So Why Is The Gospel Still An Offense?

[Tanstaafl]

<snip> What is it that has happened recently which is supposed to have changed the offensive, or otherwise, nature of the gospel? Surely you're not suggesting that your witnessing here has been so startlingly effective as to have rendered all of us Christian?

I think that's exactly what she was thinking. She has given us the "truth" many, many times. Surely by now we should have seen the light! So are we still offended by the Gospels?

Of course, Kathy is the correct one to answer this. I just doubt that she'll bother.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Smug, yes. Misguided and clueless, yes. But I would disagree with calling her "hate-filled and nasty."

ahem:

Just east of St. Louis in Maryville, IL a man shot and killed the pastor of a Baptist church during the service.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/08/church.shooting/index.html

Have these sorts of incidents increased, or is that just a reporting bias (or a bias on my part)?

Well I am afraid these types of events will continue to grow as the end draws near. We are warned in scripture many times that believers will suffer persecution.

If I was a preacher or pastor would some of you here on Jref do this to me?

[bolding mine]

 

[HansMustermann]

I dunno, Elisabeth, that could just as well a genuine concern, the way I read it. Born of a disturbing disconnect with reality / living in a weird fairy tale world, but nevertheless...

ETA: Basically all I'm saying is, don't forget Hanlon's Razor

 

[Minarvia]

KK, also remember that believers do a lot of persecuting themselves. And, no, I would not persecute anyone. The history of the Christian church is so bloody and horrible (not that others aren't as guilty, too) that I have a hard time feeling sorry for any believer who complains of persecution. The present is not so different from the past. Imo, only secular laws prevent the "rest of us" from being persecuted by believers in some countries. Not only does the US offer religious freedom, but it offers (or should) protection FROM it. As for me, I'm pretty much live and let live, as long as no-one is harmed.

 

[temporalillusion]

That KK doesn't even respond to Hokulele's offer is all that needs to be known.

 

[Third Eye Open]

Is it the message of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross that you find offensive?
Or is it the Christians who share the message with you?

Over and over I hear people stating mostly it’s the Christians they find offensive rather than Christ. If you judge Christ by his followers then you are not seeing him right since Jesus was the only sinless being who ever lived. I also think it best to remember Jesus said it is not the well that need a doctor but the sick so Christians just have gotten to a place where they agree with God and they know they need a Savior then we repent and follw his teachings. Do we do it perfectly no, but we admit our need for forgivess as all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. If you could truly have the gift of repentance then you would know it’s all true.

So again I ask if God has made a way of escaping judgment for each of us who would not want to take it? The message of the cross is only foolishness to those who are perishing, but the good news is you still have time to change your mind and receive what Jesus did for you on the cross. He died for all of us so we could be reconciled to God, what’s so offensive about that?

Yes, I find it offensive.

I find it offensive that so many young people are told that they are worthless without your approval.

I find it offensive that children are haunted with fears of eternal torture should they think the wrong thought

I find it offensive that you have set an impossible standard so that you can tell everyone, no matter how good a person, that they have 'fallen short'.

I find it offensive that you applaud sacrifice and suffering, as if pain is something to aspire to.

I find it offensive that you will not be satisfied until everyone is living his life full of guilt and shame. Guilt for the suffering Jesus endured, which is constantly rubbed in our faces as our fault, and shame that we continue to do what supposedly caused this horror: be human.

Yes I find the whole concept of Christianity offensive. The idea that god offers us the 'gift' of salvation is as ludicrous to me as that of a slaver offering his slave the 'gift' of freedom, should he only bow down and thank his wonderful master. The idea that god holds the threat of punishment over us for things we cannot avoid is as evil as a parent that admonishes his child for defecation, sparing the rod only should he admit that he was wrong and promise never to do it again.

I find your need to worship pathetic. And your god disgusting.

 

[Minarvia]

Yes, I find it offensive.

I find it offensive that so many young people are told that they are worthless without your approval.

I find it offensive that children are haunted with fears of eternal torture should they think the wrong thought

I find it offensive that you have set an impossible standard so that you can tell everyone, no matter how good a person, that they have 'fallen short'.

I find it offensive that you applaud sacrifice and suffering, as if pain is something to aspire to.

I find it offensive that you will not be satisfied until everyone is living his life full of guilt and shame. Guilt for the suffering Jesus endured, which is constantly rubbed in our faces as our fault, and shame that we continue to do what supposedly caused this horror: be human.

Yes I find the whole concept of Christianity offensive. The idea that god offers us the 'gift' of salvation is as ludicrous to me as that of a slaver offering his slave the 'gift' of freedom, should he only bow down and thank his wonderful master. The idea that god holds the threat of punishment over us for things we cannot avoid is as evil as a parent that admonishes his child for defecation, sparing the rod only should he admit that he was wrong and promise never to do it again.

I find your need to worship pathetic. And your god disgusting.

Ouch. Inside, I agree with you on this. I don't find KK awful, just her religion and most other religions. But you have pretty much voiced what I am reluctant to say out loud.

 

[HeyLeroy]

Kathy, I have a few questions that I'd like answered before committing myself to Christianity.

1) According to my understanding of Luke 1:31, Mary was warned ("You will be with child and give birth to a son") she'd be impregnated (by the Holy Spirit, no less; not God [Luke 1:35 - "The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.]); there's no mention that she gave consent.

Is rape wrong?

2) But wait... according to Revelation 22:16 - "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

Mary wasn't a descendent of David; Joseph was. If Jesus was the blood-offspring of Joseph, how could he have been sired by God?

3) How do I know if I'm not already damned to hell? Maybe I'm one of the people God's chosen to harden:

Romans 9:15-23

For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory—

I mean, I could miss a lot of Sunday football attending church and still miss the bus, right?

4) Is Judas Iscariot in Heaven? I mean, he was just a pawn, right? Someone had to fink Jesus out to the Romans for the prophecy to be true. Jesus volunteered, Judas was just the cosmic scapegoat. If Judas is in Hell, roasting for eternity, why shouldn't we pray to him instead? Jesus just suffered for a few hours on the cross and only three days in Hell.

5) If Jesus and Jehovah are one and the same (John 10:30 "I and the Father are one."), why did Jesus have to pray (Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.")?

6) What do you think about Matthew 6:5-6 ("And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.")?

7) How did Christianity even ever spring up around a guy named Jesus, when according to Isaiah 7:14 - "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel."? This is even supported by Matthew 1:22 -

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"—which means, "God with us."

Can you help me out here, Kathy? I really want to believe!

 

[headscratcher4]

Josephus' documents were doctored centuries later.

next your going to tell me that the Donation of Constantine was a made-up document.

 

[Minarvia]

It's times like these that I really miss Articulette.

 

[Nogbad]

Is it the message of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross that you find offensive?
Or is it the Christians who share the message with you?

Over and over I hear people stating mostly it’s the Christians they find offensive rather than Christ. If you judge Christ by his followers then you are not seeing him right since Jesus was the only sinless being who ever lived. I also think it best to remember Jesus said it is not the well that need a doctor but the sick so Christians just have gotten to a place where they agree with God and they know they need a Savior then we repent and follw his teachings. Do we do it perfectly no, but we admit our need for forgivess as all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. If you could truly have the gift of repentance then you would know it’s all true.

So again I ask if God has made a way of escaping judgment for each of us who would not want to take it? The message of the cross is only foolishness to those who are perishing, but the good news is you still have time to change your mind and receive what Jesus did for you on the cross. He died for all of us so we could be reconciled to God, what’s so offensive about that?

There is nothing offensive about someone being cruelly murdered for suggesting that it might be a better world if people were less judgemental and considered the needs of others. That religious people were offended by such a message and had him killed is of course in itself offensive.

It is also offensive that this message of tolerance and understanding was twisted into some bizarre new religion which became as intolerant and as dogmatic as the one that executed him in the first place and then happily tortured and murdered its way through history: executing horribly anyone that disagreed with the new dogma.

It is not the person but all the religious trappings, buzz words and dogma that are offensive. One does not need miracles, and special word formulae to see that being kind to someone who needs help makes the world a better place. However, such a simple gospel is deemed folly by the religious and in its place they put the intangible and hurdles for people to jump. They seek to shut the gate on those they disapprove of

 

[headscratcher4]

A close reading of the Gospels would suggest that Jesus is not preaching tolerance and understanding...he is preaching direct, flawless, un-adulterated adherence to his version of God and God's truth. Any deviation from that "truth" lands one in the lake of fire, as it were. Christians who have followed a bloody path are merely acting out the core dictates of their beliefs. God is intolerant of sin and of sinners. You are either with god or against god.

 

[Nogbad]

A close reading of the Gospels would suggest that Jesus is not preaching tolerance and understanding...he is preaching direct, flawless, un-adulterated adherence to his version of God and God's truth. Any deviation from that "truth" lands one in the lake of fire, as it were. Christians who have followed a bloody path are merely acting out the core dictates of their beliefs. God is intolerant of sin and of sinners. You are either with god or against god.

That is a possible reading yes and one much favoured by the heresy inquisitions.

He is also reputed to have said "those not against us are for us". There is, I believe two strands, running through the gospels. The nastier reading has largely held sway through history but the more liberal reading has always had a following (admittedly that following has periodically found itself on the wrong side of a good burning).

 

[Palimpsest]

Oh, man, I leave the forum for months and Kurious Kathy is still popping up? Some things never change.

 

[X]

You misunderstand the doctrine of the immaculate conception - it has nothing to do with sex.

Since Adam and Eve at the fruit, all mankind was cursed with the taint of Original Sin - we are born as sinners thanks to Adam and Eve, and must be redeemed.

However, Mary, being the one who was to give birth to Jesus, was conceived without this taint. Presumably her parents had sex, but an exception was made and she did not get the taint of Original Sin that everyone else has.

Jesus is the only one whose conception didn't involve sex.

All right. Catholic Dogma is just weird.

It helps if you don't think about it.



Actually, it occurs to me that that is true of all religions.

They're fine if you think what you are told, but crumble if you think about what you are told.

KuriousKathy might want to think about that.

 

[Anerystos]

I don't want to appear ignorant, or to revisit something which may have been covered before, but what does "coredeptrous" mean? As far as I can find, it doesn't appear in any dictionary known to any search engine which I access.

Am I, perhaps, right in thinking that it is yet another invention of our KuriousKathy, like most of her religion appears to be.

 

[Tanstaafl]

I think it refers to Mary being a co-redeemer, along with Jesus.

Instead of Jesus being the only way to have your sins forgiven, Mary provides an alternative avenue.

Agggh! My fingers feel weird after typing such utter nonsense!

 

[Minarvia]

Mary was incorporated, I believe, to make up for the fact that this religion was going to be so male oriented. So to help some pagans along and other cultures that didn't think women were completely worthless.

 

[HansMustermann]

Actually, Mary got incorporated when the Council Of Nicaea shoved a good helping of random greek philosophy (and just a little Mythran mysteries) up Christianity's back side.

The rationale AFAIK was that something perfect and pure cannot come (even partially) out of something imperfect and/or impure. So for Jesus to be the incarnation of godly perfection, his mom couldn't be just another sinful woman.

Of course, now some saw the problem with Mary and her parents, so at least one doctrine waved around was that God actually retroactively forgave Mary's whole lineage, all the way to Adam and Eve, for Jesus to work as the greek philosophers expected.

 

[Minarvia]

Actually, Mary got incorporated when the Council Of Nicaea shoved a good helping of random greek philosophy (and just a little Mythran mysteries) up Christianity's back side.

True. But I wish I could remember where I read it or learned it, but the incorporation of Mary was being considered for a long time due to various reasons, such as I stated above. Of course I reserve the right to be wrong but I'm sure PR had something to do with it!