

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Dash...

Now you've done it. Better duck! Here comes the self-rightous retort.

 

[Timebuilder]

I think dash deserves an answer.

God, or Elohim from Genesis, is a plural form, like "family" is a word for one entity with several parts. God the Son is one of the "aspects" of the One God. He is God, just as God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are all a part of the same entity. Because a family is the only idea that is similar to us, we have trouble understanding this.

btw, the keyword was used earlier... that word is FAITH. which means to believe in something as being true without having proof.

Not proof in the human sense, you're right. I hear a "but" coming, though...

so, just because you believe something is true, doesnt mean its fact. the only fact here is that you have faith and believe that its true.

No, not "just because we believe in it." We believe it because God says it is so, as in 2 Tim 3:16-17. If that is wrong, NOTHING else is true regarding the Bible. So, it either IS, or it ISN'T true.

To humans, that suggests that this idea of truth is transitory, or according only to the belief of the individual in question. The Bible teaches that its truth is an objective truth, and not dependant on the faith of any one person.

its one thing to believe that your belief system is fact and 100% correct. its another thing to tell someone else that it is.

The "telling" you mention is a requirement for the believer. It's called the Great Commission, if you came in late. It is reflected throughout scripture. But understand this: whether you are told or not, it is still true, according to God, in the Bible.

You don't have to believe it either. God gave us free will to accept or reject Him. From what I have seen here today, there are a few who will not believe. I expect that, and according to the Bible, so does God. He has been through this before. This does not, however, change the idea of objective truth.

there are countless different religions and viewpoints out there and telling someone something that is oppressive.

Then the Bible is "oppressive" to you. From the human standpoint, there is a 50% chance the Bible is wrong. Even then, there is a 50% chance the Bible is right. If that is true, there is an excellent chance that the Bible is correct in the singular truth it claims to contain. In that case, all other belief becomes incorrect. So, with no faith at all, you only have a 50% chance of being right in the offense you see, and an equal chance of being wrong. All that is the case before God opens your eyes to His truth, and moves you from 50% to 100%. Phew!!

its taking away their option to choose what they want to believe in.

Not really. Many will reject Him and His teaching, because He designed them to be able to do just that. God wanted people to have the option to be wrong. That has not changed, but neither has His wish they turn to Him and His truth.

While it is "up to you", it's a choice that should be an informed choice, and that's why we have the Great Commission.

if god refuses to dictate to humans what is the true religion, why should you?

Ooooh. So CLOSE!

God DOES "dictate" to us what is the true belief. All 66 books of truth.

He simply does not force that truth.

Neither do I.

 

[enigma]

too bad his/her/its followers can't leave us, normal people, alone

Who started this thread? For what purpose?

enigma

 

[Typhoon1244]

Who started this thread? For what purpose?

I was wondering that myself...

 

[Timebuilder]

This is interesting, Hugh.

In just three and a half hours on a Friday night, we go from 247 views to 386 views.

Must be a lot of those people you said that don't like this discussion, huh?

 

[TWA Dude]

mar:

Dude, he's not worth getting so worked up. Just let him have the last word and walk away. He finds comfort in his beliefs and that's okay. We'll all be happier people if we just accept that others believe differently than we do. TB thinks our souls are in trouble but he's really just displacing his own worries. I don't know about you, but I'm going to pray for TB. He doesn't even realize how much he needs it.

Dude

 

[Timebuilder]

TB thinks our souls are in trouble but he's really just displacing his own worries. I don't know about you, but I'm going to pray for TB. He doesn't even realize how much he needs it.

Please, explain how much I need to be prayed for, my friend.

I want you to base your ideas on Jewish scripture.


I want to hear this....

 

[wms]

If Jesus was alive today, would he attend Church? If so, which would he go to?

There is a group of believers today who meet according to the NT principles taught by the apostles, (Acts 2:41-42). There is no human leadership, no clergy, no human center. The Lord Jesus Christ is the center, not some minister or denominational doctrine. The truth of the Bible is taught and practiced. He gathers with His saints regularly, "For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them", Matt 18:20. The question is not where He would go if he were alive? He is alive and was seen by hundreds after he arose. The church that gathers around Him, in His appointed way, that is where He goes.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

This is interesting, Hugh.

In just three and a half hours on a Friday night, we go from 247 views to 386 views.

Must be a lot of those people you said that don't like this discussion, huh?

Everyone slows down to look at an accident scene on the highway as well. It doesn't mean they necessarily enjoy seeing the carnage.

Dude, you really are counterproductive to your cause. While your tenacity is admirable, you are failing to display your position in a positive light. It's folks like you that are the cause of other unreasonable people advocating silly laws and movements in place to do such things as remove "in God we trust" from our currency. Most of us understand that a person of your faith is compelled to spread the "word", but you have to know where to draw the line. If someone flat out seriously asks you about the subject of your religion, obviously you are well-prepared and most capable of providing a lot of information in that regard. You know darn well this was a toungue-in-cheek rhetorical thread not soliciting your serious reply, yet you choose to ignore that fact and use it as an "opportunity to teach". Then you wonder why people tell you "enough already". I'd seriously advise a thoughtful reconsideration of just when to climb onto the pulpit. The only difference at this point, that I can see between you and a violent muslim fundamentalist is the absence of violence in your tool chest. I wish you no ill-will, but I do wish you would leave the "teachings" for a place more appropriate. I know you mean well, but you know what they say about good intentions.

Standing by for the obligatory "teaching" I'm sure to receive.

 

[TurboS7]

Way to go TB

My side of the platform just gave TB a standing ovation, only ours has about a billzillon Angels in heaven cheering him on. He is also being empowered by the Holy Spirt, that means he is going to be dead on. You guys may call yourselves atheist but usually all you guys get real ornery just before you are confronted by the Holy Spirit. BTW stay out of our airplanes because when we are on a long flight we don't talk about our next PC but about Sex, politics, and religion. cheers.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Re: Way to go TB

You guys may call yourselves atheist

Can't help but think that I might be one of those "you guys" you are speaking to since I've had my trap open way too much on this thread. So just for the record, I haven't called myself anything. My beliefs are none of your business just as yours are none of mine. I wish you could appreciate both the former and the latter.

 

[Timebuilder]

The only difference at this point, that I can see between you and a violent muslim fundamentalist is the absence of violence in your tool chest. I wish you no ill-will, but I do wish you would leave the "teachings" for a place more appropriate. I know you mean well, but you know what they say about good intentions.

Standing by for the obligatory "teaching" I'm sure to receive.

There is one other difference:

Truth.

According to the Bible, only one doctrine is correct. The other is evil. That isn't very PC, and I don't advocate we wipe out Islam, either. We should work to help save them, and not take the approach they take where WE are concerned, killing 3,000 people with no warning in a non-military framework. When they attack, we respond with actions designed to limit their future effectiveness at killing us. Sometimes that means killing them first.

The "appropriate" place is where you find the opportunities. We don't agree, you and I, on when that time occurs. That's fine, since we are a free country. Any response I give does not mean that anyone who does not have a question for me or a stance to defend needs to instigate further discussion. When that happens, I will generally respond with a great deal more charity than any attack I receive. At least, I try to be charitiable.

My beliefs are none of your business just as yours are none of mine. I wish you could appreciate both the former and the latter.

If I were to follow your suggestion, I wouldn't be following what I am duty bound to do. As has been said before, if you see a thread that suggests that it might have some form of discussion you find objectionable, then just don't click on it. I do this all the time. It works great.

Now I admit that I pasted a little scripture in the "I want my $50 back" thread. Not to pi$$ off Mar, or anyone else, either. I did it because there is clearly a description of some sort of machine with wings that is unlikely to be the property of any shepherd or camel driver in the area. I think it is fascinating to consider the various possibilities of what it might be, or who might be inside it. It raises a lot of interesting questions, and it IS a flying device of some sort.

So, click where you want, but understand that if someone asks a question or makes a statement, even in jest, I will very likely give an answer, just like I was able to find out how the ignition analyzer works on a DC-6 from someone who knew.

Hope there is no serious harm done to anyone's sensibilities.

My side of the platform just gave TB a standing ovation

Thanks, my friend. It isn't the reason why I'm trying to shed some light, but a little encouragement is welcome in the face of a blast furnace.

 

[dash8driver]

ahh.. you mention duty. having a duty does not relieve one from using their discretion. also, just because you have a duty, doesnt mean its right. after all, the fundamentalist muslims have a duty to kill the infidel americans. using duty as an excuse doesnt make it right.

another thing which i think someone mentioned before, an effective speaker knows when to present his message. he chooses the right audience and the right forum to do it in. this doesnt mean any time you see a keyword it should trigger you to deliver your message.. it may not be appropriate in that context. at that point, some discretion might be used to move on and wait for a better time. most people will go out and seek the information they want. there really is no need to broadcast to an audience that you're not sure will be receptive to your message. that would be counter-productive.

think of it as another form of spam.

 

[Timebuilder]

ahh.. you mention duty. having a duty does not relieve one from using their discretion. also, just because you have a duty, doesnt mean its right. after all, the fundamentalist muslims have a duty to kill the infidel americans. using duty as an excuse doesnt make it right.

Quite true!!

What makes it right or wrong is who is giving the command.

another thing which i think someone mentioned before, an effective speaker knows when to present his message. he chooses the right audience and the right forum to do it in. this doesnt mean any time you see a keyword it should trigger you to deliver your message.. it may not be appropriate in that context. at that point, some discretion might be used to move on and wait for a better time. most people will go out and seek the information they want. there really is no need to broadcast to an audience that you're not sure will be receptive to your message. that would be counter-productive.

How does one determine when you have the right audience? It's all right here. The issue at hand was why Jesus was focusing his efforts on people that the Pharisees thought of as being disreputable. The fact was this: the people that Jesus spent time with, like tax collectors and various others, were the ones who most needed to hear His message, and would have alnmost no chance of hearing His message anywhere else. So, Jesus went right to them, the ones with the greater need. It's in Mark 2:16.

When I get spam, I just delete it. I do like your analogy, though. If you view my responses as spam, consider this: the poster to whom I am responding has placed his "email adddress", or in this case, he has provided a point of discussion for my response to be attached. Without that, you will rarely find any response from me that you find irritating.

 

[atpcliff]

Hi TB!

"Well, as a Liberal, He would have to reject the idea of a religious belief of any kind, since any good liberal is a secular humanist or someone who thinks that there should be no public evidence of faith."

Well, maybe I'm a BAD liberal, because I know God exists, but my pilot friends that know me think I'm a very left wing liberal.

TB, I know as well as U do that God exists, and that he has a purpose for everyone of us he sent here to earth, and, in fact, our whole universe is God's creation.

I also KNOW that mixing church and state is VERY bad. U end up with a political/social situation similar to that in Iran or Afghanistan. Jesus believed in helping and protecting everyone, especially the people who are minorities because of race, belief, infirmity, or something else. When U allow religious stuff in the government, the government starts saying he is good and he is bad, and it gets ugly very fast. To all those people who want the ten commandments posted or displayed in public schools or government facilities, I tell them to move to Iran, where they would appreciate the government's attempt to make everyone conform to a specific holy book.

"He has a strong set of ideas about personal behavior, morality, and family."

I have VERY strong ideas about personal behavior, morality, family, and your responsibility to your fellow human beings. I teach my kids almost every day lessons in how God wants all of us to treat other people, and the earth, with respect.

I am very spiritual, so does that mean I'm not allowed to be liberal? I know a ton of liberals, and almost every one of them believes in God and tries to live in a manner that he would applaud.

"Sure sounds conservative to me."

I think one problem Americans have is that they don't have a great understanding of conservative and liberal.

I believe that conservatives want to keep the current system, or return to an older system, such as the Amish, who believe that if something isn't in the bible, they shouldn't do/use it.

I believe that liberals want to change things to improve them, and make living conditions better for all humanity.

I think that if Jesus was a conservative, we would not be talking about him now. He would have gone to temple, and followed the teachings of the corrupt rabbis, and probably would have ended up a corrupt rabbi himself.

He fought against the established religion of the time, and it's corrupt leaders, and gave his life to changing the system so it would be more "Fair". That sounds like a liberal to me.

Cliff
GRB

PS-I know of a bunch of conservatives that hate Bush because they say he isn't conservative at all, and some Republicans I know don't like Bush because they say he's not really a Republican either.

 

[Timebuilder]

Cliff, you raise some interesting issues. I'd like to explore them a little.

Well, maybe I'm a BAD liberal, because I know God exists, but my pilot friends that know me think I'm a very left wing liberal.

Heh, heh, maybe you are a "bad" liberal. I don't know of any liberals who have any concept of God beyond Unitarianism. I'm always open to an exception. For purposes of this discussion, let's use the contemporary ideas about "liberal" or "conservative."

TB, I know as well as U do that God exists, and that he has a purpose for everyone of us he sent here to earth, and, in fact, our whole universe is God's creation.

A liberal who believes in Creation? Stop the presses!!! What a breath of fresh air.

I also KNOW that mixing church and state is VERY bad. U end up with a political/social situation similar to that in Iran or Afghanistan.

I'm a little unsure of what you might mean by "mixing" church and state. Here's what I think: the founders clearly expected the first amendment to defend our ability to freely practice religion. There was no notion whatever of barring teachers or government employees from expressing religious views, or preventing a religious symbol from being set up by believers during holidays. The founders were very specific, not general, about the prohibition against having an "official" religion of the United States, as had England. Such a specific act is for Congress to pass “a law respecting an establishment of religion.” Clearly, the "establishment" clause left nothing in the way of interpretation, so attempts to do so amount to tyranny.

No one wants an official religion of the US, unless you count secular humanism as a religion, and I certainly do count it that way. It is a religion where government replaces God.

Jesus believed in helping and protecting everyone, especially the people who are minorities because of race, belief, infirmity, or something else. When U allow religious stuff in the government, the government starts saying he is good and he is bad, and it gets ugly very fast.

Jesus believed that the helping and protecting to which you refer be a private sector matter, not one for “Ceasar.” Christ observed that "the poor will be with you always." He also realized that we should be compassionate to our brothers as individuals. In the Jewish tradition, the widows, those who had lost their husbands and who were not subsequently remarried, were cared for by the temple congregation.

Government programs cannot wipe out poverty, AIDS, or teen pregnancy. Only the changed hearts and cultural beliefs of people can do that. This starts from a moral framework that liberalism has steadily eroded in my lifetime. Remember "do your own thing!" as a moral (?) imperative? In other words, we are to construct our own variable morality as we see fit. As Pacino said in Scarface "Look at you now, you all f***ed up." As we have slouched toward Gomorrah, we have taken our entire American culture along for the ride.

So much for "do your own thing."

To all those people who want the ten commandments posted or displayed in public schools or government facilities, I tell them to move to Iran, where they would appreciate the government's attempt to make everyone conform to a specific holy book.

That's based on a false premise. Posting the commandments showed the basis for our laws. In the case of Alabama, acknowledgment of the commandments was a requirement of the state's constitution. According to the US constitution, the US government should have nothing to do with whether or not there are granite or marble, or bronze or any other kind of a list of rules, commandments, or suggestions in any public building. In order for the government to decide that such things cannot be displayed, it has entered into an area that the founders thought should be specifically prohibited: the decision of when and how a religious symbol, text, or speech should be permitted. They thought it would be permitted EVERYWHERE, but never by result of a law of the United States.

By deciding that the commandments cannot be displayed, the government has now become more like Iran than they would by insisting that they be displayed.

Ironic, isn't it?

I am very spiritual, so does that mean I'm not allowed to be liberal? I know a ton of liberals, and almost every one of them believes in God and tries to live in a manner that he would applaud.

That's great. It has not been my experience, though. I'd call that a "beginning."

I believe that conservatives want to keep the current system, or return to an older system, such as the Amish, who believe that if something isn't in the bible, they shouldn't do/use it.

I like horses, and I live near the Amish, but I don't want to live like them. I don't know of anyone who considers this to be a conservative principle.

I believe that liberals want to change things to improve them, and make living conditions better for all humanity.

That's a very laudable idea, to a point. Most of the responsibility lies with individuals. People acting to help themselves, and others acting as individuals to help them to have better lives. Government is not good at this at all. What we end up with is entitlement programs, scare tactics, and people who take office in order to specialize in the redistribution of wealth.

That is not the "American way."

I think that if Jesus were a conservative, we would not be talking about him now. He would have gone to temple, and followed the teachings of the corrupt rabbis, and probably would have ended up a corrupt rabbi himself.

Sorry. This would only work if Jesus were just a Man. He wasn't. All of His ideas are conservative, just as I listed. Family, moral values, rugged individualism, faith in God.

The Priests of the temple, on the other hand, are like a liberal government: seeking power, personal enrichment, and fearing the Truth that walked among them.

He fought against the established religion of the time, and it's corrupt leaders, and gave his life to changing the system so it would be more "Fair". That sounds like a liberal to me.

No, a liberal would have lobbied for new laws to mandate a new "fairness." Christ knew that hearts must be changed, not laws. That's the reason He came and made that sacrifice, so that we could gain the grace from His act that we are unable to gain by our own acts, because we are unable to follow The Law.

PS-I know of a bunch of conservatives that hate Bush because they say he isn't conservative at all, and some Republicans I know don't like Bush because they say he's not really a Republican either.

I can understand their view, but he is far better than any candidate from the opposition.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Timebuilder, I may have found the perfect airline job for you: link.

(I actually saw this airplane in person in FLL sometime during the Nineties. Not sure what the story was with it...)

 

[Timebuilder]

It looks like the defunct airplane of some televangelist.

I'd fly the C750 that Jesse Duplantis wants to get, but I don't think I'd be able to stomach a guy that says God told him to buy an 18 million dollar jet.

 

[Typhoon1244]

...I don't think I'd be able to stomach a guy that says God told him to buy an 18 million dollar jet.

How do you know God didn't tell him to buy an $18 million jet?