• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is Christ our Example?

dadalus said:
Oh, BS, you should be able to discern that it was a jab, and not a serious claim - even though pedophilia has been a major problem in the church ever since Jesus was found with a naked boy.


Here, let me use your style of debate:

"Dur, errr.... you said I "Can't go around making claims" like that. Uh, I just did. So, please prove I can't go around making claims like that. Huh?! Huh!?"

That's the level of debate you guys are engaged in. It's childish.

All because you can't get off your Saviors **** long enough to think straight.
Click to expand...

it's rather hypocritical to reprimand others for childishness while simultaneously levying childish personal attacks.

do a better job.
 
Thrilla said:
it's rather hypocritical to reprimand others for childishness while simultaneously levying childish personal attacks.

do a better job.
Click to expand...

I respond in a way they understand.
 
Thrilla said:
Jesus didn't pretend to be an example for anything other than morality and spirituality.

it's a rather hollow argument, and a bit dishonest, to dismiss him on grounds other than what he specifically provided an example for.
Click to expand...

I think it's completely fair to judge his morality when he showed, by his actions, that he was jobless, asked people to leave their families, to hate their parents, threatening people with Hell if they don't agree with him, condoning slavery - and beating slaves, etc.

Bertrand Russel said:
"There is one very serious defect to my mind in Christ's moral character, and that is that He believed in hell. I do not myself feel that any person who is really profoundly humane can believe in everlasting punishment. Christ certainly as depicted in the Gospels did believe in everlasting punishment, and one does find repeatedly a vindictive fury against those people who would not listen to His preaching—an attitude which is not uncommon with preachers, but which does somewhat detract from superlative excellence. You do not, for instance find that attitude in Socrates. You find him quite bland and urbane toward the people who would not listen to him; and it is, to my mind, far more worthy of a sage to take that line than to take the line of indignation."


It's fair to look at Hero's with a clear head.


Luke 14:26:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.”

Matthew 19:29:
“And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

Revelation 2:22-23 (Because a starving woman ate some food meant to be burnt for sacrifice)
“22 Indeed I will cast her (Jezebel) into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds.
23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.”


Not to mention, the insanity that Christianity is a religion of human sacrifice, and that Substitutionary Atonement is a ridiculous idea.

If we executed someone other than the person who did the crime, we'd say a huge injustice had been done. Yet, Christians believe this is moral - even beautiful.
 
dadalus said:
I think it's completely fair to judge his morality when he showed, by his actions, that he was jobless, asked people to leave their families, to hate their parents, threatening people with Hell if they don't agree with him, condoning slavery - and beating slaves, etc.

Bertrand Russel said:
"There is one very serious defect to my mind in Christ's moral character, and that is that He believed in hell. I do not myself feel that any person who is really profoundly humane can believe in everlasting punishment. Christ certainly as depicted in the Gospels did believe in everlasting punishment, and one does find repeatedly a vindictive fury against those people who would not listen to His preaching—an attitude which is not uncommon with preachers, but which does somewhat detract from superlative excellence. You do not, for instance find that attitude in Socrates. You find him quite bland and urbane toward the people who would not listen to him; and it is, to my mind, far more worthy of a sage to take that line than to take the line of indignation."


It's fair to look at Hero's with a clear head.


Luke 14:26:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.”

Matthew 19:29:
“And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

Revelation 2:22-23 (Because a starving woman ate some food meant to be burnt for sacrifice)
“22 Indeed I will cast her (Jezebel) into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds.
23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.”


Not to mention, the insanity that Christianity is a religion of human sacrifice, and that Substitutionary Atonement is a ridiculous idea.

If we executed someone other than the person who did the crime, we'd say a huge injustice had been done. Yet, Christians believe this is moral - even beautiful.
Click to expand...

If you're familiar with the Bible, then you know that God is justified in damning people to eternal hell for their sins because He is completely holy. Even the slightest fault is worthy of total condemnation. And no matter what good a person does, he or she can never cover his or her own sin. Only the blood of Christ does that.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
You're the one that made the claim about the Priests being pedophiles. You can't just go around making claims like that without some sort of documentation, some evidence.

Court records?

Affidavits?

Criminal complaints?



Got anything like that?
Click to expand...

Uh, he's talking about these priests.

For the first time, the Vatican unveils how it punished thousands of pedophile priests

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...w-it-punished-thousands-of-pedophile-priests/

Weeks ago, the United Nations released one of the greatest international indictments of the Vatican in years. Among the report’s concerns: “ritual beatings of children,” “torture and other cruel or degrading treatment” and sexual abuse and exploitation.
Click to expand...

He said, "your priests"; he means present times.

You know who these priests are, everybody knows who these priests are
 
dadalus said:
Robert Ingersoll (look him up) was a remarkable man and his writings are forceful even 100 years later.

This is one that I think stands out for its force and brevity on how we should actually view the character of Jesus in the Bible.

"IS CHRIST OUR EXAMPLE?

HE never said a word in favor of education. He never even hinted at the existence of any science. He never uttered a word in favor of industry, economy or of any effort to better our condition in this world. He was the enemy of the successful, of the wealthy. Dives was sent to hell, not because he was bad, but because he was rich. Lazarus went to heaven, not because he was good, but because he was poor.

Christ cared nothing for painting, for sculpture, for music—nothing for any art. He said nothing about the duties of nation to nation, of king to subject; nothing about the rights of man; nothing about intellectual liberty or the freedom of speech. He said nothing about the sacredness of home; not one word for the fireside; not a word in favor of marriage, in honor of maternity.

He never married. He wandered homeless from place to place with a few disciples. None of them seem to have been engaged in any useful business, and they seem to have lived on alms.
All human ties were held in contempt; this world was sacrificed for the next; all human effort was discouraged. God would support and protect.
At last, in the dusk of death, Christ, finding that he was mistaken, cried out: "My God! My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?"

We have found that man must depend on himself. He must clear the land; he must build the home; he must plow and plant; he must invent; he must work with hand and brain; he must overcome the difficulties and obstructions; he must conquer and enslave the forces of nature to the end that they may do the work of the world."

Comments, questions or concerns?
Click to expand...

Yeah, Ingersoll is trying to make a pint about it taking our blood sweat and tears to live a life that does hot come any easier through Jesus. It doesn't mean however that what's in the Bible is not wise and serves a purpose as a set of metaphors and parables about navigating through the trials and tribulations.

I can see that you are learning about arguing with the faithful around here... They are opposite sides of Ingersoll's coin, that's all.

I think that even if atheists read the Bible, they would come away with some stuff that would help them understand their own lives.
 
jet57 said:
Uh, he's talking about these priests.

For the first time, the Vatican unveils how it punished thousands of pedophile priests

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...w-it-punished-thousands-of-pedophile-priests/



He said, "your priests"; he means present times.

You know who these priests are, everybody knows who these priests are
Click to expand...
Uh... no, he wasn't.

If you trace back to the original statement you will find that he was addressing SMTA and he said specifically... "Your Priests". "Your", in this context, refers to Priests which SMTA has had personal relationships or encounters with.

Reading comprehension. It's not just for breakfast, anymore...
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Uh... no, he wasn't.

If you trace back to the original statement you will find that he was addressing SMTA and he said specifically... "Your Priests". "Your", in this context, refers to Priests which SMTA has had personal relationships or encounters with.

Reading comprehension. It's not just for breakfast, anymore...
Click to expand...

(chuckle)

Dude, some priests are known to be pedophiles. "Your" does not necessarily mean personal.
 
jet57 said:
(chuckle)

Dude, some priests are known to be pedophiles. "Your" does not necessarily mean personal.
Click to expand...

This would be a lot easier if you would just google "context" and then have someone with more patience than I try to explain it to you.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
This would be a lot easier if you would just google "context" and then have someone with more patience than I try to explain it to you.
Click to expand...

No, it would be a lot easier if you didn't jump to ridiculous conclusions. He wasn't slamming the guys personal people.
 
jet57 said:
No, it would be a lot easier if you didn't jump to ridiculous conclusions. He wasn't slamming the guys personal people.
Click to expand...

Jet...

You really should try researching things just a little bit before you spout off. Here is how this whole thing started...

dadalus said:
You haven't made any case, though. You've simply regurgitated what your pedophile priests tell you to say.
Click to expand...

How could Priests that SMTA has no relationship or no association at all with "tell him what to say"?


Time to stop digging...
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Jet...

You really should try researching things just a little bit before you spout off. Here is how this whole thing started...



How could Priests that SMTA has no relationship or no association at all with "tell him what to say"?


Time to stop digging...
Click to expand...

I read it just fine. I don't think SMTA is Catholic. "Your" is a general condemnation.
 
I am not religious. In fact, I can be quite rebellious when it come to religion.

I believe the bible presented us today, is a compilation of negotiated beliefs, between many religions, compiled by man, cherry picked and altered to suit their own agendas.

But I love the character of Jesus. And I do believe he was "raised" from the dead, so to speak. But I have no clue as to or what the God was that did it or the physics and science involved in that circumstance. If nothing else, I have faith in the story, if for no other reason, than it makes me a better man. What would Jesus do? Well, that's what I want to do. Not being the smartest fellow on two legs, I have no way to explain myself about this. But I believe.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
This would be a lot easier if you would just google "context" and then have someone with more patience than I try to explain it to you.
Click to expand...

I went to Dictionary.com:

your pronoun

1. (a form of the possessive case of you used as an attributive adjective):
Your jacket is in that closet. I like your idea.
Compare yours.

2. one's (used to indicate that one belonging to oneself or to any person):
The consulate is your best source of information. As you go down the hill, the library is on your left.

Your | Define Your at Dictionary.com
 
dadalus said:
Robert Ingersoll (look him up) was a remarkable man and his writings are forceful even 100 years later.

This is one that I think stands out for its force and brevity on how we should actually view the character of Jesus in the Bible.

"IS CHRIST OUR EXAMPLE?

HE never said a word in favor of education. He never even hinted at the existence of any science. He never uttered a word in favor of industry, economy or of any effort to better our condition in this world. He was the enemy of the successful, of the wealthy. Dives was sent to hell, not because he was bad, but because he was rich. Lazarus went to heaven, not because he was good, but because he was poor.

Christ cared nothing for painting, for sculpture, for music—nothing for any art. He said nothing about the duties of nation to nation, of king to subject; nothing about the rights of man; nothing about intellectual liberty or the freedom of speech. He said nothing about the sacredness of home; not one word for the fireside; not a word in favor of marriage, in honor of maternity.

He never married. He wandered homeless from place to place with a few disciples. None of them seem to have been engaged in any useful business, and they seem to have lived on alms.
All human ties were held in contempt; this world was sacrificed for the next; all human effort was discouraged. God would support and protect.
At last, in the dusk of death, Christ, finding that he was mistaken, cried out: "My God! My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?"

We have found that man must depend on himself. He must clear the land; he must build the home; he must plow and plant; he must invent; he must work with hand and brain; he must overcome the difficulties and obstructions; he must conquer and enslave the forces of nature to the end that they may do the work of the world."

Comments, questions or concerns?
Click to expand...




All this tells me is that Robert Ingersoll knew virtually nothing about Jesus' teachings.
 
dadalus said:
Robert Ingersoll (look him up) was a remarkable man and his writings are forceful even 100 years later.

This is one that I think stands out for its force and brevity on how we should actually view the character of Jesus in the Bible.

"IS CHRIST OUR EXAMPLE?

HE never said a word in favor of education. He never even hinted at the existence of any science. He never uttered a word in favor of industry, economy or of any effort to better our condition in this world. He was the enemy of the successful, of the wealthy. Dives was sent to hell, not because he was bad, but because he was rich. Lazarus went to heaven, not because he was good, but because he was poor.

Christ cared nothing for painting, for sculpture, for music—nothing for any art. He said nothing about the duties of nation to nation, of king to subject; nothing about the rights of man; nothing about intellectual liberty or the freedom of speech. He said nothing about the sacredness of home; not one word for the fireside; not a word in favor of marriage, in honor of maternity.

He never married. He wandered homeless from place to place with a few disciples. None of them seem to have been engaged in any useful business, and they seem to have lived on alms.
All human ties were held in contempt; this world was sacrificed for the next; all human effort was discouraged. God would support and protect.
At last, in the dusk of death, Christ, finding that he was mistaken, cried out: "My God! My God! Why hast thou forsaken me?"

We have found that man must depend on himself. He must clear the land; he must build the home; he must plow and plant; he must invent; he must work with hand and brain; he must overcome the difficulties and obstructions; he must conquer and enslave the forces of nature to the end that they may do the work of the world."

Comments, questions or concerns?
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that Christ was a carpenter, and his ministry was only a year or so.
And you don't know what he thought or cared about beyond what was written in the four Bible gospels.
 
Cally said:
If you're familiar with the Bible, then you know that God is justified in damning people to eternal hell for their sins because He is completely holy. Even the slightest fault is worthy of total condemnation. And no matter what good a person does, he or she can never cover his or her own sin. Only the blood of Christ does that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps God is "justified," in damning souls to hell, if we use the circular logic found in the Bible, but are humans justified in accepting a god who (justified or not) would do such a thing to His own creations?

That's where I run afoul of the etiological myth.
 
Is Christ our Example? Manifestly not, if you are an American. You seem to be the most hypocritical people on earth.
 
How so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom