Ep. 84: Where's the magic?

[marcuspnw]

Humanguy 1:1 - "People who write screeds promoting the murdering of abortion doctors have no fucking business preaching to me or anyone else about right versus wrong, darkness versus light or good versus evil."

Tony reminds me of the little kid that gets a toy flashlight as a gift and runs around his house turning off the lights and drawing the drapes so he can shine his little light. But, since I am not a member of his household, I am free to walk out the door. Well, look at that. The sun is shining brightly, the sky is a bright blue and I can see clearly for miles. Meanwhile, tony is happy inside with his little flashlight and his house of darkness. Until the batteries run out of course.

[tonyenglish7]

Humanguy,

Humanguy 1:1 - "People who write screeds promoting the murdering of abortion doctors have no fucking business preaching to me or anyone else about right versus wrong, darkness versus light or good versus evil."

I didn't preach one word, all I did was reference the bible.... Sorry that made you so mad...

[humanguy]

Humanguy,

Humanguy 1:1 - "People who write screeds promoting the murdering of abortion doctors have no fucking business preaching to me or anyone else about right versus wrong, darkness versus light or good versus evil."

I didn't preach one word, all I did was reference the bible.... Sorry that made you so mad...

What made you think I was mad? Was it because I used the word "fucking?" Is that a dirty word, Tony? Is that a dark word? Is that a word that God doesn't like?

If so, why? If not, why not?

[mitchellmckain]

I didn't preach one word, all I did was reference the bible.... Sorry that made you so mad...

What made you think I was mad? Was it because I used the word "fucking?" Is that a dirty word, Tony? Is that a dark word? Is that a word that God doesn't like?

If so, why? If not, why not?

No it is just an angry word. It is forbidden in many venues and considered improper in polite company, thus to use it is to disregard politeness and propriety and that disregard typically signals a loss of one cool -- ergo that one is angry. Of course there are people who spread this word liberally over all their language like peanut butter and thus render it as meaningless as the sound ...uh... One can in fact do this with any word and thus I consider this an offense against human communication and rather tragic. I think such forbidden words give us a potent spice in communication when we need them and without this forbidding they loose all of their potency.



To be quark or not to be quark. That is the quark question. Whether tis quark nobler in the quark mind, to suffer the quark slings and quark arrows of outrageous quark fortune, or to take up quark arms against a quark sea of quark troubles and by opposing quark end them.

hmmm... just testing.

[humanguy]

I didn't preach one word, all I did was reference the bible.... Sorry that made you so mad...

What made you think I was mad? Was it because I used the word "fucking?" Is that a dirty word, Tony? Is that a dark word? Is that a word that God doesn't like?

If so, why? If not, why not?

No it is just an angry word. It is forbidden in many venues and considered improper in polite company, thus to use it is to disregard politeness and propriety and that disregard typically signals a loss of one cool -- ergo that one is angry. Of course there are people who spread this word liberally over all their language like peanut butter and thus render it as meaningless as the sound ...uh... One can in fact do this with any word and thus I consider this an offense against human communication and rather tragic. I think such forbidden words give us a potent spice in communication when we need them and without this forbidding they loose all of their potency.



To be quark or not to be quark. That is the quark question. Whether tis quark nobler in the quark mind, to suffer the quark slings and quark arrows of outrageous quark fortune, or to take up quark arms against a quark sea of quark troubles and by opposing quark end them.

hmmm... just testing.

Well, okay, I'll cop to that.

[ScottBarger]

I seem to be one of the few main stream evangelical Christian on the forum that I can see. We have Scott who is sort of a new age Christian who "feels" like the things Jesus teaches resonate with him but I am not sure the exclusivity claims of Jesus are fully embraced or Jesus' endorsement of the Old Testament. He represents a new movement within Christianity which has bought into the relivatism of our current culture.

Hrrm? I don't know why this kind of things surprises me, I guess it is always a bit odd to read what other people think of you, kind of like listening to a recording of your own voice. I would describe myself as a moderate Christian, who is open to questioning theological systems that others take for granted. I take the Bible seriously, the Kingdom seriously, and Jesus seriously. I fully acknowledge that my theology is prone to seismic upheaval about once or twice a year. This fool-hearty willingness to admit my confusion with the contrived theological systems (not to mention socio-political agendas) of North American Evangelicalism has resulted in me being called (on different occasions) a heretic, blasphemer, charlatan, snake oil salesmen, gay, unsaved, unchristian, and now "New Age."

Maybe I should keep my yapper shut and just speak the party line, I would certainly get along better with my fellow Christians if I did.

[mitchellmckain]

I seem to be one of the few main stream evangelical Christian on the forum that I can see. We have Scott who is sort of a new age Christian who "feels" like the things Jesus teaches resonate with him but I am not sure the exclusivity claims of Jesus are fully embraced or Jesus' endorsement of the Old Testament. He represents a new movement within Christianity which has bought into the relivatism of our current culture.

Hrrm? I don't know why this kind of things surprises me, I guess it is always a bit odd to read what other people think of you, kind of like listening to a recording of your own voice. I would describe myself as a moderate Christian, who is open to questioning theological systems that others take for granted. I take the Bible seriously, the Kingdom seriously, and Jesus seriously. I fully acknowledge that my theology is prone to seismic upheaval about once or twice a year. This fool-hearty willingness to admit my confusion with the contrived theological systems (not to mention socio-political agendas) of North American Evangelicalism has resulted in me being called (on different occasions) a heretic, blasphemer, charlatan, snake oil salesmen, gay, unsaved, unchristian, and now "New Age."

Maybe I should keep my yapper shut and just speak the party line, I would certainly get along better with my fellow Christians if I did.

Really? Doesn't that depend on which Christians you are talking about? Or do mean you would get along with most of them most of the time if you were that kind of yes-man to them? Wouldn't you feel a little bit conflicted about following the crowd? Wouldn't you feel that maybe you should be following someone else? I suppose you could just do like Tony does and just decide that whoever isn't following his crowd really isn't Christian and then pretend that everybody else is really the "crowd" going down the wide road to destruction. LOL If you are into that self deception kind of thing.

[ScottBarger]

MM,

Well, it seems like some (many? most?) Christians feel as though it is important to delineate who is in and who is out based on theology. I don't think I have ever denied ANY of the foundational doctrines of the faith, yet I have received more than just a couple emails and phone calls to correct my "heresy." It strikes me as a strongly gnostic way to look at the Christian faith. It isn't enough to believe in the teachings, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. You must also subscribe to a "secret knowledge" (specific theological system) to really be in.

[tonyenglish7]

Scott,

Maybe I should keep my yapper shut and just speak the party line, I would certainly get along better with my fellow Christians if I did.

I actually feel bad reading back what I wrote, it was in the heat of passion I guess with all of the Atheist and one other proclaiming Christian denouncing me. I do think it is good that you are honest with your questioning and I respect that more than you know. I think about that story you told about the day you were giving the class on Genesis after a famous young earther had given the devotional. That was funny and I so related with you on that. We do have a lot in common as I find myself at odds with the church culture many times as they strain out a gnat and swallow a camel so often and I think we share that common passion. I sift through every doctrine one by one and do not accept the whole package carte blanch as some do. And so I respect you for that and relate as well.

I guess I overstated that thought because I was in a church for over 30 years that went from very conservative to emergent in a slow progressive manner. This attempt to be relevant by becoming relativistic is one of my pet peeves. My pastor, someone you would know of if I said his name actually told me it doesn't matter what you believe as long as you are sincere. This is a huge error and was predicted by the apostles for the last days.

I think one of the things that are in error is this thought that the Old Testament is somehow not accurate or not revealing the true nature of God. This comes from the error that because Jesus was so tolerant and loving that God is not to be feared and his justice and wrath are a mistaken attribute of his nature. But Jesus said the old testament is accurate and does reveal the nature of God. Jesus' mission was not one of wrath but his next mission will be. And the events will be more terrible than those in the old testament for those with no blood on their doorpost.

I do consider you a fellow Christian and I respect your opinions as thoughtful and researched. I disagree with some of your ideas but I wish I had not stated that thought the way I did.

But I sincerely apologize for that statement which was blurted out without any filter and with no respect whatsoever. I am really sorry....

[mitchellmckain]

It strikes me as a strongly gnostic way to look at the Christian faith. It isn't enough to believe in the teachings, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. You must also subscribe to a "secret knowledge" (specific theological system) to really be in.

Yes that is exacty how I see it and have said so quite frequently, but I am happy to hear from someone who also thinks that way. Uh oh, does two make a crowd? LOL

[ScottBarger]

No worries Tony, really. I think that probably most Christians have more in common than not, but in discussion forums we usually tend to talk about the differences, not the commonalities because, well, that makes for more interesting conversation.

We can start another thread to talk about the OT and how it relates to the NT if you like, that might make for interesting banter between Christians.

[LoftyTower]

How about apartheid? Is South Africa morally equivalent with and without apartheid?

Turns out it is.

Now that the ANC's plan has become clear, it turns out that their operations had less to do with black nationalism and more with violently, crudely and greedily imposing a Communist regime.

The "bloodless" transition only exists as a fantasy phraze in the media. Blood is spilt at an insane rate. And what the international media paints as a hero of a party, is in reality little more than a band of criminals sucking the country dry through their endless corruption.

Worst of all, the international media aren't making alarm this time. When it's a generalized, if not fabricated, "white man oppressing black man" story the media goes on a field trip, but when it comes to reality they seem to be like pastors and preachers of religion: It's blasphemy to point out that the ANC can do any wrong!

I think it's best we all forget about the religiouslike tale of the "liberation" from "Apartheid", for in reality it's about 5% actual fact and 95% total and complete racist fabrication.