Re: Making money from Java

"Judson McClendon" <judmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:sxBnf.4852$w7.4489@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Different English translations don't seem an issue to me. What puzzles me
> is why Catholics used to be discouraged, if not forbidden, from reading
> the Bible. John Tyndale was even burned at the stake for making the first
> English translation of the Bible. How does one say they believe in the
> Bible, yet forbid or even discourage others form reading it? It makes me
> think the motivation came more from human lust for power than any
> Christian motivation. It doesn't surprise me when non-believers see such
> things and question the validity of Christianity.
>
> My objection is that they often see only these things, while ignoring the
> vast number of true Christian acts of love, kindness, charity and
> sacrifice for others. Anyone can stand up and claim "I'm a Christian!",
> proceed to live completely in opposition to what Jesus taught, then the
> word accepts without question their claim of being a Christian, instead of
> judging their claim against their acts. If I claimed to be a socialist,
> but acted entirely like a capitalist, or vice versa, people would
> justifiably believe my actions over my claim. What Jesus actually taught
> is there for anyone to read. Anyone can act out of character on isolated
> occasion, but anyone's claim of being a Christian should be taken as
> specious, when they continue to live and act in a manner entirely
> different from what Jesus taught, rather than bashing the whole of
> Christianity. At least that would be intellectually honest.

I think the problem is that you seem to equate "Christian acts" with
"acts of love, kindness, charity and sacrifice for others" and
non-Christians don't.

That's not to say that non-Christians nescessarily equate "Christian
acts" with "acts of hate, meanness, greed and... whatever the reverse of
sacrifice is". Rather, the concept of Christian-behaviour and
loving-behaviour seem to be completely orthogonal to each other.

When we (I say "we" because I happen to be a non-Christian) see someone
acting in a kind and loving matter, we don't immediately think "Wow, that
person is acting like a Christian." Rather, we think "Wow, that person is
acting in a kind an loving matter". And if that person happened to be
Christian, it's considered incidental to, rather than the cause of, their
good behaviour.

Jesus Christ may have told people to behave kindly, but he certainly
wasn't the first person to come up with that concept. So when someone
performs a kind act, we don't call it a "Christian act", we call it a "kind
act".

Even if what Jesus taught is out there for anyone to read, why should I
care? If I want to be a good person, I already know how to be one. I don't
need to read Jesus' teachings to find out, and anyway there are plenty of
other sources on how to be a good person. If I am interested in Jesus' take
on this in particular, it is not because he's offering some advice on being
good that hasn't been said anywhere else; it would be because I am
interested in Christ himself. Hence how Christianity and "Goodness" can be
two completely seperate concepts.

I think people are bashing on Christians because it's the "biggest"
religion these days (sort of like bashing on Microsoft because they're the
richest), but really the complaint is about religions in general. The people
who bash on religions don't like the idea of believing in something
absolutely, such that if contrary evidence were to come up, a true believer
would discard the evidence and continue believing whatever it is he
believes. Most religions seem unwilling to adapt themselves when evidence
comes up contradicting one of their beliefs. AFAIK, only Buddhism has an
officially state policy of changing itself when it contradicts with
scientific evidence.

- Oliver


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Delaney demonstrates what genuine blind faith is; Look see...
    ... the Christian doctrine than that dimwit Dolan who barely gets his own ... those with first hand knowledge of Jesus beginning almost 2000 years ... in a supernatural for which you can provide no evidence. ... nor wolpert's paper ripping creationism a new ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Zero Points?
    ... evidence for Napoleon's existence. ... I'm not saying there never was a Jesus, ... The early Christian movement must have ... Vermes seems pretty convinced of the historicity, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: On-line Chat with HeartDoc (11/17/05)
    ... >The writing is itself evidence. ... >> So you seemingly have chosen to forsake the fellowship of the saints ... >> within the Christian community. ... Jesus said to him, 'If it is my will that he remain until I ...
    (sci.med.cardiology)
  • Re: Saw Jimmy Carr live on stage on friday
    ... birth is recorded as having taken place) verified history? ... of the census in the Christian calendar. ... it goes nowhere towards proving Jesus was born then. ... credible evidence for something is the same as denying it. ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: The NON CANONIC and PAGAN POLEMIC
    ... Constantine canonical cast of Jesus and the Apostles, ... Comparitive review of scholarship on the "Leucian Acts" ... New Testament Non Canonical Christian Literature Index ... The Thirteenth Apostle - the Gospel of Judas as a PARODY - ...
    (soc.history.ancient)