"::Y-Not::" <$7+-Y-Not@here.com> wrote in
news:221220040221581498%$7+-Y-Not@here.com:
>> And I've got some news for YOU, because clearly YOU are the one who
>> is completely ignorant. The God Muslims pray to is not the same God
>> that I pray to. My God doesn't instruct me to kill people.
>
> God doesn't. Not for ANY people. But people do it in his name, quite
> often. Do you believe in the death penalty? How many Christian do?
How do you go from "people do it in [H]is name," to asking me if I "believe
in the death penalty?" I could tell you what my views are on the death
penalty, but I don't see how it would be relevant to Arabs flying jets into
American skyscrappers and killing thousands of innocent civillians in the
process, or Arabs turning themselves into human bombs and setting
themselves off in the most crowded places they can find, again killing as
many innocent civillians as they can. If you are honestly suggesting that
there is a correlation between the death penalty, and terrorism, then you
are completely out to lunch.
> If you want to get theologically technical, each of us who believes in
> God, believes in our unique individual concept of Him, that can never
> completely match that of anyone else.
That's human psychology you're talking about, not theology. There is only
one God, and He is unchanging. To understand who God is, all one has to do
is read their Holy Bible, both the Old and the New Testaments.
>> Nor does the
>> Christain faith indoctrinate its members with the idea that they
>> should go out and kill all nonbelievers either.
>
> Crusades.
> Christians HAVE engaged in holy wars.
> Do I have to remind you of Pizaro, Cortes and the like?
>
> And then, what about the Inquisition? Those of the Wiccan faith call
> it the "Burning Time". Do you need me to tell you why?
>
> S. Milosivich. President of Serbia. War criminal.
And dinosuars once roamed the earth as well. What's your point? That our
world has a history? That civilization has evolved? The problem is that
Christians and most of the rest of the world have long ago left the age of
barbarism, while the Muslims and some other religions apparently haven't.
>> The Muslims refer to
>> nonbelievers as infidels, and this religion instructs its followers
>> that they will be rewarded in Heaven if they kill infidels.
>
> The religion, no. Read the Koran.
> Some religious leaders, yes. But then, all faiths have their own
> number of crazies and cultists.
Where do you think these Muslim spiritual leaders derive their religious
teachings from, Y-Not? From talking unicorns? From the Koran! And it's
ludicrous to suggest that "all faiths have their own number of crazies and
cultists." It's impossible to be a Christian and a cultist at the same
time. The two are not interchangable. You're either one or the other. Do
you see where you went wrong here?
> So they call others Infidels. And Christians call others Pagans. Jews
> call others Goyim.
> What's the difference?
I'll gladly tell you what the difference is. An 'infidel' is a
nonbeliever. A 'Pagan' is one who worships many deities, as opposd to one
God. A 'Goyim' is derogatory term for a non-Jew. Can you see the
difference now?
>> So while I
>> believe there is only one Heavenly Father, He is certainly not the
>> God Muslims pray to, and I don't care what name they call Him.
>
> They believe in the Old Testament. They are the children if Ismael,
> first born of Abraham.
> You have much to learn about these things.
Why do arrogantly assume that I am any less educated on this subject, than
you are? Do you have any idea at all just how obnoxious and offensive it
is that you behave so presumptuously? Are you even aware that you speak to
virtually everyone in a condescending tone, pretty much all of the time?
It seems to me, that I have already taught you a few things, and I'm not
even half way through your reply yet. Not that it's a contest to me. But
it sure seems to be for you though.
>> So keep
>> defending Muslims and other anti-Christian and anti-Jewish religions,
>> Y- Not.
>
> I defend religions from those who are ignorant of them, but I do NOT
> approve of those who misuse and corrupt their religion.
Bravo. Finally, here's something you've said that I don't have a
disagreement with. The odds are so greatly opposed to this, it's almost
like winning the lottery.
>> And keep attacking Christians and Jews, while you're at it. Jesus
>> is the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes unto the Father
>> except by Jesus. Jesus was also a Jew, and the Jews are God's chosen
>> people.
>
> Ah, wait a minute, Jews don't believe in Jesus.
No kidding.
> By the way, his real name, pronounced phonetically with the English
> language as spoken in America, would be "Yeshua ben Yosef". (There is
> no "J" sound in Hebrew.) Translated from the Hebrew directly, without
> going through the Greek and Latin versions of his name, it is "Joshua,
> son of Joseph".
> "Christ" is NOT any part of his name, but it's a title. It is the
> Greek translation ("Christos") of the Hebrew word "Messiah". It means
> "One who will Deliver Us", or just "Deliverer". Unfortunately, such a
> person's exact duties aren't fully described in the Old Testament,
> which caused some difficulties because of Jesus' real Hebrew name of
> Joshua. The Jews of his time were suffering under the occupation of
> the Romans. They were looking for a militaristic Deliverer to free
> them from that oppression. Because the original Joshua, in the Bible,
> was the Hebrews' first general, and a brilliant military leader, they
> thought that Jesus was the embodiment of him. Many were quite puzzled
> and disappointed that what they got for a Messiah, was a man of peace,
> not war.
The above is a major digression, which has absolutely nothing to do with
the heart of this thread. It appears you are trying despeately to impress
upon me (and others) that you know something about religion. But
unfortunately, stating a few irrelevant facts and details, that anyone
could have looked up in the more than 12 hours it took you to respond to my
comments, does not impress me.
> For myself, I prefer the peace loving Jesus. :-)
Charismatics usually do. We all enjoy the feel-good aspects of
Christianity. But balance is necessary for a healthy life. It's not all
fire and brimstone, but it's not all peace, love, and happiness either.
Christianity is also about discipline.
>> The fact that they have suffered more persecution than any
>> other people, throughout their entire history, and that they are
>> still not only here, but strong, is proof of that. It doesn't matter
>> what I say, what U says, what Rich says, or what any other Christian
>> says, good or bad, here or anywhere else.
>
> Of course it matters what everybody says. If people didn't believe it
> mattered, things would be awfully quiet. :-)
The point was that nothing I, U, Rich, or any other Christian might say,
would be capaple of diminishing Christianity, as you have suggested more
than once.
>> And yes, Christians are imperfect human
>> beings, who are capable of making mistakes just like everyone else.
>
> This is true for the faithful of any religion. It's not the religion
> that causes people to exercise their imperfectness, but quite the
> opposite. Unfortunately, many times their religions fail to restrain
> them.
People are inherently imperfect, and some religions do preach messages that
are dangerous. The two are a potentially evil combination. Therefore, to
simply assume that all religions are wonderful, and equal to one another,
is extremely naive. Reality is, nothing could be farther from the truth.
> That some choose to misuse their religion to justify their bad deeds,
> it does NOT mean that all of that religion's followers agree with
> them, and the religion is NOT to blame for it's misuse.
A deed is either in accordance with one's religious teachings, or it isn't.
It's a black and white issue, and one that requires no debate.
> A religion can't speak out in it's own defense, when it's misused, so
> our words DO count very much, to set the record straight. But that
> isn't much effective against people who need to feel superior to other
> people, and need to think the worse of them because of that.
Christianity teaches love. humility, patience, and long suffering. On the
other hand, the Muslim faith teaches intolerance towards nonbelievers.
Much like the intolerance you have practiced in this thread with those you
don't believe in. Who's feeling superior to who here?
>> But
>> Christianity cannot be diminished, and it certainly can never die.
>> And of that, I have never been more sure of anything in my life.
>
> It will probably last your lifetime, but it's not realistic, and
> therefore futile, to predict a future that we will never see.
> The Bible forbids predicting the future, or fortune telling.
> But as for dying, that would depend on how you would define it. If we
> would define it as changing beyond what it's founders would recognize,
> or approve of, then we already have that, in most denominations.
Eschatology (end time prohecy) has been study of mine for many years.
There is much I can say on the subject of what the future holds, but none
of it would be relevant to this thread. Suffice to say, that the world
will never end, but it will change. And Jesus will return again to set up
his throne and rule the world forever. The hour of this nobody knows. Not
even Jesus. Only the Father does.
> Faith is from God. Religions are created by man, and are managed and
> mismanaged by man, with all of man's faults. Because of this, no
> religious "organization" is perfect, not even the one we belong to.
> Any organization can fall prey to evil people who can control it, and
> stupid and egocentric people who would misuse it for for their own
> ends. And any organization can, even unintentionally, loose it's way.
> So how do we prevent these bad things from happening, which they
> surely will if we DON'T try to prevent them? We have to make ourselves
> be aware of them, first. Having blind faith in God is a good thing.
> Having blind faith in an institution, will blind us to the bad things
> that can happen in it. If we can SEE things as they really are, we can
> move to correct the things that have changed for the worse.
God's first Commandment in the Holy Bible: "There shall be no other Gods
before me." (Exodus 20:3). To place your faith in anyone, or anything,
other than God Almighty Himself, is to practice idolatry. It is a sin, and
sin separates us from the Glory of God.
> I just created two new tags for this:
>
> "He who cannot believe that those above him could abuse him,
> is most sure to be abused."
Possibly, but not necessarily.
> And
>
> "He who puts his faith in God, is a lucky man.
> He who puts his faith in the works of man, needs to be VERY lucky."
It is a 'wise' man who places his faith in God, not a "lucky" man. And it
is a very 'unwise' individual who places his faith in man.
>> And just
>> in case you're wondering, I was not raised in the Christian faith. I
>> came to it on my own, in my adult life, and through much study and
>> soul searching. You will surely have your place in hell, Y-Not, if
>> you keep this up.
>
> I was raised in a number of faiths, and was required to have a
> comprehensive education in all of them. Doesn't it show? :-)
Ever heard the expression, "a jack of all trades and a master of none?"
There is such a thing as spreading yourself too thin. In order to really
study something to its fullest, you need to commit yourself to it fully. I
don't mean solely on an acedemic level, although that's a part of it. But
rather you marry it, or as some would say, "eat, sleep and breath it." In
other words, live it. There is also a tremendous difference between a text
book education, and a real life education. Reading a few books and even
passing a few academic tests doesn't make you an expert on anything. You
asked, I answered, and that's all I'm going to say on the subject.
> You have no idea what I'm doing, do you? I'm giving you an education,
> that's all. The same as what you would get in an institution of higher
> Christian religious training. I have received this, and you obviously
> have not. You want to deny history, and the reality of observable
> facts. When you do this, you are not able do defend your faith
> effectively, and just look foolish and nasty.
There you go being presumptuous again. I suggest that it is your arrogance
makes *you* look "foolish and nasty." It's horrible, and you should stop
talking to people this way. You might be fairly safe in this type of
Internet environment. But if you were to talk to people like this in
public, you might just find yourself in a heap of trouble, and possibly
some great physical pain.
>> You are unbelievably, and I think willfully offensive, and I
>> don't like you at all because of that. But instead of wanting you
>> dead, I am going to do what my faith instructs me to do, and that is
>> pray for your soul. It won't be easy for me, but I trust and have
>> faith that my Lord and Saviour will provide me with the strength and
>> the ability to do that. Good day to you.
>>
>> AA
>
> I do what I do here to achieve the honorable goals of education and
> the encouragement of personal improvement, of all who read my posts.
> And to try to mediate disputes. I've said this many times before. It's
> sort of my ministry. How many people do you know who have EVER stated
> why they post here?
That's real interesting. You and your gang essentially caused a war in
this thread, over a few Christians who expressed their feelings of outrage
over the interference by a minority few, who want to interfere with and
ultimately end Christmas as a public celebration. Of course neither Rich,
nor U, nor I, ever said anything about wanting to ram our Christian beliefs
down anyone's throat. To the contrary. We just don't want anyone ramming
their anti-Christian religion down our throats, which is what they'd
essentially be doing if they had their way in sabotaging Christmas. But
regardless, we were accused of all sorts of things by you and your
groupies, including us wanting to ram Christianity down everyone's throats.
Christianity is *my* ministry. I believe in spreading the Word, because
the Bible instructs that we should spread the Good News about the Gospel of
Jesus Christ. But nowhere does the Bible say anything about ramming it
down anyone's throat, and I would certainly never have any Christian
motivation, or even a personl desire to want to do that. But now here you
are talking about what you do in these groups as being a sort of personal
"ministry" to you. The kicker is that you are ramming *your* ministry down
everyone's throats. You've been doing it for a long time. You assume that
it's okay to lecture people, to attempt to educate people, to attack people
when they step out of line according to your personal standards and
beliefs, and you routinely preach to people in a condescending way. Not an
ounce of this is invited, or in most cases even warranted. What makes you
think that a grown man would appreciates being talked to as though he were
an uneducated 5 year old? Despite all that you claim to know, you are
about the most unwise, and childish individual in our groups. And of
course you have been instructing those who like and support you, to be as
you are. Talk about compounding a major problem.
> Of course I'm willful. Everyone who posts in these newsgroups IS.
> Sissies wouldn't make it this far.
The term I used to describe you wasn't "willful." It was "willfully
offensive." Meaning, I think you get a kick out of offending people. I
think you do it deliberately, knowing full well what the consequences will
be. The natural result of which is bound to be a major fight.
> You call me willfully offensive. Where is your fairness? Who is it
> here who is calling people offensive names? Not me! And who is the
> ONLY one here who is asking people NOT to do that? ME. Who is the ONLY
> person who is asking for people here to forgive one another? Just ME.
> So I put it to you, who is the ONLY person here who is actually
> following the teaching of Jesus? OK, I know that one is difficult for
> you, so I'll answer it. It's ME. It looks as if I'm the only TRUE
> Christian here. And what a real pity that is.
If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were Jesus Himself, by the way you
just described yourself. But your self-assessment is hardly true.
> In the light of this revelation, I suggest you go back and read all my
> posts again. With a new attitude, you may learn some things you
> missed.
"Revelation?" I hardly think so. I suggest you go back and read your own
posts again. And check the time stamps on them too, as you compare them to
the responses you got in return. Notice that you lectured people first.
Notice that you were critical of people first. Notice that you were
insulting first. Notice that despite all your preaching on tolerance, you
were completely intolerant of the feelings and opinions of those who you
didn't agree with, or just plain old didn't like. So much for tolerance.
Do unto others, Y-Not, as you would have them do unto you.
> There is something I did with a poster who was being disruptive, who
> decided to quote from his religious texts to support his behavior. He
> was Buddhist. From Thailand. I've lived there. I replied to his post
> with complete refutations for each of his quotes, in the philosophy of
> his own religion, showing him that he didn't know what he was talking
> about. I then challenged him to take everything we had written to each
> other, to a learned Buddhist monk of his choosing, who could read
> English well, to get his opinion on the issues. He stopped the
> disruption. I don't know if he did as I challenged him to do, but if
> he did, he would have been very surprised!
Wonderful, if in fact this is true. But it's not applicable here.
> So I now challenge you do do the same. Take all that has been written
> in these contentious threads, to an institute of higher religious
> learning, such as an established seminary, and have some professors
> look at it. Or to a professor in the religion department of a major
> university.
> I'm confident that I know who will be most supported there, because
> I've been one of them. :-)
> I don't know if you've noticed this about my posts, but I avoid
> including the primary subject matter of these newsgroups, in these
> kinds of posts. Now you know why. I often have others review my posts.
> That's how I learn to do better. You can get some review too.
We can all use a little perspective at times. What makes you think I
wouldn't personally invite it?
> A reminder:
> True Christians don't lie. Nor do they hate.
Is this for your benefit, or for mine? You appear to be calling me a liar,
and a person of hate. Are you going to suggest you didn't mean to attack
and insult me with this either? Are you being "willfully offensive" with
this, or are you just being plain stupid?
> I hope you are able to think about some of these things that I've
> written here, in the spirit of open mindedness.
>
> Good luck! :-)
The implication here, is that my mind is closed, and that I'll need "good
luck" to open it. Are you going to suggest you didn't mean to attack and
insult me with this also? Are you being "willfully offensive" with this,
or are you just being plain stupid?
> Y Not
>
>
> PS.
> I've been doing way too much typing for my health, with this issue.
> I'll continue with this if you want me to, but only if you will let
> yourself do some actual thinking, and you try to act like a Christian
> gentleman. Otherwise, I'll just be defending others from abuse, and
> using what typing ability I have left to post some psychological
> things I had promissed someone I would do. They'll be mostly about
> anger management. You are welcome to participate, if you can behave
> yourself.
Now you've suggested that I don't think, and that I am not a "Christian
gentleman." Are you going to suggest you didn't mean to attack and insult
me with these words of yours? Are you being "willfully offensive," or are
you just being plain stupid?
If you're not looking for a constant battle, then try *thinking* a little
yourself, before you react and offer your opinions. And remember, not
everything that is said in our groups requires an editorial from *you*.
And sometimes, if you really want to be helpful, the very best thing you
can say is *nothing at all*.
> "Opening the mind can open the heart.
> Opening the heart can open the mind."
And with that, I am officially done with this thread. I will not be
responding again, so don't bother answering any of my questions. They were
designed to provoke thought only. My time is precious to me, and I have
much better things to do than fight with the lot of you. I believe Rich,
U, and I, have stated our cause, and our beliefs, and it is doubtful that
any of us could add much more to this without repeating ourselves. Have
your opinions, and we'll have ours. Good day.
AA
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 |
|