Death to the 'Teddy Bear' Teacher!!!

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

The definition of a “true believer” of any of the Big Three makes me shiver in disgust.

Islam and Judaism can be pretty cut throat but I find no justification for that kind of behavior in Jesus’ teachings.

Hmmm…time for me to brush up on my Hillel.

I am no Bible expert but it seems God directed the Israelites to wipe out whole cities.[/quote]

[Thread hijack…but I can’t resist.]

Amelek, yes. But afterwards? Oh, don’t worry, I won’t bring up post-Canaanite religion and the entire Babylonian exile.
The point about Jesus’ teachings is that he identifies himself thereby as a student of the House of Hillel. (And not of the intolerant House of Shammai, which is always the foil and loser in religious discussions of that age.) Paul would never allow this fealty to be spoken, and, unfortunately, James wasn’t allowed to say very much about it.
So if it is tolerance that we revere, we can find it in religion, usually as mark of evolution. I just don’t know about Islam…

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

If anything, the Koran is much more forgiving to intellectuals than the bible is, as it was written in a time when Muslims were superior scientists, doctors, and artists.

If you believe Muslims and Islam have never been persecuted you’re sadly mistaken. The blunt truth is that Islam sucks right now, but all three suck equally throughout history.[/quote]

The Koran was not written in a time when Muslims were superior scientists, ect. The Koran was written in a time when the Arabs were warring tribes in Arabia. Muhammad united these tribes and they went on an endless war. In the countries they conquered and converted were people who were the scientists, doctors and artists who you speak of.

The only time the muslims were ever persecuted is when Genghis Khan almost wiped them off the map. Other than that they were mostly conquers, rulers and warriors.

Only in the 17 Century when the Europeans began expanding did the Muslims experience somewhat of a humiliation. But the Ottoman Empire was never beaten till it collapsed on it’s own. That’s a pretty good run, 600 years and only about 10 loses, none bad enough to destroy the empire itself.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

A) To argue semantics, that story was written into the margins by a monk much later after Jesus’s death, and adapted into the Bible afterwards.
[/quote]

More info, please? What monk, and when? And, this specific story? You speak of this as fact. Do remember that I come at this as a believer. And, correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re talking about true believers, not skeptics.

Jesus and/or the apostles said this? New covenant… Christians are bound by the New covenant. We look at the old testament as mankind’s incomplete relationship. Christ himself said he came to fullfill the law. I (though perhaps not all sects) view the old testament as a civilizing of a harsh nomadic people. A people who perhaps had even harsher laws and punishments, up until then. So again, we (christians) view Christ as the fullfillment of law.

You’re badly paraphrasing, as he goes on to say he fullfills the law. And his Apostles, filled with the holy spirit, shake things up on behalf of the gentiles, I might add. Christ’s teachings are pretty clear, he is the judge of sin. Again, this is actually a true believer view. If you don’t see Christ as the Son of God, then you don’t see him as the one and only judge between man and God.

Note Christ, and his apostles, never even implore the early faithful to practice ‘eye for an eye’ against their persecuters. Furthermore, not only do Christ and the apostles refrain from punishing sinners, they hang out with them constantly! Something the religious authorities found as despicable.

huh?

[quote]
If you believe Muslims and Islam have never been persecuted you’re sadly mistaken. The blunt truth is that Islam sucks right now, but all three suck equally throughout history.[/quote]

Never claimed wrongs haven’t been committed against muslims.

Just about every belief has sucked throughout history. Atheistic regimes have had some bloody hands. How many dead just to found our own nation? Or, any nation, pretty much? How many have died in the name of freedom? How many have died to make distribution of resources “more equal” amongst the people? How many have died for capitialism, socialism, communism, fascism, nationalism, individualism, or just about any ‘ism’ you can think of?

Evils committed in the name of Christ, are done in spite of him. He came like a lamb, and sent his apostles out as such. Now somewhere along the way, far too many ‘Christians’ have gone forth as lions and wolves.

[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[Thread hijack…but I can’t resist.]
[/quote]

Explain this in greater detail. What’s this now?

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
[Thread hijack…but I can’t resist.]

Explain this in greater detail. What’s this now?[/quote]

For example, Beowulf writes:
"We really should just burn all of the Holy Books, and replace them with one sentence.

“'Treat others how you would like to be treated.”

“Seriously, all the good parts of every religion boil down to this. No fucked up system of reward and punishment, no ideas about the meaning of life, just treat everyone with respect. That’s the good part about religion. Everything else is fluff or evil.”

When Hillel, c. 1970 years BB–before Beowulf–was asked to teach The Law, he replied, “Do unto others as they would do unto you. The rest is commentary. Now, go study.”


I was so struck by Beowulf’s spontaneous post, I had to think, has it taken 2000 years to come around, again, to this? If so, let’s congratulate ourselves, and thank our forebears.

After thinking it over, I’ve decided to refrain from the little side debate I’ve involved myself with. I don’t want to turn this thread into something it isn’t.

The “Teddy Bear Teacher” (or any women in general) should have do their research before deciding upon a trip such as hers.

http://www.terrorismawareness.org/videos/108/the-violent-oppression-of-women-in-islam/

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

A) To argue semantics, that story was written into the margins by a monk much later after Jesus’s death, and adapted into the Bible afterwards.

More info, please? What monk, and when? And, this specific story? You speak of this as fact. Do remember that I come at this as a believer. And, correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re talking about true believers, not skeptics.

B) I’m pretty sure the language is clear in saying (I’m paraphrasing) “If your son is rebellious, bring him in front of the town and stone him to death.” Not “he should be stoned” but “stone him”.

Jesus and/or the apostles said this? New covenant… Christians are bound by the New covenant. We look at the old testament as mankind’s incomplete relationship. Christ himself said he came to fullfill the law. I (though perhaps not all sects) view the old testament as a civilizing of a harsh nomadic people. A people who perhaps had even harsher laws and punishments, up until then. So again, we (christians) view Christ as the fullfillment of law.

C) Jesus specifically states, in the Bible, that his words do not and shall never override the words of the old testament.

You’re badly paraphrasing, as he goes on to say he fullfills the law. And his Apostles, filled with the holy spirit, shake things up on behalf of the gentiles, I might add. Christ’s teachings are pretty clear, he is the judge of sin. Again, this is actually a true believer view. If you don’t see Christ as the Son of God, then you don’t see him as the one and only judge between man and God.

Note Christ, and his apostles, never even implore the early faithful to practice ‘eye for an eye’ against their persecuters. Furthermore, not only do Christ and the apostles refrain from punishing sinners, they hang out with them constantly! Something the religious authorities found as despicable.

If anything, the Koran is much more forgiving to intellectuals than the bible is, as it was written in a time when Muslims were superior scientists, doctors, and artists.

huh?

If you believe Muslims and Islam have never been persecuted you’re sadly mistaken. The blunt truth is that Islam sucks right now, but all three suck equally throughout history.

Never claimed wrongs haven’t been committed against muslims.

Just about every belief has sucked throughout history. Atheistic regimes have had some bloody hands. How many dead just to found our own nation? Or, any nation, pretty much? How many have died in the name of freedom? How many have died to make distribution of resources “more equal” amongst the people? How many have died for capitialism, socialism, communism, fascism, nationalism, individualism, or just about any ‘ism’ you can think of?

Evils committed in the name of Christ, are done in spite of him. He came like a lamb, and sent his apostles out as such. Now somewhere along the way, far too many ‘Christians’ have gone forth as lions and wolves.[/quote]

A) I’m not finding the damn article. Old bibles don’t contain the story. They found one with it in the margins. It was adapted, that much is obvious. I personally don’t believe Jesus as a person existed at all.

B/C) I’d need more information, but I’m sure you can interpret it either way. Most of theology is about interpretation.

And yes, just about every organized belief has sucked. I kind of implied that I considered them ALL religions. Religion, to me, is an organized force that wants to run your life by telling you what to believe.

I’m pretty sure it is not the beliefs of Jesus that have sucked, but CHRISTIANITY.

So, why can’t we just examine Christ as a philosopher? Why do we have to make him and his book an absolute force? Why is the “religion” part necessary?

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
A) I’m not finding the damn article. Old bibles don’t contain the story. They found one with it in the margins. It was adapted, that much is obvious. I personally don’t believe Jesus as a person existed at all.

B/C) I’d need more information, but I’m sure you can interpret it either way. Most of theology is about interpretation.

And yes, just about every organized belief has sucked. I kind of implied that I considered them ALL religions. Religion, to me, is an organized force that wants to run your life by telling you what to believe.

I’m pretty sure it is not the beliefs of Jesus that have sucked, but CHRISTIANITY.

So, why can’t we just examine Christ as a philosopher? Why do we have to make him and his book an absolute force? Why is the “religion” part necessary? [/quote]

One of Jesus’s primary messages was that he was bringing a new covenant between God and mankind. That was one of the main pillars of his message.

Kind of hard to reconcile that with “his words do not and shall never override the words of the old testament”.

I also don’t recall Jesus himself ever saying anything that could be interpreted to mean ‘stone rebellious teens’. Again, that kind of flies directly opposite to what Jesus himself teaches.

I don’t think it’s too much to ask for you to come up with some New Testament passages – preferably from Jesus himself – that support B and C.

There aren’t really any right or wrong answers in these sorts of things, but your last couple of posts really seem to be coming from way out of left field.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

A) To argue semantics, that story was written into the margins by a monk much later after Jesus’s death, and adapted into the Bible afterwards.

More info, please? What monk, and when? And, this specific story? You speak of this as fact. Do remember that I come at this as a believer. And, correct me if I’m wrong, but we’re talking about true believers, not skeptics.

B) I’m pretty sure the language is clear in saying (I’m paraphrasing) “If your son is rebellious, bring him in front of the town and stone him to death.” Not “he should be stoned” but “stone him”.

Jesus and/or the apostles said this? New covenant… Christians are bound by the New covenant. We look at the old testament as mankind’s incomplete relationship. Christ himself said he came to fullfill the law. I (though perhaps not all sects) view the old testament as a civilizing of a harsh nomadic people. A people who perhaps had even harsher laws and punishments, up until then. So again, we (christians) view Christ as the fullfillment of law.

C) Jesus specifically states, in the Bible, that his words do not and shall never override the words of the old testament.

You’re badly paraphrasing, as he goes on to say he fullfills the law. And his Apostles, filled with the holy spirit, shake things up on behalf of the gentiles, I might add. Christ’s teachings are pretty clear, he is the judge of sin. Again, this is actually a true believer view. If you don’t see Christ as the Son of God, then you don’t see him as the one and only judge between man and God.

Note Christ, and his apostles, never even implore the early faithful to practice ‘eye for an eye’ against their persecuters. Furthermore, not only do Christ and the apostles refrain from punishing sinners, they hang out with them constantly! Something the religious authorities found as despicable.

If anything, the Koran is much more forgiving to intellectuals than the bible is, as it was written in a time when Muslims were superior scientists, doctors, and artists.

huh?

If you believe Muslims and Islam have never been persecuted you’re sadly mistaken. The blunt truth is that Islam sucks right now, but all three suck equally throughout history.

Never claimed wrongs haven’t been committed against muslims.

Just about every belief has sucked throughout history. Atheistic regimes have had some bloody hands. How many dead just to found our own nation? Or, any nation, pretty much? How many have died in the name of freedom? How many have died to make distribution of resources “more equal” amongst the people? How many have died for capitialism, socialism, communism, fascism, nationalism, individualism, or just about any ‘ism’ you can think of?

Evils committed in the name of Christ, are done in spite of him. He came like a lamb, and sent his apostles out as such. Now somewhere along the way, far too many ‘Christians’ have gone forth as lions and wolves.

A) I’m not finding the damn article. Old bibles don’t contain the story. They found one with it in the margins. It was adapted, that much is obvious. I personally don’t believe Jesus as a person existed at all.

B/C) I’d need more information, but I’m sure you can interpret it either way. Most of theology is about interpretation.

And yes, just about every organized belief has sucked. I kind of implied that I considered them ALL religions. Religion, to me, is an organized force that wants to run your life by telling you what to believe.

I’m pretty sure it is not the beliefs of Jesus that have sucked, but CHRISTIANITY.

So, why can’t we just examine Christ as a philosopher? Why do we have to make him and his book an absolute force? Why is the “religion” part necessary? [/quote]

I’ll throw in on this discussion. First, I am weary of “scripture mining” because by pulling things out of contexts of the whole work in any book, you can put passages together to basically justify any kind of behaviour. What you have to realize about the old testament, for instance, that the audience primarily lived drab agricultural lives where not a whole lot happened. The stories that appealed to them where those of war, conquest, power, etc. The authors knew this and responded in kind. The message is that with God you will be victorious, you will conquer, greatness can be achieved. Those with out God in the old testament always lost. That was a powerful message to those people. It’s not just he bible, in general ye olde literature is all about war, warriors, blood and gore.
The new testament was written much later and the message was different. God was already established as THE power, where as the old testament spent a lot of time establishing God’s power. Once God was established as the power you can then fine tune the message.

Your problem with organized religion is a people problem. Organized religion has change the world profoundly. I do not think that was an accident. You focus on the negatives. Christianity has done great things. From profoundly changing the Roman empire from a murder for fun government to a far more kind an humane organization to saving thousands of jews from the holocaust. There are dark moments in Christianity, sure, but there are many good moments as well. look at the whole picture.

Jesus did exist and he changed the world. Hell, he even changed the calender we follow. It would be weirder if a myth managed to do that versus a real person who really existed.

As far as I am concerned looking at Jesus as a philosopher is a really good idea. I think it’s a shame if not just plain stupid of many Christians to think of Jesus or God as so lofty you can’t question what is said. If it’s true it will pass the test. I think a God who truly wants intimacy with it’s creation would welcome it. Only a God afraid of being exposed as a fraud would fear close examination and questioning.
That’s my $.02.

Good post Pat. I agree with almost everything.

And the reason I doubt Jesus’s historical existence is this;

You’d think a man claiming to be God who supposedly had thousands of followers would be recorded somewhere in history. He appears no where but the Bible and in historical texts written hundreds of years after his death. I believe he was a character created out of a few prominent Rabbi’s of the day. If he did exist, however, he was a great philosopher.

As for only looking at the negative, I believe the POSITIVE things done by Christianity occurred because people decided to follow the word of Christ, not because they decided to follow the dogma.

I’ll rephrase my sentiments then. DOGMA is an evil force in the world that has done almost entirely wicked or unnecessary things.

Latest news is, the president of Sudan pardoned the “teddy bear teacher”.

Now what? Is Allah going to be pissed or something?

About the Jesus controvercy, More people should concern themselves with how Jesus lived, taught and practiced, rather than taking solice in the fact that “he died for our sins”.

I hate it when people ask me “Are you saved?”

“Do you act like Jesus did?”

[quote]lixy wrote:

[/quote]

"Ibrahim Mogra from the Muslim Council of Britain told BBC News 24 that the whole saga had been very damaging for the image of the Muslim faith.

“Each time we have stories like these, that distort what Islam stands for or misrepresents what the compassion of Muslim law stands for, then we have repercussions and people begin to feel that Islam has no place in modern society…”

…maybe they feel that way because…uh…it HAS no place in a modern industrial society?

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Good post Pat. I agree with almost everything.

And the reason I doubt Jesus’s historical existence is this;

You’d think a man claiming to be God who supposedly had thousands of followers would be recorded somewhere in history. He appears no where but the Bible and in historical texts written hundreds of years after his death. I believe he was a character created out of a few prominent Rabbi’s of the day. If he did exist, however, he was a great philosopher.

As for only looking at the negative, I believe the POSITIVE things done by Christianity occurred because people decided to follow the word of Christ, not because they decided to follow the dogma.

I’ll rephrase my sentiments then. DOGMA is an evil force in the world that has done almost entirely wicked or unnecessary things.

[/quote]

You are right…being dogmatic is intrinsically evil. It provides the ultimate absolution for the most atrocious behaviors. People need to think and not swallow everything somebody feeds them. Ultimately dogma leads to failure. You can even see this effect in weight training. People who adhere to dogmatic weight training philosophies are the least successful.

Josephus, the first century historian, did record the existence of a man named Jesus, who did “extraordinary things”. He was a secular historian, not religious.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:

"Ibrahim Mogra from the Muslim Council of Britain told BBC News 24 that the whole saga had been very damaging for the image of the Muslim faith. [/quote]

There’s very little image left to damage, so the overall impact will be minimal.

I’m so tired of hearing that same lame excuse every other day. How incredibly odd that everything that transpires from Islam is always another atrocity or butchery, always committed by “false muslims” who don’t represent the majority… At some point, it doesn’t fly anymore (no pun intended).

Since the majority is held completely hostage by that nutcase minority, I propose that we liberate them by passing a world-wide ban on Islam. Make it illegal with severe penalties for believers. I’m sure the weak and completely helpless majority will thank us for delivering them from such an untenable situation.

Even as an historical footnote, it’d still be a shameful monument to mankind’s stupidity.

[quote]lixy wrote:

[/quote]

Oh the shit’s going to fly now! I wonder if this woman will be dumb enough to go back to that region of the world? People like her are often that dumb; but I don’t think Britan will stick their necks out for her ass twice.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Josephus, the first century historian, did record the existence of a man named Jesus, who did “extraordinary things”. He was a secular historian, not religious. [/quote]

It is widely acknowledged among secular scholars that Josephus’ writings were tampered with and altered by their custodians. Guess who they were…

The originals writings, as best as can be determined in modern times, made no mentions of “Christ” or “wonderful works.” About a third of the commonly cited paragraph was added long after Josephus’ death.

[quote]pookie wrote:
pat36 wrote:
Josephus, the first century historian, did record the existence of a man named Jesus, who did “extraordinary things”. He was a secular historian, not religious.

It is widely acknowledged among secular scholars that Josephus’ writings were tampered with and altered by their custodians. Guess who they were…

The originals writings, as best as can be determined in modern times, made no mentions of “Christ” or “wonderful works.” About a third of the commonly cited paragraph was added long after Josephus’ death.
[/quote]

It is disputed, yes, but not proven out and out false.