OFF TOPIC - The IOC sucks.

[dmm]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quikngruvn:

Religious fanatics? I haven't heard of any of the hundreds of religious denominations in the US declaring a jihad (a Holy War) on anyone or anybody. With the possible exception of Southern Baptists, who tried to boycott Disney because they offered the same corporate benefits to same-sex couples as to married couples. (These are the same people who, in a Sunday sermon, told the congregation my stepdaughter attended that if they watched the Super Bowl on Sunday, they'd go to Hell.) The rest of us laugh at the Southern Baptists.

---

Regarding the Disney boycott: Disney portrays itself as upright and "family-friendly." The boycott was intended to draw attention to various immoral practices by Disney, including but not limited to: increasing participation in the "gay agenda" including gay pride parades down Main Street in Disneyworld, movies by Disney-owned companies that were R-rated without having some redeeming social reason for being that way (unlike, for example, Schindler's List), increasing hostility to religion and increasing sexual content in movies intended for children. I could go on, but my point is that Quikngruvn is oversimplifying and misrepresenting the Southern Baptist position.

Regarding the Sunday sermon: My guess is that the preacher said something like "it's a sin to skip church in favor of the Super Bowl."


[This message has been edited by dmm (edited 23 July 2001).]

[Baron Munchausen]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmm:
[b] Actually, the first quote IS from Lord Acton, who was misquoting Paul. The "corrected" quote is also a misquote. The correct quote, in context, is
"People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves through with many griefs."
Note that the problem is not money, or even riches, but greed, coveting, and pride. Paul then proceeds to give apostolic commands for Timothy to pass along to the wealthy:
"Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share."

That is "Christian communalism": From each, willingly, as an act of love and mercy (and also to gain eternal rewards -- God knows human nature!), according to how God has blessed; To each, according to his/her need (not want), as determined by individuals or by a local fellowship of people who know and love him/her and want the long-term best for him/her.

In practice, this is not an easy thing to achieve. Liberals err by trying to force everyone to "be nice" to everyone, regardless of circumstances or merit. Conservatives err by assuming that people will automatically "be nice" if only the government will stay out of it.

---

Yep, yep! The long-haired hippie guy they talk about in the gospels was a flaming communist! It's a clear sign of how far many of the so-called 'Christians' of our time have traveled from the roots of their religion that you will find as many "religious" movements allied with the business community in trying to make the country safe for profit as there are charity organizations trying to help the poor.

[Krsqk]

quote:

---

Actually, the first quote IS from Lord Acton, who was misquoting Paul. The "corrected" quote is also a misquote. The correct quote, in context, is...

---

Actually, not incorrect; just from a different Version and without the context. As for the interpretation, agreed.

quote:

---

Yep, yep! The long-haired hippie guy they talk about in the gospels was a flaming communist! It's a clear sign of how far many of the so-called 'Christians' of our time have traveled from the roots of their religion that you will find as many "religious" movements allied with the business community in trying to make the country safe for profit as there are charity organizations trying to help the poor.

---

The "long-haired hippie" stereotype is derived from religious art of a period much later than Christ's life, especially medieval/Renaissance art. Long(er) hair, if anything, was just as culturally normal for men of the day as wearing high heels and hose was normal for the court of Louis XIV. Does that mean, then, that Louis XIV was either a) a woman, or b) a transvestite? He was neither; he was manly in his culture. Hippies were culturally rebellious because they participated in a style culturally associated with women. Don't try to place first-century culture in a modern setting--there is no comparison.

RE: Communism--see above comments, as well as dmm's excellent commentary.

RE: Increased religious/political involvement--Granted, much of "Christianity" has become more involved in social issues than in the "roots" they've left. But then, would you say that a Christian is someone who claims to follow Christ, or someone who actually does? Mainstream Christianity has less in common with Bible teaching than it does with modern culture; but does that condemn the "real thing"? Does the existance of counterfeit bills prove the inefficacy of genuine currency? Just food for thought.

Oh, and Baron, congratulations on your promotion. Not as far to go as you thought, was it?

------------------
"The Unpronounceable" Krsqk
Basic Tech Mod
--Basic Tech Mod v.75

[Alpha Kodiak]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmm:
[b]
"Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share."

That is "Christian communalism": From each, willingly, as an act of love and mercy (and also to gain eternal rewards -- God knows human nature!), according to how God has blessed; To each, according to his/her need (not want), as determined by individuals or by a local fellowship of people who know and love him/her and want the long-term best for him/her.

In practice, this is not an easy thing to achieve. Liberals err by trying to force everyone to "be nice" to everyone, regardless of circumstances or merit. Conservatives err by assuming that people will automatically "be nice" if only the government will stay out of it.

---

The only reason that "Christian communalism" can work is given in the exortation to "put their hope in God". A person can only truly give up there own self-interests when they know that their needs will be unfailingly met by the power of God.

In this is the greatest misunderstanding about Chritianity, both from the inside and the outside. Christianity is not a set of moral rules or a way to achieve enlightenment to make one group of people superior to another (though I have seen attempts to use it that way.) It is also not a get-rich-quick scheme, though there are those who attempt to use it that way, as well.

Christianity is a relationship with Jesus Christ. Those who follow Him should exhibit certain behavior traits as a positive reaction to what He has done, not in an attempt to win favor with God or others. That is why attempting to legislate "Christian" behavior fails. Without the relationship with Christ, there is no motivation to behave in a "Christian" manner.

[Baron Munchausen]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Krsqk:
The "long-haired hippie" stereotype is derived from religious art of a period much later than Christ's life, especially medieval/Renaissance art. Long(er) hair, if anything, was just as culturally normal for men of the day as wearing high heels and hose was normal for the court of Louis XIV. Does that mean, then, that Louis XIV was either a) a woman, or b) a transvestite? He was neither; he was manly in his culture. Hippies were culturally rebellious because they participated in a style culturally associated with women. Don't try to place first-century culture in a modern setting--there is no comparison.

RE: Increased religious/political involvement--Granted, much of "Christianity" has become more involved in social issues than in the "roots" they've left. But then, would you say that a Christian is someone who claims to follow Christ, or someone who actually does? Mainstream Christianity has less in common with Bible teaching than it does with modern culture; but does that condemn the "real thing"? Does the existance of counterfeit bills prove the inefficacy of genuine currency? Just food for thought.

Oh, and Baron, congratulations on your promotion. Not as far to go as you thought, was it?

[/b]

---

Actually, I was intentionally referring to the very large cultural gap between the originator and the self-described 'followers' of the religion today called "Christianity". Yes, it has far more to do with Medieval, Renaissance, and Modern European culture than anything Mediterranean or (especially) specifically Biblical/Jewish. Even in that context, though, Christ was a bit non-conformist. So the 'hippie' designation is not really incorrect. Call it double-irony.

And, yeah, what a surprise to discover the rank of General and reach it in the same day...

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 24 July 2001).]

[AJC]

Many an atheist behave along the definition of what I assume is meant by "A Christian manner", without believing in creationism.

Christian beliefs have been defining the western worlds laws and social attitudes for centuries. I dont think One needs a relationship with christ to understand right and wrong and most people are motivated to act according to what is defined by society as moral behavior, not because of the fear of god, but because that is what is defined by our society as correct and obey the law.

In my view most of society is law abiding and treats each other well. Its the few dimwits who are troubling the rest of society. Those few idiots out of 250,000,000 in the US justifies the media telling us and the rest of the world how evil American society is. Its all propaganda and done for the sensationalism, the media practically falls over itself generating hype everytime something happens. 1 or 2 guys shooting up the streets in LA can occuppy the news for 2 days, WHY? because Happy stories dont generate $$$ and certainly dont bring in the audience. People have a facination for disasters and tragic events, its human nature, and the media is capitalizing on it.

If the US was so out of wack and in so much trouble - there would be another revolution brewing in this country, because Americans are a pretty militant bunch. So I think that you will find that most americans are content, so obviously things are as bad here as they are painted out to be.

Another thing to consider - is the world really anymore violent than in the Last 2000 yrs past? Probably not - I think it is the medium for which reporting the news stories is allowing us an instantanious microscopic view of the same social issues that have been with us since the beginning of the human race and most of us dont like what we see.

[Quikngruvn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dmm:
I could go on, but my point is that Quikngruvn is oversimplifying and misrepresenting the Southern Baptist position.

Regarding the Sunday sermon: My guess is that the preacher said something like "it's a sin to skip church in favor of the Super Bowl."

---

Oversimplified and misrepresented, perhaps. My point was that although there are some sects in the US that take their religious zeal to seemingly extreme positions (to outsiders, anyway), most Americans are not religious fanatics. I chose the Southern Baptists because (a) I know a bunch of Southern Baptists (and I went to a Southern Baptist university), and their actions often contradict their professed beliefs (but not all of them do!), and (b) as a sect, their credo is so conservative that they're a relatively easy target from the religious middle ground.


As for the Super Bowl remark, no, the pastor said they would go to Hell. The sermon was given on the morning of Super Bowl Sunday.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AJC:
Many an atheist behave along the definition of what I assume is meant by "A Christian manner", without believing in creationism.

Christian beliefs have been defining the western worlds laws and social attitudes for centuries. I dont think One needs a relationship with christ to understand right and wrong and most people are motivated to act according to what is defined by society as moral behavior, not because of the fear of god, but because that is what is defined by our society as correct and obey the law.

---

Ah, Jesus of Nazareth: prophet, revolutionary, and all around great guy. Personally, I believe in Jesus' teachings and try to act on his teachings in my life (though my human nature gets in the way). Am I a Christian? No, for the simple fact that I do not believe Jesus was the "Son of God" any more than the rest of us are sons and daughters of God. I believe man deified Jesus later, decades or centuries after his crucifixion. Does this make Christians' beliefs any less valid? No. But, I think I am more "Christian" than some who claim to be Christians, but act in markedly un-Christian ways.

Or, put more succintly, I gotta agree with AJC.

Ya know, my momma always told me never to discuss religion or politics in mixed company. Now I see why!

Quikngruvn, back in his asbestos flak suit

[Quikngruvn]

After a short night's sleep and some rethinking, I've realized the error of my ways. Not so much oversimplification or misrepresentation of the Southern Baptists (though valid assertions), but overgeneralization. I took the actions of individuals (like the Southern Baptist who told my Catholic friend he was going to Hell for being Catholic) and individual actions of the sect (like the Disney boycott) and applied them to the sect as a whole, without really knowing the motives and beliefs of the sect and its members. Kinda like if I had said that all Canadians are nothing more than beer-swilling hockey goons, which obviously they aren't ("all I ever needed to know about Canada I learned from 'Strange Brew'").

So, I've learned three things:
A) Don't go about bashing a group of people until I understand where they're coming from;
2) Think before I post; and
�) No more posting at 4 am!

Quikngruvn, off to make an omelet with the egg on his face

[Alpha Kodiak]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quikngruvn:
But, I think I am more "Christian" than some who claim to be Christians, but act in markedly un-Christian ways.

---

We do not disagree on this. Actually, my statement about legislating "Christian" behavior was not directed at those who do not claim Christianity. I do not deny that there are people who behave in a very moral way, yet do not believe the tenets of Christianity. Rather, it is pointing out that it is futile to try to force a particular set of values (based upon a particular belief system) on people who do not follow that belief system.

This is not to say that a Christian cannot take a political stand on issues that face society: capital punishment (there are Christians on both sides on this one), pornography, abortion and many others. It just means that we have to debate the issues on their own merits, not whack people over the head with our Bibles and think that is going to convince them.

No, I am not trying to start a debate on any of those issues . I am just trying to clarify how I believe that Christians need to interrelate with the rest of society. Part of the problem with my previous post is that I also post to a couple of forums on Christianity, and I lost track of who my audience was in this one.

[Baron Munchausen]

Ok, how far can we drift from the original topic? Anyone got any other good things to bring up?