Non believers - I don't blame you

@divegeester

If you really want to rub @sonship up the wrong way you could try asking him if you MUST accept the trinity explanation of the godhead as a prerequisite of access to salvation. Good luck...

You're cluttering up mchill's nice thread.

You actually made me laugh out loud here with this.

This is not what you have been harping on. You have been harping on me allegedly insisting on accepting the DOCTRINE of the trinity.

I see you. Subtle.

He who has the Son has the Father also First John told you - you have the triune God whether you like it or not if you have received Jesus.

He did not write - "He who has the Son has the doctrine of the trinity.'

@moonbus said
@mchill

It's important to distinguish followers of Jesus from Churchianity. Veritably, the Church is no humble carpenter.

That depends on what you call the church. I don't believe all church's are set up to serve God according to the commands of Jesus.

Secondly, those that are don't have perfect people in them. Some are simply immature believers and others may be the Judas's of the congregation, etc.

And lastly, you have some interaction, or have had some interaction, with church in the past which have set your bias, but the vast majority of church's, and those who attend them, you have no knowledge of and are broadly painting the stereotype with a wide brush.

At the end of the day though, the message is there for all to see and try and follow and we have a myriad of examples for those that have and the world is a much better place with it than without it despite the charlatans and those who fall short.

@sonship said
@divegeester

If you really want to rub @sonship up the wrong way you could try asking him if you MUST accept the trinity explanation of the godhead as a prerequisite of access to salvation. Good luck...

You're cluttering up mchill's nice thread.

You actually made me laugh out loud here with this.

This is not what you have been harping on. You hav ...[text shortened]... ou have received Jesus.

He did not write - "He who has the Son has the doctrine of the trinity.'

I’ll be more than happy to discuss whether or not there is an actual meaningful difference between saying “the doctrine of the trinity” and “the trinity explanation of the godhead”.

Once you have answered the question I have put to you maybe a 100 times.

@mchill said
Christians, I know this is going to rub you the wrong way, but as a Christian, I cannot blame non believers for thinking the way they do, especially the way some believers and their organizations behave.

I think lack of belief - specifically in the Christian version of a supernatural creator being - on the part of non-believers - is unlikely to have much to do with the current state of Christian retail religion.

There are 2,000 years of art, literature, music and architecture as an aesthetic counterbalance and there is the scripture itself which stands on its own hind legs regardless of whatever shenanigans Christianity's 40,000 denominations might be getting up to in the C21st.

@whodey said
That depends on what you call the church. I don't believe all church's are set up to serve God according to the commands of Jesus.

Secondly, those that are don't have perfect people in them. Some are simply immature believers and others may be the Judas's of the congregation, etc.

And lastly, you have some interaction, or have had some interaction, with church in the p ...[text shortened]... orld is a much better place with it than without it despite the charlatans and those who fall short.

I call the Church what the Church calls the Church, and it is no humble carpenter. It is rich and pompous and ostentatious and presumptuous and exercises temporal power for its own enrichment in this world. Jesus's kingdom is the next world, not this one. Anyone who manages to learn what Jesus preached by going to Church has done it despite, not because, of what the Church exemplifies.

IMO, the Christian communities which most nearly resemble the original followers of Jesus are probably the unprogrammatical Quakers: no Church, no hierarchy, no preachers, no High Mass, no whacking great basilicas filled with idols and gold. Just people communing.

@mchill said
Christians, I know this is going to rub you the wrong way, but as a Christian, I cannot blame non believers for thinking the way they do, especially the way some believers and their organizations behave. i.e.

Take a long, hard look at the grandiose buildings decorated in gold and precious artifacts in the Vatican and other "fine" Christian structures. Do they look like a mo ...[text shortened]... o accept Jesus as their savior, you're going to have to set a better example of what a Christian is.

I'll mention one thing which I find off-putting about Christianity. I have known all manner of Christians, and count some of them as very close friends, including Catholics, Russian Orthodox, Anglicans, and various flavors of Protestants. I have also known Hindus, Buddhists, Hari Krshnas, Jews, Muslims, as well as atheists, agnostics, and non-denominational spiritual seekers. Among Christians, some, not all, I have detected an attitude which is a mixture of pity and haughtiness; it is sometimes expressed explicitly, whereas in others it comes across in subtle ways even if they never explicitly state it in so many words. They think it and believe it, even if they don't say it out loud. I would paraphrase it as something like: "You poor damned bastard — I'm going to heaven and you're not," or "I've got the One True God in my pocket and you don't." "Christians aren't better, just forgiven," expresses this same attitude.

I have never detected this attitude in people of other religions; no Hindu or Buddhist ever asked me, "Will I see you in the next incarnation?" No Jew ever said to me, "You poor lost soul — you weren't born God's chosen people." No atheist or agnostic ever cajoled me, "So, we're both going to hell in a handbasket, eh?" or "See you in the big nothing-after."

The patronizing attitude I refer to is probably familiar to everyone here, it is peculiar to Christians (though not all are explicit about it), and I for one find it off-putting that their religion instills in them such an attitude.

A Sura of the Koran says that to each people, a messenger comes, and that it was not needful for Mohammed to know who those other messengers were, or, by implication, what the contents of any of those other messages might have been.


To the person who thinks I am sitting in darkness: just because you can't see where I am doesn't mean I don't.

@moonbus said
@mchill

It's important to distinguish followers of Jesus from Churchianity. Veritably, the Church is no humble carpenter.

Unfortunately, this is true more and more. However, some churches do try harder than others.

@whodey said

The more important religion is to a person, the more likely that person is to give to a charity of any kind, according to new research released today.

If instead of an oligarchy with horrific wealth inequality we had a real government "for the people by the people", there would be ZERO need for any charity whatsoever.

@bunnyknight said
If instead of an oligarchy with horrific wealth inequality we had a real government "for the people by the people", there would be ZERO need for any charity whatsoever.

Why would we need the government to do that, to force us into something by law? Why not just take care of those you can now, because you can and should? Why do we have to be forced to do what is right by the government? Are there not enough people getting rich off tax dollars already?

@mchill said
Christians, I know this is going to rub you the wrong way, but as a Christian, I cannot blame non believers for thinking the way they do, especially the way some believers and their organizations behave. i.e.

Take a long, hard look at the grandiose buildings decorated in gold and precious artifacts in the Vatican and other "fine" Christian structures. Do they look like a mo ...[text shortened]... o accept Jesus as their savior, you're going to have to set a better example of what a Christian is.

It's only some particular doctrines of Earth I disbelieve -- but why should anyone care what I believe or disbelieve?

The Cosmic Intelligence and I were discussing this very topic over what might pass for iced tea on your Earth planet, and it seems we agreed that the People of Earth ARE trying (in the sense of making an effort) in all their various ways.

We all have the invisible Solar Wind behind our backs, nudging us on in our dodgy trails through materiality.

@kellyjay said
Why would we need the government to do that, to force us into something by law? Why not just take care of those you can now, because you can and should? Why do we have to be forced to do what is right by the government? Are there not enough people getting rich off tax dollars already?

The point is this: When citizens are homeless, hungry, sick, suicidal and homicidal, then we have a failed government. Every tax dollar belongs to the citizens, not only the rich politicians and their friends. What always happens is that the rich take control of the government and funnel more and more of the nations wealth into their own pockets while the citizens are left with nothing, which is why human history is an endless stream of violent revolutions. With a proper government that can't be hijacked by the rich sociopaths, this human holocaust would not exist, and the only thing you'd be "forced" to do is to enjoy longer vacations and a better life.

@bunnyknight said
The point is this: When citizens are homeless, hungry, sick, suicidal and homicidal, then we have a failed government. Every tax dollar belongs to the citizens, not only the rich politicians and their friends. What always happens is that the rich take control of the government and funnel more and more of the nations wealth into their own pockets while the citizens are ...[text shortened]... ot exist, and the only thing you'd be "forced" to do is to enjoy longer vacations and a better life.

So you assume we can find some good people to run the government as it should be, not as it is being run now, and that solves our problem?

@kellyjay said
Why would we need the government to do that, to force us into something by law? Why not just take care of those you can now, because you can and should? Why do we have to be forced to do what is right by the government? Are there not enough people getting rich off tax dollars already?

Take a look at the preamble to the US Constitution sometime.