My view of jesus was that he was a singularly unique itinerant spiritualist, influenced by not just semitic and jewish thought and culture, but by his travels to the east.....whose influence changed the world.
If Mary was a virgin, (and she might've been) then Joseph, quick squirter that he was, came on the outside and she rubbed it in (thanks for that embarrassing explanation in "health class", Coach Everly).
Do I believe in Dowsers, ESP and telekinetics, seances or palm readings?
No...despite the fact that police detectives swear they have solved murders with their aid, the record for them finding water and oil well sites is phenomenal surpassing that of "high tech" methods, Uri Geller bends spoons (I know that one's a trick, LOL) and there are uncanny bits of entertainment in reading your mate''s horoscope.
Why is Christianity so reviled? I argue his message of "love one another" and be charitable to one's neighbor and "store up your treasures in heaven rather than be materialistic" have been exploited by usurpers in all forms of government, especially those that are the most hostile to religion.
"jesus was a liberal" I dont think so.... he said give your coat to your brother if he is cold, he didnt say establish a parasitic bureaucracy to demand your coat by martial force, keep most of it for its own self-perpetuation, and then mete out the remainder to groups it could best exploit through divisiveness and cultivated dependency. In other words, jesus gave his own life on the cross---not somebody elses's.
But the same "enlightened, secular" socialists who would cruelly denounce religious believers and ridicule churches despite the good they do, while perverting his message of love, while being duped by the very system they claim is superior. These same people, calling religious faith "ignorant or primitive" are just as superstitious and flock to wiccan festivals and praise the da lai lama. Jesus deserves at least as much recognition even if they find it distasteful that his early followers found his example and philosphy so unique they deemed him supernatural. He may have seemed so, the roman empire was a completely opposite brutal time.
Oh...and part of the leftist condemnation of religion stems from the claim that "religion has caused wars" but I argue it has alays been the ruling elite and their greed that has caused them to use religion as a rallying cry, striking at the very hearts and fears of their people in order to compell them into battle for their imperial gain.
The bottom line is, all war is based upon powerful leaders' inhumanity towards his fellow man by coveting his possessions or territory.....................
Yes, it takes two sides to make a war, but, too frequently it is a necessary aspect of the ancient struggle of good against evil.
Evil is always the aggressor, always!
Just like the phrase; "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing", many a good people and nation have had to stand up to evil aggression.
To say that they fought for religion, would be, not only a misleading statement, but an ignorance.
Most wars were fought for no other reason than to stop the evil aggressors................... like Hitler!
Reply With Quote
Quote by: Diogenes
Bookmarks