|
|
|||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 7 users and 54 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: OlyBlog is powered by:
Who's new
 |
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 4:33pm.
»
|
OlyBlog.net OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you. If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here. Now playing at: 
Latest Classified Ads Upcoming events
 
|
|
|
More Flickr photos tagged with "olympia" and "washington" OlyBlog is a site for news and discussion about Olympia, Washington. |
|||
No!
Submitted by CIAGuy on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 4:52pm.Opposite Response
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:13pm.It is not a question of intelligence, but a question of ethical and moral motivations.
Why did the CIA support and encourage Osama bin Laden's brand of Extremism? (It's not Islam by the way. Islam does not advocate killing innocent people.)
Why did the CIA and the State Department cooperate in putting the tyrant Saddam Hussein into power?
right
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:18pm.Mainstream Islam
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:22pm.don't want to hijack,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:27pm.The Koran does support killing innocents,
Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:33pm.One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
well technically,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:37pm.For your edification.
Submitted by Tschida on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:44pm.One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
Paul,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:56pm.And then there's this:
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them- bring them here and kill them in front of me."- Luke 19:27
I've got a shiny quarter for the first person who can guess who said it.
I want that shiny quarter.
Submitted by Phil Owen on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 6:36pm.It was a nobleman who said it. Specifically, the nobleman in Jesus' parable of the pounds. In the parable, the nobleman leaves his servants to travel to a foreign land to claim the foreign throne. The people in the foreign land reject him.
It is not uncommon for Jesus' parables to depict cruel and unkind people. As in the parable of the pounds, the point is not that God is cruel (and it would be a mistake to draw this conclusion from the parable). The point is that we are expected to put the grace given us to good use... the kind of use that is talked about in the Sermon on the Mount about loving enemies and such.
The reason that unkind people are used in some parables is for shock value. It is not to say that God is unkind, but rather that God's expectations are like the expectations of this real jerk. People sit up when you say something like that, because it is counter to what they expect to hear. God is unreasonable, and expects unreasonable faithfulness. But we are not asked to kill, to be cruel, or to be unkind. Just the opposite.
Nor are the parables of the pounds or the talents a blessing of usury. Usury is condemned all over the Bible and was not permitted to Christians until the advent of Capitalism (and the people who did the permitting should be scrutinized). Again, the point is shock value. The parables start with this idea that God's expectations are like unto the expectations of a usurer.
This is really just the kind of problem with the anti-theism of the neo-atheist movement. It's ignorant. If you're going to try to beat people over the head with their own scriptures, you at least should really try to get acquainted with those scriptures first. No more taking lines out of context.
The Canaanite's Call
ok
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 9:24pm.How about this:
From Mathew:
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
As briefly as I can...
Submitted by Phil Owen on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 10:07pm.These are similar statements as the ones I pick on people for:
"Persecuted for Christ"
and
"I know I'm being effective if people are angry."
Jesus is warning his followers here that they will be outcast, persecuted, hated at home, etc. for following his teachings. Understood in the correct sense, there's nothing crazy about this. Just look at the people in history who have done the best at loving their enemies, being in solidarity with the poor, and denouncing exploitation. They get screwed.
This passage points to the extraordinarily radical message of the Gospels.
The Canaanite's Call
that's certainly the way I would expect you,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 10:30pm.But, as a believer, how do you reconcile being right, when being right means that many people, some of your closest friends included, will suffer for eternity for not believing? How do you look Mohammad Ayub or Seth Goldstein or myself in the eye and honestly feel that we deserve an eternal damnation for not believing your way?
Where in the hell do you get
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 12:16am.Where in the hell do you get this stuff, Rob? I think you might be mistaking me for the wackos.
Here's the trouble - you read authors who, in their interpretation of Scripture, absolutely fail to acknowledge the existence of vast libraries of scholarship. They are like people trying to read a difficult existentialist philosopher, yet who haven't read anything else at all about existentialism, or even philosophy for that matter. You could get some really wierd ideas about what existential crisis is at that level of ignorance. Just try taking a "literal approach" to some of the philosophers out there.
And I'll just say this: they have a motive for their ignorance. They want to interpret Scripture in the same way as the so-called "literalists" do, precisely because it takes the least effort and also because the wackos get a lot more press than the scholars. They're riding the coat-tails of the worst "thinkers" in theology, in order to get lots of press and to have as easy a time as possible at creating the most monstrous straw man they can build. They're frauds.
(BTW - your assumption: The "right" belief is that anyone who doesn't believe like I do is going to a fiery pit in the ground. It's ludicrous.)
The Canaanite's Call
Okay Rob, I'm sorry. That
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 12:49am.Okay Rob, I'm sorry. That last comment was flaming and vicious and over the top.
Your comment was intensively personal. I just realized that, as I was typing out the vitriol above, what I really wanted to say was, "What kind of person do you think I am?!"
What kind of person do you think I am? How do you look me in the eye believing what you do about my faith? I mean, we've had no shortage of beers between us. And for that matter (beer aside), how do you look Ayub in the eye believing what you do about Islam?
The Canaanite's Call
well,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 9:08am.And Phil, I think you know me better than to accuse me of making my mind up about something after reading just one or two books about it.
or this,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 9:28pm.4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables
4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
-Is Jesus speaking in parables in order to confuse people?-
In a sense.
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 12:24am.Here's a word from my Education for Ministry textbook on that particular passage:
Parables have extraordinary teaching value. They allow the teacher to convey concepts that cannot be easily articulated, and make those concepts concrete and personal. But understanding the parables (which was actually easier for people at the time; the parables mostly have cultural context that is difficult for us to get into) takes work. You've got to think, to humble yourself, and to explore yourself. "...the measure you give will be the measure you get..." Mark 4:24
Consider the story of the rich man who wanted to get into the Kingdom (Matthew 19:16-26) (btw, we're not talking "Heaven" here, but rather what translates better as "God's Reign" - a kind of heaven on earth that is found through faith, trust, and obedience). Jesus told him to sell all he had and give it to the poor. The rich man simply couldn't find it within himself to do so. (This passage includes the "eye of the needle" line.) The demand was a stumbling block.
So are the parables. They can't be comprehended without a little work, humility, and wisdom. Most of the parables are shocking, even offensive. They turn worldly wisdom on its head (take some time to meditate on the parables of the Prodigal Son or of the laborers who get equal wages to get a sense of what I'm saying). We simply can't get past them without being transformed.
In spite of what the "Salvation by Faith Alone" people say, God has expectations of His servants. We are expected to accomplish precisely what we are unable to accomplish. This is why, in the story of the rich man when his disciples ask how anyone is to get into the kingdom, Jesus says, "...for God all things are possible". (Matthew 19:26) Jesus is suggesting here that God does a great deal of the hard work in us. We are given a stumbling block beyond which we can't get, and must humble ourselves to allow God to work within us.
I should also mention here that Jesus is citing a passage from Isaiah (6:9-10). This passage occurs immediately after Isaiah's calling to the vocation of prophet, and is in the earlier, pre-exile chapters of Isaiah that scholars refer to as the "Isaiah of Jerusalem".
The chapter in which this passage sits predicts the coming hardships that result from Israel's apostacy. I think (I'll need to look it up) that the exile to Babylon began in the life of Isaiah of Jerusalem, so this passage would be referring to the horrors of the exile. In spite of its brutality, the exile in Bablyon is credited with transforming Israel's theology and relationship to the divine. A great deal of social justice type literature in the prophets was written immediately preceding, during, and immediately after the exile. Jeremiah, who wrote during the exile, encouraged the Israelites to build a new relationship with God, independent of the Temple (it is difficult to convey how radical this idea was at the time). Most of the messianic and apocalyptic literature was born of the exile.
At any rate, I should say that there is a great deal of scholarly debate about a whole lot of passages in Scripture, this particular passage not being the least among them. Everything I've written in this comment is strictly IMHO.
The Canaanite's Call
Let's stop
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 9:00am.A very important question that I feel you glossed over by turning it back around to me, was the question of what you think is going to happen to the rest of us when we die or when your savior returns. If it offends you that I ask whether or not you believe I and all of your other non-christian friends are going to pay some fierce penalty in hot climates, then perhaps you have issues that need to be dealt with regarding your choice of faith. I don't get how it's OK to just forget about that part, the bible promises no end to my suffering, yet the very mention of is taken personal by you. I should be the one angry at you, no? After all, you want me to burn in hell if I don't change my ways. No matter how good of a person I am in this life, no matter how hard I try to make the world better at least for those around me, if I don't bend my knee and pray to your invisible friend, I burn in hell. I simply do not buy that.
Life is about living, to worry about some imaginary consequences is a waste of time. Religion is the great divider of people right now, imagine the things we could accomplish if we could cast it aside and see each other as equals instead of infidels.
I didn't gloss over any questions.
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 11:21am.When are you going to stop beating women, Rob? Have you quit using meth yet?
Can you find a common factor between these two questions? Because they're a lot like the questions you asked me. You didn't ask if I believe people go to hell or for what reasons, you accused. The questions came after, and had the general tone of "how could you".
The Canaanite's Call
I assumed, you're right. I shouldn't have, forgive me.
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 1:01pm.So how do you reconcile the fact that you don't believe in parts of the bible when it's all the word of God?
So how do you reconcile the
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:35pm.So how do you reconcile the fact that you don't believe in parts of the bible when it's all the word of God?
Who said I don't believe in parts of the Bible? And what do you mean when you say, "...it's all the word of God?"
The Canaanite's Call
well,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:53pm.If the bible is considered the infallible word of God, then how is it possible that a human being can say, "This part of it is wrong, and this part of it is right; I'm going to follow this, but not this?"
You wouldn't believe, but
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 6:16pm.I actually wrote a very long and pretty well composed comment this morning to answer the first part of this question (the heaven/hell stuff). It took me nearly twenty minutes to type. But then I accidentally put the cursor off the text box when I was trying to delete a typo, and the backspace key sent me back to the main thread page. I tried to return to the unfinished comment, but it was lost. Then I had to go to work.
Hmph.
I'll answer in a separate post, titled "The Religion Thread", either later tonight or tomorrow.
The Canaanite's Call
Our selfishness and innate capacity for tribalism is the divider
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 11:47am.Oh but it doesn't really matter to me
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 1:09pm.This is part of the stigma of being atheist, that's right, I'm gonna pull the "I'm so oppressed" card. As an atheist I'm hounded for criticizing religion. You don't understand why it matters to me? Maybe I think religion is a destructive force that is going to tear our world apart if we don't shed it soon. If I said that, would you then say, "OK, you seem to feel very strongly about that, in that case, go right ahead." Most likely you would not. Most likely the response I would get would be that I was crazy, or overreacting, even though I'm not the one who believes in a giant invisible man in the sky.
I am hard pressed to understand how you
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 1:47pm.know I would respond to your hypothetical. And I don't believe in a giant invisible man in the sky, which is a rather fundamentalist notion of god. Don't bind me to your prejudices. I recommend you to some Thomas Merton.
And, I don't think you are hounded for being an athiest (a belief system I have no problem with). I think you are being hounded because you criticize others. If you criticized some republicans, would you consider yourslef oppressed if they hounded you as a result?
Believe me, I have very serious problems with many Christians. But I have some serious difficulty understanding how my personal brand of faith affects anyone in a negative way. You seem to think I have an obligation to reform other Christians. Well, I do so everytime I speak about matters of faith. But I cannot make them listen.
I give up
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:07pm.Don't give up Rob
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:19pm.no worries,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:23pm.I'll probably be out for drinks tonight around 7, if you're there we can continue the discussion.
Great hijack Rob
Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 5:46pm.I don't believe it
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 9:07pm.and you're right,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 9:30pm.Perhaps you should...
Submitted by Tschida on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 9:32am.Phil did a good job refuting Rob's specific versus from the Bible. I don't agree with Phil much but he did a much better job with Rob than I would have done. That goes without saying though I suppose! Rob is sort of offended that Christian faith would make clear that those who do not accept
Christ as their savior will be sent to hell. But the But the Bible is pretty clear on the matter. Deeds will not get you into heaven.
Does this mean that friends and family will likely not be in heaven with us? Sadly yes. God does not want anyone to suffer this and has made it as easy as possible for us to have redemption and be close to Him.
One of the great non sequiturs of the left is that, if the free market doesn't work perfectly, then it doesn't work at all-- and the government should step in.
Thomas Sowell
let's be clear,
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 9:58am.Your sentence about me being offended stopped halfway through but I think you were saying that I'm offended by Christians and their belief in hell as a punishment. That's just not true. It's not something I believe in, therefore I put as much stake in it as you do Valhalla. It seems we are both atheists in some regards.
Don't buy it Rob
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 10:08am.how convenient
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 10:10am.Convenient for everyone involed
Submitted by Guglielmo on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 10:29am.you asked this question twice
Submitted by Rob Richards on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 1:16pm.If 90 percent of this
Submitted by Phil Owen on Thu, 01/03/2008 - 4:33pm.If 90 percent of this country views me as evil for not believing in God
You're being silly now, Rob.
The Canaanite's Call
I think it is part of the
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Wed, 01/02/2008 - 10:15pm.If religion succeeds in separating people and furthering social divisiveness and exclusiveness, then I think that needs to be addressed and remedied.
The goal should be to further our understanding, appreciation and tolerance of each other.
Rob has a good point in that religion as it is practiced by many has negative social consequences. But Phil has an equally good point that religion, when practiced as G-d intended it to be practiced, has a profoundly uplifting and positive impact. Am I right that is what I hear you guys are saying?