Choosing a faith

Sorry, I missed this reply.I have to say, when I see people doing it I feel a mixture of embarrassment and disgust. All that grovelling! I can sort of understand everyone having a good sing-along but communal chanting of religious drivel turns my stomach.It's all very silly and looks very cultish to me.

Perhaps the revolution as it were was and is non-violent externally, but I would argue that internally, salvation/deliverance and healing can be quite violent and extreme. Here are some things to chew on. Perhaps, but consider the meaning of the following scripture: Ringo has a point. Jesus (as a character in the book if nothing else ) was far from a peaceful hippie.​

It's religion. No matter what the flavor they are all cults by definition. And like the coach of a football team the priest leads in the "we're number one!" chant as their worship service. All cults are the same. Stupid mob mentality.

That reminds me of my 10-year-old son's confused reaction to a Lutheran service.We had joined a Unitarian-Universalist church, so that was what Ian had grown up with. Our sermons were somewhat intellectual in nature, posing meaningful questions, discussing issues and history, etc. Even our hymns (traditional music with entirely new lyrics) were meaningful and thought-provoking; eg, "Some call it God, some call it Evolution.").My then-wife's brother and his then-wife, Trisha, were fundamentalists of the Chuck Smith Calvary Chapel variety -- because of the turmoil and acrimony he caused when he tried to convert the rest of the family, my mother-in-law had a very strict rule forbidding any discussion of religion in the house. Actually, I knew Trisha from my French class where another student described her as "that Jesus Freak chick", which was the first time I had ever heard that term. She was best friends with Jeannie who years later showed up at an Atheists United lunch and told me about their "friendship". They were inseparable but Trisha kept trying to convert her and she kept resisting. When Trisha finally realized that Jeannie would never convert, she broke off their "friendship" and never talked to Jeannie again. IOW, the only reason Trisha was friends with her was to gain a convert, a dirty trick I've seen other fundies pull.OK, that sets up the scene with the kind of people they were. So they were leaving "true Christianity" for Lutheranism. Why? Just because they wanted to get their young daughter into the church's school (I'm pretty sure Calvary didn't have a school yet). As Redd Foxx said in Harlem Nights: "That must be some really good ***** to make a man switch gods."Part of their joining that "apostate" church was a dedication ceremony, which is why we and the rest of the family were there. The service was mostly praise that basically amounted to "Yeh, Jesus! Yeh, Jesus! Rah-rah-rah!" Dumbfounded, Ian looked to me as if to ask, "What is this? What is happening?"

Correct.I was referring to the Holy Spirit and/or perception/awareness thereof.How can one have objective evidence of a vapor or cloud of steam? You are correct in approaching the Bible critically and unbiased, but a believer is not always wrong for approaching the arguments from their very different discipline, story, preferred narrative and the reason or reasons for challenging the secular scholars, the mythicists, the Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennets, Sam Harris's and on and on.We see Monsters where science shows us windmills. We see demons in action whereas science sees quantifiable mental conditions. We see Jesus whereas you simply ask "Which One"?

Fair enough but as Bob Dylan penned "ya gotta serve somebody". You can worship God, Buddah Mohammed etc, or you can even choose power, money, sex status etc.I choose to serve God as we seem Him embodied in Jesus. It is not about needing a saviour.So yes, I do my best to pick and choose in the Bible based upon what I see in Jesus.

I can see why you would say that but I'm not completely sure what type of service you are referring to. I don't see it as grovelling. I see church as not a place to get God to do what I want Him to do, but as a place that helps me become the person that He wants me to be.I guess I see it this way. You can see my signature where I quote a verse that IMHO is consistent with Christ's command to love. I see a church service is primarily to aid me in that call on our lives. This is not to say that you need church, or even Christianity for that matter, but I believe that it helps to love out that calling.

Hi Phat This is the problem with understanding the Bible literally, with literal meaning essentially as if this library of books all have one consistent ethos. They are written by numerous authors over several centuries. Jesus didn't read it that way as we can see how, particularly in the "Sermon on the Mount" He repudiates some of the OT commands.Jesus was a 1st century Jew in a 1st century Jewish culture dominated by the Romans. He preached forcefully against the various movements that were advocating and preparing for a violent revolution to rid the country of the Romans. He said things like "love your enemy", "turn the other cheek", "go the extra mile etc.He also forecast what would happen if the went the route of violent revolution, using in many cases Jewish apocalyptic language, such as stars falling and the sun being darkened. He went as far as forecasting the destruction of the Temple if they went the route of violence.Remember as John 1 says that the Word became flesh; he didn't say that it became a book. Those verses are a reference to the violence that the church was suffering, and certainly was not about a call on the church to violence. The hippies were not really a peaceful bunch in general, and their mantra often was, "if it feels good do it" or "looking out for number one.However I suggest you look at Jesus' response to His follower that cut off the ear of the Roman soldier. One thing He said was "those that live by the sword. die by the sword".

But it isn't what you "see" in Jesus. Matthew 25 is clear that Jesus condemns people to eternal torment but you whitewash your made-up Jesus.

Well, you certainly phrased that badly, didn't you? What could be easier than measuring the temperature of a cloud of steam? And three-year-olds see Santa Claus where science sees a guy with a fake beard who's being paid by the mall. Why do you agree with science in one case and not the other?

Sorry missed this.

quote:

---

I never said that the Farrer hypothesis din't need Q

---

Evasion. As I stated the Farrer hypothesis does away with Q without Matthean priority. And it can do that because Matthean priority has almost no relevance to the issue.

quote:

---

My only point was that Matthean priority as outlined in the Griesbach hypothesis did away with Q.

---

Which is obviously not true. It is not Matthean priority that does away with Q, it is the idea that Luke used Matthew as a source.

quote:

---

If the Griesbach hypothesis is one of the available proposals. It is a minority view which I happen to agree with. That is the only claim I'm making.

---

False again. You even misrepresent your own arguments. The (false) claim you actually made was that the Griesbach hypothesis somehow proves that Matthean priority does away with Q. You don’t explain how - because it doesn’t. (And if you really cared about the truth you would know that).

quote:

---

I didn't claim that it was needed.

---

So just what does it do then? If assuming that Luke uses Matthew as a source is all that is necessary how can you say that Matthean priority does away with Q? Because even Griesbach makes that assumption.

Yes I know. What I was getting at is John 3:1-21.

Read Matthew 25 again before accusing Jesus of condemning any human. Youwhitewash right over Jesus and steal His message for your clueless socialists.Let us examine Matthew 25.

quote:

---

Matt 25:31-46--
"When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.'

​

37 "Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?' 40 And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.'

​

41 "Then He will also say to those on the left hand,' Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.'

​

44 "Then they also will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?' 45 Then He will answer them, saying, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
NKJV

---

Read it carefully.
Verse 31-When the son of Man comes in His glory. The implication is of a time in the future. There are no sheep nor goats listening to Jesus. There are but humans.
The sheep become sheep at a later time, during the separation.(Verse 32)...there will be a separation. The goats likewise are judged as goats at that same future time. Jesus is essentially warning everyone that there will come a time in the future when there will be a separation. I could be a goat today (though I am but a human. Ringo...or perhaps Jesus...warn me to straighten up and let go. If I refuse, I will be judged as a goat in the future judgment. If I repent, there is still time to redeem myself.Don't try and tell me that Jesus sends people to hell. He sends demons...operating in us...who we neglect to kick out. The warning is that if we don't clean up our act, we will be separated from Jesus.(When He comes back)

It is interesting to see how phake Christians try to explain away the parts they don't like.

Why, in the context of religion, are you distinguishing between faith and belief? Is it because you see faith as unevidenced while belief can have evidence? Yes, we know you feel that way. Now you have to go off and gather evidence that will convince other people that there's something beyond chemical reactions going on in our brains that we haven't detected yet.There's already massive evidence against you. For example, emotions like grief can be caused by sticking a probe in the corresponding part of your brain.--Percy