Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.
Why is it that ultra-conservatives, most of whom claim to embrace Christian values, are the first to chuck their morality once it becomes inconvenient?
How do they reconcile this with their Faith? Is it "do unto others and turn the other cheek" unless the others are "filthy Arab terrorists"?
Seriously, this really vexes me. What loophole have they found in their beliefs?
Old Testament vs New Testament
Turning the other cheek is New. Smite thine enemies is old.
no loophole...they aren't really Christians, just church-going hypocrits. they're the same ones that push for the death penalty, pre-emptive war and fight abortions (while secretly snikkering if a clinic get's bombed) please don't confuse them with those of us that actully follow our beliefs
JohnRussell, if you don't like the question why bother answering at all let alone answering with bigotry. Your comment is inflammatory and rude. The is no reason to be rude.
Your comment is inflammatory and rude.
Other Viners who dislike encountering rude and bigoted spam should use the ! beside the comment vote to share that sentiment with staff and give authors fair credit for those contributions.
What bigotry? The question asked by the author is offensive. Did the people who did the waterboarding say they were inspired to do so by Jesus? If not, what is the point of the question? Jesus never harmed a fly, the same cannot be said for Muhammad. Why is Christianity dragged into this controversy. Haven't you people ever heard of separating church and state?
After reading down to #18, Unrepentant Conservative has the best answer.
Old Testament vs New Testament
Turning the other cheek is New. Smite thine enemies is old.
Many who profess to be Christians follow the Old Covenant instead of the New Covenant.
Who Would Jesus Waterboard (besides Judas)?
I don't even believe that Jesus was 'god' and I can't get my mind around these people who are defending torture!
There is great cognitive dissonance going on here.
Great article, Walt.
Jesus is a nice story embellished by years of retelling. If you chose to see the following as the primary tenet, "Love your neighbor as you do yourself." then he wouldn't even have waterboarded Judas.
No. But many of them, and many of their supporters, claim to be Christians. The point, which is obvious to most, is that torture is un-Christian.
Jesus wouldn't waterboard anybody...so how can his followers support such a thing?
Is the killing of innocents through terror bombing non-Muslim?
I bet Jesus would waterboard Wall Street bankers. He had a thing for money changers, you know. Didn't like 'em, not one bit.
Ever heard of the Crusades, JohnRussell?
Let me explain the problem with this thread to you. The question posed by the thread is why do people who espouse religious ideals betray those ideals. The answer? Human beings are fallen creatures, who do not actualize the potential of their religious beliefs. Otherwise, why would devout Muslims destroy bulidings filled with people and blow up cars on crowded city streets?
How many of the people on Newsvine ask the question "what would Muhammad do"?
Ever heard of the Crusades, JohnRussell?
I had to double check my calendar, 21st Century, if we're going to take religious fanatics to task for holding grudges for centuries on end then shouldn't we hold ourselves to the same standard?
the question posed by the thread is why do people who espouse religious ideals betray those ideals. The answer? Human beings are fallen creatures, who do not actualize the potential of their religious beliefs. Otherwise, why would devout Muslims destroy bulidings filled with people and blow up cars on crowded city streets?
That is a terrific answer! Why then did all your previous "answers" point in only one direction.
How many of the people on Newsvine ask the question "what would Muhammad do"?
Who knows? Why ask now? The authors question has to do with politicians who claim to be of Christian morals but yet love the idea of torture and the like.
I had to double check my calendar, 21st Century, if we're going to take religious fanatics to task for holding grudges for centuries on end then shouldn't we hold ourselves to the same standard?
My point was, Tim, that people kill in the name of religion. All kinds of people.
"they aren't really Christians, just church-going hypocrits."
So, could the same go for an 'environmentalist', who drives an SUV?
The point is if you say you are Christian you can NOT support waterboarding or any torture; if you DO support it, you are NOT Christian. Now, you can look at radical muslims who blow things up and say that it's unfair that they get to act like that and you don't - that's your choice. But again, if you follow in their footsteps and keep holding them up as examples, you aren't Christian.
It's pretty simple.
My point was, Tim, that people kill in the name of religion. All kinds of people.
I get your point, I agree with your point, but citing examples a thousand years old doesn't have much impact.
That is a terrific answer! Why then did all your previous "answers" point in only one direction.
How many of the people on Newsvine ask the question "what would Muhammad do"?
Who knows? Why ask now? The authors question has to do with politicians who claim to be of Christian morals but yet love the idea of torture and the like.
My other answers are meant to show the prejudicial nature of the question. People who follow every precept of their religion 100% of the time are saints, not people in government in wartime.
Jesus wouldn't waterboard anybody...so how can his followers support such a thing?
Just like Jesus wouldn't lie, covet thy neighbors wife, think impure thoughts, cheat, steal, lust, be greedy... etc etc. If anyone can act totally perfect like Jesus.. please raise your hand. Sinning is sinning... dosen't matter what the sin. Its all the same. So "sinning" by waterboarding as you are equating it, would be like "sinning" and telling a fib to your sister / brother. One in the same (In God's eyes). Just because someone declares themself a Christian dosen't mean they act like one... same goegs with people of many different faiths as well. No one is perfect and everyone falters. We are after all human in a sinful word. (Providing you belief in all that ;) )
Don't pick on Judas! He was doing God's work in betraying Jesus and was stuck thanks to the predestination set by an omniscient God and a path predicted by inspired prophets. Since prophecy couldn't have been brought about without the betrayal, and Jesus was all about meeting the guidelines of those prophecies, Judas was stuck with the thankless role of villain. Waterboarding or any other actions to prevent the betrayal may have meant no crucifiction, no resurrection, etc. Where would the Christian faith be then?
Maybe the "betrayal" of Judas was a setup from the start and the whole story of him hanging himself was a cover for some kind of "witness protection"-style, new-identity thing.
Judas was Jesus' friend and one of the 12 disciples, he was supposed to turn Jesus into the Romans according to the unpublished Gospel of Judas. While Jesus wasn't a choir boy goody two shoes that some like to portray him as, he still wouldn't have waterboarded Judas or the money lenders. He would have, and did, kick over the tables and chase the money lenders out of the temple.
Terrorism is a tactic of war, not a person or anything to do with religion. The term has been misuded and misunderstood by many after 9/11 mainly due to media and pundit misuse.
JR (1,24),
People who follow every precept of their religion 100% of the time are saints, not people in government in wartime.
There are precepts and precepts... some are peripheral and some are central. For a Christian ("love thy neighbor"), "not doing harm to another" is a very central precept. A "Christian" who abandons that commandment so easily... isn't much of a Christian.
Old Testament vs New Testament
Turning the other cheek is New. Smite thine enemies is old.
So it is not the vengeful God that according to the Old Testament "smites" the Earth at whim,
it is Christ the "Christian" Conservatives have issue with.
John Russell (1.3)
How do you reconcile people holding the cross of Jesus and throwing bombs at clinics or Timmothy McViegh?
What does that have to do with Mohammad?
SImple answer would be no one. Or if you want a laugh he would waterboard those that think waterboarding is not torture.
I don't think Jesus would have waterboarded Judas. He realized that Judas was only doing what needed to be done and forgave him. But don't think he would have waterboarded the SUSPECTED terrorists.....maybe those who did the waterboarded.
Normal people don't torture other people. JR this is a good thread because it deals with the issue of morality. Bush et al claimed the "moral right" in the so called Bush Doctrine. As you point out, the basis was that the terrorists were "evil" and we were "good".
These are religious concepts based on Morality found in the bible, even the Koran. The major problem is that our "leaders" have historically used the concept of godd vs evil as an excuse to unlease evil on others in the name of good!
If you buy the Bush story, you still need to reconcile that his war on terror killed without any cause or prevocation at least 100,000 unarmed, innocent civilians. So are we standing on the moral high ground? The irony of the claims of an administration who embraced things which are by definition "evil" to fight for "good" and help the people upon whom the "evil" was being done in the first place is a little much for even a5th grader.
At least the muslims aren't telling us, as they murder and torture, that they are doing it for our benefit!!! The bottom line, as a Christian you should know, Jesus was subjugated to torture and execution by a corrupt human race over Easter to "suffer" for our sins. The worst "evil" that man had was unleashed on him so he would suffer - Does the bush administration look more like Jesus or Pilot today?? Thats the only question you should ask.
Mohammed didn't fly an airplane into anything. He never saw an airplane. JR inferred that we knew the answer, meaning that 9/11 was the fault of Mohammed. Or at least that is how it was perceived.
How am I a hypocrite?
The author of this article did not collapse the comment, the community did. The author can delete but not collapse a comment.
The Real question is: Are we living in denial? Are we too afraid to look the monster in the eye? Are we too afraid to defend our freedoms? Has FEAR paralyzed you rwarner and Walt D?
Pitty.
Your questions make no sense, not to me anyway. Defending freedom has nothing to do with what is spoken about here.
Is your name Pitty or did you misspell pity?
Jesus would have waterboarded Jesus as a sacrifice to Jesus. (That is what the scripture says isn't it?)
What a silly premise...
Jesus wouldn't need to waterboard anybody since He would already know their thoughts and actions
...plus going to Hell for eternity trumps waterboarding any day!
; )
And as for Judas... every great protagonist needs a worthwhile antagonist...
...or don't you watch any television and movies?
You guys are missing the point of this thread - Jesus was tortured. He was tortured specifically so he could "forgive" those who purpotrated the ultimate evil on other men .... since Christianity is all about forgiveness of any sin.
Therefore, Jesus did not condone torture, murder, execution, war, poverty, exploitation and slavery - he experianced it so that we could all be saved if we saw the "light". This does not mean that we should continue to practice evil on others just because we can be forgiven for it by Jesus. It means that we should always be able to forgive those who've done evil upon us.
Now, there are two problems with people who disagree with this thread - First they are clearly failing to forgive those who have done them wrong (this is Christianity speaking not me) which in itself is not Christian. Secondly, they are acting contrary to what Jesus said was reasonable human behavior. The bible discusses what behavior is acceptable for us as Christians, it does not give us a free pass to be evil because someone behaved badly towards us! In fact, Christianity preaches the opposite - to behave with kindness and forgiveness to your enemy as you would your friend.
Therefore, there is an excellent argument that Bush's "war on Terror" was the opposite of Christian values. That is the point of the thread.
Yes, I think this is a good time to bring out that Ghandi quote... I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians; they are so unlike your Christ.
Look you guys are all off topic.
The answer to the question, is of course, Rush Limbaugh
Consultant -
Just so Im clear - Jesus doesn't exist. Mohamed did exist, and created a religion whose main message is terrorism? Have your actually read the Koran??
The basic message of all religion is a set of rules for moral behavior while living with other people .... you know the ten commandments, seven deadly sins, karma, etc... The stories of the various religions are written to underscore the value of these behaviors.
The problme is that Christianity which was originally a religion of the oppressed definately does not like oppression - torture, execution, poverty, slavery are all topics dealt with at length in the New Testament - all deemed to be generally unacceptable behaviors for a Christian. This is not to say that all Christians followed the word of Jesus, even those who swore to be Christians.
This is the irony which religion failes to deal with. The wealthy and powerful use violence to subjugate us, and use religion to convince us that the same behavior they used on us is evil. Its bad to enslave, to rape, to torture, unless the government or the wealthy are doing it then its OK.
Therefore, don't blame religion for the problems, blame the people who use religion to undertake their vioelnce on us all.
If you really want to question why people don't act more as their religion requests (Christian or otherwise), you should, instead of asking about water-boarding (though I understand that it's the "topic of the moment"), ask about something bigger and more emotional...say...9/11.
I mean, if we can look to the Amish as an example of true Christian-style retort when their very children were slaughtered (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amish_school_shooting), then we should have completely "turned the other cheek" when 9/11 happened...and when the next group murders countless totals here, we should simply (and quickly) forgive them for their actions, embrace them in the hopes that they'll be forgiven, and move on.
Not saying that might not be what we're "supposed" to do as per the scripture says...but if you kill my child you'll feel my wraith, and I'll deal with the consequences when the time comes and I meet my maker - so far as I recall, I am understood a sinner and it's my ambition to do the best I can, not be perfect.
Shawn - the point of Christianity is that if everyone stopped murdering and mistreating others, there would be no death, poverty, war - its only because our "leaders" and their leaders keep doing these things that violence and exploitation continue. In this sense religion is a net positive, its the failure of our leadership to execute that is the problem!
eco101,
I would agree with you if the whole of the world were Christian, as then you would be able to speak on the behalf of a particular belief system. That said, if someone is not a follower (ignoring those that are and fall), we as individuals, communities, and nations have a choice to make:
As stated before that while I commend those that are able to live in the former, it has been my experience to date that if someone realizes they can run over you at will...they will do so without hesitation until there is nothing left. It is in that ideology (regardless their belief) that I have issue.
That's why I commend those that were able to fogive with such spirit as they did...I sat in amazement watching the TV thinking to myself, they are so much better than I am.
My point is that virtually all major religions talk about some sort of golden rule .... treat others well, etc. Islam and judiaism also state these principals. The problem is not with the religions themselves, but with our secular leaders - whether Bush or Bin Laden - they always seem to invoke the "fight against evil" as cause to do more evil .... if everyone just agreed that there would be no evil maybe we could manage a little better?
No problem - whatever helps - BTW I'm certainly not a "true believer" in Christianity, but can't stand the irony of constantly doing the complete opposite of what they "believe in" - who would Jesus choose: Rush and George W or Iraqi orphans??? Don't think there would be much of a decision there ....
My point is that virtually all major religions talk about some sort of golden rule .... treat others well, etc. Islam and judiaism also state these principals.
You are right...and those that are moderate believers have no problem with each other. I (a Methodist) have acquaintances that are Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Catholic, Jewish, Atheists, Agnostics, and even a Wiccan. We all live in peace and harmony (the golden rule so to speak).
It's when the fanatics choose to take their respective faith to the extreme that there is interference with day-to-day normalcy.
if everyone just agreed that there would be no evil maybe we could manage a little better?
Here's the problem with that (though I do agree 110%)...when you have people that believe if you get rewarded for homicide, then you have the beginnings of conflict. Then you have to, as previously mentioned, decide as a leader how to handle such an incident. Some can handle it using peace, I prefer...my piece.
who would Jesus choose..
lol...agree completely.
Shawn,
I know what you mean - the problem is that our "leaders" are rewarded by breaking all the rules. They expect us to follow the rule, but thye are constantly breaking them. Murder, theft, violence, torture - these are how you get rich, powerful, not by being kind, generous, helpful.
My point is that since we know this, can't we come up with something that rewards those that behave as Jesus did (or is said to have) and punishes those who do the opposite - our system clearly doesn't!
John good to see you again!
JohnRussell wrote:
Human beings are fallen creatures, who do not actualize the potential of their religious beliefs. Otherwise, why would devout Muslims destroy bulidings filled with people and blow up cars on crowded city streets?
John, I think, the thing you and some others here are missing is that what the 9/11 terrorist did really has nothing to do with the question posed. The question seems to be asking if it is hypocrisy to endorse torture and simultaneously claim to be living a "Christian life style".
It seems that people who are defending the Bush administration's actions fall into two basic camps. The first says that "enhanced interigation techniques" are not torture. The second camp conceeds that the "enhanced interigation techniques" are torture but claim torture worked so well "the ends justify the means".
I think both camps have a problem with hypocrisy. The "it's not torture" camp is simply arguing against the weight of the facts. Waterboarding has been prosecuted by the US for over 100 years as torture. The hypocrisy here is plain. The other camp is at least taking a more honest approach on the facts. The problem comes when you look at the law. Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s" In other words, obey the law of both the Bible and the government. Again plainly hypocrisy.
The 9/11 hijackers are a separate issue. I don't think anyone here is going to condone what they did... neither should those evil actions be used to breed new evil. In fact letting 9/11 change "us" in ways that run counter to our beleifs simply proves ... we don't have the courage of our convictions.
Why is it that ultra-conservatives, most of whom claim to embrace Christian values, are the first to chuck their morality once it becomes inconvenient?
Do you suppose its because when they get really scared, many of them become liberals ?
You have it backwards. When people were scared after 9/11, they didn't become liberals.
Oh my gosh... when you put it that way, my post almost looks like a sarcastic comment....
On 9/11 I was living twenty miles east of Ground Zero. After learning from a friend in Canada about the attacks, I flipped on the TV and watched the first tower burn. Then in real time the camera caught second jet impacting the other tower.
When people were scared after 9/11
Scared? Hardly. It was merely a real-life re-enactment of what we'd been treated to countless times in motion picture theaters.
Actually thats the scary thing about 9/11 - they were preparing us for it for years. Especially, how 2 buildings hit on different spots at differnet height collapse in exactly the way we expect (from TV) .....
one has to marvel at the lack of continuity with regards to the ethos presented by such beliefs
#2 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 4:37 PM EDTYes its called reality smacking into religious idealism. Reality always wins out.
Unrepentant Conservative_
Yes its called reality smacking into religious idealism. Reality always wins out.
I beg to differ. I am neither religious nor an idealist, yet I find it apalling that there are so many psychopaths around, that are ready to massacre others in order to feel just a wee bit more secure.
Karl, most of the religious zealots are not psychopaths. There is an old Jesuit saying. ''Give me the child until he is 7 and I will give you the man.''
we have a segment of the religion that is askew with the rest of the values of humanity. Islam cannot continue to say that these people do not represent us without confronting them. if Pakistan does not fight the Taliban and it will wake up one morning and find itself in hell.
Reality always wins out.
Never underestimate the ability for a human to rationalize.
Yes its called reality smacking into religious idealism. Reality always wins out.
So, how about we keep religion out of the "reality" business in the form of government? Questions of "idealistic Christian morals" vs "The reality of government action in wartime" wouldn't come up like this if we didn't have so many politicians trying to tout ther faith among their credentials to appeal to voters.
Keeping religion out will just mean some other prejudice will surface to take its place.
This has less to do with religion than it does about human nature and the urge for simple solutions to complex problems.
one has to marvel at the lack of continuity with regards to the ethos presented by such beliefs
That is what bothers me about organized religion .... especially the Catholic Church that claims to be so ridged but has altered their beliefs with no visit from God up high to justify their core belief structure.
The world would be a much better place if there were no organized religion. Notice I only said Organized. Pray if you like believe if you like group together if you like. Walking into a church that is organized is like a lamb walking into slaughter. You beliefs are not your own anymore but are the whim of the "organizers".
Any student of history will tell you that the rich and powerful have always claimed to be "good" and then used "evil" to get what they want. During the 19th century, higher class people oversaw a soceity were children were enslaved to factory owners to work up to 20 hours per day in dangerous appalling conditions to make them clothes, and routinely executed young children for minor offenses such as theft - all the while being very concerned that these children were at "divine worship" every Sunday to learn about good and evil.
The bottom line is that the rich and powerful routinely bend morality to fit their needs. The took the word of Jesus and bent it into a support for torture, murder, slavery, sexual exploitation and feudalism. The best part, as you can see from this thread, is they have managed to con most of us that this is by definition "good".
Take for example our justice system which supports widespread lying, theft, fraud by the wealthy, but severely punishes minor transgressions by the poor. We pay Billions every year to arrest, imprison and torture the less fortunate not to protect our lives or even our property, but to protect the social order. All the while we claim we are a Christian country that Jesus would be proud of????With the money spent on this we could house the homeless, end illiteracy, child hunger and deprivation which leads to more crime ..... But that wasn't Jesus' way he liked prisons and torture right?
Consultant:
Religion does not produce psychopaths. Misuse of religion by leaders who "bend" the message for their own benefit does. However, the same can be said for virtually all movements (sports, materialism, spiritualism, politics, etc.) can produce dangerous behavior.
The truth is that all religions basically preach the same thing: Live together in peace, treat each other well, and respect the established social order. The last is the most important part of religion since it was the reason most were developed - to maintain control over ever larger groups of people where violence and intimidation no longer worked.
The end to the value of religion came with the 2 sided attack of modernism. Very effective police/courts and mass media which projects socially acceptable behavior withoutneeding divine intervention. The end result is the same, the spreading and enforcement of rules to the lower classes from the ruling class to protect their position.
Therefore, to try to pretend that one religion is better or worse than another is moot. All religions have the same purpose - domination of the middle and lower classes by the wealthy. We see that in India where Hindus attack the Muslims. In Africa where muslims attack the native religions, etc...
Hey Walt,
Nice to "see" you again, my friend.
As far as your question goes; I have it on fairly reliable information that cruelty, mass murder and organized religion go hand in hand. There is a paradox with the historical time-line of death and torture, where one finds the massivest of mass murders and most horrific torturous technics carried out not by an organized church, No Sir. These greatest crimes against humanity, were done in the name of politics (Right and Left). The human animal is a sick and easily manipulated being, and I shake my head at some of the specimens.
I am sorry to tell you that as a Viking and an Odinist I don't believe that WaterBoarding, Placing a Subject in an Uncomfortable Physical Position, Humiliating a Person and even Scaring them with Dogs, raises to the level of torture, but everyone has their opinion. ;^)
My take on the situation with this crapola is the terrorists were very lucky that they are fighting the some of the fairest people on the planet, and a military that will not take a person like myself because I'm "Too Violent for Service". I view every one of those "detainees" a threat to this nation and her people, that should have been taken out on the battlefield (A viking never leaves an enemy drawing breath to his/her rear, Basically it comes down to: Take No Prisoners, No Quarter Will be Given, No Mercy Asked for nor Granted). You know a real down and dirty bar-room brawl, played out on a larger stage.
I've heard the argument raised "We (the USA) are better then they are.", I am glad you did not do so, but I did want to address that here if I may. It is complete hog-wash, Yes, we (the USA) have a better place to live then most places, but as people we (generally) are no better or worse then the next nationality, and it is disingenuous for anyone Left or Right to raise it as a valid argument in any debate.
Wow I guess I've said enough for one comment, Hope You Have A Great Day!
Take care,
Aloha
Basically it comes down to: Take No Prisoners, No Quarter Will be Given, No Mercy Asked for nor Granted).
at least that's fair, you know going in what you get.... you get captured you get a bullet to the back of the head,,,,
Walt D
Jesus wouldn't waterboard poor Judas. How else would this whole thing get rolling? Judas was what critical historians call a necessary vehicle/ narrators invention to the story of the hero protagonist.
Hey again Walt,
Ya know I was thinking (F*ck not again), and I am no fan of torture, inflicting pain on a helpless human being is not the Warrior's Way. Again my contention is a little water in the face does not raise to the level of torture, but I don't want to repeat myself. ;^)
I would like to hear some ideas on how we (America) will retrieve information from these Enemies of our nation without some type of force or threat of force being used. I mean are we supposed to just ask them nicely over and over and hope we get timely intell?
It is not as if the interrogators are ripping off finger nails, hooking up electricity to a bad-guy's fun parts, or taking three or four "detainees" up in a Blackhawk and coming back down with one or two (the others would be feeding the sharks)... all of those acts are torture.
I could not defend those actions, but tell a guy to stand on his toes with his arms outstretched for awhile (wow put a cross behind him and ...), strip them down and have a female belittle them, I just don't see the issue. Hell I will go one step further; I would and could, hose-down everyone of those A-holes in pigs blood on a daily basis until they spilled the beans, or play Barney songs at level 11, 24/7 (OK I may have crossed the threshold into the realm of torture with the Barney Song technique). 8^O
We may disagree about somethings, but it is good to smile while disagreeing, No?
All my Best to you and yours, my friend
Aloha
I'm sorry guys, but it is pretty well established that waterboardin is considered torture - and its alot more than just a little water in the face .... furthermore, the other tortures mentioned have been used by the "allies" of the USA in their secret interrogation camps - we just don't hear about the ones that went wrong ....
Regardless, how can we complain about how our citizens or servicemen who are captured by these guys are treated when we do the same thing? As for the information value of all this waterboarding, testimony under torture is about as reliable as .... testimony as a result of torture - not worth the paper it was written on ...
PS: I dont recall Jesus saying it was alright to torture, murder, rape as long as we are going to get information from them (maybe) as a result ....
economics101 - how can we complain about how our citizens or servicemen who are captured by these guys are treated when we do the same thing?
So its still OK to complain about our guys and girls being beheaded, burned alive, and dragged through the streets by a truck?
We absolutely want to be on the high ground so we can whine and complain, because that whining and complaining is a great deterrent...
; )
Alan,
The point is that has the "war on terror" accomplished any of its stated tasks? Sure we killed lots of civilians, destroyed the inferstructure of two countries, and amay have killed some bad guys along the way. Our response to 9/11 was to kill an estimate 100k+ innocent, unarmed people.
On top of that we captured and mistreated thousands of people including torture, summary executions, indefinate imprisonment without charges or legal representation. This is what the Bush Administration and their "allies" proudly define as success. Other than "confessions" from a couple of people, gotten under torture and therefore inadmissable, we have very little to show for all of this.
Therefore, my point is "the ends do not justify the means." The end result of this war has been massive loss of life on both sides, economic catastrophe in Afghanistan, Iraq and the USA directly related to the war, our international image completely trashed, our "leaders" and servicemen accused of war crimes, and at this point barely a kangeroo court conviction of any of the "terrorists".
Now Im not a military man, but I don't see how this benefits the people of the USA, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.... the people at Halliburton, BP, Blackwater, Carlyle Group,.... definately!
economics101 - Sure we killed lots of civilians, destroyed the inferstructure of two countries, and amay have killed some bad guys along the way.You make a good case
You make a good case for the terrorists who crashed into the World Trade Center...
...that happened after the US did all that terrible stuff you mentioned, didn't it?
Alan,
my point is that its easy to come up with reasons to do vioplent things. The general argument for the "war on terror" was to "fix" the problem - the general consensus outside of Fox news is that we are no better off than we were in 2001, and lots of people think that we are worse off.
So all the ends justfiy the means nonsense doesn't get you very far since it was all basically a waste of time.
economics101 - the general consensus outside of Fox news is that we are no better off than we were in 2001, and lots of people think that we are worse off.
Well, don't count me in that group...
...despite all the liberals there, I'm glad Los Angeles wasn't attacked
And is there some reason to believe that it would have been if we didn't waterboard people and other things?
Just because something didn't happen, dosen't mean that something stopped it from happending ....
Just because something didn't happen, dosen't mean that something stopped it from happending
As a friend of mine said today: So if no attack for eight years proves we've stopped terrorism, does 2000 years with no return of Jesus prove he's never coming back?
You have a good point.
If we ever want to see Jesus again, we better not try to stop the terrorists
How about looking at it another way: We have had 2 major foreign terrorist attacks in 20 years - 1993 and 2001. Now we know that the CIA and FBI were involved heavily with the first one, because they had at least one mole in the organization. There is lots of inconsistencies about the second one as well - particularly how they identified the "terrorist" within hours of the attacks, though there was little or no information available to link them that day.
Now the fact that 7.5 years has gone by without a 3 rd attack means very little. Most plots don't amount to anything because those planning have no idea what they are doing. Take for example the "cells" in NJ or Canada, whom the authorities fully admit were nothing more than kids with dangerous ambitions.
Therefore, I ask again, does the absence of an attack (of which there have been only 2 in recent history) mean that we have been effective? Certainly the interrogators didn't think so ....
I will certainly take waterboarding over beheadings for the media any day and sleep nicely without a care in the world.
#5 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 5:31 PM EDTUnrepentant ,why don't you set it up for charity. Get the news involved and get someone who knows how to adminsiter waterboarding properly. Then have them subject you to 183 waterboardings in one month.
If after all that, you are still the same person you were before the waterboardings started, then I will agree that waterboarding isn't torture.
Now thats a little harsh Spox, you can't honestly expect him to go through 183 in one month can you? Oh wait...
Actually, I got waterboarded in SEER school. The key is not to panic.
Something tells me you wouldn't want to endure waterboarding again...
The key is not to panic.
Good grief. When a person thinks they are drowning, the brain goes into panic mode. I capsized one time while whitewater rafting and tried not to panic as the current swept me towards some rocks. The next minute or two was a total blur as the adrenaline surge kicked in.
Call it the fight or flight reaction, call it panic if you will. It's a survival instinct, kind of like pulling your hand away from a hot stove. Either way, it's not pleasant.
Look, the point is not is waterboarding as bad a midaeval tortures such as drawing and quartering - the point is that our Government, without any reasonable democratic authorization, took it upon itself to violate US law, International law and destroy any moral ground we might of had in this conflict.
Sure, terrorists have done some bad things - killed women and children, tortured people - so have we. We say they did it first, so do they. Its called spin people .... To debate who is worse is a bit of a joke no?
The only real issue is, was this behavior a criminal act? Did the politicos who thought this was OK have the autority to violate all these laws on our behalf? If not, when are we having a trial to figure it out. Likely nothing will come of it, but at least we will have some closure on this disasterous war about nothing.
They gave me a White Russian once. I didn't tell a thing except for my name and number.
"By their fruits shall ye know them." If waterboarding is the fruit, then who is the vine?
#6 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 5:37 PM EDTIf the Devil exists, Cheney MUST be part of his gang. If not Cheney then who?
Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, and the rest of Bush 43's henchmen.
I think I know this one! The answer is that they are not really Christian. They just like to play at it on Sundays.
But...I KNOW they are Christian because they have bumper stickers that SAY they are!!!
Not all have bumper stickers, some prefer the stick on 'Jesus fish', which ironically is used quite a bit by what I call Sunday Christians.
But you don't have to be Jesus to be a Christian. Which is good, seeing as Jesus was fictional and all.
Here's a question: Jesus and Hitler are in a room (Godwin law alert!) Jesus has a gun and Hitler is about to push the button to launch all of the world's nukes. WWJD?
Jesus wouldn't need the gun to stop Hitler since he is the Son Of God.
Celestina:
"They are not Christians...."
They are as Christian as any Christian. Is Christian some form of absolute perfection? If Christians can be disqualified by our preferential judgement of bad behavior then nobody is a Christian.
Now is torture a policy inconsitent with Democratic values...I think we can answer that quit accurately...torture not acceptable.
They were truely bad examples of good and wise leaders.
Here's a question: Jesus and Hitler are in a room (Godwin law alert!) Jesus has a gun and Hitler is about to push the button to launch all of the world's nukes. WWJD?
Not a damn thing, fictional characters don't shoot people.
Adam Hobson - Jesus and Hitler are in a room (Godwin law alert!) Jesus has a gun and Hitler is about to push the button to launch all of the world's nukes. WWJD?
Those who believe in Jesus will tell you He was in the room when Hitler ordered millions of Gypsies and Jews exterminated
Your fanciful scenario could never have happened, as it is not part of the Biblical prophecies.
Also, it is physically impossible for anyone else to do so, as the launch codes and "buttons" are located in various parts of the world, and not even in the same country, much less the same room
It is a not too well kept secret that certain Biblical prophesies - namely the always vindictive Ezekiel on the three third parts of Israel and the viciously threatening Deuteronomy 28 - are taken as warnings of the grissly fate of Israel in their end of days diaspora (Holocaust), at least by many Christians.
One Christian, who I am sadly related to, said as I criticized these overly harsh measures prescribed by YHWH:
"Yes, but that is just the way it is."
Not a nice god to cross. He likes to watch people fall, and he is sadistic in his punishment.
For those who hope for Heaven: One might want to consider that if a god has done this not once or twice but many, many times throughout history, who is to say that he will not do it again in the afterlife... all you got is the testimony of a bunch of religious radicals that it will be the end of the insidious entrapment by proxy (Satan) known from Genesis and the Book of Job.
If the devil is 6, then God is 7...
Rainmaker - One Christian, who I am sadly related to, said as I criticized these overly harsh measures prescribed by YHWH: "Yes, but that is just the way it is."
Yeah... mean old God is a lot like your mother...
She probably told you that if you decide to stick your hand in the fire you will get burned
...if she was really a loving mom, she wouldn't allow fire to hurt anybody
Yeah... mean old God is a lot like your mother...
Not my mother. Cold scanning failed. But thank you for revealing your vicious nature, alan. Can you thank God for that, or did you develop like this on your own?
Question: Do you think the Jews deserved the exile and the Holocaust for being disobedient to God - or did it all happen accidentally, leaving the excerpts from Deuteronomy and Ezekiel null and void.
Something to think about when you go to sleep. Good night.
Rainmaker - Not my mother... But thank you for revealing your vicious nature, alan.
Sorry to learn your mom didn't warn you about things that might hurt you
(...not even the one about don't play in traffic? )
; )
I lost my mother when I was three years old. Don't talk about her again, please.
I did manage to figure out not to put my hands into fire or play in the traffic on my own, thank you.
Rainmaker - I lost my mother when I was three years old. Don't talk about her again, please.
So you can't communicate in certain areas as a result?
(That is about you, by the way )
alan,
question: What finger I am holding up?
clue: It's the one your mother preferred.
The double standard you reveal is priceless... !
...you're busted ! Ha ha ha ha ha....
( Good thing Jesus loves you so at least you won't be waterboarded )
; )
Adam Hobson wrote:
Here's a question: Jesus and Hitler are in a room (Godwin law alert!) Jesus has a gun and Hitler is about to push the button to launch all of the world's nukes. WWJD?
Adam here is the answer. I KNOW IT IS FACTUAL AS I SPOKE TO J.C. JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO. ( yea...we are tight like that! )
Jesus (the son of God) said:
I would make Hitlers junk fall off... Hitler would forget all about the button and grab for his junk (on the floor). Once he picked up his junk, I would send him up to dad for judgement... I would wait till he picked up his junk cus' making some other person pick up dismembered junk is just plain evil....
I hope this helps Adam... I know that question had been bothering you.
I think he'd waterboard Larry King and Anderson Cooper. To find out why, you'd have to ask the Son of Man...whatever that means.
#10 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 6:22 PM EDTanyways torture's so last week. This week is flying pig zombie vampires with headcolds. Please keep up.
#12 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 6:29 PM EDTWhich are "attacking" the U.S. because of Obama's socialistic, facist, making America less safe ways, right :)
Mexican diseased flying zombie pigs.
I think I see an upcoming "SciFi Channel Original Movie" title in that.
"SciFi Channel Original Movie"
The scariest 4 words in the English language as you just know that the movie will stink to high heaven.
It wouldn't be as bad as a Sci-Fi Channel Original Series...
<shudder>
A guy Obama shook hands with days ago is dead, some say heart attack, others swine zombie vampires. Could be a near assassination attempt.
Anyway, Jesus wouldn't even waterboard satan,Jesus is so full of himself that hell is specifically defined as the absence of him and that's the worst he's ever done, create hell.
All the best tortures do, the cold temp and the waterboarding, is prolong with care, indefinately, the life defying moment of death. People who are into this sort of stuff are much like your typical fox viewer, adults who still pull the wings off insects.
it doesn't matter that it's proven ineffective, that's not the point, the point is gaining strength from the agony of others. Nothing to do with 'deserving' just sad externally powerful people who are internally wimps and their followers who are internally and externally wimps.
It wouldn't be as bad as a Sci-Fi Channel Original Series...
Wasn't BSG a Sci-Fi channel original series?
Also, and I may be inviting mockery here, but despite bad acting (which got progressively better) and bad effects, the Dune series was thoroughly enjoyable, and Children of Dune was better in all respects than Dune.
The nuns that brought me up mentioned in passing that heaven was full of people fornicating in front of a throne. I think they were the order of the muted pelvic thrust.
Strangely, Helen was mute throughout while Marcel caterwauled and bellowed french obscenities such that flowers wilted and mirrors stopped working.
Helen remained uneffected.
Hey they'd lynch Jesus Christ if they found out that during his time he was guilty of anything than being pure and perfect.
Remember Christ was a Jew and you know everyone that isn't like 'them' is suspect.
Who who Jesus waterboard..............personally I dont think he would waterboard because he knew he would be tortured himself..........
But if Jesus could........safe money it be those who live ignorant lives and who spread it.
#13 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 6:45 PM EDTJesus would not waterboard anyone. I don't care for too much in the bible but Jesus' life was certainly the high point of that book.
Why would the Son of God have to go to those extremes?
After having "heated debates" with some folks on the sad side of this subject on other threads, I wish Jesus would come back right now and give us all some much-needed TRUTH. Unfortunately, Fox "News" would crucify him much worse than previously.
#15 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:04 PM EDTSorry. Jesus's dad Yahweh did the greatest waterborading of all history: it's called the Flood (even though it is a myth). Jesus's pop was not at all averse to killing off those who broke his rules...so why should the son be different?
As for the crucifixion, please don't forget that Jesus himself engineered his own crucifixion, setting himself up as the anointed one who would fulfill the prophecies and then die. Even Pontius Pilate couldn't figure out his motive and almost released him.
Without the crucifixion, which according to Christian belief is necessary (not tragic), there would be no resurrection. No life after death. No Easter. Get it?
khepri, you know I was being fascetious, right? However, should we get that hardcore Christian contingent on this thread, there should be some "lively" comments that I will relish taking apart as well...
Without the crucifixion, which according to Christian belief is necessary (not tragic), there would be no resurrection. No life after death. No Easter. Get it?
No Easter. Get it?
Actually, that's not accurate. "EASTER" is historically a pagan holiday that happens to be celebrated on the same day as the resurrection of Christ. The term "EASTER" is not connected to Christianity at all, but to the fertility goddess "Esotre".
As for the "FLOOD" argument, apples and oranges here. The Old Testament is the testament of the Law, the New Testament is the testament of Grace. Christians are no longer under the Law, but under Grace, which is the complete foundation of New Testament Christianity. Please refer to Ephesians 2: 8-9 - "For by grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast."
Finally, it was ACTUALLY John the Baptist who set Jesus up as the annointed one when he spoke loudly to the people about Jesus who had come to be baptised, saying: "Behold, the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world".
I take the "No Gods" part of "No Gods, No Masters" pretty seriously, but Dylan923 is totally correct. I generally just say that Old Testament God was a childish jerk that grew up a bit in the New Testament, but dude knows his Bible.
I think if Jesus returned, He would not be welcome in most modern day 'Christian' churches.
Depends. If Jesus were a Democrat, he wouldn't waterboard anyone, since it's not the "christian" thing to do (even though Christianity did not exist at the time).
If he were a Republican, he would waterboard anyone who opposed his point of view, but his spin disciples would call it "aggressive baptism".
#16 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:17 PM EDTNow there's a term for it! "Aggressive baptism." Hehe, I like it.
Hey now, no need to give them anymore bullsh!t terms to use.
aggressive baptism
=o))
"Agressive Baptism" : )
Thank you ScienceGuy that was a good laugh
#17 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:35 PM EDTWhy is it that ultra-conservatives, most of whom claim to embrace Christian values, are the first to chuck their morality once it becomes inconvenient?
On some level it seems there's also a disconnect between what most people believe on any subject and the slant that dominates MSM portrayal of the group. I'm still hoping for the liberal media to materialize!
#18 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:38 PM EDTLooking at the question, if you follow the line of the story then Judas was essential to Christ's mission, he was preordained to turn on Jesus because the death of Christ was essential to his mission. If he would waterboard anybody it would be the moneylenders, after all he did drive them from the temple with a whip, a fairly unpleasant instrument of punishment.
#19 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:10 PM EDTThe Gospel of Judas has a really interesting perspective on the matter.
Even if you don't know the Gospel of Judas, with some though and logical reasoning you could arrive at the same conclusion.
Judas is not the "devil" as he is portrayed to be through-out history.
"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think"... Quite true, and in this case, very fitting.
Violence begets violence, hate begets hate is the law of this land. Has nothing to do with Jesus.
Many Christians have lost direction by culture and the traditions of the false prophets and teachers they gain their education from.
Don't be like Israel at Siniai. Be willing to hear His Word directly. You can't do that if you don't slow down and put Him first, His Spirit talking to your spirit, because you are willing to not just listen, but to hear. You can hear Him in everything if you are trying to hear.
That's impossible to do if you are caught up in every screwed up detail of this world. Think about it, if you say you are a Christian. Father, in the O.T. disiplined His children when they turned away from good. He does not change, right? Do you think it's any different now? Are we under judgement as in the days of Jeremiah? I think He would disipline His own first, we claim to know Him as our Father.
Do you not understand that He manifest Himself in the flesh. That means He is the samr God of the O.T., The Word, The Truth. Do you believe? Or does it just make it convenient in this world to push your idea of righteousness to use His name.
He loved His enemies, sacrificed His life for them, forgave them as He died at their hands.
Don't become so well adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking. Instead fix your attention on God. You'll br changed from the inside out. Readily rcognize what he wants from you and quickly respond to it. Unlike the culture around you, always dragging you down to its level of immaturity. ---paraphrased from Romans 12
Do you REALLY have faith to depend on Him? Or are you going to continue to try to take the kingdoms of this world by force.
You either try to follow His teaching or you don't. None of us are perfect, but do you try, or do you just ride the violence wagon and claim His name?
Are you too caught up in the politics of babylon, or do you trust that He is in control of all things.
Just something to think about.
8 "For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,"
declares the LORD.
9 "As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts
Would we crucify Him again if He showed up today? We act like the pharasees, and many of us have jumped on the Zionism bandwagon trying to take the Kingdom by force.
Truth in Love
Peace to all,
a sinner saved by grace
#20 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:31 PM EDTThirdfeast:
I don't know where to begin here. Maybe, why do you believe humankind needs instructions on how to live from god? If anything good has happened on this planet or by the end of your hand why can't you see it's just human goodness and mostly practical to do justly by your fellow humans.
Can't you believe in the goodwill of humans without instructions from the unconscious mind? The quotes from Isaiah aren't helpful. They only glorify ancient pastorial poetry as the foundation of some divine prophecy about...I don't know.
TF, you can do good to others with out instructions. You can take quiet and humble pleasure for being kind. Go ahead try it. It's good medicine for the human soul.
See Robert Price's works to inform your faith...that is if a little freethinking doesn't harm you emotionally.
I have found that believers in all forms of faith have one thing in common...they are afraid to think and investigate what they believe. And I have come to conclude that they so badly want to be of one mind with the diety that rational thinking puts them in an outer limit that feels analogous to the mythical outer darkness. Peace to you.
1standlastword: You comment believers are "afraid to think and investigate what they believe". You are judging everyone by the same standard. That is wrong. As a "believer", I did enough "thinking" and "investigating", I discontinued my affiliation with any organized "religion". I am perfectly capable of reading my Bible and/or other writings, to determine my faith.
Tequila1942: Congratulations on your courage and spiritual independence. I apologize to you as I assume I have insulted you. My comments are for the those people in organized religion.
1standlastword: Sorry if I misinterpreted what you said. You did say "all forms of faith have one thing in common..they are afraid to think and investigate what they believe". In view of the fact "organized religion" was not mentioned, I assumed you meant all "believers". Churches have become "big business" just like every thing else in this world. Religion scares me, faith inspires me - it is very simple. I also strongly believe churches and any real estate they own should be taxed just like everyone else. Some yell - what about separation of church and state. I would yell what about separation of my money from the state. Most tax payers are literally owned body and soul to the government at every level. Also, if money is the root of all evil, I have to wonder why churches are always begging for it, and do nothing to help even those in their own congregation that are in need?? As far as this thread is concerned - who would presume to try to figure out what God would do?? I don't even know why I started reading it in the first place. I couldn't believe anyone would start such a discussion. However, since no one died and left me judge, I have no business judging anyone at all. My respects to all who have expressed their opinions here.
Well yeah Walt. Cheney says it works. Well of course it does, you torturer! Whoops! Don't know where that came from...heh. Must be the ants blown into my ear with a straw. Ouch! Simon Cowell, he's the one you want! Ow! Bamboo slivers underneath my fingernails is not my idea of a manicure. Ow! Okay! Paula is in on it! Ow!
#21 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:47 PM EDTWhat would civilized people do?
#22 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:41 PM EDTWhat would civilized people do?
They certainly wouldn't fly planes into the Wrold Trace Center.............................
They wouldn't bomb the Murrah Federal Building...........................
They wouldn't send CHILDREN to be suicide bombers in the name of ALLAH.................
They wouldn't make it legal for a man to rape his wife..........................
They wouldn't lock up a journalist under the guise of being a spy.......................
They wouldn't speak openly and blatently about the complete destruction of Israel.....................
Getting the picture here...........................
Dylan923 wrote:
Getting the picture here...........................
Dylan let me paint you another picture.... One of American Justice?
Keeping people confined in extremes of heat and cold... for days
withholding clothing...forced nudity.
Manipulate a persons diet so they have uncontrollable diarrhea while not allowing clothing and providing no way to clean themselves...for days.
Hand cuff people to the ceiling, arms over head, standing for days.....
Force people into "stress positions" using chains and hand cuffs for days...
placing "hoods" over their heads to both "restrict air flow" and give the feeling of isolation.... while chained in "stress positions" for days.
Suffocate people only letting them have a breath to answer questions ...
placing people in in very small "boxes" with no light and bugs(probably stinging or biting bugs)... for extended periods of time
Beating people to the point of having blood in their urine....
Beating people to the point of nerve damage in their face ...
sleep deprivation ... no sleep for up to eight days.
Withholding food ... liquid diets ... intentional making food taste and look bad.. only enough calories to maintain life....
using dogs to "menace" and scare people.
having guards disrespect and "humiliate" people
Threatening the above treatments for a uninvolved wife, child or, other family member
It sounds like American justice doesn't it...?
Not to me. Don't use my money and name to do this stuff. Further don't try to tell me I am not patriotic if I disagree with your use of torture. Not you Dylan... but Dick Cheney and many others on the right
Demock,
I have to admit you have some very valid points here. I want you to know I am IN NO WAY condoning torture. My comment was simply meant as a response to the comment about civilized people. However, I do believe that, if intelligence CONFIRMS that a person has immediate and consequential knowledge about terrorist activities, extreme measures are justified in gathering that information if the information will in fact save lives.
I find it horrendous what went on at Gitmo. But where do you draw the line is my question.................did all of those detainees deserve to be treated like that? NO WAY But I certainly don't believe they are all innocent of wrongdoing either, and if our intelligences confirms a person has knowledge, to what extent do you go after that knowledge in order to save possibly hundreds or even thousands of lives?
Dylan, I like to think that I would not be involved with atrocity's on either side... I can picture a situation where I would do most anything to save my family etc... I think anyone who is honest could say the same... I draw the line at the government codifying it. They went way over the line of civility. We are better than that stuff... I would say this: The American Justice system is based, at least in part, on the idea that we would let guilty parties go free to avoid convicting innocent parties. If that is the case.. and we know it is... we have a high moral standard to live up to. We have made it over two hundred years without reducing ourselves to obscenity. Our system will carry us another two hundred without it. As stated, I see your point... I just want the counter point to be as clear. Rock on!
DeMock,
Cool Deal, and I agree.......................and the counter point is very clear indeed.
Have a great weekend.....................
Water-boarding still doesn't rise to the level of torture
What do you call doing it to a human being 266 times in one month, a trip to Disney World?
#23 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:48 PM EDTWhy is it a waste of water?
Because it's ineffective torture?
Or it's not a torture at all?
Sean Hannity thinks it is not torture ... in fact he is certain it is not torture. To him it is down right terrifying. I don't know how Hannity shows his mug on TV after Olberman humiliated him! Buck up Sean! KEEP YOUR WORD! It's not torture... just a little water? Right? $1000 bucks a second is a bunch of money for the troops families a blow hard like you should be able to hold your breath for at least $30,000 thousand.
Ode to Sean Hannity
by John CleeseAping urbanity
Oozing with vanity
Plump as a manatee
Faking humanity
Journalistic calamity
Intellectual inanity
Fox Noise insanity
You're a profanity
Hannity
I like the term Hannity Insanity, it sounds kinda like some Disney engineered and sponsored singing act, just a lot meaner, scarier and crazier.
Stone5150 wrote:
Hannity Insanity - it sounds kinda like some Disney engineered and sponsored singing act, just a lot meaner, scarier and crazier.
I heard John Cleese read it on KO... it does have that kind of ring! The part I like is "Aping Urbanity" John Cleese captured Hannity's insanity in nine lines! As a fan of Monty Python... it is nice to know I can still relate to the Python wit.
Rock ON!
There are two biblical messiahs. You might also ask for the view of the Avenging Messiah, the counterpart of Jesus Christ.
We read about the distinctly warlike messiah thus:
"Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? … Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garmentry like him that treadeth in the winefat?
"I have trodden in the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment." (Isaiah 63:1-3)
#24 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:32 PM EDTWouldn't it be great if life was simple so that we never had to worry about ambiguities, moral dilemmas, complex situations, and never had to worry about our own inherent biases, motivations and sinful nature? Sounds like heaven,,,, can't wait until I get there by the grace (alone) of God.
#25 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:37 PM EDTWouldn't it be nice if life was so simple that we didn't have to worry about ambiguities, moral dilemmas, complex situations, or have to worry about our own biases, motivations and sinful natures,,, and that we would all know just what the right thing to do, think, and say is?
Hmm, sounds like heaven,,, and I can't wait to get there by the grace (alone) of God.
#26 - Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:42 PM EDTWhy not just be good for goodness sake, not for the sake of going to heaven?
Fortunately, doing good and "being a good person" is not a requirement for entry into heaven, at least according to the Bible (see John 3:16). Instead, one reason for doing good SHOULD be by being so grateful for the free free free gift of heaven (e.g. no payment or performance required on our part) that was fully paid for on the cross -- we have only to believe and accept it. THAT is the message of the Bible, in fact it is the ONLY message of the Bible - the Old Testament fortells it, and the New Testament fulfills it.
It is unfortunately a popular misconception that some kind of good works and being good is a requirement for heaven. If it were so, it is a pity that none of us would be able to qualify-- so the cross was God's way of qualifying ALL of those who believe that he has done it for us through his Son.
If we choose not to believe and not to accept it, then God has left us that freewill choice not to, and therefore not to receive it. If we DO accept it, then God asks that we demonstrate our appreciation by doing good things for others.
This is why Christians can say that they are not "better", just forgiven by freely accepting God's own sacrifice of his Son. Even though Christians are forgiven,,, that does not make them any better than anyone else. In fact all Christians keep right on sinning, although hopefully not as much and hopefully they feel compelled to confess that sin daily as another demonstration of our appreciation for God's forgiveness.
Pete (25,3),
I don't know which particuar flavor of Christianity you are describing... But you are both right and wrong.
Different branches have taken different sides of just about every possible aspect of the faith: predestination, the value of good works, confession, ... I really don't know that you can make any generalization, other than "Jesus is my saviour".
rwarner - Why not just be good for goodness sake, not for the sake of going to heaven?
From where do you derive your concept of "good" ?
If there is no absolute right and wrong or good and evil, and no heaven or hell, what difference does it make what you do since there would be no long term consequences?
What reason could there be to "be good" ?
You nailed it there - one man's good may be another man's evil. Bush talked about spreading freedom and fighting evil, yet killed tens of thousands of unarmed women and children - to them was the US good? When they waterboarded a guy 150 times for absolutely nothing - was that good?
Good and evil are subjective concepts. The powerful have always claimed their enemies are evil to justify war, death, deprivation - how can one fight evil with more evil? Does that equal good?
Hi Bob,
I'm trying not to subscribe to "any particular flavor of Christianity", except a sincere and honest interpretation of the Bible.
Of course, the most obvious citation is:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16
Salvation by grace alone and not by works is the theme of the entire Bible, not just a few select verses, such as the one above however. The major theme of the Old Testament is that man was held accountable to God under God's law. God's law required sacrifice (usually in the form of animal sacrifice such as a clean lamb). However since man kept sinning against God in the Old Testament throughout - repeated sacrifice for the "atonement" of sins was required over and over again.
However, the Old Testament fortells of the coming Messiah (God's only begotten Son), who would come and take the place of the sacrificial lamb on behalf of all those who would believe in Him. The central point is that God's only Son would be the only PERFECT sacrifice -- thereby eliminating the need for further sacrifice to obtain oneness with God. God came down to his creation through his Son to save his people - once and for all by his Son's obedience to face death on the cross - in our stead.
I'm afraid that some churches have taken such liberties with the Biblical teaching as to suggest that Christ's sacrifice somehow was not perfect and was not enough to restore us to God. No where does the Bible teach that,,, and of course, it would seem actually to be blasphemy to suggest that God's final work isn't good enough for our forgiveness. It is just not at all consistent with the Bible teaching to suggest that our doing good things for others on this Earth could possibly be a substitute,,, or a necessary add-on to what He did for us on the cross.
There is a passage in James that states that "faith without works is dead", which I believe is the only place in the Bible where it might come close to suggesting that being good is a requirement for entry to heaven. However, the overwhelming messages over and over, both explicitly stated and embedded in God's story from Genesis to Revelation is that God himself came in the form of a man to redeem his people for those who believe and accept his sacrifice on our behalf. Therefore, doing good things for others cannot be a requirement for salvation, as none of us could ever be good enough to earn heaven and that would insult God's work on the cross.
The passage in James is basically saying that our faith in Him becomes alive when we demonstrate it through doing good deeds for others - it is NOT adding some new requirement for salvation, and there is no where else in the Bible that comes close to suggesting it.
Also,,, how would we ever measure our good works to be good enough?? The answer is that we could never be good enough as imperfect beings and we could never measure suffiency,,, even as the Bible states that all our good works are just like filthy rags to God -- because He knows that even our good works are nearly always based in self-centeredness and self-promotion anyway.
God certainly calls us to good works to serve eachother, but the Bible is about as clear as it could be that all our good works combined are still steeped in self-centered sin and therefore cannot be enough to earn heaven -- only Christ's perfect once-and-for-all sacrifice as Christ cried out from the cross... "It is FINISHED"! -- meaning nothing else now needs to be done to obtain redemption to God except to believe in it and take it.
I hope I haven't offended you or anyone, but I have been studying the Bible for over 40 years and I keep coming back to the same conclusion. If other churches feel justified in adding to the Bible or changing it, then as far as I'm concerned, all bets are off. :)
Why not just be good for goodness sake
goodness sake+candy
Pete: Thank you for posting something that makes sense. I have read my Bible all the way through 3 times in my years on this earth. No - I don't understand everything, and I know much is lost with revisions, and I know it is written by man. All that being considered - I fail to see how any one could look at nature and all it's beauty and then say there is no God?? I seldom discuss my belief in God with others as I feel it is wrong to "argue" this subject. I am not to judge others and I try very hard to follow that rule - I fail because I am flawed. This whole discussion is, for the most part, only being silly and making "cute" remarks. It is nice to see one person clearly state what the Bible is about - thank you.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
Comment collapsed by the community
