Jesus-centered Christianity?

[LuckyTheDog]

Any theologians out there?

It seems to me that the Christian right is, more or less, a kind of Old Testament cult. The religious "left" should, I think, should counter that by talking openly about a "Jesus-centered" Christian theology based on the actual teachings attributed to Christ.

I think this could be an easy sell and simple enough for people to grasp. You'd just have to get people to concentrate on the New Testament and the progressive, compassionate words printed in red therein.

It is not a new idea, I know. But I have never seen the idea of a counter-fundie message framed exactly in this way.

But I am no theologian. I don't have the religious "street cred" to pull it off. So, if there are any trained ministers or theologians out there who want to "steal" this idea and take credit for it, please do.

[kliljedahl]

1. me neither, but it's a good idea

Wonder why it's always the 10 commandments (old testament & moses) & nothing from the new testament like the sermon on the mount?


Keith’s Barbeque Central

[LuckyTheDog]

13. Try to use the phrases...

... "Jesus-centered Christianity" and "New-Testament Christian" several times in the next few days. Work them into message-board posts.

I really think we could use those phrases to fram the religious right as what the really are: out of the mainstream of society and of Jesus' teachings.

[Inland]

2. Let's put it this way.

The Fristians never ask for the Beatitudes (or any New TEst. tract) to be posted in the courthouse.

They find some single sentence in Leviticus rather than cite Jesus.

So yes.

[NAO]

3. Doesn't take a theologian to see that the RR is wrong on social AND econ

If we were trully a Christian Nation, things would be EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of those supported by the so-called "religious right".

IF we were a truly Christian Nation, we would NOT have elected Bush nor would we tolerate ANY of the SOCIAL POLICY nor the ECONOMIC POLICY of the GOP, both of which are opposed by the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The "Christian Right" has got it WRONG on both the "values agenda" AND the right wing economic/abolition of social programs agenda.

On Being a Christian Nation

Part I: Jesus vs. The Social Conservatives - Culture Wars in the Time of Christ

- Let Him Who Is Without Sin Condemn the First Gay (John 8:3-11)
- Foreign Objects in the Eyes, or Jesus Teaches Us How (and More Importantly, to Whom) to Apply Biblical Laws (Matthew 7:1-3)

Part II: Jesus vs. The Economic Conservatives - Did Jesus Teach Personal or Social Responsibility?
- Separating the Sheep Nations from the Goat Nations, Based on Domestic Economic Policy - Subsistence Programs (Matthew 25:31-46)
- Not My Responsibility? The Pharisee and the Levite Had Excuses, too (Luke 10:30-37)

Part III: Putting Parts I and II Together - On Being a Christian Nation
- What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply to Nations and to Government Policy?
- What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply only to Individuals?

**********************

Part I: Jesus vs. The Social Conservatives - Culture Wars in the Time of Christ

Let Him Who Is Without Sin Condemn the First Gay (John 8:3-11)

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

“No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

Foreign Objects in the Eyes, or Jesus Teaches Us How (and More Importantly, to Whom) to Apply Biblical Laws (Matthew 7:1-3)

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Part II: Jesus vs. The Economic Conservatives - Did Jesus Teach Personal or Social Responsitility?

Seperating the Sheep Nations from the Goat Nations, Based on Domestic Economic Policy - Subsistence Programs (Matthew 25:31-46)

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

"Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Not My Responsibility? The Priest and the Levite Didn't Think So, Either (Luke 10:30-37)

In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Part III: Putting Parts I and II Together - On Being a Christian Nation

What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply to Nations and to Government Policy? What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply only to Individuals?

The Religious Right frequently emphasizes that God will Judge us "as a Nation". They combine this notion with their condemnation of certain behaviors of individuals, and this is the basis of the "culture wars" and the "values vote". They rally for the government to pass laws that uphold (their version of) Biblical standards. They want to ban gay marriage. They maintain that as Christians, we should not only observe God's commandments, but enact them as governmental legislation.

Curiously, when passages such as Matthew 25:31-46 are discussed, they quickly retreat from the notion that Christs teachings should be enacted as government legislation. They assert that charity - helping the poor, feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, and so forth - should be left to individuals and to the churches. They do not believe that these divine directives should be on the national agenda, nor do they believe that welfare and other subsistence programs are properly the duty of the federal government.

So if it's about condemning sin, they are in favor of shaping government and passing laws to mirror God's directives...but when it's about taking care of 'the least of these', they think that it should be left to individuals, that it is not the proper place of the governmetn to pass laws to enforce these divine directives. Now that would seem to be the exact opposite of what Jesus plainly taught in the passages cited above (Judge not, let him who is without sin, etc). Somehow, those on the Religious Right have got it wrong on both counts, and have both issues completely backwards.

They are working to have the values agenda (which is nothing more than the condemning of others based on the Laws of Moses) built into the structure of government...but when you talk about building the helping of the poor, the feeding of the sick into the structure of government, they immediately launch into right wing talking points about how THAT is not the proper role of government, but should be left to private individuals and charities.

Now the words of Jesus quoted above indicate, beyond any doubt, that the exact opposite is the correct course in both cases. Adherence to the Laws of Moses SHOULD be left to private individuals and at most, the churches. We have been commanded by Jesus NOT to engage in the moral condemnation of others. Conversely, we have been commanded to feed, clothe and shelter those in need.

If Christians REALLY want a Christian nation, they should vote for a ban on the condemning of sinners (unless of course you are 100% sin free, in which case feel free to blast them) AND they should provide a MANDATE for social programs.

[NAO]

4. Doesn't take a theologian to see that the RR is wrong on social AND econ

If we were trully a Christian Nation, things would be EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of those supported by the so-called "religious right".

IF we were a truly Christian Nation, we would NOT have elected Bush nor would we tolerate ANY of the SOCIAL POLICY nor the ECONOMIC POLICY of the GOP, both of which are opposed by the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The "Christian Right" has got it WRONG on both the "values agenda" AND the right wing economic/abolition of social programs agenda.

On Being a Christian Nation

Part I: Jesus vs. The Social Conservatives - Culture Wars in the Time of Christ

- Let Him Who Is Without Sin Condemn the First Gay (John 8:3-11)
- Foreign Objects in the Eyes, or Jesus Teaches Us How (and More Importantly, to Whom) to Apply Biblical Laws (Matthew 7:1-3)

Part II: Jesus vs. The Economic Conservatives - Did Jesus Teach Personal or Social Responsibility?
- Separating the Sheep Nations from the Goat Nations, Based on Domestic Economic Policy - Subsistence Programs (Matthew 25:31-46)
- Not My Responsibility? The Pharisee and the Levite Had Excuses, too (Luke 10:30-37)

Part III: Putting Parts I and II Together - On Being a Christian Nation
- What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply to Nations and to Government Policy?
- What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply only to Individuals?

**********************

Part I: Jesus vs. The Social Conservatives - Culture Wars in the Time of Christ

Let Him Who Is Without Sin Condemn the First Gay (John 8:3-11)

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

“No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

Foreign Objects in the Eyes, or Jesus Teaches Us How (and More Importantly, to Whom) to Apply Biblical Laws (Matthew 7:1-3)

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Part II: Jesus vs. The Economic Conservatives - Did Jesus Teach Personal or Social Responsitility?

Seperating the Sheep Nations from the Goat Nations, Based on Domestic Economic Policy - Subsistence Programs (Matthew 25:31-46)

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

"Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Not My Responsibility? The Priest and the Levite Didn't Think So, Either (Luke 10:30-37)

In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”

Part III: Putting Parts I and II Together - On Being a Christian Nation

What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply to Nations and to Government Policy? What Parts of the Bible Should we Apply only to Individuals?

The Religious Right frequently emphasizes that God will Judge us "as a Nation". They combine this notion with their condemnation of certain behaviors of individuals, and this is the basis of the "culture wars" and the "values vote". They rally for the government to pass laws that uphold (their version of) Biblical standards. They want to ban gay marriage. They maintain that as Christians, we should not only observe God's commandments, but enact them as governmental legislation.

Curiously, when passages such as Matthew 25:31-46 are discussed, they quickly retreat from the notion that Christs teachings should be enacted as government legislation. They assert that charity - helping the poor, feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, and so forth - should be left to individuals and to the churches. They do not believe that these divine directives should be on the national agenda, nor do they believe that welfare and other subsistence programs are properly the duty of the federal government.

So if it's about condemning sin, they are in favor of shaping government and passing laws to mirror God's directives...but when it's about taking care of 'the least of these', they think that it should be left to individuals, that it is not the proper place of the governmetn to pass laws to enforce these divine directives. Now that would seem to be the exact opposite of what Jesus plainly taught in the passages cited above (Judge not, let him who is without sin, etc). Somehow, those on the Religious Right have got it wrong on both counts, and have both issues completely backwards.

They are working to have the values agenda (which is nothing more than the condemning of others based on the Laws of Moses) built into the structure of government...but when you talk about building the helping of the poor, the feeding of the sick into the structure of government, they immediately launch into right wing talking points about how THAT is not the proper role of government, but should be left to private individuals and charities.

Now the words of Jesus quoted above indicate, beyond any doubt, that the exact opposite is the correct course in both cases. Adherence to the Laws of Moses SHOULD be left to private individuals and at most, the churches. We have been commanded by Jesus NOT to engage in the moral condemnation of others. Conversely, we have been commanded to feed, clothe and shelter those in need.

If Christians REALLY want a Christian nation, they should vote for a ban on the condemning of sinners (unless of course you are 100% sin free, in which case feel free to blast them) AND they should provide a MANDATE for social programs.

[NAO]

5. See Katherine Yurica's Excellent Bible Based Analysis of Bush Agenda

Bloodguilty Churches:
Why Bush’s Agenda Is Immoral and an Abomination to God
http://www.yuricareport.com/Religion/TheBloodGuiltyChurches.html

Thesis of "Bloodguilty Churches"

George W. Bush, his administration, the Republican controlled congress as well as the Republican Party itself, and most of the churches in America (including evangelical, Southern Baptist, Pentecostal and Roman Catholic), stand indicted—not by men—not by this writer—but by the very Holy Scriptures the religious-right and Mr. Bush profess to uphold. Weighed against the Bible, the Bush actions are not only morally corrupt—they are unchristian and unbiblical to the core. In this essay, the Bush agenda is weighed on the scale of God’s standards and it is found wanting.

Contents of "Bloodguilty Churches"

In the Beginning
Invade Iraq or What's a Preemptive Strike?
Lies About the Threat of War
What Does the Bible Say About Preemptive Strikes?
The War Fairs
What Does the Bible Say About Profiting from War?
Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo
Does Mr. Bush Have the Moral High Ground?
Bush's Agenda for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid
What Does the Bible Say About How a Nation Must Treat the Poor and the Sick?
Mr. Bush's Immigration Plans
Deregulate Health and Safety and Environmental Laws
What Does the Bible Say About Rigging Devices?
Mr. Bush’s “Justice” Versus the Bible’s Justice
The Development of the Biblical Justice System
Be Careful Not to Commit Judicial Murders: The Texas Clemency Memos
Is Mr. Bush's Tort Reform Biblical?
The Bible's Criminal and Civil Code System
What Does the Bible Say About Abortions?
GOP Operatives as Slanderers and Hooligans, Scorner's and Ridiculers
What's Wrong With Today's Churches and 'Christians'?
Profile of the Man God Hates
End Notes

Bloodguilty Churches:
Why Bush’s Agenda Is Immoral and an Abomination to God
http://www.yuricareport.com/Religion/TheBloodGuiltyChurches.html

You can read the entire essay online at the above link or buy the book from Amazon.com

[silverlib]

6. I think it is happening...

Jim Wallis, founder of www.sojo.com, operates out of D.C. and it is my understanding that he has been invited to the table of several top Democratic politicians. He is the author of a best selling book "God's Politics," which addresses the exact issues, in a theological way, that you mention.

I hope it works. There was something said by Kerry recently in a speech to the effect that the Republicans didn't know much about religion - and he gave examples. Sounds like it came directly from Wallis.

[LuckyTheDog]

7. I hope they make it SIMPLE

I think we need to break it down to a bumper sticker: "Read the words in red." If the "Jesus-centered" camp comes off as a bunch of egghead academic theologians, they are sunk.

I don't know enough about liberal theologians to know how they are framing things. So, I am not saying that they are being too complex. I just hope they are not.

I'll look up Jim Wallis.

[Bluerthanblue]

22. Jesus never ok'd killing ANYONE-

Fundementalists, who 'claim' to hold to a 'literal' inerrant bible, try to twist his fury at the moneychangers outside the temple as His 'ok'ing violence- but He DID say, "Those who live by the sword, will die by it" while stopping one of his disciples from fighting for Jesus life in the while being taken to see the equivelient of bin laden or Hussien by well armed 'Roman Insurgents'-

Talk is cheap- walking can hurt, and sometimes cost you your life-

"Do good to those who hurt you" Jesus Christ
"Who is my neighbor?"-

Jesus has no home in the hearts of many who call themselves 'religious'- and 'right'-

[hecate77]

24. Love everyone, no killing - my take on Jesus' message, as a non-

Christian. Pretty simple, eh? One reason I am no longer a Christian is because I saw it become hate everyone, and then kill them. I can dig Jesus, though, without being a Christian.

[johnnomac]

26. "Non-Christian"

There are a fair number of people I've encountered who don't call themselves "Christians" for that reason, but still follow Christ's teachings, and look to him for salvation. I wouldn't count myself among that number, but I certainly see their point of view.

[Tux]

27. Me 2

I came to the conclusion Christianity wasn't for me. Now I call myself a Deist. Jesus' lessons of loving God and taking care of others is what I keep from those days.

Instead of Jesus centered, why not say "red ink for Christ's blood". Seems fitting that the red ink will save them from Hell or purple monkeys. Could get at least a few to think for a second.

[eallen]

8. You need a snappy slogan. How's this: What Would Jesus Do?

The problem isn't that the religious right doesn't read the New Testament, but that they read it differently than you do. In case you haven't noticed, the Bible isn't exactly a text book. It doesn't have any essays. There aren't passages -- to my knowledge -- that focus on definition and clarification of the important concepts. Instead, there are parables and stories and rambling epistles. Paul went to Athens, but he didn't seem to learn much there.

So a right-wing fundamentalist reads the New Testament, and develops one image of Jesus, helped by the sermons and study guides he favors. You read the New Testament, and develop a totally different image.

Now you two are primed to argue theology.

:eyes:

[pansypoo53219]

9. can't agree more.

the talibornigans may have this profound relationship with jesus, but they sure ain't listening to him.

[autorank]

10. Here is a GREAT source for Jesus-centered Christianity!!!

IMHO, the very best source of Jesus centered Christianity is The Gospel of Jesus by Stephen Mitchell. Mitchell makes sense of Jesus as teacher through scholarship and analysis. The results are great:

"Once the sectarian passages are left out, we can recognize that Jesus speaks in harmony the the supreme teachings of all the great religions....when words arise from the deepest kind of spiritual experience, from the heart pure of doctrines and beliefs, they transend religious boundaries, and we speak to all people, make and female, bond and free, Greek and Jew."

This is a great work of scholarship and spirituality and helps anyone who reads it reconnect with the promise of Christianity.

THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JESUS: A New Translation and Guide to His Essential Teachings for Believers and Unbelievers. Stephen Mitchell.

Well, what are you waiting for:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060923210/103-7878435-8367857?v=glance

[LuckyTheDog]

12. Thanks

My hope is that the phrases "Jesus-centered Christianity" and "New-Testament Christian" enter the general lexicon.

[autorank]

14. Welcome to DU!!! I think this phrase is great.

I do not go to church but I like this book and the direction it takes things. I find this more accessible and it is actually a pleasure to read! :hi:

[Tux]

11. Won't take

Strauss, the founder of neocons, was a Jew that hated liberals. He used the Torah as a means to kill liberals. Christians, especially uneducated ones, fell for the new emphasis on OT and ignored Jesus. The "once saved always saved" crap appeared so they can ignore what Jesus taught and focus on hate. My Catholic neighbor told me that some Pope declared that not following Jesus' teachings will send you to Hell. Anyways, throwing out academics won't help. We need Southern blue collar guys to show them that following Jesus and not the drunken Moses (dropped the tablets while being hammered)is a good thing and get them out of those childish evangelical churches.

[autorank]

15. Good for you. I agree totally!

"We need Southern blue collar guys to show them that following Jesus..."

[Bluerthanblue]

23. how bout? "let's put "Christ" back into "Christianity"?....

seems he's become nothing more than a 'catch phrase' for those who want what they want, a way to 'justify' any thing in the name of 'god'.

[johnnomac]

29. I like!

I frequent a Christian youth message board, and I think I may use that phrase there. Thanks!

[NickofTime]

16. Only True Jesus!

Evil Christians, like evil Bush, distort Jesus. Here is the truth:

Isa in Islam balances belief in Isa (Jesus) with the religion of Islam. Allah has provided every Muslim (Christian) salvation from hell through the Messiah’s blood sacrifice. Jesus in Islam: Isa al Masih (Mesih) the Muslim's Messiah.

Embrace Islam & reject Evil Bush!

[beam me up scottie]

17. Um, yeah.

Whatever you say, dude.
I'll be over in the damned to hell group if anybody's looking for me.
:P

[Tux]

18. Er

Sure OK. Can you provide a link for that?

[beam me up scottie]

19. no no no no no no no no

PLEASE NO LINKS!
I really don't want to know where that comes from, do you?
:scared:

[Tux]

20. Why not?

According to Christians we're going to Hell anyways. SO what if another religious person yells that? "You're going to hell!" is now our national motto.

[beam me up scottie]

21. You're right.

I'm damned for eternity, maybe I can at least get a window seat.
Do you think his hell is hotter than the one we're usually threatened with? I need to know what to pack...
:evilgrin:

[dattaswamI]

25. JESUS AS HUMAN INCARNATION

GOD (HOLY SPIRIT) AND HUMAN INCARNATION.

STATEMENT: - MATHEW 10: 40

Lord Jesus was the human incarnation of the Holy Spirit. The human body of Holy Jesus is like the metallic wire, which was all over, pervaded by the Holy Spirit. Veda says ‘Antarbahischa’ which means that the Holy Spirit pervades all over the body of Human Incarnation. Wherever you touch the wire the electric shock is given. Similarly the entire human body of Holy Jesus is holy. The holiness is the nature of Holy Spirit just like the shock is the property of electricity. As the electricity cannot be separated from the wire, the Holy Spirit cannot be separated from the Holy Jesus. So here the Holy Spirit is the Holy Jesus. Holy Jesus refers this Holy Spirit as His Father. He tells that He was sent by His father as a messenger. Though He and His father are one and the same, He speaks like this for which there is a practical reason i.e.; every human being repels with another human being. A man cannot accept another man as God due to Jealousy and Egoism. Bhagavatgita says, “A man will insult Me when I come here in human form (Avajananti mam….)”. For this purpose Holy Jesus wants Himself to be called only as the messenger of the Holy Spirit by the disciples whenever He is introduced to the public. If He tells the truth the egoistic public will not hear even what He preaches and will reject Him. Therefore He is telling His disciples to introduce Him as a messenger only. Of course, the disciples are really the messengers of Holy Jesus.

Holy Spirit has taken over the human body of Holy Jesus and pervaded all over the body to preach the divine knowledge to this world. The same Holy Spirit is sending the disciples for the propagation of the Divine knowledge. Both the body of Holy Jesus and the disciples are instruments of the Holy Spirit chosen for different purposes. The Holy Spirit is preaching through the body of Holy Jesus and is propagating the divine knowledge through disciples. Therefore if you respect the disciple you are respecting the Holy Spirit indirectly. Though both the instruments exist like this, the Holy Spirit is present in Jesus and is not present in the disciples. Due to this difference the disciple is an indirect instrument and the direct instrument is Holy Jesus.

The disciple propagates the divine knowledge after hearing from the Holy Jesus. Therefore when such disciple is respected, Holy Jesus is respected first and then the Holy Spirit. But among the disciples there may be some person who cannot repeat what Holy Jesus exactly preached. In such a case the Holy Spirit will take over the body of that disciple and preaches (Mathew 10: 20). Such a disciple differs from Holy Jesus because the Holy Spirit resides in that disciple for some time only where as the Holy Spirit resides in Jesus all the time.

Holy Jesus is telling that He is the messenger of the Holy Spirit and He is also telling that the disciple is His messenger. He is giving the same status to Himself and the disciple by telling like this. The reason is that some disciple may become jealous in future if He says that He Himself is the Holy Spirit where as the disciple is His messenger only. The difference in the status may bring jealousy. Therefore He is maintaining the equal status so that no devotee becomes jealous of Jesus in the future. Due to jealousy the disciple may slip from Holy Jesus.

When He says that He is only the messenger, this shows the humble and submissiveness of Holy Jesus. He wants His disciples to be humble and submissive to the Holy Spirit through out their lives. For this purpose He sets Himself as an ideal. The Holy Spirit present in the human body of Holy Jesus is the essence of true and infinite knowledge as Veda says “Satyam Jnanam Anantam Brahma….”. Humbleness and submissiveness are the fruits of the Divine Knowledge. Therefore the humbleness and submissiveness are the qualities of the Holy Spirit itself. This means whatever Holy Jesus speaks is the statement of the Holy Spirit only.

www.universal-spirituality.org

[Pacifist Patriot]

28. You have an excellent point but I'd take it a step further.

The religious right is an Old Testament cult that cherry picks the Old Testament. Their vision of God is certainly one of condemnation and judgment rather than compassion and concern. Although judgment is featured in the NT and compassion appears in the OT, the difference is rather glaring. Their cherry picking tends to ignore the evolution of God throughout the OT and focuses on the hateful rather than charitable aspects.

Then we have the difference between the Gospels/teachings of Jesus and the conversion hysteria of Paul. Paul's interpretations are often appealing to the religious right and I think this is where they derive their sense of Christianity. Too often Christianity is a religion about Jesus rather than a religion of Jesus.

I do talk about the distinction from the pulpit, but with my audience I'm preaching to the choir. Get me a speaking engagement at a particularly conservative Southern Baptist church and see how fast I can run from the pitchforks.

[Nothing Without Hope]

30. GOOD NEWS - see this thread on a new progressive Christian organization:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=226x2359
Thread title: "Good news - a new progressive Christian organization to OPPOSE the..."

(Note that its OP links to a current thread on this in GD-Politics. And don't miss the flash movie!)