My Addition to the Hitler debate
Michael V. SturnBacher
I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
Hitler was not a Christian.
Here is my grouds for saying this:
1) The Bible says that God's children (Christians) will be known by
their fruit (Matthew 9). The fruit that came from Hitler's life was
malice, greed, hate and strife. This is not compatible with being
Christian.
2) Jesus also said "if you love me, you will obey my commands". While
I do not agree with salvation by works ("it is by grace you are
saved"), we can see from Hitler's life that throughout his life he
deliberately disobeyed God's word not to kill and to love his enemies
and was unrepentant.
3) Just becuase someone says their are something does not mean they
are it. if I said I was a hamburger, that would not make me one.
4) The thought that Hitler was a Christian comes from the mistaken
belief that Christianity is nought but another belief system or
religious order. True Christianity is about a relationship with
Christ Jesus and following Him. While the Bible does say "confess
with your mouth and blieve in your heart that Jesus Christ is Lord and
you will be saved" the word for belief here is not the same as we take
it nowadays. Today belief is mere mental ascent, then it meant the
pattern your life was lived by. This is shown with the use of "that
jesus Christ is Lord" that means allowing Jesus to rule in your life
is part of believing. Hitler's life shows no hint of Jesus being
Lord.
Ergo, HITLER WAS BY NO MEANS A CHIRSTIAN!
MVS
Hall
I agree.
Jane
Michael V. SturnBacher wrote in message
<7672315b.03011...@posting.google.com>...
Steven Schrader
> Sirs,
>
> I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
> Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
> Hitler was not a Christian.
Well, do keep in mind that that particular article is located in the
"debates" section. :)
Unless you object, I'll add your points to the article at some point in the
future.
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"The chicken realised that if it were on the other side
of the road, the side that it was already on would become
'the other side'. Hence it had already crossed without
crossing and clucked leisurely down the street." - Okamura
Charos
news:7672315b.03011...@posting.google.com...
> Sirs,
>
> I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
> Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
> Hitler was not a Christian.
Indeed, I compiled the list of links...I've actually been thinking about
going around and finding a few others because a number of the ones that were
working at that period are now defunct...but there's still a number that
work there...
> Here is my grouds for saying this:
I'll deal with each as it arises...
> 1) The Bible says that God's children (Christians) will be known by
> their fruit (Matthew 9). The fruit that came from Hitler's life was
> malice, greed, hate and strife. This is not compatible with being
> Christian.
this depends which perspective you're viewing it from, from Hitler's, and
many of the Germans at the time viewed the "fruit" of what Hitler was doing
as being a transcendence of the human race. A rising above of the imperfect
human which, while it can attempt, could have no real hope in ever living up
to God's word. Who are we to say that Hitler didn't see his new master race
as one which could better serve the laws that God...as a route to a better,
more full human being which would be more fulfilling from his Christian
perspective than what it is now? In essence, the perceived fruit which
Hitler was striving for at the time was the elimination of the direct foe's
of God, the Transcendence of the human race to a more fuller being which was
more able to follow god's laws and a more joyous world in which God's
children could live.
> 2) Jesus also said "if you love me, you will obey my commands". While
> I do not agree with salvation by works ("it is by grace you are
> saved"), we can see from Hitler's life that throughout his life he
> deliberately disobeyed God's word not to kill and to love his enemies
> and was unrepentant.
Hitler saw his decimation of the Jews as BEING God's laws...there are a
number of points in the bible in which God ordered the deaths of, on
occasion, thousands of people...even children and women in various points
(I'll look this up if you'd like and give exact quotes if need be, but most
Christians I've met agree that God did indeed do this). Hitler saw the
Jew's as a sub-human scourge which would eventually lead the the destruction
of the entire race of god's children. He saw them as a group which defied
God's love and didn't simply see them as enemies...but as a direct threat to
the world which God created. Also, the bible states that "thou shalt not
murder" (at least in most translations I've seen), as murder is DEFINED as
pretty much "unlawful killing" and almost ALWAYS involves humans, Hitler's
perception that the Jews were NOT humans in the manner we are and the fact
that, as it was legal, it was not "murder" as such nixes this point.
> 3) Just becuase someone says their are something does not mean they
> are it. if I said I was a hamburger, that would not make me one.
Stating that you are a hamburger and stating that you are a Christian are
two ENTIRELY separate things...unless you have read Hitler's mind and
understand fully his beliefs there's no way we can say for certain that he
wasn't a Christian...what we have to go by is his constant admonitions and
public speeches stating that he was an AVID Christian and saw his plan as
corresponding absolutely with God's law and God's plan...
> 4) The thought that Hitler was a Christian comes from the mistaken
> belief that Christianity is nought but another belief system or
> religious order. True Christianity is about a relationship with
> Christ Jesus and following Him. While the Bible does say "confess
> with your mouth and blieve in your heart that Jesus Christ is Lord and
> you will be saved" the word for belief here is not the same as we take
> it nowadays. Today belief is mere mental ascent, then it meant the
> pattern your life was lived by. This is shown with the use of "that
> jesus Christ is Lord" that means allowing Jesus to rule in your life
> is part of believing. Hitler's life shows no hint of Jesus being
> Lord.
The evidence doesn't support this assertion. Hitler's view was that he was
Following god's laws, bettering God's world and in essence, being a direct
"general" as such in god's army in (pretty much) a holy war. Hitler saw the
Jew's and the non-Aryans as sub-human nothings who needed to be wiped out in
order for god's full vision to be realized. He saw his job as to be the
hand of God on this earth and do his will. We can't claim that, simply
because Hitler's actions directly oppose our present moral perceptions, he
didn't honestly feel that what he was doing was right and that god had
chosen him to further his cause.
> Ergo, HITLER WAS BY NO MEANS A CHIRSTIAN!
You can't say this with any degree of certainty unless you can read Hitler's
mind. Here's the basic rule...if Hitler believed that Jesus Christ died on
the cross and shed his precious blood in order to absolve him and all HUMANS
(not Jew's or those who opposed him in his perception) of their sin, then he
was indeed a Christian just like any other who believes such.
> MVS
--
*+_Charos_+*
"'Are you angry at me, don Juan?' I asked
when he returned. He seemed surprised
at my question. 'No! I'm never angry at anybody! No
human being can do anything important
enough for that. You get angry at people
when you feel that their acts are important.
I don't feel that way any longer.'
--Carlos Castaneda
The Steel Wolf
V. SturnBacher) scripsit:
>No matter what he said, Hitler was not a Christian.
>1) The Bible says that God's children (Christians) will be known by
>their fruit (Matthew 9). The fruit that came from Hitler's life was
>malice, greed, hate and strife. This is not compatible with being
>Christian.
Well, nobody's saying he was a *good* Christian :)
>2) Jesus also said "if you love me, you will obey my commands". While
>I do not agree with salvation by works ("it is by grace you are
>saved"), we can see from Hitler's life that throughout his life he
>deliberately disobeyed God's word not to kill and to love his enemies
>and was unrepentant.
So did many Christians throughout history, both people who were
fundamentally good and a few who were probably otherwise. Assuming a
positive view of human nature (at least for the moment), the soldiers
who went off to fight in the Crusades were probably good people for
the most part, but they still slaughtered those whom they were
fighting against. Granted there is a massive difference between the
individual crusaders (many of whom likely didn't know what the war was
really about in the first place) and the likes of Hitler, but the
point is that killing doesn't seem to disqualify people from being
considered as Christian.
>3) Just becuase someone says their are something does not mean they
>are it. if I said I was a hamburger, that would not make me one.
Yet hamburgers are not objects of faith. The problem here is that
when it comes to matters of belief, it's all a matter of what the
individual says he or she believes. Perhaps they don't act in
accordance with the ideals of that belief as conceived by the
mainstream, but ultimately one must either accept that a person is
being truthful when he or she professes to adhere to a given belief
system (or at least *believes* that they are adhering properly to the
belief system) or reject the claim as false. The problem is one of
when we can safely reject such a claim. If we say that one person who
professes Christianity is not a Christian, where do we draw the line?
I'm not saying that this is an insoluble difficulty, but it's at least
something to think about.
>4) The thought that Hitler was a Christian comes from the mistaken
>belief that Christianity is nought but another belief system or
>religious order.
Well, it really kind of is--otherwise, what is it?
>True Christianity is about a relationship with Christ Jesus and
>following Him.
And true Islam is about a relationship with Allah and following him,
and true Hinduism is about a relationship with Brahman, true Shinto
the kami, true Wicca the God and Goddess, et cetera. I don't think
Christianity is unique in that it's about a relationship between deity
and follower: I'd say this feature is common to all theistic
religions.
>While the Bible does say "confess with your mouth and blieve in your
>heart that Jesus Christ is Lord and you will be saved" the word for
>belief here is not the same as we take it nowadays. Today belief is
>mere mental ascent, then it meant the pattern your life was lived
>by.
This interpretation isn't borne out by an examination of the Greek
verb in Strong's. The verb pisteuo (Strong's Greek #4100) is
translated in that lexicon as "believe, commit, commit to (one's)
trust, be committed to, be put in trust with, be commit to one's
trust, believer". Thus the verb clearly pertains to belief rather
than how one lives one's life. Certainly belief *should* influence
the way one lives one's life, but this was not an intrinsic part of
"pisteuo" inseparable from the belief itself.
--
"When I tell any truth it is not for the sake of convincing those who
do not know it, but for the sake of defending those who do."
-- William Blake
PGP fingerprint: 8C37 6F91 A883 F7C9 2ECC F65C 0DEC AB5A 3084 906D
Charos
news:MPG.18910728c...@news.enteract.com...
> On 16 Jan 2003 08:23:40 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Sirs,
> >
> > I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
> > Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
> > Hitler was not a Christian.
> <snip>
>
> Well, do keep in mind that that particular article is located in the
> "debates" section. :)
>
> Unless you object, I'll add your points to the article at some point in
the
> future.
I have my doubts he'll object... ;) they're good points...I find that the
Christian argument against the debate seems to be too in the "because his
moral perceptions are in direct opposition to mine he can't believe what I
do"...stating that Hitler is a Christian isn't an insult in any
fashion...but I don't doubt that he truly did feel that his actions were in
accord with God's laws.
Michael V. SturnBacher
> "Steven Schrader" <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.18910728c...@news.enteract.com...
> > On 16 Jan 2003 08:23:40 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > Sirs,
> > >
> > > I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
> > > Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
> > > Hitler was not a Christian.
> > <snip>
> >
> > Well, do keep in mind that that particular article is located in the
> > "debates" section. :)
> >
> > Unless you object, I'll add your points to the article at some point in
> the
> > future.
>
> I have my doubts he'll object... ;) they're good points...I find that the
> Christian argument against the debate seems to be too in the "because his
> moral perceptions are in direct opposition to mine he can't believe what I
> do"...stating that Hitler is a Christian isn't an insult in any
> fashion...but I don't doubt that he truly did feel that his actions were in
> accord with God's laws.
>
No my Christian opposition is that he did not live by God's laws or
show any fruit as a Christian. It is not moral perception but
Christian absolutes.
MvS
Hall
Charos wrote in message ...
>"Steven Schrader" <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.18910728c...@news.enteract.com...
>> On 16 Jan 2003 08:23:40 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
>> > Sirs,
>> >
>> > I noticed that on your FAQ there is a debate about if Hitler was a
>> > Christian. I disagree with your conclusions. No matter what he said,
>> > Hitler was not a Christian.
>> <snip>
>>
>> Well, do keep in mind that that particular article is located in the
>> "debates" section. :)
>>
>> Unless you object, I'll add your points to the article at some point in
>the
>> future.
>
>I have my doubts he'll object... ;) they're good points...I find that the
>Christian argument against the debate seems to be too in the "because his
>moral perceptions are in direct opposition to mine he can't believe what I
>do"...stating that Hitler is a Christian isn't an insult in any
>fashion...but I don't doubt that he truly did feel that his actions were in
>accord with God's laws.
I think he was using the institutional "church" for his own political
purposes. It's STILL going on!
Jane
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Michael V. SturnBacher" <yoda...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:7672315b.03011...@posting.google.com...
<snipree>
>> 1) The Bible says that God's children (Christians) will be known by
>> their fruit (Matthew 9). The fruit that came from Hitler's life was
>> malice, greed, hate and strife. This is not compatible with being
>> Christian.
>
>this depends which perspective you're viewing it from, from Hitler's, and
>many of the Germans at the time viewed the "fruit" of what Hitler was doing
>as being a transcendence of the human race. A rising above of the imperfect
>human which, while it can attempt, could have no real hope in ever living up
>to God's word. Who are we to say that Hitler didn't see his new master race
>as one which could better serve the laws that God...as a route to a better,
>more full human being which would be more fulfilling from his Christian
>perspective than what it is now? In essence, the perceived fruit which
>Hitler was striving for at the time was the elimination of the direct foe's
>of God, the Transcendence of the human race to a more fuller being which was
>more able to follow god's laws and a more joyous world in which God's
>children could live.
If you're talking about Christianity as a religion that believes in
Jesus even if one does NOT have to follow anything he commanded, then
okay. If you're talking about the Christianity represented in the New
Testament then someone can't just make up your own rules as you go
along.
<snop>
>> 3) Just becuase someone says their are something does not mean they
>> are it. if I said I was a hamburger, that would not make me one.
>
>Stating that you are a hamburger and stating that you are a Christian are
>two ENTIRELY separate things...unless you have read Hitler's mind and
>understand fully his beliefs there's no way we can say for certain that he
>wasn't a Christian...what we have to go by is his constant admonitions and
>public speeches stating that he was an AVID Christian and saw his plan as
>corresponding absolutely with God's law and God's plan...
What if I claimed to be an atheist but prayed to a god. Would you
still classify me as an atheist? What if I publicly proclaimed
evolution as fact but then constantly talk about how God created the
world and everything in it and not much has changed since then? Your
standards have to apply to all sets of beliefs.
<snipee>
>> Ergo, HITLER WAS BY NO MEANS A CHIRSTIAN!
>
>You can't say this with any degree of certainty unless you can read Hitler's
>mind. Here's the basic rule...if Hitler believed that Jesus Christ died on
>the cross and shed his precious blood in order to absolve him and all HUMANS
>(not Jew's or those who opposed him in his perception) of their sin, then he
>was indeed a Christian just like any other who believes such.
There are those who believe that and yet claim that they are *not*
Chrisitans. So, by the standards you applied throughout this post,
that person would not be a Christian at all.
-- Inky
Charos
news:7672315b.03011...@posting.google.com...
The only "christian absolute" I've really seen is the belief in
Christ...beyond that, it seems to vary from belief to belief...and I still
think that within his perceptions he DID live by gods laws...and even
defended them.
--
*+_Charos_+*
http://www.noun.org
"I could not believe in a god who does not dance"
--Nietzsche
Charos
news:o6bh2vkqpojovi2t7...@4ax.com...
No one said that...but there seems to be thousands of interpretations out
there as to what exactly those "rules" are...
> <snop>
> >> 3) Just becuase someone says their are something does not mean they
> >> are it. if I said I was a hamburger, that would not make me one.
> >
> >Stating that you are a hamburger and stating that you are a Christian are
> >two ENTIRELY separate things...unless you have read Hitler's mind and
> >understand fully his beliefs there's no way we can say for certain that
he
> >wasn't a Christian...what we have to go by is his constant admonitions
and
> >public speeches stating that he was an AVID Christian and saw his plan as
> >corresponding absolutely with God's law and God's plan...
>
> What if I claimed to be an atheist but prayed to a god. Would you
> still classify me as an atheist? What if I publicly proclaimed
> evolution as fact but then constantly talk about how God created the
> world and everything in it and not much has changed since then? Your
> standards have to apply to all sets of beliefs.
I would call these people "Hypocrite" or "nut-case"...you're listing exact
opposites...an atheist who believes in a god is a direct
contradiction...Hitler being a Christian isn't. It's quite feasible that
Hitler saw what he was doing as being in the interest of the Christian
faith.
> <snipee>
> >> Ergo, HITLER WAS BY NO MEANS A CHIRSTIAN!
> >
> >You can't say this with any degree of certainty unless you can read
Hitler's
> >mind. Here's the basic rule...if Hitler believed that Jesus Christ died
on
> >the cross and shed his precious blood in order to absolve him and all
HUMANS
> >(not Jew's or those who opposed him in his perception) of their sin, then
he
> >was indeed a Christian just like any other who believes such.
>
> There are those who believe that and yet claim that they are *not*
> Chrisitans. So, by the standards you applied throughout this post,
> that person would not be a Christian at all.
Who believes that Jesus Christ died for their sins and doesn't feel they're
Christian? That's what Christianity, by definition IS...
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:o6bh2vkqpojovi2t7...@4ax.com...
<snipree>
>> If you're talking about Christianity as a religion that believes in
>> Jesus even if one does NOT have to follow anything he commanded, then
>> okay. If you're talking about the Christianity represented in the New
>> Testament then someone can't just make up your own rules as you go
>> along.
>
>No one said that...but there seems to be thousands of interpretations out
>there as to what exactly those "rules" are...
Well, if they're not based on the New Testament, then it would be "the
Christianity represented in the New Testament," would it?
<snop>
>> What if I claimed to be an atheist but prayed to a god. Would you
>> still classify me as an atheist? What if I publicly proclaimed
>> evolution as fact but then constantly talk about how God created the
>> world and everything in it and not much has changed since then? Your
>> standards have to apply to all sets of beliefs.
>
>I would call these people "Hypocrite" or "nut-case"...you're listing exact
>opposites...an atheist who believes in a god is a direct
>contradiction...Hitler being a Christian isn't. It's quite feasible that
>Hitler saw what he was doing as being in the interest of the Christian
>faith.
You didn't address the second part. Also, to muddy it up more, what if
I claimed to be faithful to my wife but committed adultery with other
women?
<snipee>
>> There are those who believe that and yet claim that they are *not*
>> Chrisitans. So, by the standards you applied throughout this post,
>> that person would not be a Christian at all.
>
>Who believes that Jesus Christ died for their sins and doesn't feel they're
>Christian? That's what Christianity, by definition IS...
You say there are "thousands of interpretations" and yet put one
single definition to what Christianity is?
-- Inky
Steven Schrader
Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
Granted, not exactly in the mainstream, but just an example of there being
exceptions for everything.
<snip>
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a
lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
The Steel Wolf
<digi...@enteract.com> scripsit:
>On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:53:13 GMT, Charos wrote:
>> The only "christian absolute" I've really seen is the belief in
>> Christ...
>Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
>Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
I didn't see him use the word "literal"... :P
Steven Schrader
True, I just assumed as much. My bad if that's not what he meant. :)
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"The whole interior of the room was flooded with the sweet scent
of the white roses he'd brought. It occured to me that if the
scent lasted until night, I might be able to fall asleep without
drinking so much." - Banana Yoshimoto, "Asleep"
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:55:11 GMT, The Steel Wolf wrote:
> > anno Domini Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:19:13 -0600, Steven Schrader
> > <digi...@enteract.com> scripsit:
> >
> > >On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:53:13 GMT, Charos wrote:
>
> > >> The only "christian absolute" I've really seen is the belief in
> > >> Christ...
>
> > >Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
> > >Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
> >
> > I didn't see him use the word "literal"... :P
>
> True, I just assumed as much. My bad if that's not what he meant. :)
Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
a Christian. Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
church? Is someone who goes to mcdonald a hamburger?
Mic
>
> Later,
Steven Schrader
> Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1897ef957...@news.enteract.com>...
> > On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:55:11 GMT, The Steel Wolf wrote:
> > > anno Domini Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:19:13 -0600, Steven Schrader
> > > <digi...@enteract.com> scripsit:
> > >
> > > >On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:53:13 GMT, Charos wrote:
> >
> > > >> The only "christian absolute" I've really seen is the belief in
> > > >> Christ...
> >
> > > >Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
> > > >Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
> > >
> > > I didn't see him use the word "literal"... :P
> >
> > True, I just assumed as much. My bad if that's not what he meant. :)
>
> Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> a Christian.
*shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> church?
They didn't go to church either.
<snip>
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"I am not a writer. I am an actor. Everyone is a actor. Noone
is who they really think they are. I think that I could write a
song, but it would be really stupid. So I won't even try."
- Anonymous journal found in a recycling bin in Corvallis, OR
The Steel Wolf
V. SturnBacher) scripsit:
>If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be a Christian.
Why not? What is it about Christianity that requires one's belief in
Christ to be literal? While it's fine and good if a person holds a
belief in Christ as a historical figure in the person of Jesus, why is
that component of historicity necessary? Why do you not think it
sufficient that a person believe in Christ as divinity separate from
any historical consideration?
--
"Homo homini lupus." -- Plautus
Charos
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:57:11 GMT, "Charos"
> <zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:o6bh2vkqpojovi2t7...@4ax.com...
>
> <snipree>
> >> If you're talking about Christianity as a religion that believes in
> >> Jesus even if one does NOT have to follow anything he commanded, then
> >> okay. If you're talking about the Christianity represented in the New
> >> Testament then someone can't just make up your own rules as you go
> >> along.
> >
> >No one said that...but there seems to be thousands of interpretations out
> >there as to what exactly those "rules" are...
>
> Well, if they're not based on the New Testament, then it would be "the
> Christianity represented in the New Testament," would it?
What do you mean? I don't quite follow here...the rules put forth in the
new testament are often interpreted in MANY, MANY different ways and often
in completely opposing manners...
> <snop>
> >> What if I claimed to be an atheist but prayed to a god. Would you
> >> still classify me as an atheist? What if I publicly proclaimed
> >> evolution as fact but then constantly talk about how God created the
> >> world and everything in it and not much has changed since then? Your
> >> standards have to apply to all sets of beliefs.
> >
> >I would call these people "Hypocrite" or "nut-case"...you're listing
exact
> >opposites...an atheist who believes in a god is a direct
> >contradiction...Hitler being a Christian isn't. It's quite feasible that
> >Hitler saw what he was doing as being in the interest of the Christian
> >faith.
>
> You didn't address the second part. Also, to muddy it up more, what if
> I claimed to be faithful to my wife but committed adultery with other
> women?
I would call you a liar if you said that I don't see how that's relevant to
Hitler being a Chirstian...which "second part" do you mean...my standards DO
apply to all sets of beliefs...there's a big difference between interpreting
the bible in a certain manner and outright lying...I've seen no evidence
that Hitler wasn't a devoted Christian...all the historical documents
disagree with you...he visited church every Sunday, paid his church dues, he
even prayed each night before going to bed...he wrote Mein Kampf long before
he rose to power in Germany and states a number of times his devotion to
Jesus...why would he lie about his belief in God without even politics as a
reason?
> <snipee>
> >> There are those who believe that and yet claim that they are *not*
> >> Chrisitans. So, by the standards you applied throughout this post,
> >> that person would not be a Christian at all.
> >
> >Who believes that Jesus Christ died for their sins and doesn't feel
they're
> >Christian? That's what Christianity, by definition IS...
>
> You say there are "thousands of interpretations" and yet put one
> single definition to what Christianity is?
Well, I always thought as that one aspect of Christianity as being
absolute...Jesus, the son of God and savior of man died on the cross and
shed his blood so that the sins of all man should be forgiven...virtually
everything else in the book can be interpreted in a number of ways...and
Steve mentioned friends of his who were Christians who didn't believe in a
literal Jesus...*shrug*
Charos
Seriously? Whoa...I'm curious about that...any websites that may have info
on this ideology? A figurative Jesus figure...very interesting.
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:mgqr2vgb4eq40nevs...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:57:11 GMT, "Charos"
>> <zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:o6bh2vkqpojovi2t7...@4ax.com...
>>
>> <snipree>
>> >> If you're talking about Christianity as a religion that believes in
>> >> Jesus even if one does NOT have to follow anything he commanded, then
>> >> okay. If you're talking about the Christianity represented in the New
>> >> Testament then someone can't just make up your own rules as you go
>> >> along.
>> >
>> >No one said that...but there seems to be thousands of interpretations out
>> >there as to what exactly those "rules" are...
>>
>> Well, if they're not based on the New Testament, then it would be "the
>> Christianity represented in the New Testament," would it?
>
>What do you mean? I don't quite follow here...the rules put forth in the
>new testament are often interpreted in MANY, MANY different ways and often
>in completely opposing manners...
Interpretation is one matter but
<snop>
>> You didn't address the second part. Also, to muddy it up more, what if
>> I claimed to be faithful to my wife but committed adultery with other
>> women?
>
>I would call you a liar if you said that I don't see how that's relevant to
>Hitler being a Chirstian...which "second part" do you mean...my standards DO
>apply to all sets of beliefs...there's a big difference between interpreting
>the bible in a certain manner and outright lying...I've seen no evidence
>that Hitler wasn't a devoted Christian...all the historical documents
>disagree with you...he visited church every Sunday, paid his church dues, he
>even prayed each night before going to bed...he wrote Mein Kampf long before
>he rose to power in Germany and states a number of times his devotion to
>Jesus...why would he lie about his belief in God without even politics as a
>reason?
I never said he was lying about his belief in God or in Jesus. No
doubt he was a theist and even believed in the same Deity as
Christians do. However, Christianity is more than believing in the
existence of certain beings, it is following the standards set forth
in the Bible.
By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
them would deny.
<snipee>
>> You say there are "thousands of interpretations" and yet put one
>> single definition to what Christianity is?
>
>Well, I always thought as that one aspect of Christianity as being
>absolute...Jesus, the son of God and savior of man died on the cross and
>shed his blood so that the sins of all man should be forgiven...virtually
>everything else in the book can be interpreted in a number of ways...and
>Steve mentioned friends of his who were Christians who didn't believe in a
>literal Jesus...*shrug*
There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who say,
"Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian and
I don't care."
-- Inky
Inky
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:03:55 -0700,
> Inky (yada_y...@hotmail.com) says:
>
>
>> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
>> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
>> but they would claim to be Christians.
>> -- Inky
>>
>
>Yeah. My deacon would be one of them. Treu
What flavor is he?
-- Inky
The Steel Wolf
<yada_y...@hotmail.com> scripsit:
>By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
>in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
>them would deny.
Actually, Satanists are generally atheists. The vast majority of them
just use Satan as a symbolic character, and like to scare Christians.
Many of the rest are idiot teenagers playing with powers they don't
understand. And then you have Setians, but they're another matter
entirely.
The Steel Wolf
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> scripsit:
>"Steven Schrader" <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1897d7bd7...@news.enteract.com...
>> Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
>> Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
>> Granted, not exactly in the mainstream, but just an example of there being
>> exceptions for everything.
>Seriously? Whoa...I'm curious about that...any websites that may have info
>on this ideology? A figurative Jesus figure...very interesting.
You and I should have a chat sometime, Charos :)
Inky
wrote:
>anno Domini Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:03:55 -0700, Inky
><yada_y...@hotmail.com> scripsit:
>
>>By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
>>in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
>>them would deny.
>
>Actually, Satanists are generally atheists. The vast majority of them
>just use Satan as a symbolic character, and like to scare Christians.
If one can argue that the references to God in _The Satanic Bible_ are
symbolic, one could also argue that the references to God in Hitler's
message were the same.
>Many of the rest are idiot teenagers playing with powers they don't
>understand.
Agreed but many of them do believe in God and in Jesus but would not
classify themselves as Christians.
>And then you have Setians, but they're another matter
>entirely.
What is a Setian?
-- Inky
Charos
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 07:12:27 GMT, The Steel Wolf <steel...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >anno Domini Sat, 25 Jan 2003 10:03:55 -0700, Inky
> ><yada_y...@hotmail.com> scripsit:
> >
> >>By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
> >>in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
> >>them would deny.
> >
> >Actually, Satanists are generally atheists. The vast majority of them
> >just use Satan as a symbolic character, and like to scare Christians.
>
> If one can argue that the references to God in _The Satanic Bible_ are
> symbolic, one could also argue that the references to God in Hitler's
> message were the same.
It's not an argument at all...the creator of Satanism as it's known today
Anton Szandor LaVey himself renounced the Christian belief in Satan as such.
The Satanists perspective on "Satan" is as a symbol of the renouncement of
the perceived weakness in the Christian faith...they use Satan because as
the arch-nemesis of the largest religion in the world he is almost
universally recognized. Satan is a representation of the animalistic aspect
of ourselves, the satanic belief is that we are, at our cores animalistic
beings and embraces this belief. They see no problem with pursuing personal
gain/power and pleasure in a quite animalistic fashion...please see:
and ESPECIALLY read the "theory/practice" section...and if you'd like, read
"The Satanic Bible" and "The Satanic Rituals" for a more complete
understanding of the belief system...Satan is openly acknowledged and viewed
by any self-respecting Satanist as a symbol of the animal side of human
nature...I've never in my life met one who believed in the Christian idea of
"Satan" as being a manifest being of ultimate darkness. There ARE
Luciferians...but that's a completely different belief system.
> >Many of the rest are idiot teenagers playing with powers they don't
> >understand.
>
> Agreed but many of them do believe in God and in Jesus but would not
> classify themselves as Christians.
Any who do haven't read the most basic tenets of the Satanic
belief...Satanism is sort of an amalgamation of Existential philosophy with
some "magic" and "mysticism" thrown in for good measure...God/Satan has
nothing to do with it.
> >And then you have Setians, but they're another matter
> >entirely.
>
> What is a Setian?
> -- Inky
Charos
Um...okie... ;)
And I've yet to see any evidence that he didn't see himself as doing just
this...as we've said...interpretations can vary...he may not have followed
YOUR interpretation of the standards set forth in the bible, but I have no
doubt that he followed HIS interpretations of those standards.
> By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
> in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
> them would deny.
I've yet to see a Satanist who believes in God or the Devil
whatsoever...EVERY satanist I've talked to is an atheist.
> <snipee>
> >> You say there are "thousands of interpretations" and yet put one
> >> single definition to what Christianity is?
> >
> >Well, I always thought as that one aspect of Christianity as being
> >absolute...Jesus, the son of God and savior of man died on the cross and
> >shed his blood so that the sins of all man should be forgiven...virtually
> >everything else in the book can be interpreted in a number of ways...and
> >Steve mentioned friends of his who were Christians who didn't believe in
a
> >literal Jesus...*shrug*
>
> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
> but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who say,
> "Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian and
> I don't care."
Sounds like me...I'm sure that at some point there was an extremely
charismatic man named Jesus of Nazareth and he was crucified for
blasphemy...but I've yet to see any evidence of his "divine nature"
Charos
news:ci273vcjgcoai9rll...@4ax.com...
LOL I've always seen you as somewhat of an enigma...*scary music* I'm STILL
not clear on what it is exactly you believe...of course, I'm still not clear
on exactly what it is "I" believe :)
Inky
wrote:
>One of the everything works for everybody types.
Ah, gotcha.
>Trey
-- Inky
The Steel Wolf
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> scripsit:
>LOL I've always seen you as somewhat of an enigma...*scary music* I'm STILL
>not clear on what it is exactly you believe...
And I am? :)
But I'm serious about the chatting. I think it would be fun, not to
mention interesting, to exchange perspectives sometime.
Inky
I didn't ask what they believed Satan represented. My point was that
_The Satanic Bible_ mentions God. If you feel that this is symbolism,
then it could be argued that Hitler was using symbolism as well. It's
just that Hitler doesn't have a web site to explain exactly what he
meant.
>http://www.churchofsatan.com
>
>and ESPECIALLY read the "theory/practice" section...and if you'd like, read
>"The Satanic Bible" and "The Satanic Rituals" for a more complete
>understanding of the belief system...Satan is openly acknowledged and viewed
>by any self-respecting Satanist as a symbol of the animal side of human
>nature...I've never in my life met one who believed in the Christian idea of
>"Satan" as being a manifest being of ultimate darkness.
Okay, this tells me what they feel that Satan represents. It still did
not address the issue of the mention of God in _The Satanic Bible_.
>There ARE
>Luciferians...but that's a completely different belief system.
Do they believe in God and/or Jesus? If so, then are they Christians?
<snop>
>> >And then you have Setians, but they're another matter
>> >entirely.
>>
>> What is a Setian?
>
>http://www.xeper.org/
Couldn't you give me a nutshell description?
Content aside, the two sites you linked to in your message are much
cooler looking than any sites I've seen for Christian churcces. In
fact, that's some of the coolest design I've seen on the net.
-- Inky
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:07g53v850uqqivtkm...@4ax.com...
<snop>
>> I never said he was lying about his belief in God or in Jesus. No
>> doubt he was a theist and even believed in the same Deity as
>> Christians do. However, Christianity is more than believing in the
>> existence of certain beings, it is following the standards set forth
>> in the Bible.
>
>And I've yet to see any evidence that he didn't see himself as doing just
>this...as we've said...interpretations can vary...he may not have followed
>YOUR interpretation of the standards set forth in the bible, but I have no
>doubt that he followed HIS interpretations of those standards.
As long as you're willing to allow any bizaare, off-the-wall,
completely irreconcilable intrepretation of any document whatsoever,
then okay, I can see your point of view as somewhat making sense. But,
that can't just go for the Bible. It has to go for scientific
findings, medical studies, the beliefs of other religions, and even
the things that you yourself write.
>> By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
>> in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
>> them would deny.
>
>I've yet to see a Satanist who believes in God or the Devil
>whatsoever...EVERY satanist I've talked to is an atheist.
Then you'll have to argue the symbolism point.
>> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
>> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
>> but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who say,
>> "Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian and
>> I don't care."
>
>Sounds like me...I'm sure that at some point there was an extremely
>charismatic man named Jesus of Nazareth and he was crucified for
>blasphemy...but I've yet to see any evidence of his "divine nature"
Those were far from the words they used.
-- Inky
Hall
The Steel Wolf wrote in message ...
The arc-t chatroom is still on IRC. I was in there the other night.
Jane
Hall
Inky wrote in message ...
The Unitarian Church would be a comfortable place for your deacon!
Jane
Hall
Charos wrote in message ...
You won't find any "evidence" as in the Scientific Method to "prove" the
divine nature of Jesus. It's simply a matter of personal conviction. It
requires "faith".
Christians believe that when you embrace Jesus as God's plan of salvation in
Jesus, you receive the "Holy Spirit" who will lead you to all truth.
Personally, I perceive the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.
I know some people would think it's just an emotional warm fuzzy, but hey!
It works for me! I would say that Christianity in its most basic, truest
(as we can get) sense is experiential.
Jane
Steven Schrader
IIRC, groups don't reside on IRC indefinitely. They're created on the fly
and close when nobody is chatting in that particular room.
So the arc-t chatroom is on IRC only in the sense that you started a
chatroom on IRC called arc-t. Which isn't a bad thing, just figured I
should clarify. :)
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"Reality is merely an illusion,
albeit a very persistent one." - Albert Einstein
Charos
Would that be painful? I'm not big on pain... ;)
Charos
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 11:37:16 GMT, Hall wrote:
> >
> > The Steel Wolf wrote in message ...
> > >anno Domini Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:56:05 GMT, "Charos"
> > ><zarathustras...@yahoo.com> scripsit:
> > >
> > >>LOL I've always seen you as somewhat of an enigma...*scary music* I'm
> > STILL
> > >>not clear on what it is exactly you believe...
> > >
> > >And I am? :)
> > >
> > >But I'm serious about the chatting. I think it would be fun, not to
> > >mention interesting, to exchange perspectives sometime.
> >
> > The arc-t chatroom is still on IRC. I was in there the other night.
>
> IIRC, groups don't reside on IRC indefinitely. They're created on the fly
> and close when nobody is chatting in that particular room.
>
> So the arc-t chatroom is on IRC only in the sense that you started a
> chatroom on IRC called arc-t. Which isn't a bad thing, just figured I
> should clarify. :)
*nod* I haven't been on IRC in AGES...
Charos
No, hitler used his speeches and books, saying things like "I always have
been and always will be a Christian", and "My feelings as a Christian points
me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the One, who once in
loneliness surrounded by only a few followers, recognized these Jews for
what they were and summoned men to fight against them."...Sure, the Satanic
bible MENTIONS god...but it's in complete passing and isn't in the same
context Hitler used it in ANY way...mentioning god and declaring ones self a
Christian are two VERY different things...
> >http://www.churchofsatan.com
> >
> >and ESPECIALLY read the "theory/practice" section...and if you'd like,
read
> >"The Satanic Bible" and "The Satanic Rituals" for a more complete
> >understanding of the belief system...Satan is openly acknowledged and
viewed
> >by any self-respecting Satanist as a symbol of the animal side of human
> >nature...I've never in my life met one who believed in the Christian idea
of
> >"Satan" as being a manifest being of ultimate darkness.
>
> Okay, this tells me what they feel that Satan represents. It still did
> not address the issue of the mention of God in _The Satanic Bible_.
Yep...see above...it's in a COMPLETELY different context.
> >There ARE
> >Luciferians...but that's a completely different belief system.
>
> Do they believe in God and/or Jesus? If so, then are they Christians?
I'm really unsure of what they believe in detail...either way, they
certainly don't WORSHIP Jesus and view him as a Savior of their sins like a
Christian does...
> <snop>
>
> >> >And then you have Setians, but they're another matter
> >> >entirely.
> >>
> >> What is a Setian?
> >
> >http://www.xeper.org/
>
> Couldn't you give me a nutshell description?
>
> Content aside, the two sites you linked to in your message are much
> cooler looking than any sites I've seen for Christian churcces. In
> fact, that's some of the coolest design I've seen on the net.
I would agree on that...those satanic web-designers are damn good...must be
the infernal influence... ;D
Charos
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:54:31 GMT, "Charos"
> <zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:07g53v850uqqivtkm...@4ax.com...
>
> <snop>
> >> I never said he was lying about his belief in God or in Jesus. No
> >> doubt he was a theist and even believed in the same Deity as
> >> Christians do. However, Christianity is more than believing in the
> >> existence of certain beings, it is following the standards set forth
> >> in the Bible.
> >
> >And I've yet to see any evidence that he didn't see himself as doing just
> >this...as we've said...interpretations can vary...he may not have
followed
> >YOUR interpretation of the standards set forth in the bible, but I have
no
> >doubt that he followed HIS interpretations of those standards.
>
> As long as you're willing to allow any bizaare, off-the-wall,
> completely irreconcilable intrepretation of any document whatsoever,
> then okay, I can see your point of view as somewhat making sense. But,
> that can't just go for the Bible. It has to go for scientific
> findings, medical studies, the beliefs of other religions, and even
> the things that you yourself write.
What exactly did he do that was so far off what the bible stated...he saw
the Jews as being an absolute threat...as a race of people who would
eventually lead to the downfall and destruction of God's kingdom on
earth...doesn't mean he wasn't a nut-job or whatever...it simply means that
he saw what he was doing as being in line with the doctrines of
Christianity...Scientific findings and medical studies ARE interpreted like
this...the difference is that they are written in such a fashion that pretty
much only one can be take from them...also, for my posts AND those findings,
all one needs to do is ask the person who authored them to explain the
context and they can clarify...the bible is extremely vague in places,
contradictory in places...it's a text that one could take almost ANY message
from...Hitlers wasn't even THAT off the wall, he saw the Jews as being a
threat to the church/Jesus' people and fought against that...he was insane,
I agree...doesn't mean he didn't believe that Jesus died on the cross for
his sins...
> >> By your definition, satanists would be Christians because they believe
> >> in God, Jesus, the devil, and so on. This is a charge that most of
> >> them would deny.
> >
> >I've yet to see a Satanist who believes in God or the Devil
> >whatsoever...EVERY satanist I've talked to is an atheist.
>
> Then you'll have to argue the symbolism point.
I've done that...they mention the devil and explain that they see him as a
metaphor for the animalistic side of human nature...Hitler said "I'm a
Christian" and saw Jesus as the savior who died on the cross for his
sins...those are very different things...
> >> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
> >> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
> >> but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who say,
> >> "Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian and
> >> I don't care."
> >
> >Sounds like me...I'm sure that at some point there was an extremely
> >charismatic man named Jesus of Nazareth and he was crucified for
> >blasphemy...but I've yet to see any evidence of his "divine nature"
>
> Those were far from the words they used.
Who?
Charos
news:s5uZ9.13327$ni5.1...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
I agree...
> Christians believe that when you embrace Jesus as God's plan of salvation
in
> Jesus, you receive the "Holy Spirit" who will lead you to all truth.
> Personally, I perceive the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.
>
> I know some people would think it's just an emotional warm fuzzy, but hey!
> It works for me! I would say that Christianity in its most basic, truest
> (as we can get) sense is experiential.
Exactly...but the main problem with this aspect is that there are those who
accepted Jesus...opened themselves to the faith as much as possible and
still didn't "feel" him in their hearts...however when they did the same and
had faith in, say for example, the pagan belief system they felt as though
they'd come home...it's ENTIRELY personal...I used to be an avid Christian
and eventually realized I didn't believe the same way I had before...I
eventually drifted away and I feel more at home where I am NOW spiritually
than I ever did as a Christian...it only bothers me when people claim that I
didn't "try hard enough" or "I must not have been listening hard
enough"...*shrug* :)
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On 22 Jan 2003 03:05:34 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1897ef957...@news.enteract.com>...
> > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 04:55:11 GMT, The Steel Wolf wrote:
> > > > anno Domini Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:19:13 -0600, Steven Schrader
> > > > <digi...@enteract.com> scripsit:
> > > >
> > > > >On Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:53:13 GMT, Charos wrote:
>
> > > > >> The only "christian absolute" I've really seen is the belief in
> > > > >> Christ...
>
> > > > >Heh, I'm not even sure if that's an absolute. I've met a handful of
> > > > >Christians over the years who don't have a belief in a literal Christ.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't see him use the word "literal"... :P
> > >
> > > True, I just assumed as much. My bad if that's not what he meant. :)
> >
> > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > a Christian.
>
> *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
I will if I can find them.
>
> > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > church?
>
> They didn't go to church either.
Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
>
> <snip>
>
> Later,
Michael V. SturnBacher
> anno Domini 22 Jan 2003 03:05:34 -0800, yoda...@yahoo.co.uk (Michael
> V. SturnBacher) scripsit:
>
> >If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be a Christian.
>
> Why not? What is it about Christianity that requires one's belief in
> Christ to be literal? While it's fine and good if a person holds a
> belief in Christ as a historical figure in the person of Jesus, why is
> that component of historicity necessary? Why do you not think it
> sufficient that a person believe in Christ as divinity separate from
> any historical consideration?
Okay, first, we have to ask what a Christian is. Can it be someone
who goes to Church? Not really, any more than going to McDonalds
makes you a hamburger. Doers it mean believeing in Jesus, well the
Bible says even the demons believe in Christ but they aren't
Christians. What does the Bible say? The Bible clearly says that to
be a Christian (or disciiple or follower of Chirst as Christian was
only used about 50y after Jesus died) you must follow Jesus, believe
he is the Son of God and that he die, rose againa dn ascended for you.
Look all over the New Testament and you see this repeated. Do you
want examples?
MvS
Hall
Charos wrote in message
<3t%Z9.503550$F2h1....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
I have to say that there have been times in my life when I didn't "feel" or
"perceive the presence of the Holy Spirit, but I chose to believe the
promise that I was "sealed". During the dark times, it's hard to see
ANYTHING positively, but we move out of the darkness and perspective clears
up.
Sometimes the waters are too muddy to see. I know some would say that I
pulled from my "inner resources". I don't place my faith in "feelings".
Emotions come and go. My faith is based on the promises that I perceive are
from God. There have been times in my life when I have not "felt" like a
wife, but the marriage contract stated that I am, indeed a "wife". I'm
happy to say that for the past two years, I have "felt" like a wife!
WOOHOO! My faith is like that. It's a contract. A covenant. I may break
a covenant, but I do not perceive that God would ever break one.
I have personally witnessed many, many people whose lives were changed for
the better because they placed their trust in God's plan of salvation in
Jesus. Many of the changes were "miraculous". Again, I know that some
would say that it was time for them to pull their lives together and live
positively.
Jane
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7ca93voishg1itcst...@4ax.com...
<snipree>
>> I didn't ask what they believed Satan represented. My point was that
>> _The Satanic Bible_ mentions God. If you feel that this is symbolism,
>> then it could be argued that Hitler was using symbolism as well. It's
>> just that Hitler doesn't have a web site to explain exactly what he
>> meant.
>
>No, hitler used his speeches and books, saying things like "I always have
>been and always will be a Christian", and "My feelings as a Christian points
>me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the One, who once in
>loneliness surrounded by only a few followers, recognized these Jews for
>what they were and summoned men to fight against them."...Sure, the Satanic
>bible MENTIONS god...but it's in complete passing and isn't in the same
>context Hitler used it in ANY way...mentioning god and declaring ones self a
>Christian are two VERY different things...
I guess our disagreement here is, what defines what a Christian is. If
a Christian is anyone who labels himself as such, then you are
correct. If Christianity is subject to a more strict internal
definition that calls for a set of standards to be followed, then I am
correct.
Jesus was a Jew. How did Hitler reconcile that?
<snop>
>> Content aside, the two sites you linked to in your message are much
>> cooler looking than any sites I've seen for Christian churcces. In
>> fact, that's some of the coolest design I've seen on the net.
>
>I would agree on that...those satanic web-designers are damn good...must be
>the infernal influence... ;D
I'm sure many people would say so. A lot of churches are still singing
songs written over 100 years ago (to the exclusion of newer songs) as
if God hasn't inspired any art in over a century. *sigh*
-- Inky
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4fb93v48t1i2ab0nk...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:54:31 GMT, "Charos"
>> <zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Inky" <yada_y...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:07g53v850uqqivtkm...@4ax.com...
<snop>
>> As long as you're willing to allow any bizaare, off-the-wall,
>> completely irreconcilable intrepretation of any document whatsoever,
>> then okay, I can see your point of view as somewhat making sense. But,
>> that can't just go for the Bible. It has to go for scientific
>> findings, medical studies, the beliefs of other religions, and even
>> the things that you yourself write.
>
>What exactly did he do that was so far off what the bible stated...he saw
>the Jews as being an absolute threat...as a race of people who would
>eventually lead to the downfall and destruction of God's kingdom on
>earth...doesn't mean he wasn't a nut-job or whatever...it simply means that
>he saw what he was doing as being in line with the doctrines of
>Christianity...
Perhaps he did. But, Jesus was a Jew. The Jews were God's chosen
people and every writer of the Bible was a Jew. To me, Hitler's
doctrine seems off the wall.
<snipree>
>> Then you'll have to argue the symbolism point.
>
>I've done that...they mention the devil and explain that they see him as a
>metaphor for the animalistic side of human nature...Hitler said "I'm a
>Christian" and saw Jesus as the savior who died on the cross for his
>sins...those are very different things...
I know you did. I was just letting you know that I understood your
argument. I wasn't clear. {:o)
>> >> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
>> >> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with them
>> >> but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who say,
>> >> "Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian and
>> >> I don't care."
>> >
>> >Sounds like me...I'm sure that at some point there was an extremely
>> >charismatic man named Jesus of Nazareth and he was crucified for
>> >blasphemy...but I've yet to see any evidence of his "divine nature"
>>
>> Those were far from the words they used.
>
>Who?
People I know who have said they believe Jesus died but they don't
care and aren't Christians.
-- Inky
Steven Schrader
> Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
<snip>
> > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > a Christian.
> >
> > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
>
> I will if I can find them.
I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
anyway).
> > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > church?
> >
> > They didn't go to church either.
>
> Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
*nod*
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"I am not a writer. I am an actor. Everyone is a actor. Noone
is who they really think they are. I think that I could write a
song, but it would be really stupid. So I won't even try."
- Anonymous journal found in a recycling bin in Corvallis, OR
Inky
wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 22:04:22 -0500,
> Trey (tsh...@rockbridge.net) says:
>
>
>>
>> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 10:06:01 -0700,
>> Inky (newsgr...@hotmail.com) says:
>>
>>
>> > I guess our disagreement here is, what defines what a Christian is. If
>> > a Christian is anyone who labels himself as such, then you are
>> > correct. If Christianity is subject to a more strict internal
>> > definition that calls for a set of standards to be followed, then I am
>> > correct.
>> >
>> > Jesus was a Jew. How did Hitler reconcile that?
>> >
>> He probably said the Jews killed Jesus.
>>
>But then, some would argue the Romans killed Jesus.
The Romans did carry out the sentence so, yes. But, the Jews
instigated so, yes. We are all responsible though.
Even so, Jesus was a Jew!
>Trey
-- Inky
Inky
wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:04:49 -0700,
> Inky (newsgr...@hotmail.com) says:
<snop>
>> The Romans did carry out the sentence so, yes. But, the Jews
>> instigated so, yes. We are all responsible though.
>>
>> Even so, Jesus was a Jew!
>>
>
>I'm not supporting it, I'm just trying to guess who Hitler would have
>justified it. But then, I don't think he really cared too much about
>religion.
I know you weren't supporting it. And, I have heard plays about
Passion Plays being labelled anti-semitic. Makes no sense.
>Trey
-- Inky
Charos
news:iemi3v8grip85aonr...@4ax.com...
see, I think that Hitler DID think of there as being a pretty set thing of
rules in the bible...he simply interpreted those rules differently...
> Jesus was a Jew. How did Hitler reconcile that?
From what I can tell, Hitler saw the other Jews as having "turned their
backs" on Jesus...Jesus was the king of the jews, sent to free them from
their sin, and they refused to believe in him...Hitler saw them as
treacherous and deceptive...Jesus is rather transcendant above all of them
in his mind I'm sure...Jesus was the savior...the rest of the Jews were
"sub-human scum"...wiping them out would only be destroying the direct
enemies of God...remember, Hitler was pretty damn crazy...
> <snop>
> >> Content aside, the two sites you linked to in your message are much
> >> cooler looking than any sites I've seen for Christian churcces. In
> >> fact, that's some of the coolest design I've seen on the net.
> >
> >I would agree on that...those satanic web-designers are damn good...must
be
> >the infernal influence... ;D
>
> I'm sure many people would say so. A lot of churches are still singing
> songs written over 100 years ago (to the exclusion of newer songs) as
> if God hasn't inspired any art in over a century. *sigh*
*nod* it's sad to see more modern things get thrown out because of a fear of
change.
Inky
<zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Inky" <newsgr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:iemi3v8grip85aonr...@4ax.com...
<snipree>
>> I guess our disagreement here is, what defines what a Christian is. If
>> a Christian is anyone who labels himself as such, then you are
>> correct. If Christianity is subject to a more strict internal
>> definition that calls for a set of standards to be followed, then I am
>> correct.
>
>see, I think that Hitler DID think of there as being a pretty set thing of
>rules in the bible...he simply interpreted those rules differently...
>
>> Jesus was a Jew. How did Hitler reconcile that?
>
>From what I can tell, Hitler saw the other Jews as having "turned their
>backs" on Jesus...Jesus was the king of the jews, sent to free them from
>their sin, and they refused to believe in him...Hitler saw them as
>treacherous and deceptive...Jesus is rather transcendant above all of them
>in his mind I'm sure...Jesus was the savior...the rest of the Jews were
>"sub-human scum"...wiping them out would only be destroying the direct
>enemies of God...remember, Hitler was pretty damn crazy...
That last sentence says it all. {:o)
<snop>
>> I'm sure many people would say so. A lot of churches are still singing
>> songs written over 100 years ago (to the exclusion of newer songs) as
>> if God hasn't inspired any art in over a century. *sigh*
>
>*nod* it's sad to see more modern things get thrown out because of a fear of
>change.
Churches are terrible. "We've always done it that way." Yet, they're
not the only ones.
-- Inky
Charos
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 21:57:56 GMT, "Charos"
> <zarathustras...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Inky" <newsgr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:iemi3v8grip85aonr...@4ax.com...
>
> <snipree>
> >> I guess our disagreement here is, what defines what a Christian is. If
> >> a Christian is anyone who labels himself as such, then you are
> >> correct. If Christianity is subject to a more strict internal
> >> definition that calls for a set of standards to be followed, then I am
> >> correct.
> >
> >see, I think that Hitler DID think of there as being a pretty set thing
of
> >rules in the bible...he simply interpreted those rules differently...
> >
> >> Jesus was a Jew. How did Hitler reconcile that?
> >
> >From what I can tell, Hitler saw the other Jews as having "turned their
> >backs" on Jesus...Jesus was the king of the jews, sent to free them from
> >their sin, and they refused to believe in him...Hitler saw them as
> >treacherous and deceptive...Jesus is rather transcendant above all of
them
> >in his mind I'm sure...Jesus was the savior...the rest of the Jews were
> >"sub-human scum"...wiping them out would only be destroying the direct
> >enemies of God...remember, Hitler was pretty damn crazy...
>
> That last sentence says it all. {:o)
LOL yes, but so were a lot of famous Christians...take a gander at the sect
that Heironymous Bosche belonged to... :)
> <snop>
> >> I'm sure many people would say so. A lot of churches are still singing
> >> songs written over 100 years ago (to the exclusion of newer songs) as
> >> if God hasn't inspired any art in over a century. *sigh*
> >
> >*nod* it's sad to see more modern things get thrown out because of a fear
of
> >change.
>
> Churches are terrible. "We've always done it that way." Yet, they're
> not the only ones.
*fighting change tooth and nail*
Charos
The main thing with this though is that I also know a great number of people
who have converted FROM Christianity to some other belief (like Wicca) and
they would argue that it changed their lives in much the same way...it's
possible that a major alteration like this may cause that feeling of
transcendence...one may "need" that experience in order to really gain a
"bond" with that belief system...
> Jane
--
*+_Charos_+*
visit:
http://verb.noun.org
English in Action
Charos
I kind of touched on the Jesus being a Jew to a point...his race is
transcended really by his acts...As far as I can tell, Hitler felt that the
Jews had turned their back on Jesus...
> <snipree>
> >> Then you'll have to argue the symbolism point.
> >
> >I've done that...they mention the devil and explain that they see him as
a
> >metaphor for the animalistic side of human nature...Hitler said "I'm a
> >Christian" and saw Jesus as the savior who died on the cross for his
> >sins...those are very different things...
>
> I know you did. I was just letting you know that I understood your
> argument. I wasn't clear. {:o)
OHHHH...OK...LOL :)
> >> >> There are major sects of the Christian religion who do not believe
> >> >> that Jesus died on the cross for their sins. I do not agree with
them
> >> >> but they would claim to be Christians. I know a lot of people who
say,
> >> >> "Yeah, I believe that Jesus died on the cross. I'm not a Christian
and
> >> >> I don't care."
> >> >
> >> >Sounds like me...I'm sure that at some point there was an extremely
> >> >charismatic man named Jesus of Nazareth and he was crucified for
> >> >blasphemy...but I've yet to see any evidence of his "divine nature"
> >>
> >> Those were far from the words they used.
> >
> >Who?
>
> People I know who have said they believe Jesus died but they don't
> care and aren't Christians.
Ah...yeah, well, like I said...I believe that...but I don't know if I can
accept the "devine savior" aspect of it...I find it just as likely (even
moreso) that Jesus was a very charismatic and influential person who came
along at a very tumultuous time in the world...some psychological
dysfunction may very well explain the belief he was the son of God...
Charos
news:7672315b.03013...@posting.google.com...
These people may believe this, but in a metaphorical sense...
> Look all over the New Testament and you see this repeated. Do you
> want examples?
--
Hall
I agree to a point. If we perceive ourselves in "bondage" to anything, we
are generally happier when we break the chains. With Christianity, we have
the added bonus of the indwelling Holy Spirit, but of course there is no
scientific or real proof of the HS. It's a perceived thing. My perceiving
it does not prove it.
I guess every belief system has its perks.
Good point, Charos!
Jane
Charos
True, also true for all systems of belief...
> I guess every belief system has its perks.
Exactly...I've always been very alchemical with beliefs...I feel there's
value in every belief system...I find adhering to only one much too
contraining.
> Good point, Charos!
I love your universal positivity... ;)
--
*+_Charos_+*
Official aCHU Professor of Sweet, sweet, lovin'
Hall
Charos wrote in message
<_ne3a.354575$pDv.2...@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
"universal positivity". Thanks, Charos! I like that.
How was your trip?
Jane
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> <snip>
> > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > > a Christian.
> > >
> > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> >
> > I will if I can find them.
>
> I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
> anyway).
It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
>
> > > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > > church?
> > >
> > > They didn't go to church either.
> >
> > Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
>
> *nod*
Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
MvS
>
> Later,
Michael V. SturnBacher
That would be like saying, even although there is no bridge across
this canyon, I believe in a metaphorical bridge so I can cross.
Metaphorically of course.
But we all know what would happen if you did that. Metaphors alone
don't do anything.
Mic
Michael V. SturnBacher
So basicaly what yiu are saying is, you want all the god bits but none
of the hard bits?
> >
> >> Good point, Charos!
> >
> >I love your universal positivity... ;)
> >
> >--
> >*+_Charos_+*
> >
> >Official aCHU Professor of Sweet, sweet, lovin'
>
> "universal positivity". Thanks, Charos! I like that.
>
> How was your trip?
Did he take drugs?
MvS
-+-
Alchemy never made gold.
>
> Jane
Steven Schrader
> Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> > <snip>
> > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > > > a Christian.
> > > >
> > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > >
> > > I will if I can find them.
> >
> > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
> > anyway).
>
> It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
It could be based on the values embodies in the concept of Christ.
> > > > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > > > church?
> > > >
> > > > They didn't go to church either.
> > >
> > > Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
> >
> > *nod*
>
> Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it to be
in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
belief does exist.
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"Hell is truth seen too late." - John Locke
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On 17 Feb 2003 02:03:47 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> <snip>
> > > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > > > > a Christian.
> > > > >
> > > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > > >
> > > > I will if I can find them.
> > >
> > > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
> > > anyway).
> >
> > It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> > Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
>
> It could be based on the values embodies in the concept of Christ.
So what if I said I only had a relationship with the concept of a
woman, would that make me married? Would I sitll be single?
>
> > > > > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > > > > church?
> > > > >
> > > > > They didn't go to church either.
> > > >
> > > > Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
> > >
> > > *nod*
> >
> > Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> > believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
>
> Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it to be
> in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> belief does exist.
It seems to not be able to be defended.
Mic
>
> Later,
The Astute Andrew
<snip>
> > > > *nod*
> > >
> > > Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> > > believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
> >
> > Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it
to be
> > in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> > belief does exist.
>
> It seems to not be able to be defended.
People who call themselves Christians who deny an aspect of the Holy Trinity
generally aren't defended by people who don't deny an aspect of the Holy
Trinity. :-)
Meaning that we don't particularly think they are theologically or
ontologically Christian. They are something else.
--
The Astute Andrew
Just a kid seeking enlightenment
aCHU's Official Spineless Lackey
Steven Schrader
> Steven Schrader <ar...@hurtingalex.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18bab8a86...@news.rcn.com>...
> > On 17 Feb 2003 02:03:47 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > > > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> > <snip>
> > > > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > > > > > a Christian.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will if I can find them.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
> > > > anyway).
> > >
> > > It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> > > Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
> >
> > It could be based on the values embodies in the concept of Christ.
>
> So what if I said I only had a relationship with the concept of a
> woman, would that make me married? Would I sitll be single?
The analogy doesn't fit though since they don't adhere to the same concept
of a relationship with Christ as you do.
<snip>
> > Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it to be
> > in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> > belief does exist.
>
> It seems to not be able to be defended.
*shrug* Whatever makes you happy.
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"Teaching without words and work without doing
Are understood by very few." - Lao Tsu
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On 18 Feb 2003 07:29:01 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Steven Schrader <ar...@hurtingalex.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18bab8a86...@news.rcn.com>...
> > > On 17 Feb 2003 02:03:47 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > > > > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > > > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> <snip>
> > > > > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot be
> > > > > > > > a Christian.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will if I can find them.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own experience
> > > > > anyway).
> > > >
> > > > It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> > > > Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
> > >
> > > It could be based on the values embodies in the concept of Christ.
> >
> > So what if I said I only had a relationship with the concept of a
> > woman, would that make me married? Would I sitll be single?
>
> The analogy doesn't fit though since they don't adhere to the same concept
> of a relationship with Christ as you do.
Okay then what if I said I was married since I believed I was having a
relationship with the concept of a woman. Saying you are a Christian
without believing in Christ is totally stupid.
>
> <snip>
> > > Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it to be
> > > in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> > > belief does exist.
> >
> > It seems to not be able to be defended.
>
> *shrug* Whatever makes you happy.
Hm
Mic
>
> Later,
Michael V. SturnBacher
> "Michael V. SturnBacher" <yoda...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:7672315b.03021...@posting.google.com...
>
> <snip>
>
> > > > > *nod*
> > > >
> > > > Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> > > > believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
> > >
> > > Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it
> to be
> > > in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> > > belief does exist.
> >
> > It seems to not be able to be defended.
>
> People who call themselves Christians who deny an aspect of the Holy Trinity
> generally aren't defended by people who don't deny an aspect of the Holy
> Trinity. :-)
Obviously. But they are Christians in anme only.
>
> Meaning that we don't particularly think they are theologically or
> ontologically Christian. They are something else.
They are something else indeed.
Mic
Steven Schrader
> Steven Schrader <ar...@hurtingalex.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18bc85bc2...@news.rcn.com>...
<snip>
> > The analogy doesn't fit though since they don't adhere to the same concept
> > of a relationship with Christ as you do.
>
> Okay then what if I said I was married since I believed I was having a
> relationship with the concept of a woman. Saying you are a Christian
> without believing in Christ is totally stupid.
<snip>
How nice of you to say so.
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"The chicken realised that if it were on the other side
of the road, the side that it was already on would become
'the other side'. Hence it had already crossed without
crossing and clucked leisurely down the street." - Okamura
Michael V. SturnBacher
> On 20 Feb 2003 02:37:01 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > Steven Schrader <ar...@hurtingalex.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.18bc85bc2...@news.rcn.com>...
> <snip>
> > > The analogy doesn't fit though since they don't adhere to the same concept
> > > of a relationship with Christ as you do.
> >
> > Okay then what if I said I was married since I believed I was having a
> > relationship with the concept of a woman. Saying you are a Christian
> > without believing in Christ is totally stupid.
> <snip>
>
> How nice of you to say so.
Well, Christianity without Christ is a kind of masturbation. You are
going after a concept and afterwards you realise you really haven't
achieved an awful lot.
MvS
>
> Later,
Steven Schrader
*shrug* I imagine they would disagree.
Later,
--
Steven Schrader
The Musician's Homepage - http://www.themusicianshomepage.com/
"Reality is merely an illusion,
albeit a very persistent one." - Albert Einstein
Charos
Hmmm, I would avoid saying something like that in front of the people who
believe such....
--
*+_Charos_+*
Official Professor of Sweet, Sweet, Lovin' at aCHU
Visit
http://verb.noun.org
English in Action
"I could not believe in a God who does not dance"
--Nietzsche
Charos
> Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> > <snip>
> > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you cannot
be
> > > > > a Christian.
> > > >
> > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > >
> > > I will if I can find them.
> >
> > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own
experience
> > anyway).
>
> It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
Likely the belief in the values which Christ taught...
> > > > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > > > church?
> > > >
> > > > They didn't go to church either.
> > >
> > > Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
> >
> > *nod*
>
> Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
See above...I don't know these people, so I don't know...
Charos
> "Hall" <lafs...@nc.prestige.net> wrote in message
news:<S5q3a.8142$jR3.4...@news1.news.adelphia.net>...
> > Charos wrote in message
> > <_ne3a.354575$pDv.2...@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> > >"Hall" <lafs...@nc.prestige.net> wrote in message
> > >news:Yn61a.4197$jR3.2...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
*snip*
> > >Exactly...I've always been very alchemical with beliefs...I feel
there's
> > >value in every belief system...I find adhering to only one much too
> > >contraining.
>
> So basicaly what yiu are saying is, you want all the god bits but none
> of the hard bits?
I don't get what you mean here...did you mean "good" bits? I don't believe
in a physical manifestation of "god" as such...forces maybe...I would
describe it differently...I take aspects from beliefs which fit into and can
be assimilated into my perceptions on reality...I see value in every
religion/philosophy, it's a matter of separating for myself the fluff from
the valid...master morallity.
> > >
> > >> Good point, Charos!
> > >
> > >I love your universal positivity... ;)
> > >
> > >--
> > >*+_Charos_+*
> > >
> > >Official aCHU Professor of Sweet, sweet, lovin'
> >
> > "universal positivity". Thanks, Charos! I like that.
> >
> > How was your trip?
>
> Did he take drugs?
You have NO idea... ;P
--
*+_Charos_+*
Official Professor of Sweet, Sweet, Lovin' at aCHU
Visit
http://verb.noun.org
English in Action
Charos
We're not talking about a physical bridge however...we're talking about a
metaphysical belief system...as a note, I also know a number of Christians
who believe in Christ, but who don't accept the divinity of the bible.
--
*+_Charos_+*
Official Professor of Sweet, Sweet, Lovin' at aCHU
Visit
http://verb.noun.org
English in Action
Charos
news:7672315b.03021...@posting.google.com...
news:<MPG.18bab8a86...@news.rcn.com>...
> > On 17 Feb 2003 02:03:47 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.18a3c03bd...@news.enteract.com>...
> > > > On 30 Jan 2003 02:41:27 -0800, Michael V. SturnBacher wrote:
> > > > > Steven Schrader <digi...@enteract.com> wrote in message
news:<MPG.18987d1eb...@news.enteract.com>...
> > <snip>
> > > > > > > Oh come on. If you don't believe in the literal Christ you
cannot be
> > > > > > > a Christian.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *shrug* Not my belief, you'd have to take it up with them.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will if I can find them.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that it's all that common a belief (based on my own
experience
> > > > anyway).
> > >
> > > It shouldn't be. Let's face it, basially, if you don't believe in
> > > Chrsit, what is your so-called Christianity based on?
> >
> > It could be based on the values embodies in the concept of Christ.
>
> So what if I said I only had a relationship with the concept of a
> woman, would that make me married? Would I sitll be single?
You're mixing up literal reality with that of a metaphysical belief
system...I understand that you see this metaphysical belief system AS
literal reality, but that alone doesn't mean it's so.
> > > > > > > Otherwise, what is a Christian? Someone who goes to
> > > > > > > church?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They didn't go to church either.
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, now you have got me. Did they read the Bible at all?
> > > >
> > > > *nod*
> > >
> > > Let me rephrase that, do they understand the Bible at all? Do they
> > > believe it? What makes them call themselves Christians?
> >
> > Like I said already, it's not my belief. I don't know enough about it
to be
> > in a position to try and defend it. I was just pointing out that such a
> > belief does exist.
>
> It seems to not be able to be defended.
Hmmm, if we who don't hold these beliefs can defend them to some extent, I'm
sure that those people who DO hold them would have a much easier time.