Jump to content
Political Forums
MiddleClassCentrist

How do Conservative Christians ignore that their saviour

Recommended Posts

Shady    157

As I've said before, that sounds an awful lot like the religious who tell people what they should believe.

I can understand criticizing the position, but to expect them not to hold the position is another thing entirely.

Exactly. Plus, there's nothing funnier and more ironic than proselytizing athiests! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kimmy    61

Come on, kimmy - you're smarter than that. I'm clearly not "bent" on the idea that non-Christians might have opinions about "Christian scripture." I've made it quite clear that it's not the opinions about "scripture" that I've been commenting on. Again, it's not comments on "Christian theology" that I've been responding to. It's the idea that someone who believes there's no difference between Jesus and Pierce Hawk, that there's no difference between Jesus and a fictional character, would presume to tell us "what Jesus would do." That is presumptuous. Or something.

"Pierce Hawk"?? I said Hawkeye Pierce. Regardless, the point was to illustrate that contrary to what you said earlier, speculating as to how a character would handle a situation is a hypothetical exercise that does not require that the character being discussed be a historical figure. During the Bush years I recall more than once reading people writing about how America would be different if Jed Bartlet were president. The people were well aware that Jed Bartlet was a fictional character.

By comparing them both as "characters out of a book," no more, no less, one is in effect saying there is no difference. One is made up, thus their characteristics are made up, the other isn't.

The characteristics of both are well documented in the literature through which we know these characters.

My point is that I didn't say anything about atheists ASKING what Jesus would do, as you claimed.

And in case you're unaware, WWJD is a rhetorical question.

A rhetorical question is one to which the answer is obvious, like "Is the Pope Catholic?"

If Christians are called on to follow Christ's example, then WWJD? is more than a rhetorical question, it's a guiding principle. His book provides a set of core principles that should allow people to answer the question WWJD when they're faced with decisions.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....If Christians are called on to follow Christ's example, then WWJD? is more than a rhetorical question, it's a guiding principle. His book provides a set of core principles that should allow people to answer the question WWJD when they're faced with decisions.

Not when there decisions are influenced by other constitutional and political considerations. WWJD? also ignores the existing influence of Judeo-Christian beliefs on existing common law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kimmy    61

No ofense kimmy, but it's really not your place to tell people why or how they hold their positions. Everyone has the FREEDOM to use faith, or not use faith, however they want.

If they choose to do so, then faith is on the table for discussion.

You can't go around saying "Jesus would want this, Jesus would want that, vote for me and send me money so that I can do what Jesus would want" and then turn around and say "Hey, stop persecuting me for my faith!" when people ask whether it's really what Jesus would want.

As I've said before, that sounds an awful lot like the religious who tell people what they should believe.

I can understand criticizing the position, but to expect them not to hold the position is another thing entirely.

I'm not telling anybody what they should believe. But if people want to make their faith a public issue, they can't complain when people talk about their faith.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....If Christians are called on to follow Christ's example, then WWJD? is more than a rhetorical question, it's a guiding principle. His book provides a set of core principles that should allow people to answer the question WWJD when they're faced with decisions.

Not when their decisions are influenced by other constitutional and political considerations. WWJD? also ignores the existing influence of Judeo-Christian beliefs on existing common law.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shady    157

You can't go around saying "Jesus would want this, Jesus would want that, vote for me and send me money so that I can do what Jesus would want" and then turn around and say "Hey, stop persecuting me for my faith!" when people ask whether it's really what Jesus would want.

I haven't heard many claim that their tax policy, or entitlement reform policy, or foreign policy, etc is guided by what Jesus would want. Only from you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kimmy    61

Exactly. Plus, there's nothing funnier and more ironic than proselytizing athiests! :lol:

And I'm not proselytizing, I'm asking why some Christians don't act like they've read anything about the guy their religion is named after.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

"Pierce Hawk"?? I said Hawkeye Pierce.

Wow. That must have been really confusing for you that I inadvertently reversed the names. So sorry. :(

Regardless, the point was to illustrate that contrary to what you said earlier, speculating as to how a character would handle a situation is a hypothetical exercise that does not require that the character being discussed be a historical figure. During the Bush years I recall more than once reading people writing about how America would be different if Jed Bartlet were president. The people were well aware that Jed Bartlet was a fictional character.

Good for them recognizing the obvious. But again, Jesus isn't fictional to Christians, hence my point.

The characteristics of both are well documented in the literature through which we know these characters.

Jesus isn't a character, and that you see him as such, and think your POV is meaningful to a Christian as such, is what I find odd. There is a difference between projecting what a character would do and what a real person would do.

A rhetorical question is one to which the answer is obvious, like "Is the Pope Catholic?"

Ummmm. No. The answer isn't always obvious. For example, you claimed Jesus would "beat the crap" out of the Christians you were criticizing, or some such thing.

If Christians are called on to follow Christ's example, then WWJD? is more than a rhetorical question, it's a guiding principle. His book provides a set of core principles that should allow people to answer the question WWJD when they're faced with decisions.

Yes, but it's not for you to force it on them, especially when you don't follow that principle yourself. It's a way of life, which involves more than "reading about a character in a book."

At any rate, I do find it odd when atheists are as insistent at pushing their views and expecting others to act on their beliefs as the Christians they are criticizing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eyeball    628

Not when their decisions are influenced by other constitutional and political considerations.

Why?

WWJD? also ignores the existing influence of Judeo-Christian beliefs on existing common law.

No it doesn't, if anything WWJD? underscores them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shady    157

And I'm not proselytizing, I'm asking why some Christians don't act like they've read anything about the guy their religion is named after.

-k

And I'm guessing that those people would disagree with you. Now what? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kimmy    61

And I'm guessing that those people would disagree with you. Now what? :rolleyes:

Ok, so... based on what we know about Jesus, do you believe that building a 100 foot long, 20 foot high salt-water exotic fish aquarium in the foyer of your megachurch is something Jesus would approve of?

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

Because decisions are ultimatey decided for both pragmatic and ideological reasons, if only because it is not practical to do otherwise.

No it doesn't, if anything WWJD? underscores them.

Moot and redundant...why ask WWJD? about murder when the answer is already codified in law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kimmy    61

Jesus isn't a character, and that you see him as such, and think your POV is meaningful to a Christian as such, is what I find odd. There is a difference between projecting what a character would do and what a real person would do.

Not really. We can't ask him in person (although Herman Cain can) and we've never met him, so all we can really go on is what has been written about him. That's all the information we have to answer that question.

Ummmm. No. The answer isn't always obvious.

That's why it's not a rhetorical question.

For example, you claimed Jesus would "beat the crap" out of the Christians you were criticizing, or some such thing.

I did clarify that I was speaking figuratively and that he would "smack the shit out of them" using words, not physical violence. And based on what we know of his beliefs, I think there's no doubt that he would have nothing less than a stinging rebuke for a Fred Phelps or Lou Engle. Does anybody actually disagree?

Yes, but it's not for you to force it on them, especially when you don't follow that principle yourself.

If people wish to proclaim their righteousness, their righteousness will come under scrutiny. I'm pretty sure that Jesus said something to that effect in his biography, and I'm also pretty sure that he told admonished people to not go about proclaiming their righteousness in the first place.

It's a way of life, which involves more than "reading about a character in a book."

At any rate, I do find it odd when atheists are as insistent at pushing their views and expecting others to act on their beliefs as the Christians they are criticizing.

I've not pushed atheist beliefs on anyone in this thread; on the contrary I've suggested that Christians ought to live up to their own beliefs.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I've not pushed atheist beliefs on anyone in this thread; on the contrary I've suggested that Christians ought to live up to their own beliefs.

But that's just pushing your own brand of righteousness. There is a Christian ad campaign running in the USA right now that debunks judgement of Christianity based on the actions of some Christians.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

That's why it's not a rhetorical question.

Yeah, it is. It's meant as personal introspection; it's not meant for others to answer.

I've not pushed atheist beliefs on anyone in this thread; on the contrary I've suggested that Christians ought to live up to their own beliefs.

:lol:

I see. So you're the atheist Christian police. Gotcha.

You're determining what their beliefs are/should be - based on your beliefs; and expecting them to live up to it. That is pushing your beliefs on them.

Edited by American Woman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dre    49
How about we all stop asking what Jesus would do, say, or think on a given issue.

Because holding someone to the standard they claim to embrace is inevitable in a philosophical debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

Because holding someone to the standard they claim to embrace is inevitable in a philosophical debate.

Who decides what that standard is? One can ask WWJD? and leave it to the the person to reflect upon, but to tell them what he would do, which is really only what they believe he would do, and expect them to follow their take on it, is simply telling them what to do. There's no "debate" involved in that: it's holding the other person to their own standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cybercoma    17

By comparing them both as "characters out of a book," no more, no less, one is in effect saying there is no difference. One is made up, thus their characteristics are made up, the other isn't.

No one said that either. Where do you get this stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cybercoma    17

????????????

"Making claims" about what Jesus would do is not "asking" what Jesus would do. Do you honestly not know the difference between making a claim and asking a question?????????

So all those Christians that go around asking WWJD? are really just confused? If you answer the question, you're making a claim. If one can't infer what Jesus would do, then asking the question is pretty moot. As soon as one infers or Christians make an implication as to what Jesus would do, a claim is being made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

So all those Christians that go around asking WWJD? are really just confused? If you answer the question, you're making a claim. If one can't infer what Jesus would do, then asking the question is pretty moot. As soon as one infers or Christians make an implication as to what Jesus would do, a claim is being made.

You answer the question yourself. FOR yourself. That's what "personal introspection" is. If you can't understand that, you're beyond the time I'm willing to devote to helping you understand. But do have a nice day anyway. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cybercoma    17

You didn't say personal introspection in that post and you called it a rhetorical question in a later post. Now you're saying it's a question for personal introspection. That's not exactly the case, since the question asks what Jesus would do. How does a person figure out what Jesus would do anyway, AW? Perhaps by what was written about Him in the Bible? Or do they figure it out some other way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

You didn't say personal introspection in that post and you called it a rhetorical question in a later post. Now you're saying it's a question for personal introspection. That's not exactly the case, since the question asks what Jesus would do. How does a person figure out what Jesus would do anyway, AW? Perhaps by what was written about Him in the Bible? Or do they figure it out some other way?

How they figure it out isn't relevant; that they figure it out is. In other words, it's not for you or anyone else to decide and then demand that others live up to it. That would be expecting others to live up to your beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shady    157

Ok, so... based on what we know about Jesus, do you believe that building a 100 foot long, 20 foot high salt-water exotic fish aquarium in the foyer of your megachurch is something Jesus would approve of?

-k

Well, are you and he taking into conisderation the charity work and aid such churches provide in the community and around the world? Are you and he taking into consideration the individual members charity work in the community and around the world? Has Jesus studied up on the ways of micro-economics, and that building a so-called megachurch and big aquarium translates into good paying construction jobs in the community? Will he know that such building projects increase the property tax revenue into the community, as well as its home values? Tax revenue that's used to provide services. See, this is why asking or applying your interpretation of what Jesus would do in today's terms can be completely asinine. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BubberMiley    42

How about we all stop asking what Jesus would do, say, or think on a given issue.

No ofense kimmy, but it's really not your place to tell people why or how they hold their positions. Everyone has the FREEDOM to use faith, or not use faith, however they want.

Spot the hypocritical double-talk. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest American Woman   
Guest American Woman

Well, are you and he taking into conisderation the charity work and aid such churches provide in the community and around the world? Are you and he taking into consideration the individual members charity work in the community and around the world? ......

You touched on some of the things I thought of in response to that question, Shady.

My first thought was that it's for those involved in the church to answer for themselves. Do they love the aquarium more than they love God? Do they love the fish because they are beautiful creatures created by God? Is there anything wrong with enjoying God's creations? Or did they build it to impress and outdo the church down the street? Did they do it out of vanity? These are questions I believe the members of the congregation have to ask themselves - and determine if Jesus would approve or not. It's not for me, or anyone else, to determine.

I will say this. I don't think Jesus would arbitrarily judge, hence the questions for self introspection along with the points you raised. Again, I most definitely don't think it's anyone else's place to arbitrarily determine if Jesus would approve or not - and criticize and expect others to act and live accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×