Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

[LynahFan]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Oh boy...where's those straws. They called themselves out as Quakers...they were called out of a larger group to the public as Quakers...and you're point is that they probably weren't Quakers? When Thomas Paine joined an organization...do you think everyone said 'oh there's a Quaker joining us'?

No, he's saying it's a bit disingenuous for you to claim that their convictions were based on Christianity when they didn't even self-identify as mainstream Christians. Yet, you would turn around and do just that to every Southern Baptist who ever argued in favor of slavery - they called themselves Christians...they were called out of a larger group to the public as Christians...and your point is that they probably weren't Christian.

In short, show any examples where slavery was extended by applying Christ's principles...rather than showing examples of people who advanced positions contrary to Christ's principles.

See, that's what you say, but what you mean is, "Show me an example where someone extended slavery using what *I*, in 2014, deem to have been one of Christ's true principles." The set-up for No True Scotsman is so obvious it's comical. You might as well say, "No Christian has ever committed murder, because murder is not one of Christ's principles, so those people weren't true Christians." Problem is, if you follow that thought process long enough, you'd be excluding liars, cheaters, adulterers, etc, as well, and pretty soon you'd realize that the only Christian ever was Christ himself. Even Christ considered sinners to be his followers; I guess his standards aren't high enough for you.

(Yes, Cornell '94, and I did have a few professors that I suspect were conservative, but in Engineering it's kind of hard to tell for sure - there was an awful lot of talk of the "Right Hand" ruling everything, though...could have been a coded message!)

[unofan]

Which is a core issue around how non believers misappropriate Christianity (such as the logic used by UNO).

Its the Christ message that matters...and its ongoing impact. Others who say or do things contrary to that message are just using it for their own personal means.

So anything bad done in the name of Christianity means they aren't true Christians but fakes. Anything good done by a Christian is because of their faith. Got it.

[FreshFish]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Apparently someone collected most of the things Gandhi wrote or said about Jesus into an entire book with the title "What Jesus Means to Me," with Gandhi listed as the author.

PDF copy here:

http://www.mkgandhi.org/ebks/whatjesusmeanstome.pdf


or, as cited in wikiquote: "I know of no one who has done more for humanity than Jesus."

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Christianity is a faith based on Christ. If you want to argue that the old testament trumps the new...go find some Jews.

Most Christianity is based on Paul's interpretation of Christ from what I've seen.

[Kepler]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

One question though - did any of you have a conservative lecturer while you were on campus? Or, had they been all run off by then?

98% of the time I had NO idea what the personal political perspective of my professor was. Reports of intellectual bias on campus are (or were then) greatly exaggerated -- if you could make a good argument and support it with facts then you were part of the discussion. There were always a few far left or far right posers who had their panties in a bunch that The Man was keepin' em down, but that was an indication that the kid just didn't rate. Anne Coulter didn't hate Cornell because it was biased; she hated it because her classmates (liberal and conservative) were smart and they didn't fall for her infantile SS drag queen act.

Purely by hearsay I would say that at the time I went to school the only really skewed departments were English (this was the height of the intellectual rot of PoMo and we were a close second to Yale for leading the league in that idiocy) and Business (no prizes for guessing which way they rolled). Oh, and the Math department had a couple anarchists, but I'm pretty sure they were just messing with us.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

I went to UMN and coach F500 companies on fact based strategy. I figured this out within the last 10 years. Nobody told me the stuff in my posts.

So anything bad done in the name of Christianity means they aren't true Christians but fakes. Anything good done by a Christian is because of their faith. Got it.

So let's look at four simple questions:

1. Has Jesus' word had major positive impacts on the evolution of societal norms since the age of enlightenment began?
Yes as shown...in fact, I don't think anyone has attempted to prove otherwise.

2. Has Jesus' word had major negative impacts on the evolution of societal norms during that same time?
I don't know of any...I have yet to see anyone prove or even try to make this case either.

So the final record for Jesus' word is 2-0 and by definition, pretty much a great thing.

3. Are causes frequently poorly executed and/or misrepresented to further personal goals?
Yeah, pretty much all the time...Hitler is example one.

4. How do we know when they are?
They bare little resemblance to the cause that they are supposedly following.

This may have the potential of creating a conundrum for your case. Perhaps that's as it should be.

[geezer]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

98% of the time I had NO idea what the personal political perspective of my professor was. Reports of intellectual bias on campus are (or were then) greatly exaggerated --

I read fairly recently of how academia in the US has changed very quickly in this regard. According to the writer, if anything colleges were seen as far too conservative in political thought as recently as perhaps 40 years ago... I forget the timeline but liberals may have fled to academia en masse during the 80's (?) and schools leaned heavily left during the 90's. My gut feeling is that there's a pretty good balance nowadays. I had three of the lovable old liberal hippie types who were holdovers from the time they controlled the curriculum, and one really conservative guy who was probably here before them. Most of the young professors now are all about open-mindedness to the point of being all squishy about everything. Most of them.
But I came through Humanities.

[unofan]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

1. Has Jesus' word had major positive impacts on the evolution of societal norms since the age of enlightenment began?
Yes as shown...in fact, I don't think anyone has attempted to prove otherwise.

2. Has Jesus' word had major negative impacts on the evolution of societal norms during that same time?
I don't know of any...I have yet to see anyone prove or even try to make this case either.

We're not saying Jesus committed bad acts, we're saying Christians have committed such acts using their religion as a basis for doing so. What you're arguing is that all Southern Baptists during the Civil War were not true Christians because they were pro-slavery. Or, alternatively, that Christianity shouldn't be blamed for it because Jesus was anti-slavery, notwithstanding that millions of Christians (the Southern Baptists) were pro-slavery at the time.

3. Are causes frequently poorly executed and/or misrepresented to further personal goals?
Yeah, pretty much all the time...Hitler is example one.

4. How do we know when they are?
They bare little resemblance to the cause that they are supposedly following.

One person's misrepresentation is another person's true belief. Just because you personally don't want them associated with your religion doesn't mean they don't still qualify as Christians.

Also, I don't understand how you can say the new testament trumps the old rather than complement it. The Old Testament is as much God's word as the New, if you believe in it.

This may have the potential of creating a conundrum for your case. Perhaps that's as it should be.

Nope. You're just missing the point.

[geezer]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Also, I don't understand how you can say the new testament trumps the old rather than complement it.

As I understand this is the basis of Christianity. Jesus fulfilled the law (the old testament) so completely and perfectly as a favor for mankind that it enabled anyone who wants to hitch a ride with him to disregard the requirements of the old testament. The old testament was completely and utterly trumped and made without effect by the Son of God. Otherwise we'd have to avoid shellfish or whatever to be acceptable to God.
Whereas if you're Jewish, Jesus wasn't the true Messiah and therefore the old requirements still apply.

[unofan]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

As I understand this is the basis of Christianity. Jesus fulfilled the law (the old testament) so completely and perfectly as a favor for mankind that it enabled anyone who wants to hitch a ride with him to disregard the requirements of the old testament. The old testament was completely and utterly trumped and made without effect by the Son of God. Otherwise we'd have to avoid shellfish or whatever to be acceptable to God.
Whereas if you're Jewish, Jesus wasn't the true Messiah and therefore the old requirements still apply.

If that were the case, why do we even have the Old Testament in the Bible? Why do Catholics still confess based on the Ten Commandments rather than simply Jesus' "love thy neighbor as yourself" golden rule?

The Catholic schools I went to from K-8,and later law school, and the numerous masses I went to through the years sure placed significant importance on the Old Testament (insert joke here about Protestants saying Catholics aren't Christians). Obviously not as much as the Gospels or Paul's letters since the latter 2 make up 2/3rds of the Bible readings at mass, but they never said the Old Testament somehow didn't apply anymore.

[LynahFan]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

If that were the case, why do we even have the Old Testament in the Bible? Why do Catholics still confess based on the Ten Commandments rather than simply Jesus' "love thy neighbor as yourself" golden rule?

The Catholic schools I went to from K-8,and later law school, and the numerous masses I went to through the years sure placed significant importance on the Old Testament (insert joke here about Protestants saying Catholics aren't Christians). Obviously not as much as the Gospels or Paul's letters since the latter 2 make up 2/3rds of the Bible readings at mass, but they never said the Old Testament somehow didn't apply anymore.

Significant importance on some *parts* of the Old Testament, anyway. You know, the parts consistent with the True Christianity of the day.

[geezer]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

If that were the case, why do we even have the Old Testament in the Bible? Why do Catholics still confess based on the Ten Commandments rather than simply Jesus' "love thy neighbor as yourself" golden rule?

The Catholic schools I went to from K-8,and later law school, and the numerous masses I went to through the years sure placed significant importance on the Old Testament (insert joke here about Protestants saying Catholics aren't Christians). Obviously not as much as the Gospels or Paul's letters since the latter 2 make up 2/3rds of the Bible readings at mass, but they never said the Old Testament somehow didn't apply anymore.

I've mostly heard it read as prophecy foreshadowing the Messiah, and as "a harsh teacher" demonstrating the need for Him.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

We're not saying Jesus committed bad acts, we're saying Christians have committed such acts using their religion as a basis for doing so. What you're arguing is that all Southern Baptists during the Civil War were not true Christians because they were pro-slavery.

Each of the four questions and their answers are valid, and therefore I feel quite comfortable that my point stands.

One person's misrepresentation is another person's true belief. Just because you personally don't want them associated with your religion doesn't mean they don't still qualify as Christians.

Remember I did say misrepresented or poorly executed. Some act counter to Jesus' teaching intentionally and misrepresent their actions, and others do so by a misunderstanding or bad execution. Are these people Christian? By admission...but that doesn't mean they follow Christ's lead.

Again, prove that there was no misrepresentation or poor execution by showing how southerners effectively executed the core tenants of what Jesus preached by practicing slavery...and you'll make your case.

[St. Clown]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

Each of the four questions and their answers are valid, and therefore I feel quite comfortable that my point stands.



Remember I did say misrepresented or poorly executed. Some act counter to Jesus' teaching intentionally and misrepresent their actions, and others do so by a misunderstanding or bad execution. Are these people Christian? By admission...but that doesn't mean they follow Christ's lead.

Again, prove that there was no misrepresentation or poor execution by showing how southerners effectively executed the core tenants of what Jesus preached by practicing slavery...and you'll make your case.

This sounds so much like the old argument that the only true Christians are the Christians that are members of my synod. "You're a Catholic? Well, Catholics have that whole weird thing with the Pope and saint worshipping, they're not Christians. You're a Baptist? You're lucky you can even read, so you can't understand the Bible correctly and therefore not Christian. You Lutherans over there, you're far too __________ to be Christians. Out. The only true Christians belong to the Holy Mount Methodist synod. Only WE understand the message of Christ and execute it correctly." And so on. It's like those that claim Islam isn't a religion, that it's really just a cult. A billion-plus person cult.

[Bob Gray]

Re: Your Political Stance - 2014 Edition

This sounds so much like the old argument that the only true Christians are the Christians that are members of my synod. "You're a Catholic? Well, Catholics have that whole weird thing with the Pope and saint worshipping, they're not Christians. You're a Baptist? You're lucky you can even read, so you can't understand the Bible correctly and therefore not Christian. You Lutherans over there, you're far too __________ to be Christians. Out. The only true Christians belong to the Holy Mount Methodist synod. Only WE understand the message of Christ and execute it correctly." And so on. It's like those that claim Islam isn't a religion, that it's really just a cult. A billion-plus person cult.

Oh, good heavens. So people are what, supposed to not believe that where they attend has things maybe figured out a little better than places you don't attend? There has to be some reason why they attend where they do, and it's probably because their beliefs match closer to those they attend with than the place down the street with different beliefs. You're arguing against human nature. Of course there are people who take it way too far in thinking that only they have the truth and nobody else has a clue, but you're sweeping comments go way beyond such persons.