A regular criticism heard on OLO is that our country is suffering because we're drifting away from Christianity, and that we'd be better off if we all accepted more church involvement in our lives and in the running of our community.

So tell us, if you were granted unlimited authority to "Christianise" Australia, what changes would you make, and what would society look like when you're finished?

OH DEAR,sanchos;..come in spinner..lol

a truely xtian australia makes the inferance the current one isnt,..ofcourse thats a judgment call,..that xtians can only try to defend..[whilst the a-thiest's poke fun at the unxtian attuitude of many who call them self..[or rather think themselves].. xtian]

but hey im a sukker for a challange..[so here goes],

christs house is divided..[just as he didnt intend even forming a house,because he came to join the fathers house..lol..that was at the time also divided,

so in reply to your posit<<if you were granted unlimited authority to "Christianise" Australia,>>i would insist that those calling on christ with us [emanuel]..act as christ did in trying to restore our fathers house

<<what changes would you make>>i would not make any,it is for each to get their own house in order..[no one can make you be anything you dont yearn to become]lead by egsample be seen doing the xtian thing.

<<what would society look like when you're finished?>>thats not for me to say...[jesus tried and only managed to get those who saw him doing as our father does,..for them..to think he was the father ..lol..[see me see my father]does not mean i am my father

anyhow an intresting..[if leading question..lol]

i would love to see 20 million people doing the good we saw the christ do..[or at least trying to do that good that comes only from god, as witness by the christ.[serving the one true creator god of love life and mercy..[beyond name..[who lives in our hearts..[who sustains all living their very lives to live]

but this isnt the christs realm...this realm clearly is satans..[the next realm is not jesus realm either]..that is the fathers;who art in heaven,

knowing jesus he possably claims the hells,he isnt one to abandon a sinner,..but there you go...you did ask..so i did respond..lets see what the tide brings in

if you hear weeping it will only be me silently weeping as i see the good and true tempted to try to create 'heaven] on 'earth',..thinking we need two heavens...[while our leaders try to create two hells..

[there is my response...just for you ...lol]

Damn interesting question Sancho.

My prediction is that we'll get no constructive answers here, because it's easier to criticise than put forward alternatives.

It really depends which kind of Christian gets the reins of power.

If it's the paranoid crusader type like Boaz was (to give due credit he was in favour of separation of Church and State) then I imagine we'd probably make discriminatory religious policies that target groups such as Islam, and become a target of militant Islamists quite quickly, with moderate muslims adopting more of a 'serves them right' mentality.

In relation to social policies, I imagine that institutionalising laws that limit people's freedom on the basis of religious teachings would inevitably result in a backlash by those who reject this as nonsense.

Australia's been fortunate to have comparatively civil politics on this issue (compared to the vast gulf between left and right in the US). This would become a vast chasm and things would inevitably get more confrontational and probably more violent.

Sancho

"So tell us, if you were granted unlimited authority to 'Christianise' Australia, what changes would you make?"

What changes are there left to make?

We open parliament with prayer and we have politicians holding prayer meetings in Parliament House.

Government gives churches, despite their wealth, generous tax and rates concessions.

Government funds Christian schools.

We've got chaplains and religious 'education' in public schools.

We've got Christian groups providing all sorts of paid and unpaid services - whether it's counselling, finding employment, or used clothing, you name it and there's a church out there somewhere cashing in on it.

We have our weddings and funerals in churches.

Our main holidays, easter and Christmas, are religious festivals.

Government funds religious talkfests such as the Catholic Church's World Youth Forum.

We appointed a church leader as Governor General.

And the list goes on.

"And what would society look like when you're finished?"

Not much different to how it looks today I'd imagine. We've already been well and truly 'Christianised' I'd say.

Though no doubt Runner could take us one or two steps further towards Christian totalitarianism.

No abortion. Blaspheming would be a capital offense. Comedians would regularly be hung (or maybe the christians would prefer crucifixion).
Homosexuality would be seen as a crime once more. Divorce would be restricted. Unwed mothers would once again be forced to give up their children for adoption. Churches and their leaders would become more powerful and influential than they are now. Maybe they would even comprise the government. Corporal punishment of children would be reintroduced. Probably a resurgence of kiddie fiddling priests abusing with impunity. Persecution of nonbelievers and non christian religions.
Shops etc would be closed on Sunday. Science would be curtailed in case it discovers inconvenient truths. Progress would falter. Bigotry, racism and intolerance would all increase.

I for one would fight it endlessly.

Bronwyn and Mikk you have said it all, with perhaps the exception of (restricted) corporal punishment. I think the abolishment of that has created more problems than it's solved.

mikk, crucifiction was never a christian form of execution. Crucifiction was one of the Romans' methods of putting someone to death.

A truly christian Australia would probably be as bad as predicted here but how would it compare with a truly moslem Australia?

Given the choice, I'd take the lesser of two evils.

snake

"Bronwyn and Mikk you have said it all, with perhaps the exception of (restricted) corporal punishment. I think the abolishment of that has created more problems than it's solved."

I see the problems (I think you're referring to) as resulting from a complex mix of many contributing factors and I certainly don't think corporal punishment is the answer. You don't create better people by inflicting violence on them.

In fact I see that as the same type of autocratic 'I know best' solution favoured by many of the churches. Hitting people might seem to bring them into line, but it can fuel resentment and anger, which only further feeds into a negative cycle of rebellion and retribution.

Austin Powerless

"A truly christian Australia would probably be as bad as predicted here but how would it compare with a truly moslem Australia? Given the choice, I'd take the lesser of two evils."

Why limit ourselves to a choice between two evils? Why not aim a little higher than that? Let's build a strong secular and inclusive society, capable of accommodating all religions, but giving none of them any powers that should rightfully belong to the state.

Currently we have a secular State that has been influenced in the past by Judao-Christian morality. When Australia was founded the Fathers were church people. However they brought with them much of established secular laws. (By the way secular does not mean anti God - but means dealing with issues of the physical state of man.)

To bring in a truly Christian society I suggest you first read the teachings of Christ in the New Testament and you might just pick up on some of His attitudes and social relationships. He is not about the enforcement of laws, but the education of the human spirit to live like God, showing mercy, justice and love to all persons.

I deeply fear a Christian Australia. My ancestors fled Orthodox Christian czarist Russia. I do not want to live in a Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or any other state based on a particular religion. I think it is an unhealthy development that Australia has Christian missionaries in the the public schools in the school chaplaincy program. It is not good that there is no civil marriage in Israel. It is not good that Saudi Arabia doesn't allow non-Muslims to freely practice their religion. It is not good that churches have to get official approval from the Chinese government to operate. I favour no government support for religion and no interference from government in the free exercise of religion. I think it best that religion be no business of government.

stabler society with lower divorce rate? more loyalty. so everyone can concentrate more on their job? and lower crime rate? i hope so.

We all want those things, rouge. Can you explain why and how Christianity would bring them about?

Philo,

I'm well and truly intrigued by this:- "When Australia was founded the Fathers were Christian.." Who exactly is it that you consider those founding Fathers to be? The King of England? The convicts? MacArthur? The illustrious members of the Rum Corps? The rebels of Eureka stockade? The Bushrangers? Everyone who ignored the fact that the country did not belong to them and that they weren't the original inhabitants?

I'm seriously puzzled.

Behind all the feel-good rhetoric, I can imagine a drift toward a fundamentalist state with our own version of the Taliban - empowered to instruct people on how to behave and what they can and cannot do or say.

Political, social and medical decisions would be made with consideration given to ideology rather than the common good - as advised by some sort of non-elected spiritual spokespersons.

Education and the media would need to be strictly controlled.

Currently the predominant values of the average Australian person is based in greed - make as much as you can without honest work, slothfulness - rip off the welfare system - and personal feel good pleasure - take no responsibility for bad behaviour. This has increased an fractured family and social unity. There is no sense of good conscience and moral responsibility.

The founders of Australia were Church men and not strictly followers of the teachings of Christ.

Christ demonstrated a life and attitude to be followed and admired. Those that live by those principles are Christian.

1. He did not discriminate on the basis if nationality, religion or gender. In Luke 4 he praises Naaman the Syrian, and the poor widow of Zarepath. In Luke 7 he praises a Roman centurion - the Romans were military occupiers of the Land.
2. He cared for those with personality disorders and destructive addictions.
3. He attended to and healed the sick and social outcasts - the lepers.
4. He fed the poor and hungry and employed workers to attend to them in a disciplined way.
5. He supplied sight to the blind.
5. He spoke out against injustice and greed, and identified the root causes of social dysfunction.
6. In John 8 he identifies the problems of the death penalty applied by Jews to adultrous women - as all men have committed social sins.
7. He deals with attitudes and motives - study Him.

For a true treatment of Jesus life and attitudes read the Gospels. Until you do you cann't comment on what is the basis of a true Christian Society.

davidf:"I think it best that religion be no business of government"

Hear hear!!

Ideally, it'd be no business of anyone, but there's so much money to be made...

philo:"I think it best that religion be no business of government"

What gives you the idea that the four collections of writibgs called the gospels are either accurate in their original forms or have been unaltered by later generations to suit the agenda of the time?

I have no doubt that Jesus was a well-meaning man, but those who've come after have very often been anything but.

What would a truly Christian Australia be like?

Lots of sinning, lots of moralising, lots of counselling and lots of repenting.

Ad nauseum.

A hell on earth (except for the sinning part).

Antiseptic,
Pardon but you ignorance is showing. The point is not how accurate is text of the message but is the message of Christ relavent to offer a better society?

You can be cynical, agnostic, and critical; but what sort of society do you offer and envisage as ideal. Obviously palimpsest, feels offencive behaviour that violates the ideals of good society would be best for him. His society values are based in anarchy, and offencive self seeking behaviour.

As Sin is behaviour that offends social decency, the respect of the individual, and attitudes that seek to destroy the personal reputation and developing potential of others.

in the claimed xtian text[gen 1;29]..and GOD SAID..behold i have given you EVERY herd bearing seed, which is upon the face of the EARthand EVERY tree in which is the fruit of the tree yeidinmg seedTO YOU IT SHALL BE MEAT..

yet to govt it will be the means to make children criminal for smoking a plant[to wit cannabis], those legal lawyer types running govt's of australia are the antichist, in a truelly xtian australia dopesm,okers wouldnt have the rules of a drug war thrust on those simply smoking a herb

in fact in the first chaper of the first book[and thye last chapter of the last book [rev 22] mention is made to hemp, even in exodus the bush which was not comsumed by fire[lol] was hemp [indica variety, read ex 25;40, then go see the design of the lamp.

or worse go read issia 42;3.. ba bruised reed..[canna]bis.. shall he not break[and the SMOKING FLAX..[read hempenflax]..[canna-bliss]SHALL HE NOT QUENCH, he shall bring forth judgment for truth

4.HE SHALL NOT FAIL..nor be discouraged,[till he has set forth judment in the earth, and the isles wait for his law

or chap 40[the voice of him cries in the wilderness , comfort my chilfdren all flesh is grassand all the godly ness there of is as the flower of the field... indeed set the drug war prisoners free, in an xtian australia all drug war prisoners would be set free

[but the antichrist runs the govts of the world[thus we make war on drugs not thieves or childmolestors, nor war mongers]read rev 22 the last chapter of the last book[time to grow the tree of life [cannabliss] and say to govt get ye behind me satan

know legally a plant affixt to the ground BELONGS to the ground[knowing this understand what the holy book says[and disregard the unholy law books]the drug laws are wholy fraud[yet criminalise one percent of the population EAXCH YEAR

Antiseptic wrote: I have no doubt that Jesus was a well-meaning man…

In the Gospels Jesus does not always show up well.

Anglican Bishop John Shelby Spong wrote “Sins of Scripture”. On his website you can see:

RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY: "No one comes to the Father but by me" (John 14:6);This text has helped to create a world where adherents of one religion feel compelled to kill adherents of another. A veritable renaissance of religious terror now confronts us and is making against us the claims we have long made against religious traditions different from our own.

Jesus placed himself between people and God. If there is a God it seems to me righteous people deserve his favour whether or not they subscribe to a particular mumbo jumbo.

MATTHEW 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Jesus doesn’t sound different from any other egocentric leader of a cult. I suggest that one who demands putting himself above family is not worthy of worship.

Driving from the Temple the moneychangers [MATTHEW 21:12] who were serving a function for visitors makes as much sense as trashing the money change facilities in the Sydney airport. People coming to Jerusalem from foreign countries needed the local currency to get food and lodging.

Cursing the fig tree because it didn't bear fruit out of season for him [MATTHEW 22:19] was the act of a petulant child who can’t always get his way.

Jesus was possibly well-meaning, but he was also bigoted, egocentric and unreasonable according to the Gospels. He was deeply flawed.

I do not want a government to act in the way of Jesus.

Philo, I should have added literalism and humourlessness to my list. I am all for individual ethics as against societal moralising.

Here in East of Eden we follow the dictum 'do unto others as we would have them do to us', an old Buddhist line I think. We've rejected the concept of original sin because it has been a tool used for control and dominance too many times. Rather we think that mankind is fundamentally good.

A truly christian Australia should be honest, faithful, merciful and should live a christ-like life to salvage his country and the world in general.
Mr T.
www.onebigfamily.forumotion.net

How would a Christian Australia in 2009 be any different from Europe during the Dark Ages, before the Enlightenment and secularism removed the church from state affairs?

Sancho

I have been thinking much the same thing. Would women have to dress like they do in the Exclusive Brethren? With those long skirts and little headscarves? There'd be no women in positions of authority. Would there even be equal opportunity? In education? Or employment? As according to Ephesians 5:

5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. (5:22-24)

5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Imagine having to ask permission just to go to school or do the grocery shopping.

And Rock music would be crap - all that hand clapping and 'nice' music. Grrr. And art would just be pictures of holy people again.

I think if Australia became truly Christian we'd be bored sh*tless.

I think the problems of the 21st Century deserve 21st Century solutions, not a reinterpreted and reedited collection of Middle Eastern stories from the Iron Age. The world wasn't flat with 4 corners then and still isn't today.

What would a truly Christian Australia be like?

One word - "Inclusive!" If we really practised
the basic tenant of Christianity, "That you love
one another as I have loved you." Then there would
not be an exclusion of people who're "different,"
from the norm. Everyone would be welcome, and there
would be a place for everyone in our society. We would
celebrate our "differences," not fear them.

Men like Cardinal Pell - would not be able to rise to
high position. He simply wouldn't meet the qualifications
necessary for the job. (A compassionate heart).

It would be a world in which love ruled.

But, sadly - that's an impossible dream, dear Sancho.
And, although we all have a conscience for a reason -
very few of us act on it. We take the "easy"
option. We get what we allow. And, we settle for
what we can get. Such is life!

I think it'd be a cross between Toowoomba and Kabul.

Truly frightening.

Foxy
If that was what Christianity was like in the real world the even I would have no problem with it.

A pox on priests like Pell and long live priests like Father Bob.

God help us. I have a thorough disdain for those who generally describe themselves as Christian. The reason for this view of my mine is that in my limited experience of the world and its people, "religious" people have a number of unacceptable things in common.

They are all convinced of their own personal God concept to the exclusion of others, do not like to be questioned and seek to inflict their will upon everyone else and dictate our behaviour, beyond certain basic norms like don't torture, thieve, rape and murder people

In this regard, these religious/political figures are all the same to me, and thoroughly undesirable the lot of them. Our political process must be adept at peering under the outer garment as of course, a charismatic powerful mind with the support of the people under our present system can easily inflict mono culture and religious tenets on the whole group.

Having said that, when my blood father shot thru and my mother could afford me not, a Jewish person offered to adopt me. In a dark period of my life, Gay "Christian Priests" tendered me, when without home, Muslims housed me ... the Buddhists too in other lands added to my development.

I consider that I would be less without all of them, and skewed if I had only the input of one of them.

*Philo*
I think those poppets had had quite enough to drink before JC made more wooblah and consider that he enjoyed a good p!ss up as much as the rest of us. HaHaHa

(The last time I made a comment like this Philo sought to command me otherwise, which remains an amusing thought in my memory.)

;-)

I got to see an enjoyable interview with

*Riz and Rabbi Schoomzey*

on Al Jazheera this morning. I enjoyed it very much as he spoke of the things that unite us, like when the Jews were taken in by the Muslims in 1492 and how in reality they have much in common.

Yes, the Heart/Mind combination that has regard to that which unites us, instead of the unbalanced focus on that which only divides us.

In this case the common things that unite the different religious/cultural/language groups of the world.

..

I must ask DavidF a rudey? What's this Kosher Sex then?
Is that when your Mrs goes Vampire and drains the Blood 1st?

HaHaHa

" ... A Lady in public but a Freak in the bed. ... "

What is 'truly Christian'. As another poster stated it would depend a lot on which arm of Christianity were to take hold.

I would shudder at a society that is truly Christian if it means that all others are persecuted and we have to conform to one set of Christian behaviours that might be espoused by the likes of the Exclusive Brethren or the Patriarchs of Tasmania.

But if truly Christian means - taking Foxy's point - compassionate and inclusive (secular) it would not be far removed from what experience today. None of us are persecuted for being atheists or for subscribing to other beliefs/religions. Which is why I would rather live here than in countries who observe a strict religious code.

DreamOn asked:

I must ask DavidF a rudey? What's this Kosher Sex then?

It’s probably before your time, but Rudey (Rudy) Vallée (28 July 1901 – 3 July 1986) was an American singer, actor, bandleader, and entertainer. Born Hubert Prior Vallée in Island Pond, Vermont, he took up the saxophone and acquired the nickname "Rudy" after then famous saxophonist Rudy Wiedoeft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Vallee

Jews have a different attitude towards sex from that of Christians and Buddhists. The ascetic tradition is almost lacking. God created the earth to enjoy. [Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.] If you deny yourself food, drink and sex for no reason you are denying God since you reject the good things that he has put on earth for you. If you deny yourself food, drink and sex for the sake of your own holiness you are guilty of the sin of self-righteousness.

No Jewish denomination advocates anything like a missionary position or sees anything thing wrong in oral sex.

In Australia there are three main branches – Orthodox, Masorti and Progressive. The Orthodox feel the same way about homosexuality as fundamentalist Christians do, but other branches feel differently. Outside of the Orthodox homosexuality is no bar to being a rabbi or cantor, and some rabbis have officiated at same sex marriages.

Sex is not just for procreation. It is a bond of love between human beings and meant as such by God.

Dear david f,

Your explanation of the Jewish take on sex

reminded me of a joke:

A Priest and a Rabbi were sitting next to each other
on a long flight.

After an hour passes and not a single word is exchanged
by the two men, the Priest finally turns to the Rabbi and
says, "Rabbi, do you mind if I ask you a personal
question?" The Rabbi replies, "Of course, go ahead."

"I understand that many of you Jewish people, especially
Rabbis, keep kosher and, don't as such eat things like
bacon or ham." The Rabbi acknowledges that. "Haven't you
ever tasted bacon or ham?" asks the Priest.

The Rabbi explained. "Many years ago, I was visiting a small
town in the middle of nowhere and found myself in a diner
one Sunday morning. There was no one around so I ordered bacon
and eggs. It was quite good but that was the only time
that ever happened."

"Now, can I ask you a very personal question?" asks the Rabbi.
The Priest says, "Sure, go ahead."

"You Priests take an oath of celibacy, right?" "Yes," replies
the Priest.

"Well, haven't you ever had sex since you've become a Priest?"
asks the Rabbi. The Priest leans towards the Rabbi and
answers softly, "As a young parishioner, I was approached by
a troubled woman who was looking for my guidance. She was
an incredibly beautiful young woman and one thing led to
another. So, yes, just once I had sex with a woman."

A few moments pass and the Rabbi leans over to the Priest and
remarks, "A lot better than pork, isn't it?"

Dear *DavidF*

yes I do appreciate your posts. Yes Rudey and the Vagabond Luver was a bit before my time. I was born under the Aquarian sign in the summer of '69, bastard child of a flower power girl and carried as a mascot in a back pack to anti nam wars as a rug rat, though I have no recollection of this.

Rabbi Schoomzey seems a bit caught up about this "divorce" thing. In some cases I would suggest it is good. In my case, strewth, domestic violence etc etc .. my blood father is a thoroughly vile individual - I am thankful though that I ended up with a v.kind pommy step dad .. temporarily .. actually I had several father figures. ..

People grow and change, and sometimes divorce is appropriate i.m.o. Some of these religious types who carry on .. !JESUS! .. clueless. I hope Shmoozey preaches from a perspective of more than just his own difficult childhood.

As for JC preaching to be above family. Another of my father figures used to say:

"Blood may be thicker than water, but Spirit is thicker still."

I can relate to this. Perhaps another thread at some point.

david f>>..Outside of the Orthodox homosexuality is no bar to being a rabbi or cantor,and some rabbis have officiated at same sex marriages.

Sex is not just for procreation...It is a bond of love between human beings!..?.>>

from
http://www.biblestudysite.com/factsarefacts.htm
I apologize..for the'language'which will appear'here-UNDER'

from The official unabridged..Soncino'Edition of the'Talmud'..published in 1935..quotations with footnotes from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud,(Book)

YEBAMOTH,60b."As R.Joshua,b.Levi related:`There was a certain town in the Land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants disputed,and Rabbi sent R.Ramanos who conducted an inquiry and..found in it the daughter of a'proselyte'....*who was under the age of three years..!and one day..,and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest"

note..A proselyte under the age of three years and one day may be married by a priest...And was married to a priest.ie.,permitted to continue to live with her...'husband'!

SANHEDRIN,55b-55a...:"What is meant by this?..Rab said:Pederasty with a child below nine years of age..is not deemed as pederasty..with a child above that.

Samuel said:Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.....55a)(he)who commits bestiality,whether naturally or unnaturally:...or a woman who causes herself to be beastially abused,....whether naturally or unnaturally,is liable to punishment."

(footnotes)"(1)The reference is to..the passive..'subject'/victim..of sodomy...As stated in supra[54a,guilt is incurred by the active participant even if the former be a minor;..i.e.,less than thirteen years old...

2)Rab makes nine years the minimum;..but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age,...no guilt is incurred..!...Samuel makes three the minimum...(There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha.

why single out pederasty:..in all crimes of incest,..the'passive'adult does not incur'guilt'..unless the other'party'is at least nine years and a day?

Hence the Baraitha supports Rab's'contention'that nine years(and a day)is the minimum age of the...passive partner..for the adult to be liable."(emphasis in original,Ed.)..Before giving any more verbatim quotations from the"sort of book"..from which it is falsely alleged Jesus"drew the teachings''..

In'official-statement'made by Rabbi Morris N.Kertzer..that the Talmud"IS THE LEGAL CODE...WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW..AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS"...Please bear this in mind as you read further.

http://www.biblestudysite.com/factsarefacts.htm

Dear One Under God,

I read your post telling me terrible things Jews are taught. I never heard of these things, and I had a Jewish education. At the site
(http://www.biblestudysite.com/factsarefacts.htm) you listed and saw:

'FACTS ARE FACTS'
THE TRUTH ABOUT KHAZARS (the so-called Jews)
Distinguishing between the "Jew", and Hebrews who are Israelites.

That told me enough. Unfortunately there are Jew hating websites. Also unfortunately Christians operate some of them. They make up or repeat horrible things about Jews. One of the problems some Christians have is that Jesus was a Jew. Some Christians accept that. Some don’t like it. One way to deal with that is to deny that Jesus was a Jew by arguing that the Jews of today do not have a connection with the Hebrews of the time of Jesus. They are really all descendents of Khazars, a people who became converted to Judaism. Actually some Jews are, but most are not.

If one believed the website then Jesus was really not a Jew because the Jews of today are not descended from the ancient Hebrews.

From http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article5504478.ece

“The theory was originally developed by David Ben Gurion, Israel's first Prime Minister. But it has gained a new lease of life since a study into a rare blood disorder shared by Jews and Palestinians revealed a closer genetic match between the communities than between Palestinians and other Arabs. “It's all a tragic mistake, a tragic misunderstanding,” said Misinai, who divides his time between tracking down Palestinians who acknowledge their Jewish heritage, and lobbying ministers, ambassadors, religious leaders and activists in both communities.”

The above is from the Times, a reliable English newspaper. The shared genetic heritage will make no difference in resolving the conflict in Israel since the conflict is religious. However, it does show that the ancestors of the Jews in the world are the Hebrews that Jesus was part of. The website OUG cited puts out Jew hating propaganda.

Go to a Talmud in an English translation and check for yourself. You will find none of the horrible things you got from the website.

david<<Go to a Talmud in an English translation and check for yourself.You will find none of the horrible things you got from the website.>>there is the rub dear man, the talmud[a guidebook[rulebook]for the rabies]is extreemly difficult to find on line to read

we hear much of semites[but arabs are semites, yet we see it exclusivly claimed by the northern semites who run the worlds cartels, everything from law to media, acting to writing sciences, every area of organised human indevour is dominated by the non goys

even half the rich list[top 100 wealthy]over 50 percent is non goy, the vast majority of the rest work for the non goy[a goy is anyone not jew]

it is also known that the bolchovics [wo killed 25 million xtians] were non goy[yet the genocide of 25 million xtians is not worthy of mention, yet the 6 million arte repeated infinatly, i wont get into how israel has gotten over half us aid[over 1 trillion, not of how israel runs us politics via the jdl and other organisations

i have even found that many activists are run by the non goy[and many of my friends are non goy]the big trouble is that the non goy run the world now[we might claim to be an xtian nation, but the non goy version of xtianity is what runs the world today[as any real study soon reveals]

it is clear the organisational abilities of the non goy got us to this stage of societal evolution,but that is hardly supprising [look at what happend when mosus plundered the egyptian gold supply,the same thing going down globally as we speak,right now

what would a truelly xtian aussie look like[i guess a clay man[goyum] who does as told when told by any of those calling themselves a child of god[when of fact the god created the clayman aswell[who is not a child of god?who did god not give to live?but simply speaking this is satans realm[one need only read the talmud to realise this.]

OUG, your 'goy' spiel isn't helping your credibility.

The advocates of a Christian Australia are confused - I don't think they actually want a Christian country at all.

See, now judging from the posts, what they're really gunning for is a Disney Australia.

I don't see anything about an institutionalised Christian government - it's just a Disney movie!

Hooray!

Step 1: Quick, everybody find a token best friend from a minority group!

Step 2: Whitewash over all the unpleasant aspects of our society. Better yet, write then out of the script! Drugs? Mental illness? Step 3. has the answer!

Step 3. Burst into song wherever possible! It's the solution to any problem!

Step 4. Increase the pluckiness of society by a factor of 5! Bright colours only!

Now you too can live in Disney glory.

We have had talk on this thread of everthing else but the truth of the subject. What would a truly Christian Australia be like?

We have had the denial of the innate nature of man to offend the ideals of human character - the image of God. Man by nature is rebellious at heart against maintaining good relationships.

We have had the regurgitation of historical religious attempts to enforce a religion State. Which has nothing to do with true Christian practise of each person living with good conscience.

The topic is an attempt to give vision to the truth of living like Christ. The state of people living in good conscience toward God and neighbour. Where everyone seeks to bless and enhance the life of the other people in their environment; instead of seeking to reduce and destroy them, which sems to be the nature of the antagonists here.

Philo
"Where everyone seeks to bless and enhance the life of the other people in their environment..."

Philo, doesn't everyone wish for that ideal - atheist and theist alike?

I have not witnessed any antagonism toward that ideal. The only difference is that the Christian will be guided by faith in the example of Christ, the Muslim by Mohammed, Bhuddists by Bhudda, atheists by their own human conscience and/or faith in human nature and so on.

Marianne Williamson in her book, "Illuminata,"
put it so well:

"...Let us remove the walls that separate us
and the chains that hold us down...Let us
create a new world on earth... Remove from
our hearts the illusion that we are separate.

May every nation and every people and every colour
and every religion find at last the one heartbeat
we share."

She goes on to point out that, our individual minds
create our collective realities. We have to take
more seriously our individual contributions to it.

Personal transformation can and does have global
effects. As Williamson says, "As we go, so goes
the world, for the world is us..."

I am afraid the thought that everyone wants to enhance the well being of others is not the reality. I have just watched a programme on policing the streets in Sydney. Violence fueled by drugs, alcohol over space, pride and women are examples of attitudes that prove my point; people seek injury on others. I daily hear people seeking to destroy good peoples reputations. They have not learned the power of forgivness, and release. Our Petty courts are full of these disputes. As Christians we deal with crime with honour and not with revenge.

Dear Philo,

I understand what you're saying.

However, we must hold to the conviction that the heart,
is the light of the world.

Each of us can make a difference.

We can touch people's hearts.

We can make this a better place for everyone,
if we all try.

In a truly Christian Australia we would have an education system. That education system would teach, as The English taught themselves, that the foundation of good government is in the New Testament, in the two great commandments there. The two are: Have no God but me, and love thy neighbour as yourself. The rest do not matter.

I can understand the paranoid fear expressed by so many Europeans who fled the continental model of Christianity, promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church, and its orthodox fellow travelers, in Russia, but hey, the English worked it out. Why cant we.

If you belong to a footy club, you obey the rules or you leave. The Constitution of Australia is the Rule book of a big footy club. We have got away from the rules, and adopted the failed continental model. No other democracy has ever succeeded like the English one. In a truly Christian Australia the Constitution would be taught and understood by everyone for the uniquely Christian document it is.

It sits like a capstone on a pyramid, with the Imperial acts that preceded it making up the rest of the structure. One Imperial Act banned lawyers from Parliament in Britain, for 498 years, because the Gospel of Luke in 12:10-12 warned us about them. They have never changed, and making them Judges and Magistrates is continental government, not Christian.

The Roman Catholic Church used Christianity to enslave people and that was why the English rebelled. The Magna Carta was the first truly Christian document and the New Testament is the English Constitution or was. In a Christian Australia the right to worship would be absolutely free, and access to justice universally granted. The special privileges given to themselves by lawyers in Parliament would be abolished, and the twelve judges prescribed by Parliament would be drawn not from an elite, but from the common people, just as S 79 Constitution demands. Wealth would be redistributed, by the simple medium of honest Judge free courts, as Henry VII had legislated in 1487.
Christianity as taught in the New Testament is democracy itself

In addition in a truly Christian Australia we would have a justice system, not a just us system. The just us system we have in Australia is set up by the Liberal Party Church, self described, where elites rule the rest of us, and we better get used to it.

The Christian justice system came straight out of the New Testament. The separation of powers comes out of John 5 verses 22 and 23. The prohibition on an elitist government comes out of the Sermon on the Mount. In the New Testament all men are created equal, and Jesus Christ was executed because he would not become a King or a Roman.

We had a truly Christian Australia in 1949. In that year the High Court ruled that the Commonwealth could not nationalize the banks. In 1951 it also ruled that the Communist Party could not be banned. The High Court had to go. It was sent packing by Menzies in 1952, and as soon as Christian Government had its head cut off, by a Rule of Court, the rot set in. Rule by an elite was started and has been continued for sixty years. Australia is now only slightly better than communist Russia was.

We have the same type of government by State appointed Judges and Magistrates. We have 100,000 homeless because resources are funneled into the private pockets of politicians and the likes of Norman Allen, the former Police Chief. If a homeless person could sue the Premier, for the necessities of life, and have his prayer heard, as it was able to be before 1970, in a Church constituted with a Priest, and twelve of his fellow homeless as the judges of fact, instead of by a state appointed atheist, then the homeless problem would be gone.

The Holy Bible says: Judge not that ye be not judged. Christianity is all about justice, not just us. It is all about representative democracy, not controlled democracy. If the Christians wake up to the confidence trick pulled on them by the Liberal Party, Labor will govern well and long

" ... The High Court had to go. It was sent packing by Menzies in 1952, and as soon as Christian Government had its head cut off, by a Rule of Court, the rot set in. ... "

Perhaps you would care to cite the rule *PtheB?*

And it was that same "Christian" guvment abusing the
*Original Australians* I assume?

Seriously, whilst you make some interesting points i.m.o. you appear to have cherry picked a few nice bits without offering a true representation of the overall despicable conduct of the collective.

(WARP)

For the heinous war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the crown there is no excuse. And of course, when they put their boot on the neck of the germans too hard too long, they in part orchestrated the rise of a monster which in turn savaged them, and for some of them I would argue that it was well deserved.

(WARP)

Then in the case of saddam hussein and O.B.L. they did the same. Have you any idea how much blood of the innocents they have shed? But they along with n.americans, tell us that as opposed to being part of the problem, they are part of the solution. <PUKE>

(WARP)

Bazza Obama said:

"and words must mean something and laws must yada yada" in relation to n.korea, but on the other hand *bush turkey* and his band of torturers are to be spared.

(WARP)

If anyone actually believes that these people are taken seriously by the rest of the world then I would strongly suggest that you are sadly and foolishly mistaken.

If we were to Christianise Australia, these would probably be the things that would happen:

1) Gay and lesbian people will be jailed, stoned, or deported
2) The seafood industry will suffer because eating prawns and shellfish will be illegal
3) Violence towards children will escalate as forms of punishment again
4) Women who get caught cheating in relationships will be liable to be stoned
5) Women will not be allowed to hold positions of power in business, politics or church ministry or leadership
6) Slavery will be brought back in because it was never condemned in the Bible
7) Naturism and Nudism will be permitted anywhere because it is never condemned in the Bible (except when getting people drunk in order for them to get naked, or for soliciting people in the street for sex)
8) The age of consent will be lowered to 12 or 13 and it will be legal for people to get married at that age
9) The government will spend more money on taking care of orphans and widows as well as privatising education and health care
10) Taxes will still be around regardless, because Jesus said to 'pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar' when the pharisees tried to trap him asking him if it was immoral or evil to pay taxes
11) Anybody who takes or keeps money dishonestly will be convicted of lying to the Holy Spirit and be punished by immediately being struck dead by an invisitble force
12) People who practice levitation can be put to death by born again Christians praying that they hit the ground, and will

Need I go on?

13. Cats and dogs will have to go back in the closet.
14. OLO would lose 95% of its topics.

Mr Fatpizzaman,

10) Taxes will still be around regardless, because Jesus said to 'pay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar' when the pharisees tried to trap him asking him if it was immoral or evil to pay taxes.
But you may see them imposed upon just terms, as required by the beautiful Christian Document, the Constitution. Until the atheists took over, and Menzies cut the head off the High Court, in 1952, with Order 58 rule 4 Subrule 3, High Court Rules 1952, a working man was given his daily bread, straight out of Matthew 6:9-13, before he paid taxes, but when the atheists defeated the Christians in 1972, taxes were raised without reference to just terms, and millions of people have been paying too much tax since. The Tax free threshold, in existence in 1972, was nor raised when wages were inflated 100% in two years. Taxes then became unjust on working people.

11) Anybody who takes or keeps money dishonestly will be convicted of lying to the Holy Spirit and be punished by immediately being struck dead by an invisible force.
That is exactly what should happen because jury trials were a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, but struck dead! No! repent maybe, and then forgiveness after making restitution.

12) People who practice levitation can be put to death by born again Christians praying that they hit the ground, and will.

I don’t know where you get the downie on seafood. The first Christian men’s breakfast was held on the shores of Lake Galillee where the resurrected Jesus, showed himself to a very despondent group of fishermen, and told them to throw their nets on the other side, which they did, with great success. Jesus Christ already had some fish cooked, when they came ashore. John 21:12.

I don’t know where you get the idea that Christians don’t value women. The divine partnership between a man and a woman is central to Christianity, and there are more women than men, and it is nonsense to waste half the intelligence of the human race. Women are different but equal

fatpizzaman,
1) Gay and lesbian people will be offered practical ways to escape their dysfunctional sexual identity
2) No food will be considered unclean or not kosher as identified by Acts 10: 9 - 18 unless it is dedicated to gods Acts 15: 29.
3) The Government will adopt the Churches highly sucessful parenting skills programme.
4) Women in all cases will be equal to men except in gender roles, i.e. strength, childbirth and mensuration.
5) Slavery will not exist as in the current Australian society. As Jesus came to release those in slavery, Luke 4: 18.
6)The age of consent will be restricted to married adults so as to avoid high costs of health as is the current situation.
9) The government will spend more money on employment creatioin, taking care of unemployed, orphans, widows as well as privatising education and health care
10) Taxes will reflect community needs and not be squandered on political jaunts.
13. No animals will be considered unclean, unless they are diseased or cause allergic reactions or are a public threat or nusance.

A Christian Australia would see reverence conquering wit, sobriety conquering humour and the amber darkness, the stygian pall of nothing, nothing, nothing at all.

As stated, you don't have to scratch too deep before you get these individuals like those in the vatican, with serious delusions of grandeur, wanting to dictate the behaviour of others even in the bedroom.

In so doing, I would question their understanding of the doctrine of Luv Unconditional in the 1st instance.

I assume that they argue that they "persecute" Gays & Lesbian "for there own good." Like stealing Original Australian Children. And to me, it is here that we see the hand in hand work of the political churches with the some of the great instances of crimes against humanity in the history of this world.

IF 2 Souls come together in Luv, no person has the right to interfere with that. It is regarded by some as one of the Holiest Sacraments and it can only be determined by the individuals concerned.

I personally more appreciate the God concept that requires not ritual or religion or old books, whose meanings lay for most of us long lost, but rather the acknowledgement that something of the Being of the Living God dwells within the Being of all Beings, regardless of creed, colour or otherwise. And, in the quiet and privacy of our own Being, here we may commune.

If it is our priveledge to share this in Luv with another of the choosing out of the Luv of our own Heart, then that in part is our Divine Inheritance, and may we have some small pity for those so deluded in thinking that they have the right to interfere with others in this regard.

The Lord is the Lord. He is not a toad, bacterium, walrus or human. He is not Odin, Zeus, Jupiter or Jesus Christ. It is a primitive way of thinking to regard a man as a god. To my way of thinking it is horribly wrong. It is Christian belief, but it simply sounds like blasphemy to me.

However, when you get away from the confusion of Jesus Christ and God the connection between the horrible acts of Christians and Jesus becomes perfectly clear.

"No one comes to the Father but by me" (John 14:6) is simply a bigoted and arrogant statement which was made by a bigoted and arrogant man. His followers under the delusion that he was God have acted out his bigotry and arrogance.

The Crusades where not only Muslims but Orthodox Christians, Jews, Lithuanians and other were slaughtered in the name of Christ, the Inquisition where people were burned at the stake in the name of Christ and the Wars of the Reformation where Christians slaughtered Christians in the name of Christ are some of the many examples of the Christian record of murder in the name of Christ.

I suspect a truly Christian Australia would be like the truly Christian charnel houses that were products of the truly Christian states of the Dark Ages which some Christians refer to as the Golden Age of Faith.

It would seem davidf has had a very severe case of Christian persecution, probably at the hands of Roman Catholics. He has no idea how the Christian Australia we had until 1970, in New South Wales at least has made Australia the reasonably safe and reasonably prosperous Nation it is. Christianity was replaced with Roman Catholicism in South Australia in 1927, when the great saviour of human rights, the civil jury was abolished and a Lawyer Court system established.

Lawyer Courts are an Old Testament institution adopted by the Roman Catholic Church because they believe all authority comes down from the top, whereas the courts adopted by Australia were until the lawyers started to take over, a form of government from the grass roots up. The subversion of the Australian Constitution has been brought about because non Christians wanted corruption, and Christians have been sleeping in their smugness.

We have a guaranteed Christian Australia and it looks like it looks now, but it has to have competition between the courts of the States and the Commonwealth, with both playing by the Christian rules, set out in the New Testament. Currently the Courts of Australia are more in the Levitican model, than the Christian model, taught by Jesus Christ. A Court and a Judge are not words used in the Australian Constitution. They are used in the Judiciary Act 1903 in S 2, that is a Capital C Court and a capital J Judge, coupled with the word Appeal, so that if we ever got Courts and Judges, the long suffering Australian public would have a remedy.

With courts instead of Courts, most cases in the possession list in the Supreme Court in New South Wales would be dismissed and the claiming Mortgagee ordered to comply with Christian Commonwealth Law. Currently the Judges of NSW abuse the civil rights of every Christian every day. Courts are no better in Victoria or Queensland, and a truly Christian Australia would have courts, instead of Courts, and judges instead of Judges, just as it says in the Constitution and New Testament. Forgive them

Peter the Believer wrote: It would seem davidf has had a very severe case of Christian persecution, probably at the hands of Roman Catholics.

Please do not put your anti-Catholic bigotry on me.

I did not mention Catholics. I mentioned the arrogance and bigotry expressed by Jesus in the New Testament that is followed by all Christians. There are many instances of Protestant bigotry. The first few years after the First Fleet landed only Church of England clergy who were chaplains to the English military were supported. Catholics, dissenting Protestants and Jews were deprived of religious representation.

In the United States Protestant Puritans in Massachusetts hanged Quakers and persecuted others who did not follow their religion.

In England Catholics were persecuted after Henry VIII established his own cult called the Church of England. Priest hunting, in general, ended by the mid-18th century. In 1791 the Roman Catholic Relief Act repealed most of the disabilities in Great Britain, provided Catholics took an oath of loyalty, and in 1793 the army, the navy, the universities, and the judiciary were opened to Catholics, although seats in Parliament and some offices were still denied. The Catholic Emancipation Bill passed in 1829.

The first Totalitarian state in Europe was Protestant John Calvin’s Geneva. In Calvin’s truly Christian State, God's word, "la parole de Dieu," was the supreme expression of morality, thought, faith, law, and life; the Bible, as a book, embodied all wisdom, all justice, all truth. For Calvin the Bible was the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end. All decisions in all matters must be based upon its texts.

Calvin substituted Protestant orthodoxy for Catholic. Bigotedly sober, he never asked or derived pleasure from anything which can make a man drunken: wine, woman, art, or God's other jolly gifts to earth. Calvin recognized no limit to his power, for, as a theocrat, he considered that everything mundane must be subordinated to the divine and the spiritual.

For the greater glory of God, Calvin executed heretics.

http://www.gospeltruth.net/heresy/heresy_chap2.htm describes Protestant totalitarianism.

david<<I mentioned the arrogance and bigotry expressed by Jesus in the New Testament that is followed by all Christians.>>

mate you dont even know him
the new testiment is about others writing ABOUT him
the end of the old testiment refer's to much of what he did[the messiah returning to his people
delivering the new covenant

telling his own that there is no end time reserction day[we are all reborn again instantly[as he told even the thief on the cross]

its funny how he came to his own and they knew him not
but he was following the script
much of what he did was because ''it was written''

he knew he had to die[mat 26; 11-12, 24, 31 38, 54,56]

its clear he did what the messiah had to do and left[but his judean own knew him not[those currently claiming to be 'his people', or the people of god, arnt who they think they are[the bolchovic jews arnt real judeans[they follow the talmud] a discusting text, written by saton himself[according to friedman and many others]

jesus revealed love god love neighbour[not eye for eye] but turn the other cheek, any who link..''arrogance and bigotry expressed by Jesus'' clearly is deluded or trolling for some reaction to lodge a complaint about defending the true messiah.. but this too was wrote[prophesised by malachi and other true judeans]

israel was but one of the tribes [how come levi the priest class dont claim the holy lands] why only the lowly tribe of israel[under the blue star,lying between the two rivers]the whole thing sounds suss

[add the acts of rothchild to bring the ultimate banker sanctury,..i would be carefull of thowing too many stones at your.[and our] messiah
he came and left,and his'own'knew him not in the least.

its sad bro..your;<<..arrogance and bigotry expressed by Jesus..>>you got no idea, your believing the lies that say he thinks he was god[he didnt]but the lies just go on and on

*OneUnderGod*

I don't think *Davo* is trolling. He has expressed a view based on the words allegedly spoken by *JC* contained in "your" seemingly cherished book.

Now, I would assume you cannot prove to the satisfaction of the scientific method that the writings in the Bible are not the mere fancy of historical figures,

and that neither could you prove the reality of same by way of the processes of courts of law, in that you are expressing supposition, hearsay, and that is to say you do not know it to be true by the faculty of your own five physical senses.

We can accept that you "believe" as a matter of "faith" but that does not make it a fact.

The different peoples of the world have a huge variety of belief systems and intolerance of the views of others is often the reason for conflict.

Now, again, I am not an expert, but I have some experience with other cultures and languages, and the translation of same. I would not be overly confident that the bible is an accurate reflection of what *JC* meant when he spoke.

Now, if you are conversant with Ancient Greek, and what did the Jews use (?Hebrew? ?Aramaic?) And of course the history of those political church creatures who compiled the bible is appalling, so again, I wouldn't be too confident on that basis either.

Even today, the translations at the UN itself are often called into question. Movie translations are generally attrocious, perhaps with the exception of BBC Knowledge & National Geographic, and I am familiar not with them all, and this is but the tip of the iceberg.

Now, I would suggest that *JC* had great support also amongst the local people of the time, which is likely in part one reason the authorities took offence.

t.b.c.

A truly Christian Australia the one we agreed to in 1899 by a referendum, would have Protestant Christian government from the grass roots up, not Roman Catholic government from the top down. It would see lawyers removed from their mediaevil positions of absolute power as false Gods sitting in Capital C Courts meting out punishment to all and sundry who refuse to worship the God State.

Lawyers have replaced the Christian pastors, who used to control the lawyers, before Federation in 1900, by the simple medium of ex-communication. If a Justice got too big for his boots as the Justices on the High Court and all other big C Courts, have, a complaint to his or her local Church, would have seen them excommunicated, and deemed no longer a fit and proper person to hold judicial office. That changed in 1900, when the Constitution gave equality to Roman Catholics.

We adopted top down government instead of the bottom up government introduced to England very firmly by Henry VIII. These new aristocrats, invented on the continental model, drawn exclusively from the legal class rule without mercy, and rarely deliver justice. Justice was supposed to be assured by the matrix of Imperial laws, on top of which the Constitution sits. Lawyers have been persuaded that they can ignore Almighty God, and that their God, the Law, is Supreme.

We should still be able to complain to our Local Church, the Federal Court but the lawyers have control of the door, and decide without ever having a meeting of the people, who will get a hearing and who will not. Order 46 Rule 7A Federal Court Rules. Just like a Roman Catholic Priest, unless you subscribe to their religion, you cannot enter their Church and commune with Almighty God. When you so enter their Church, you must submit to a False God, under craven images, instead of the true Almighty God represented by the Royal Seal of Almighty God.

A truly Christian Australia would be tolerant and governed by common sense where bigots and fanatics would get short shrift, and everyone get justice.

Of course, even today, to attend the UN, the state reps all make the same flowery speeches about human rights for example, and you know that some of them are terrible abusers of one description or another.

They're all a pack of self interested <snip>'s for the most part and there's nothing new in that, so to suggest that the Jews knew him not based on the alleged actions of the establishment is verily the kind of ignorance and bigotry which others have played upon to garner broad support for persecuting Jews historically for political gain. And not just Jews incidentally!

To be honest, you are just like the fundies everywhere. Ignorant, irrational and barely coherent. I preferred *BoazY* What happened to him anyway?

The local Muslims and those of other religious persuasions in this third world country in principal are exactly like you. They justify their position in exactly the same way as you do:

"It is written in the Al'Qoran, that being a true copy, of the words of he who wrote the words of the Arch Angel Gabrielle, who was sent unto the world by El Goddo (it)Self (need a new beyond gender word in english i.m.o.) and therefore you must "bow your <snip> head" and do what we say, as only we the priests really understand these things."

Something like that anyway. And again, in my view why religion at schools should be confined to the comparative only.

I wonder if *OneUnder God* like *BoazY* claims to have had a direct "alien encounter" with the Divine?

PrayTell friend - can you offer us something special or are your rants really just a matter of ideaology and faith mixed together?

..

*PtheB*

If you want change in the courts, then I would suggest you put your complaints to the Greens and preach accordingly. You won't get everything you want, but you will make a difference. You certainly are only likely to get more of the same from the blue and the red.

We're getting some great *GoGreen* stuff coming thru CNN, BBC Knowledge and National Geographic .. and Bazza Obama is going to work on revamping the rules in n.america to provide fertile ground to bring some new clean and green tech along. Not too much on the Australian network channel though I note other than lets appease the han war criminals coz they'll give us money on ABC news breakfast.

The news network recently did a piece on rabid dogs in Bali as breaking news. Rabid dogs have been a problem for more than 6 months, with local community organisation hunts and poison baiting for some time.

Still to date, the locals won't confine their dogs, walk them on a lead or pick up their poo. A young local girl got bit here recently. It has the potential to come to violence I suspect.

one under god wrote: i would be carefull of thowing too many stones at your.[and our] messiah he came and left,and his'own'knew him not in the least.

Dear one under god,

Jewish history is full of false messiahs. Abu Issa Al-Isfahani, Jesus, David Alroy, David Reubeni, Shabbatei Zevi and Jacob Frank are some of their names. The messiah is a myth which started when Jews hoped for a figure which would reunite the kingdoms of Israel and Judah to restore the kingdom of David and Solomon. From those beginnings the myth grew until the messiah came to be a figure who would bring on the messianic age where peace would reign on earth, nations would study war no more and the lion would lie down with the lamb.

I don't believe in the myth. However, if a figure did appear and bring the messianic age that would be evidence that he was the messiah. Jesus did not bring peace on earth or anything like it so he was obviously one of the many false messiahs. The only difference between Jesus and the other false messiahs was that many gullible people followed him.

I would like to see peace on earth. I think Obama would also like it. Maybe he is the messiah. Jesus certainly isn't. There is no second coming for a messiah. A messiah should be competent enough the do the job the first time.

All the antagonists on this thread have never had an encounter with the spirit of a true Father, they make counterfeit claims that do not represent Christ.

Jesus statement in John 14: 6 where Jesus says - "I am the only way to the Father" - when the spirit of these words are understood means understanding the true heart of fatherhood is love, care, encouragement, security, healing forgivness and example. Jesus had a fathers heart and to be like him resembles the heart of God the Father of the true spirit. "I am the truth" his spirit is the true example of the nature and character of the Father. To have the character and spirit of Christ Jesus is the true life of the Father. Jesus continues in the text to speak about the spirit of the Father is in himself and he represents the true nature of the Farher. No one enters into the spirit of the Father except through him.

The question is: does Jesus represent the spirit of true fatherhood? Is his spirit the true nature of God? To admire, adopt and emulate his attitudes, character and actions as the only true expression of God is the only way to the Father, any other spirit or character does not represent God as the way the truth and the life. The false Christs' came with violence as the answer to overcome their enemies, not self sacrifice, the offer to a better life by love, forgivness and reconciliation.

TO THE ANTAGONISTS I ASK: "WHAT DO YOU OFFER AS THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE WE OUGHT TO ADMIRE AND EMULATE? HOW IS YOUR OWN CHARACTER, ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOURS DEMONSTRATING THE TRUE SPIRIT OF FATHERHOOD?"

*PHILO*

" ... All the antagonists on this thread have never had an encounter with the spirit of a true Father ... "

I imagine that you lose some of your audience at this point.How can you know the truth of your assertions? Merely because the views of some are contrary to yours? Do you see the problem?

Are you not content just To Be, in the faith that All God's children will one day reach his feet?

Apparently not if your words are any indication.

So, I saw his popiness get a good snorter full at Easter recently? What was he praying at that moment *Philo?* Was it the Christian prayer that we are all born again in *JC* and live on, or something else?

Dear Philo,

Jesus was one of the many false messiahs in Jewish history. We really don't know what he was like or even whether he existed. My opinion is that he was a composite figure on which people put many of the myths current at the time. I discount all the miracles and do not really know what else is true or not.

We only have the picture of him in the New Testament. According to that I gather that he was a charismatic figure who accepted the superstitions of his time, was sometimes tolerant and understanding, was sometimes bigoted and didn't get along with his family. I don't believe any such person as described in the New Testament really existed.

Philo asked: does Jesus represent the spirit of true fatherhood?

He certainly doesn’t. As far as fatherhood goes conventionally it starts when a man in conjunction with a woman conceives and then cares for a child. Jesus was sexually inhibited or had a weak sexual impulse. That would make him less able to understand human problems in that area.

There is no evidence in the NT of any relationship he had with any child. Jesus liked children in the abstract and said “Suffer little children to come unto me.” However, that was just to worship him as he seemed in great need of people to worship him and did not want to really be a father.

Philo asked: “HOW IS YOUR OWN CHARACTER, ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOURS DEMONSTRATING THE TRUE SPIRIT OF FATHERHOOD?"

MATTHEW 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

This is a jealous, possessive love. A loving spouse would not demand making a choice between the children of your union and herself or himself, and a loving saviour would not demand that people make a choice between him and one's family.

I have more of the true spirit of fatherhood than Jesus. I care more for my children than for any mythical figure like Jesus.

david f,
Jesus was not merely addressing himself as a human who sought worship of himself when encouraging the children who sought him - but as one who had the truth about the kingdom of God; which is spiritual not flesh. The spirits of children are pure in their search of truth. Jesus likens their purity as those in the kingdom.

Similarly the meaning of MATTHEW 10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. This is not seeking devotion or focus on of him as human but the character and spirit he manifest. You might tell your son to be passionate to follow the character traits you admire more than the example you yourself set.

Jesus represented God by his character. Give total devotion to the development and admiration of these ideals of personal character more than following the spirit and character of any of your closest loved ones. By comparison love of mother or father is a lesser admiration than the admiration of the spirit of the highest ideals - God.

it is most important to understand statements in the immediate context and in the context of the whole of his words. Nowhere is Jesus encouraging hatred or hostility to family or neighbours. But he is making a statement by contrast how mush we are to love God.

*Philo* you spout belief as if it were proven fact. That to me is the dangerous character trait with people like you.

You don't seem to be able to accept that as an imperfect mortal like the rest of us, your belief system and God concept may be flawed, and perhaps out of desperation because you have no experience of the spiritual yourself, you seek to gain it by inflicting your belief on others.

To me if there is a God, it most certainly doesn't need defending. I'm sure El Goddo is quite capable of doing that itSelf. No, when I hear the likes of *OuG* sqealing it is in desperation to defend his own Ego and nothing to do with El Goddo at all i.m.o.

Oh, did everyone see the news of the elderly priest and his wife being butchered in Sulawesi? I wouldn't be surprised if the "killer" justified his action in defence of his God concept.

*David*

A memory welled up this morning. From primary school. We spent a lot of time drawing war pictures, and then eventually nazi swastikas. Some of us even took to carving these symbols on the local trees, in the parks and the gardens. As kids we were clueless of course, and this about 30 years ago. No teacher of the time corrected our behaviour.

..

I've met a few Indos here who proudly sport the swastika on their clothes and affects. The ones I've spoken to though have some awareness of the relevant history though.

:-(

Philo wrote: Jesus was not merely addressing himself as a human who sought worship of himself when encouraging the children who sought him - but as one who had the truth about the kingdom of God; which is spiritual not flesh.

Dear Philo,

The above is an expression of Greek dualism that has influenced Christianity. My belief is that the kingdom of God if there is such a thing is here on earth. Plato propounded the concept of ideal forms of which their copies on earth are imperfect. The neo-Platonists grafted this on to Christianity.

Earlier in the Bible there is not the separation into the sacred and profane. Genesis 1:31 “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” Note that. The earth is the kingdom of God, and it is very good. The separation in a kingdom of God which is not flesh is merely an expression of neo-Platonic ideas in Christianity. It was a step backward from Judaism which holds that the good things on the earth such as food, drink and sex are for humans to enjoy in reasonable proportions.

Christianity and Buddhism both share the idea of a spirit world which is somewhat more holy than the world of the flesh. This has resulted in both religions in such concepts as the monastic life in which individuals reject the good things of the earth in the belief that somehow they are more holy by virtue of that behaviour.

As I mentioned in my post presenting Jesus as a sexless figure furthers this idea. With Paul the idea that sexual desire is somehow evil was carried on. Judaism regards rejection of the joys of the flesh as rejection of God who has put the good things of the flesh on earth for humans to enjoy.

Although there are questionable ideas in Judaism I think they have got it right in the way they regard the world as the kingdom of God.

Dear DreamOn,

The swastika is a symbol of worship for many people. It generally represents the sun.

phylo<<I wonder if*OneUnder God*like*BoazY*claims to have had a direct"alien encounter"with the Divine?>>you are a sad man my brother,you think all religins are full of mindless fools,that the only reason people could chose to believe is by same mental derangement

but i will confirm my share of amasing experiences[and you too have had them but throw them away as coincidences,or just nature,..but the mundane is quite amasing when you realise a greatness beyond your own ego

you feel the alian encounter to be devine[i call alian encounter insanity,the nearest'alian',lives 2000 years[at the speed of light away from here]if they egsist at all,i think we can be quite definit that no alians reside in our solar system,thus if any they are a whole universe away[to seriously consider alians reveals your plain nuts]

<<PrayTell friend-can you offer us something special or are your rants really just a matter of ideaology and faith mixed together?>>i know god is real..simply by virtue i didnt give life to me,and science has not and cannot make dead/matter live..[as for proving it thats not a thing i care to share,

as for him being human,thats right up there with alians]..simply god is the force sustaining life[no more no less]all life,..every life[even the lives of those who reject him]

you thrive on your unbelief..[and i couldnt care less],by saying god is equally in you as well as in me,i am able to love you as i love myself,..such self delusions[as you would call]them are revealed[is revealed in parrabels]..found in religious texts,..say all the workmen getting equal wages...

but its seek and find..[your not seeking thus havnt found even proofs sitting right in front of you]...how can this not affect me..[easy i tried..you ignored]

so as you see it you win...lol
as i see it i tried,..thats all im obligated to do

<<I hear the likes of*OuG*sqealing it is in desperation to defend his own Ego and nothing to do with El-Goddo at all>>mate let the readers judge who speaks of ego..[you ignorantly insult a thing you deney..[how stupid are you]..i at least tell you what i believe...lol

Philo wrote: Jesus represented God by his character. Give total devotion to the development and admiration of these ideals of personal character more than following the spirit and character of any of your closest loved ones. By comparison love of mother or father is a lesser admiration than the admiration of the spirit of the highest ideals - God.

Dear Philo,

The above is another bit of Christian nonsense taken from paganism. Jesus is no more God than Zeus, Mithra, Odin or all the other humanoid gods in pagan religiosity. There is no more God in any human being than there is in any other human being .

Love of our fellow human beings and our family is a greater good and a higher morality than the love of any abstraction set up for us by theologians.

God is not the spirit of the highest ideals. I think the following secular humanist ideals are preferable.

Secular humanism:

1. Rejects ideas of a creator god, believed by some to control human life and answer prayers.
2. Holds that a person has only one life, since the evidence for personal existence before conception or after death is totally unconvincing.
3. Considers that morality comes from the conscience and values of the community rather than any divine source.
4. Considers that science provides a more authentic understanding about the origin and nature of the universe than that found in ancient scriptures.
5. Re-examines knowledge and ideas continually, to achieve ways of improving the living conditions of humanity and the world environment.
6. Tries to maintain an open mind, recognising that human knowledge is never the final answer, and are prepared to live with uncertainty and accept that we may be wrong.

*DavidF*

Yes, there are the Balinese Hindu versions of the swastika all over the place. I most often see them as golden danglies hanging from the rear vision mirror in peoples cars.

The "other" version I have only seen rarely, but it is usually set in black and red on a "heavy metal" like t-shirt with hell pictures of skeletons etc and a twist .. a lot of people here like guitar and metal though.

So, on one occasion I bailed this character up with two nazi swastikas on his shoulders and had a yarn. It went a bit like this, in language other than this one.

ME: Hey! A person from where are you?
HIM: I'm from <location>
ME: <Expression in dialect>
HIM: Hey, how do you know that?
ME: I have a house with my Islamic wife over there.
HIM: Ohhhh!

ME: That's a cool t-shirt.
HIM: Beams with pride.
ME: But, do you know what that symbol is?
HIM: Yes.
ME: They executed some 6,000,000+ Yahoodees you know? Doesn't that bother you?
HIM: No, not at all, I like it.

..

My friend *Pepper Sauce* who holds "prayer groups" in the quiet places outside the mosques confirm that the prevailing opinion, in his view, is that Jewish residents in the middle east are despised by the local Islamic population in East Java.

This is perhaps not news to you? My Jewish GP expressed concerns to me regarding Indonesia.

*OuG*

One of the reasons that I come to this place is that there are some fine minds here. I try to learn form them.

In your case, to me, you continue to presume to know that which you cannot. For example, you presume to know that I have no belief in the Divine. You do not "know" this. You may believe something, but that doesn't make it so.

" ... i know god is real..simply by virtue i didnt give life to me,and science has not and cannot make dead/matter live..[as for proving it thats not a thing i care to share, ... "

Well, re physical life being the rationale, if that is the only way that you "know" then you ought know that most people would consider that what you mean by "know" other people consider to be a belief, as defined by accepted meanings of these words.

Thereafter, the brain is very powerful, a magnificent structure all the way down to its most primal evolutionary form. It is capable as you may be aware of generating perceptions which only exist in the mind of the individual having the experience. You are perhaps familiar with the term "hallucination?" Fasting can induce the experience, as can substance and also certain pathological states, to name but a few.

Simply, people who experience hallucinations often see what they "want" to see. That is to say, the deep seated subconcious desires of an individual often become the subject matter of the hallucination, say visual, which the individual perceives as if it were a "real" external phenomena (and it does have a reality within the brain itself) but in actuality it is like a movie from the subjects own brain matter playing internally and being interpreted in that part of the brain, assumably, which normally processes sight from the external world.

Some people even enjoy inducing this kind of experience, but to have insight is to know it for what it is.

So, a Christian first experiencing a hallucination is likely to have a Christian revolation, etc etc.

I'm going to try to address the original topic here - what would a truly Christian Australia be like?

Firstly, there is the term 'truly Christian'. Is it the fundamentalists who are 'truly Christian', or the people who go for the 'spirit' of the religion? Is a 'truly Christian' Australia one in which every word of the Bible is carefully interpreted (by some miracle, correctly), or one in which the general message is enough?

I'm going to take the liberal side - I'm going to say that there is a Christian ethos which guides 'true Christians' but cannot be found through staunch and often hateful imposition of religious laws.

My ex-housemate once said to me that it is the duty of Christians to 'hate the sin, but love the sinner'. In this regard, a truly Christian Australia would be tolerant. We would maintain open minds towards each other and, though we would disapprove of 'sinful' behaviours, we would offer support to sinners rather than condemnation. Justice would be restorative rather than punitive - prisons would be used to maintain public safety rather than to punish 'bad' people. I suspect, unfortunately, that some sort of Gulag-style 're-education' would take place there, too.

What of non-Christians? Realistically, Christians have lived alongside 'others' for as long as their faith has existed. There have been misguided attempts at annihilation, but these do not reflect the Christian ethos I am trying to illustrate - rather, they reflect the very human hatred of 'the other'. Following in the spirit of 'loving one another', a Christian Australia would embrace difference. It would probably (once again, unfortunately) be very evangelical - all those souls out there to be saved and all that - but tolerance would have to be there.

In other words, I'm painting a bit of a utopia here. Has it ever existed? No. Will it ever exist? No. But the doom, gloom and hatred of some of the Christian states that have been suggested here reflects an interpretation of words, backed up by historical precedent. I don't think it reflects what Christianity is all about.

The principles of OT Judaism, some major elements of the Christian Church and Islam are based in Governments enforcing their laws upon a society. Laws are made for the lawless. Therefore God is viewed as Judge and administrator of punishments.

Jesus stated I came not to Judge but to give life. He was a physician to the soul and healer to the spirit. He viewed himself as coming not for the rightliving people but for those in need of a physician.

People are lawless because they cannot perceive justice and example in their parents and peers. To follow the teachings of Christ is so different to administering punishments upon the lawless; which is what laws are about.

As Otokonoko stated love the sinner despite his bad behaviour and demonstrate love by a beter way of living. Offer by example and practised education a better way of living rather than enforcing unpalatable laws upon the rebellious. The fact is the human spirit is rebellious and unreasonable when devoted to self interest. Jesus taught sacrifice for those who hated him is the only hope for change.

Chris Lewis said: There is no perfect political system. Most European democracies, like Australia’s Senate, also have proportional voting with its different models, which also gives minor parties greater power than warranted by their vote when there is a struggle for majority consensus on a particular issue.

I would like to suggest there was a politically near perfect system in place in the United Kingdom between 1372 and 1870, when lawyers were banned from Parliament for 498 years. 46 Edward III AD 1372 80. Lawyers and Sheriffs excluded from Parliament

Lawyers have their uses and I firmly believe they are like fire. They make wonderful servants, but as the Victorian Bushfires demonstrate, like fire, they make lousy masters. My good mate Jesus Christ reserved a special mention for them in His template for good government that has been a worldwide best seller since King James had it published in English in 1610. Luke 11 verses 46 and 52. The English took the Bible as their own special Constitution, from 1215 much to the disgust of the Roman Catholic Church, and its principles underpin the only successful republic ever formed, the United States of America.

Lawyers should be on the outside looking in to Parliament, not on the inside throwing stones at the population. Their use in society is in testing in the crucible of a properly conducted Christian trial, the legality or otherwise, of the deliberations of those who are elected to the National Synod. For the first time in nearly sixty years, Almighty God has given us a non Lawyer dominated Cabinet, and a Christian Prime Minister.

Chris Lewis is from a political school of thought propounded by Justice McHugh, and others of Roman Catholic heritage, that there is a Doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy. That the divine right of Kings, supported by the Roman Catholic Church, is replaced with the divine Right of Parliament. Unfortunately in Australia we have nine of these Divine Deities, all competing to enslave their unfortunate victims. We should kick all lawyers out of Parliament and put them to work at a real job

*Philo*

What about equality of Rights for everyone in yr Jesus concept, which includes women and gays?

What about Mary? Was she *JC's* babe?

..

Now, either the 2nd coming has not occurred, or it has occurred in a way which the mainstream Churches as of yet do not comprehend?

..

*PtheB*

I am no fan of the legal establishement but I am not of the view that anyone should be excluded from participating in the political process but rather that their ability to excessively control and manipulate needs to be regulated to equality standing with everyone else, which obviously includes addressing their fees and the cost of participation.

DreamOn,
Show me a society where gays give a healthy, secure and balanced future to their offspring and I can compare where their society will lead.

Being a homosexual male in the Biblical sense means engaging in anal sex - i.e. having sexual relations with the same gender. It does not resuly in offspring and future generations do not come from them. However plenty of disease is spread as does having indiscriminate sexual partners among a population. Being homosexuality is an act not a person as many hetrosexuals also engage in the act of anal sex. So please identify what you mean by gay.

Obviously you if a male practising homosexual will also have a very unbalanced view of women. No healthy married woman wants to have sex with a practising homosexual partner whose penis has been dabbling in the body excreatre of another man.

I suggest you research Jesus views of women in his life. Compare John 8.