The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The impossibility of Christianity > Comments

The impossibility of Christianity : Comments

By David Young, published 2/3/2009

Jesus could be extremely valuable to humanity with his teachings and philosophies, if he can be delivered from the clutches of Christianity.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
>>You don't need to be a theologian to see this article is full of crap<<
runner, I am almost embarrassed, but this time I must agree with you.
Posted by George, Monday, 2 March 2009 9:53:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Daviy:

<What is generally called Christianity today is not the only form of Christianity that sprung up after the death of Jesus. It is merely the form that suppressed all other forms by one way or another.>

Obvious rubbish! Christianity today is as multivariate as it ever was.

<Christian thinking is solely external and material...>

There is a strong tradition of Christian practice that emphasises meditation and artistic activity as a means of deepening the encounter with the Godhead. Over centuries figures like Julian of Norwich, Meister Eckhart and today’s Matthew Fox have followed this path. Many people today are treading in their footsteps.

<The genocide Christianity has practiced against the “heretics” has gone beyond the physical genocide of people into the genocide of thinking.>

“Genocide of thinking”? This makes no sense -- either literal or metaphorical!

<The Christian church is built on the epistleistic writings of its founder (Paul), with the life of Jesus relegated to a non-essential adjunct.>

Who gave you this ridiculous idea? You’ve immediately lost credibility with anyone seriously practising within one of the many streams of Christianity. And that word you invented -- “epistleistic” – is just as ridiculous in its morphology and spelling. Why not use the readily available “epistolary”?

<The crux of the matter is that Christianity is not a religion, it is a legal system...it cannot do any wrong because everything that it does is God’s will… >

Unsubstantiated. Some people want the Bible to be a book of rules, but most heed Jesus’ warning to avoid the legalism of the Pharisees as they appear in the Gospel stories.

< Jesus viewed free of the Christian enveloped is a fascinating philosopher no matter who he or she was.>

It is a mistake to treat Jesus as a “philosopher” who simply needs to be understood. Inner transformation comes about through an encounter with him in a more subjective way – e.g. through practices such as meditation and good liturgy, both essentially forms of prayer.

One could say much more, but I suspect you would not listen. I’d rather forget your article immediately.
Posted by crabsy, Monday, 2 March 2009 10:59:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shadow Minister

Lest any “heretic” suggest that the Christ may be present when the Bishop is absent, Ignatius sets him straight:
It is not legitimate to baptise or hold an agape [cult meal] without the Bishop. ... To join the Bishop is to join the church, to separate oneself from the Bishop is to separate oneself not only from the church, but from God himself.
Apart from the church hierarchy, he insists, “there is nothing that can be called a church.”

(Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels. Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1979.)

If Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, defined Christianity in terms of a legal system who am I to argue? Take a look at the inquisition, the 'legal' processes of excommunication and the hierarchy of Christianity. If that is not a legal system what is?
Opinionated2
It is indeed a pyramid legal system like the 'Amway' model.
Your link was very apt. Since the separation of state and church the Christian church has maintained the position that it works according to God's law, not secular law, and so it is above secular law. Hence the church can hide away pedophilia and other aberrations within its ranks because it is a law unto itself.
A big problem for Christianity today is that some awkward people expect Christian churches to obey secular law above their 'law of God.' Some even expect religions to pay taxes!
The word spiritual means coming from within. Christianity is a physical religion, not a spiritual religion. It is easy to get confused with this but Christianity has nothing to do with spirituality. It is a legal system of dogma and observances.
While the words religion and spirituality are often incorrectly used interchangeably, an important distinction exists between spirituality in religion and spirituality as opposed to religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality
As for the rest of the 'Christian' posts, is 'nit picking' and 'tradition' the best you can do?
There is nothing 'nit picking' about the origins of Christianity or the need for the Immaculate Conception to keep Christianity afloat. That doesn't need interpretation. All it need is a little basic research.
Posted by Daviy, Tuesday, 3 March 2009 9:17:35 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The crux of the matter is that Christianity is not a religion, it is a legal system. It is also why Christianity must never be allowed to get a foot hold back into our legal system.

David Young must have once been a Roman Catholic, or he would not have such violent anti-Christian views on the law and Christianity. The reality is that today in practical terms we have adopted nine universal Catholic Churches, in the Roman Catholic tradition, with the Parliament as the Godhead.

This may be alright to Roman Catholics and Atheists, but it is getting Protestant Christians madder than cut snakes. Roman Catholics have never known a system where the Priest was wrong. As Roman Catholic people have become better educated 90% have left the Church but the Church has not let them go. The States have become a Catholic Church, and universal.

The Roman Catholics insisted on full equality in Australia by S 116 Constitution, but have by dint of political power, made Australia a Roman Catholic Country with a universal Catholic Church. There is absolutely no practical difference between a Roman Catholic Bishop with almost absolute power, and a Judge. The Federal Judge has a choice but chooses to be a potentate, as an Atheist or Roman Catholic.

Neither admit that Jesus Christ taught the separation of powers, and that the Protestant Christian legal system adopted by the English, based upon the Gospels, not the Epistles, has worked for the English and Americans for hundreds of years since 1295. There are nine separate Catholic Parliaments in Australia all churning out law. The Catholic Federal Court of Australia has closed its doors to most subjects, and refuses to empanel juries in the Protestant Christian tradition to act as a winnowing floor for bad laws.

Protestant Christianity teaches from the Gospels, we insisted Our Queen take an oath to uphold them, not the Epistles, and deliver law and justice in mercy. Catholic ( universal) States were the method used by Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mugabe and even Menzies, and Daviy is right. We don’t want it in Australia
Posted by Peter the Believer, Tuesday, 3 March 2009 10:20:25 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Spot on, Jon J - the ancient Greeks had far more sophisticated ideas than most utterances attributed to Jesus. Indeed, Jesus as represented in that highly manufactured and selective document the bible comes across mostly as derivative, paranoid and megalomaniac, frantically worried about whether people hold beliefs in other gods. For real food for thought, the Greeks provide far more nutrition, as do the other thinkers you mentioned, Jon. Bertrand Russell is an excellent source for all-too-rare commonsense on a variety of philosophical/ethical issues.
Posted by Miranda Suzanne, Tuesday, 3 March 2009 11:29:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,

As from the link http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09056a.htm#I

Canon law is the body of laws and regulations made by or adopted by ecclesiastical authority, for the government of the Christian organization and its members. The word adopted is here used to point out the fact that there are certain elements in canon law borrowed by the Church from civil law.

Note: "for the government of the Christian organization and its members"

Every organisation has a code of conduct and governing principles and procedures. No one would however, try and claim that ANZ bank is a legal system.

Because the church has rules and procedures (such as ex communication) does not infer that christianity is a legal system.

"All birds have 2 legs, I have 2 legs, thus I am a bird."

From what he stated, I would take any pronouncement of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, with a large pinch of salt.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 3 March 2009 12:39:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy