Testing The Christian Apologists

And just who are you to say what Christianity *should be* any more than they or I? I happen to believe that what you market is most certainly not what Christianity should be, apart from your exhortation to feed, clothe, and comfort. And just what evidence do you have that mainstream preaching and teaching in any way equates to carny schpiels? At best, you don't like it. Its ok...I dont like your message either. Namely: In other words, God saves everybody. Only if you believe that anyone and everyone can simply become one with no strings attached. I will agree with that. We wont know 100% untuil after we die, if then. I agree except to sy that I believe in One Holy Spirit and that if there were a spirit of Santa Claus it would in fact be the Holy Spirit The question is, do you believe that Jesus is God? (Gods character) Because without that, God is simply a He, She, or It to you. I will agree with you here, though I don't believe that other people with different beliefs can or should ignore Jesus, especially if He is present at the day of judgment. Im glad you stated that. It is often hard to get you to say that. Then why accuse so many mainstream Christian leaders of being dishonest hucksters? The vast majority whom I've met are honest, in my opinion. They are not trying to con anybody. I can't argue with that. My current problem with you is that you are preaching a different Gospel than your own words in your Belief Statement professed. Let's take your admonition to throw God away. You never mentioned that back then. Why do you find it important to preach it now? And finally, why do we need evidence that the apologists are rights? They may or may not be, but they are not dishonest. That evidence is your job. As you said, Belief is personal. Quit attacking mainstream Christianity.Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

jar, in Message 395

quote:

---

All of the Christian Apologist fail miserably as examples of what Christianity should be but are great examples of the Carny Midway spiels.

---

To be fair, I don't accuse you of attempting to define Christianity or what a Christian should be, though you have no basis for the blanket accusation that so many are carny barkers and hucksters. At best you accuse them of making stuff up to support their position. Would you like me to show where you have done the same thing?Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

I disagree. And I charge that as long as you are trying to suggest that your own silly notions of "throw God away", and "even if Jesus was just a tale told around campfires the message has value" and "Christianity is about what YOU do and not about what He did" and "God lied and the snake told the truth" then you are no better. It may be what you think Christianity should be but the rest of us Christians don't buy it. Your message might sell at an atheists convention but littlewhere else. You can claim to be a believer and it is nobodies business but your own and I respect that you are a Christian. I also am well aware of what the book says.

I agree. Let's just throw the book away. May as well read Long John Silver. How would you like someone coming along and trying to explain to you what Treasure Island really means? With no regard or respect for your interpretation?You would tell them to get lost unless they made the story any better. What you guys do is make the story into an allegory for humanist community building. Which is fine...just throw the Christianity away. You never use it anyway. And I will keep the charge to go feed, clothe and comfort the community. Many of my fellow Christians already do. And when critics call them carny barkers and conmen, I get offended. I bet we feed more people than your local salvation army or red cross does. What gets the humanists mad is the "Christian" part. They cant stand proselytes.

You thought wrong.
My friend volunteers for David CliftonMinistries, which has a food bank and he runs the soup kitchen and assists the Pastor. According to him, they feed an average of 75-100 people per day except when the weather is bad when they can feed 200.I can look into the stats for other faith-based ministries, but what do you care? You don't seem to trust anything I say anyway. All Im trying to say is that the local church helps as many people as do the secular organizations, excluding the state itself.And why does it burn? What do you care who feeds the needy as long as they get fed?

Not even. Do you really think we are gonna take a bunch of atheists seriously when they try and teach us what the Bible means? That would be almost as laughable as you listening to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's attempt to explain economics to Milton Friedman! (Although he is dead, so no, that would not be funny )Seriously, despite my usuing the appeal to popularity, I will trust the majority over a literalist socialist atheist minority. As for jar, he is on his own planet anyway. I dont find many Anglicans agreeing with him on everything.

OK, you win. I did open my mouth first. Now can we move on? Im more concerned about how ringo attempts to define what my religion should be teaching. You all seem to get so mad when the creationists do that in schools and yet you are trying to teach us what the Bible really says as if you have any clue beyond your secular critical exegesis.

because many of us believe that Jesus speaks through the scriptures, teaching you as you study. There has been many a Bible study where we read passages we have read before and get a fresh interpretation. I knew that you valued socialism more than the messenger. Your socialism will break down along with the rest of the world systems when the fossil fuels run out and the oceans rise. Watch Christianity take off and grow exponentially. Then you really will have a lot of nuts and false prophets to deal with, as will we.

From what I understand, its basically collective ownership. Nothing is privately owned. As long as I'm not forced to share my home with a bunch of street people, I can tolerate it. Some areas of life remain sacred. I could care less if I'm ever rich, but I do consider some things mine and nobody else's.And I don't want the government messing with my freedom of religion, speech, or keeping their hand in my wallet.

But do you know human nature? Look at History. When great Empires collapse, they often implode and it takes more than socialism to keep the people safe. It often degrades into fearful leaders hiring armed thugs to protect them. Do you see that in America's possible future? Otherwise, any excess bounty we have will be picked clean by the vultures...sorta like what the US did to the Natives of many lands, only in reverse. I try not to act like an entitled European, nor do I advocate any sort of racial conflicts, but I honestly feel that there will be cultural wars and that those of us who grew up having it good will find life much more difficult. Thats a fear I have. Perhaps I am being irrational. A good Christian would accept their lot in life.Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.

Apparently, Ananias and Saphira did not have the ability to let go of literally everything they owned. Many in today's world would have the same issue. Shall they all simply be struck dead for not surrendering everything to..wait for it..not Jesus or His Apostles but to a secular government ran by fallible humans? If that is the conclusion, I'm giving what I can, holding on to what I need, and may God strike me dead if I'm wrong.

On this one, I am quite sure you will be proven wrong. Times will get tougher. People will organize into collectives to survive. Some collectives will be secular and some "spiritual". Within the spiritual groups will be both fake and real Christians. You will know them by their fruits and by their politics.

You are conflating two issues. One is what Jesus would have us do...that one im arguing with ringo exclusively. The other is your charge that I dont understand democratic socialism. I may be guilty of that one, but I can google with the best of them. As I have stated before, I am in favor of a moderate government. Let me keep control over some of my stuff. I'm not afraid to pay taxes, but I am afraid of any sort of collective responsibility which puts me on the hook of taking care of all of the poor impoverished masses globally. To whom much is given, much is required. The US middle class is shrinking precisely because the rest of the world is now interconnected and we were wealthier relative to them so now we are losing more percentage-wise as they escape poverty.

It seems pretty simple to me. The rich have manipulated the system so that they keep their money and leave the responsibility of helping the poor on the middle class. My point is that socialism will never be implemented as long as the wealthy keep their power. But when I point this out to ringo, he seems to suggest that if the "cushy" middle class sacrificed more, the poor would be better off and it would be no big deal for the middle to get knocked down a rung or two. I disagree.

OK, that's a decent argument. I likely misunderstand socialism because I see it in the microcosm of union politics. If too many new people get hired, the union benefits because of more union dues, the company benefits because of cheaper labor, but the senior union members then have to share their hours and end up taking home less.