A Christian question, but applies to all thinking Christian too!

by free2beme 100 Replies latest jw friends

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Tetra:
    A big shiney person walks up to you in the quiet of your own home and says, "Hi, I'm Jesus, I'll be your drinking buddy today - how's it hanging?". You look at your cup and wonder if there's something in the tea, before looking back at this incredibly bright apparition in front of you.

    It happens on not one but several occasions. All the time you're totally compus mentus, holding down work, family and social life. You've never taken drugs, aren't under undue stress, and have no history of mental illness (and neither has your family).

    Explain this concept of meme to me again...

  • NeonMadman
    NeonMadman
    Here though it what I define a troll as.

    Someone who comes to a board and post extreme messages that make little to know sense and are direct attacks on posters. Using words that would be considered unacceptable and repeating the post over and over and over (flooding). They also post pictures that are sick and say things that are hurtful for no reason what so ever.

    How convenient. The Watchtower also offers a definition of what a cult is and - guess what? When you use their definition, they are not a cult!

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake

    Free, thanks for responding to my post. You said

    I think I gather what you are trying to say, but I know from being a Witness, that the Bible is the text book of Christianity and to say it is in error is to develop a religion that would not really be true Christian.

    I do not believe the Bible is in error in the important teachings it contains, but I can very easily prove there are many minor errors in it. One of its strengths is that these have not been corrected or deleted. In other words even the clear inconsistencies teach us something. The Bible itself does not clearly teach its own verbal inerrancy. The apostles often failed to understand the teachings of Christ, Paul made mistakes in his earlier letters that he corrected in later ones.

    We must discern which parts of the Bible sublate other parts. All the Old Testament is both negated and fulfilled at the same time by the teaching to love our neighbour. I was once a fundamentalist adventist, but last month I opened my mind and read a Christian challenge to fundamentalism. Only read it if you have an open mind.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0281056803/qid=1119912087/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_10_1/026-1645485-9290029

  • hmike
    hmike
    I only had to read this far to hear, "your going to hell, your going to hell, your going to hell" in my mind.

    Just curious, do you mean…

    “You ignorant, heathen scum. You dare to insult God, and say I am wrong. You’re going to hell where you and your kind belong, and I will enjoy seeing it happen!”

    Or do you mean...

    “Without the love and sacrifice of Jesus, every one of us would be forever lost in darkness, misery, and sorrow. Jesus gave himself to save you out of that. If you persist in rejecting him, you’re going to hell. God, please, open this person’s eyes and heart to your compassion and glory, and use me in whatever way it takes to help him receive your grace. Forgive him, for he knows not what he is doing.”

  • tetrapod.sapien
    tetrapod.sapien



    LT,

    wow, sorry! how did i miss your post?! anyhoo,

    A big shiney person walks up to you in the quiet of your own home and says, "Hi, I'm Jesus, I'll be your drinking buddy today - how's it hanging?". You look at your cup and wonder if there's something in the tea, before looking back at this incredibly bright apparition in front of you. It happens on not one but several occasions. All the time you're totally compus mentus, holding down work, family and social life. You've never taken drugs, aren't under undue stress, and have no history of mental illness (and neither has your family).
    Explain this concept of meme to me again...

    okay, first of all old sport, let me say that if that did happen to me several times, and the variables you inject are as you say they are, then i admit that my skepticism would be really really shaken. please belive me when i say this. i am not saying it just for the sake of this debate, so that i don't sound like a close-minded bigot. it really would have an impact on me.

    how i interpret it would be another matter all together. if i were a hindu, and had never been exposed to the christ meme, then i probably would not think it was christ coming to have a scotch with me. there is your meme explanation again. need it be any simpler? how i interpret phenomena is based on memes that i am host to.

    if this happened to me, i would not be able to dismiss the possibility that christ came to drink with me out of hand. i would have some real soul searching ahead of me. i would take the time for it, i assure you. but would i not also be obligated to remain skeptical, instead of pulling a Saul of Tarsus and running out and changing my entire life around? would i not be obligated to get myself checked by a head doctor even if there had been no previous mental problems in my family? perhaps my family genome is but one mutation away from mental illness, and i am the first one with the mutated gene? would i not be obligated to go with the simplest explanation until i could prove to myself that it was something more than the simplest explanation would suggest? and if not, why? i can't think of a single reason why i would automatically assume that it actually had been a laphroaig-loving jesus (i presume laphroaig because i am middle class, and it's the best i could break out for the occasion). anyways, if it was jesus, he would have a lot of explaining to do. filling my heart with love, would not be good enough. also, i would hope that his salvation would transcend my natural skepticism. after all, he is just, and merciful, and he was the one that gave me my mental faculties and my right temporal lobe.

    also: one of the first things i would do, would be to ask if it were alright if i could bring a friend over as well. i would let jesus pick the friend. if the friend saw the drinking jesus too, then that would go much farther in convincing me it was jesus. next, i would ask jesus if he wanted to save the many many many more people, by coming on Larry King Live with James Randi and I. i would assume that he would say yes, since he does want people to believe in him and be saved. if he said no, this would only increase my skepticism, in this case, at myself.

    of course, it would be a gamble. and i see what you are getting at. you wouldn't want to be my drinking partner if every time you showed up at my house i ignored you and called my shrink for advice. and neither would jesus. /

  • the_classicist
    the_classicist

    A few thoughts:

    1) I feel the application of the meme to history to be rather anachronistic.

    2)

    i am not saying it just for the sake of this debate, so that i don't sound like a close-minded bigot. it really would have an impact on me.

    Tetra, I think we all enjoy your skepticism, seriously. What motivates LT is knowledge by faith, which, since it is not scientifically quantifiable, I would assume you reject. Knowledge by faith is hard to philosophically define, but it is primarily motivated by the grace of God within the Christian context. Knowledge by faith is what motivated Paul to change his life and the Apostles to preach.

    3)

    also: one of the first things i would do, would be to ask if it were alright if i could bring a friend over as well. i would let jesus pick the friend. if the friend saw the drinking jesus too, then that would go much farther in convincing me it was jesus. next, i would ask jesus if he wanted to save the many many many more people, by coming on Larry King Live with James Randi and I. i would assume that he would say yes, since he does want people to believe in him and be saved. if he said no, this would only increase my skepticism, in this case, at myself.

    In the Christian system of belief, God fully manifested himself by becoming man. The incarnation of the Son of God was a wholly wonderful act by which God fully revealed himself to man. The second wholly wonderful act was the death and the Resurrection of the Son of God. The Apostles, upon whose testimony we base our faith, spread the Gospel of the Lord in order that all men might be saved (the Gospel=good news, the good news of God giving his life to save man and restoring him to life by the Resurrection).

    God usually requires people to believe without "having seen," but to some individuals, like St. Paul, he choses to personally manifest himself usually because he sets such people aside for a special mission. Others are motivated by the grace of God to faith.

    In a sense, we use types of faith to believe in many things. For example, we accept that scientists are correct and dilligent in their research. Now you may counter that we can prove whether or not a statement by a scientist is correct or not. True in some cases, but not in all. Many have faith in the theories concerning global warming (ie., that global warming is caused more by human action than by, but its no more than "belief in things that are to come" having been told these things by authorities in such mattters. The Apostles are such authorities in matters of God. They beheld the Son of God fully in the glory of the Resurrection. Why should we distrust them? As I'm sure you heard many times, these men were more than willing to die for their faith. Why would they have been willing to die for the thing which is not? It did not gain them money, power, or women.

    Likewise why do we to not believe other prophets or sages who do not hold the belief in Christ? For me there are some reasons. Islam, for example, was a tool for empire building. Not too compelled by Buddhism, when Buddha abandoned his wife and children to become enlightened.

    Another point would be, what would you think of those scientists who dedicate their lives to tell of the coming apocalyptic events to take place with global warming. To be, they are just as valid in their mission as St. Paul.

    That's just my thoughts on the subject.

  • hmike
    hmike

    Actually, the LT-Tetra scenario sounds like another sequel to Oh God!

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    hmike:
    Sorry the reference is lost on me. Is that a TV program?

    Classic:
    I'm afraid your going to have to stop speaking for me and my alleged motivations. I don't tolerate that

    Tetra:Ironically, I'm a sceptic. However events of exactly four years ago this morning completely shattered my paradigm. They were followed up with further events, including such "apparitions". Ok, I made up all the details, including the drink bit, but setting that aside I feel certain that Macallans of Glenmorangie would be far more preferable than Laphroig

    I should also add that I work in the health service and have access to doctors, including mental health specialists, all day long. The nearest I've come to a mental health episode was just prior to separating from my wife (in fact the physical factors that might have given rise to the potential for it precipitated our separation), but that's another story.

    I'm not going to do an FMZ and lay my life history out on a plate for disection, because in cold text such things rarely make great reading - you simply cannot put them in words. I did feel that you deserved a word of explanation as to why someone who claims to be a sceptic could also be a believer. It's because I have seen things with my own eyes!

    My interpretation might be considered suspect (it's certainly subjective), but without the same input noone else is in a position to question it. Nonetheless, I do completely accept that my proof is not your proof. A further irony is that many would say that if they just had such and such an experience it would convince them, or they would say this or do that. Allow me to assure you that it's egotistical poppycock (IMHO). If it were to have half the effect on another that it had on me, you'd be struck dumb.

    I'll throw this at you, however. It's my understanding that such "power encounters" (as some portions of the Christian world labels them) have been happening on a frequent basis in the Middle East, where the individuals had little or no knowledge of Christianity, or where they have it's anathema to them. They claim a wide range of experiences, including being approached and taught.

    Some claim to he told a name (what's the Arabic for Jesus? Yahshuah?), others later meet up with Christians and find their beliefs in accordance with what they now hear, to a scale that precludes other religions (which isn't too hard, given that Christianity has some fairly unique doctrines, on a worldwide scale of religion, these days).

    Lots of claims, including my own. But it perhaps highlights that the spiritual community isn't just made up of a bunch of airheads who go to church on Sunday and swallow one ancient manuscript or another whole. There's certainly far more going on in the world than we were lead to believe as JWs.

    So, simply stated, the world isn't easily divided into sceptics and believers...

  • NeonMadman
    NeonMadman
    I only had to read this far to hear, "your going to hell, your going to hell, your going to hell" in my mind.

    Just curious, do you mean…

    Or do you mean...

    I have to suspect that what he really meant was, "I am so biased against Christianity that I am unable to even consider any thought expressed by a Christian or from a Christian point of view." The line in the article that made him "hear", "you're going to hell" was only the second line, and the article was in no way geared toward telling anyone they were going to hell. It was simply his knee-jerk, mindless reaction to anything Christian.

  • free2beme
    free2beme
    I have to suspect that what he really meant was, "I am so biased against Christianity that I am unable to even consider any thought expressed by a Christian or from a Christian point of view." The line in the article that made him "hear", "you're going to hell" was only the second line, and the article was in no way geared toward telling anyone they were going to hell. It was simply his knee-jerk, mindless reaction to anything Christian.

    Been around enough Christian's in this life to know one thing, believe my faith and I will be your friend and together we will enjoy the rewards God has for us. Do not believe and punishment (hell/Armagedon) is in your future. No matter how I have seen that doctored up or sugar coated by Christian faiths, it always comes down to that simple thought in the end. I am bating 100% on this one. Even my own father who claims to be in some modern Christian faith that only sees the Bible as something you take what you want from, admited that he does see Jesus as the path of salvation and all other paths leading to pain. So sorry, but yes it is a knee jerk reaction based on years and years of experience. My thought in this whole thread is to ask Christian's if they realize how Greek/Roman myth is just another form of the myth we read in Jesus and other Bible stories. If I am bound for hell for knowing and seeing this, then slap on the factor 1000 sun tan lotion and put some steaks on the BBQ and expect them well done.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit