The Internet is the root of all evil

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:03 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep:
<STRONG>I see your point Loner, and it is valid, the problem is that people are taught that the Bible is the truth and as with all things people wish to put their own spin on it. Interpretation can lead to all manner of problems and solutions, but it still clouds the issues.

What are your feelings on TV evangelising?</STRONG>

The Bible is the truth; we just have to learn how to read it in a responsible way. That means finding out how it was written.

TV evangelizing? I think like everything else, there's good and bad. Billy Graham is basically a TV evangelist, and he's legit. Of course then you have the guys like Jim Bakker et al, who just want money. And the guys who tell you everything is a sin and everyone's going to hell. It's people like that who give Christianity a bad name, and unfortunately that's pretty much all people see

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:14 am

What is your opinion of TD Jakes? and others like him who seem to be more about entertainment than message.

SOme of the TV evangelists make sense and also add to ones understanding and others are way over the top

It seems most people want to interpret things for their own ends. THe wonderful world of the human natre

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:26 am

Entertainment over message seems to be par for the course recently. You can't really blame these guys IMO, even though I don't agree with their approach. Look at what they're competing against. Ever see "Sister Act"? Whoopi Goldberg's character says "People like going to casinos, and they like going to theatres, but they don't like going to church. Why? 'Cause it's a drag." People have an idea of worship as boring. In addition, we're a sound-byte society, the images on TV are getting shorter and shorter, decreasing our attention spans. So the preachers like the guys you mention feel the need to offer something comparable to Hollywood in order to keep people's gnat-like attention span from deflating. Sad but true.

I think this is one of the reasons for the success of the emotion-based charismatic movement.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:34 am

Unfortunately you are right again, so it is the fault of society not the fault of the preacher, an interesting thought

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:00 pm

EMINEM, where are you? Your last post has been spammed back to page 3, but I'd still very much like to discuss those things...

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Jul 20, 2001 4:25 pm

Originally posted by loner72:
[QB]As far as the 10 Commandments forbidding the worship of other gods: Well, yeah. Of course. Doesn't it make sense to be faithful to your own religion?[/b]

Only if "faithfulness" to one's religion embodies worshipping a particular embodiment of the Eternal. I'm faithful to my religion, which sees god's incomprehensibility behind a variety of masks, including many that are contradictory and not at all godlike.

Regarding hell: No one condemns anyone to hell but the individual person. It's not a condemnation but a continuation. And theologians have never been able to agree on what exactly hell really is. Thomas Merton said it was (willful) separation from love. I'm not talking here about the person who's been beaten on all his life; I'm talking about the serial killer, et al, the person who is consumed with hatred and acts that hatred out in destruction of others.

Sometimes, the serial killer evolves out of the person who was beaten or mistreated through much of their early life. Interesting dilemna, that.

Some believe that hell is a temporary state; that it need be endured only until the soul is aware of its evil and repents of it.

I've heard this voiced by a very few Christians, but never with any theological foundation in the religion. Do you know of any?

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Jul 22, 2001 11:38 pm

I'm wondering at Eminem's absence, too, @CE. He made a pretty startling attack against atheists which I feel was indefensible, and suddenly vanished.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Jul 28, 2001 11:35 pm

This topic has been bumped by a few tons of anonymous spam.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:22 am

Eminem attacked Atheists! That.... Grr... I happen to be very athiest (if that's possible) What page was that attack on. I wish to see what he said about people like me. I also think I should light a few fires in my wake....

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:33 am

@Eminem: So what your saying is that Atheists are people who cause all the problems? Them and Communists! What the hell kind've thought is that! If it's anything, it is pretty discriminatory of belief! By saying Atheists and Communists can go around, kill hundreds of thousands of people, and claim they had good cause for it, your adopting a pretty strong belief of Nazism. It was the Nazi's who first said that, namely Hitler (Read "Mein Kompf" written by Hitler during his jail years). Only, instead of Atheists and Communists, he blamed it on the Jews and Communistd! Now, when did Atheism become such a bad thing, bad enough to be put in with the same Communist beliefs that Joseph Stalin (Even though his were misguided) had ruled over the Soviet Union with!

Do you find Atheists can do that because they don't have a god that they must be weary of? Well, you seem to forgot that we, Atheists, still of morales, a conscience, and doubts! Just because we choose not to beleive, or have faith in any religion, that does not meen were a bunch of pagan murderers out to kill the world with our Communist friends! Even though I'm Atheist, I still think that some of the morale stand points of the Christian philosphy are worth listening to, I just choose not believe/hae faith in a man I do not know really exists. I personally up-hold of few of those morales, and many other Atheists do as well.

I'm starting to get tired of this rant, but know this Eminem, this has severly pissed me off, and it is not the last you'll hear of it.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:26 am

Just one point Aegis, pagans beleive in religions that are not Christian (ie Bhuddism, Druidic orders etc.) the word you are looking for is Heathens.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 11:59 am

Sorry, I was on a bit of a rolling rant. I just needed to get what I wanted to say out, and when I'm feeling up to it, mores gonna come.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 12:07 pm

Perhaps you should open a thread called Aegis' Vitriol

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 1:01 pm

@Sleep: I'm rather unfamilar with the word.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 1:10 pm

That is what a dictionary is for

[url="http://www.dictionary.com"]www.dictionary.com[/url]

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:17 pm

Pagan once meant heathen, as it's commonly understood, when the word was pay-nim. Nowadays, I think it usually means any of a cluster of counter-culture religions, but that's a bit of a misnomer. After all, there are quite a lot of South and Central Americans who worship Santeria--a religion made up of Christian saints and African gods. Pagan? No, not really. Christian? Hardly.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Sun Jul 29, 2001 9:35 pm

So what? Pagtians

? How about Chrisgans? It could work ether way

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon Jul 30, 2001 2:06 pm

Heh, @Aegis. I remember once reading a note by the self-proclaimed Heretodox Christian Church of America. Kind of a contradiction in terms, given the history of Christianity.