Forum Post: Occupy Christianity
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 19, 2011, 6:56 a.m. EST by sophiaomni
(289)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I've been debating with conservative Christians lately about how to understand the OWS movement in light of the teachings of Jesus. It boggles my mind that these jack-asses can turn Jesus into a first century libertarian, despite the overwhelmingly progressive nature of his teachings:
http://www.michaelsrusso.org/2011/11/your-savior-was-commie.html
I know that many in the OWS movement are suspicious of organized religion, and perhaps rightly so. But most Americans identify themselves with one religion or another, so it may be time to challenge them from the perspective of their own faiths. This is much harder to do with older Christians, but I've had some success with younger people who are more open-minded about these kinds of issues.
Does anyone else think it makes sense to try to win over the theists? Or is this ultimately going to be just a big waste of time?
It is a mistake to try to win specific people over for a genuine puropse. It means that you're engaging in targeted manipulation. If your perspective is true, people, regardless of their background, will see it for what it is and agree with it if it agrees with their own agenda. Don't become a polititan trying to market an idea to gain support. Such tactics are apart of the imbeded problems that the OWS movement is supposedly against.
You have an interesting perspective, but right now OWS is really only reaching a relatively youthful urban population. The only way to make any kind of movement really sustainable is to somehow reach middle-class, suburban--and yes religiously inclined--Americans. From what I've seen, these folks are still suspicious and often hostile towards OWS...probably because we are not making much of an effort to speak their own language (i.e., to target them). I don't think that this is manipulation, it's just smart persuasion.
i would disagree - there are all sorts of people who have been crushed by this system - may older factory workers and single mothers - all types who are working harder for less - these are the people who need to be reached. they are the backbone of the country and the majority of the workforce and they need to be on board here. that is one reason the anarchists and trotskyists need to back off
I think that we actually are in agreement. I want to engage "conservatives" like those, because I think they they really should be part of this movement. Since I'm definitely not an anarchist or trotskyite I like to think that I am capable of having a reasonable discussion with open-minded conservatives (not the rabid ones).
I would argue that an appeal, to basic humanity is required. If we are "targeting" the 99%, then we must target only those things that those people have in common. To choose one religion over another, is to my mind, to ostricize all others. To appeal to a persons humanity, however, is supported, by ALL major religions. When you research you will find that the teachings of Jesus, are not so different to those of the Buddha, or Mohammed, or Confucious, or ANY of the great sages. To say that one of those sages had wisdom that surpasses the others is to ignore the teachings of those sages.
To make this a religious thing, will make it a religious thing, and that may very well (should you follow historical references to such things) end in war, as it has so many times before.
Ergo to target basic human impulses, desires, needs and wants is to leave no-one out, and be truly representative of the 99%.
Your strategy does make some sense to me. Human beings are human beings regardless of the religions to which they belong. And we all have the same basic human needs and desires.
I'll consider your point!
agreed - we need to reach out to all sorts - the labels don't mean much - chomsky says he is a conservative - trying to conserve the values of the enlightenment i think. anyway we need to understand what is happening and possible solutions - understanding money and debt is one of the main issues seems to me. too many here are out of their minds sadly
yeah why waist time for a bunch of crazies playing make-believe?
unless they can summon their god now what use is it or they?
Even among Christians I suspect it is reaching a mainly youthful population, (for example, I'm 25) on the other hand though, that's fine, because I think in successful movements, the youth move first, but if we (presuming I'm genuinely included even being a dirty filthy Christian) don't reach out to the conservative side, we're going to meet the same fate as the Tea Party.
nonsense! we are an eternal community of the heart. christians are fascist stooges who believe they are saved and our community is their hunting ground for prey for their BS.
It really is "funny" that you feel so free to bash Christians as you have just done. Yet should someone do the same about the OWS people go absolutely apoplectic. Please try to keep in mind that not all Christians are fanatical fundamentalists, and that they do believe in social programs for the welfare of their communities.
go ye out from among us and be ye separate! you do not have our community at heart. all christian preachers GROOM children by telling them their mothers are sinners thus undermining the basic relationship in our community. you look down on us and think you are saved. all we can see is the crucified jew is a RACIST ABOMINATION.
Oh please take your nonsense somewhere that someone will actually listen to you.... You are in serious need of therapy
you know that what you call my nonsense is a quote from the bible which your pastor preaches! I FIND A HUMAN BEING NAILED TO A CROSS TOTALLY OFFENSIVE. and i will strive relentless against the snare of the gospel. all christian preachers MONEY SHARK the poor and vulnerable with tithes. fishers of men are predators of men! we must protect our community from christian predators and their gospel BS. OUT DEMONS OUT!!
Got news for you skippy, my "pastor" never preached anything like that. AND I FIND A HUMAN BEING WITH YOUR HATRED TOTALLY OFFENSIVE.
You can believe anything you wish.... just do NOT presume you can berate me for my beliefs and expect me to sit back and take it.
Btw, is it just Christians that you fear or are you against any kind of religion?
I thought you were an atheist.
Don't know where you got that idea.
i am a spiritualist, a reincarnating Hindu, follower of the upanishads by eknath easwaran. Ras Tafari is the True Returned Christ, the Incarnation of Vishnu, the Heart. i believe in the literal words of the bible! Daniel2 the stone cut out without hands is the SILICON CHIP that grows into a great mountain which fills the whole earth is the WORLDWIDE WEB which destroys this babylon of slavery and fraudulent property rights. in Revelation 5v5 there is the literal prophecy of Ras Tafari as the true christ. there shall be no more curse means MASS UNEMPLOYMENT the end of the curse of slavery and forced work for the fascist rulers. the tree of life is cannabis our holy communion for the healing of the nations. the queen of england is the whore of babylon and jesus is the antichrist. so my beliefs are in the present fulfilling of prophecy. the end of cannabis prohibition is the RAPTURE. heaven and earth will pass away but MY WORDS WILL NOT PASS AWAY.
Wow! I am a big fan of Easwaran myself and have read all of his translations of Hindu spiritual classical, including the Upanishads. Are you sure that you read the same book I did? I don't recall any discussion of returned Christs or the rapture in that work!
Easwaran gives the clearest translation of the Upanishads, Ras Tafari fulfills the prophecy of Daniel2 and Revelations! "THEY SHALL FLEE FROM BEFORE HIS FACE!"
Well good for you........ I would not presume to denigrate your beliefs so kindly refrain from bashing mine.
Best wishes :)
your beliefs are against the spiritual interests of OUR COMMUNITY. you think it is acceptable to tell children about a human sacrifice crucifixion. you believe it is good for your pastor to tell your children that you are a sinner! you believe that eating dead flesh is a sane religious communion. your beliefs are UNACCEPTABLE in any decent human community.
My beliefs are against whose community??? Certainly not OWS's, because they welcome all religions.... even yours.
You really need to calm yourself. I am not going to enter into a religious argument with you... you have a God given free will to believe as you wish. What I tell my children about Christ, how I perform communion, (which btw doesn't involve eating flesh, dead or otherwise) and if you are without sin then you are very special indeed.
It is a shame that you find us unacceptable for your community, because we certainly wouldn't turn you away.
christians are a bunch of psychos reliving the crucifixion and talking to their imaginary friend. they are BAD MENTAL HEALTH in our community.
christianity is a roman invention NOT a divine revelation. there was no virgin birth, no resurrection, no nazareth. jesus was a nazarene married to mary magdalene at cana. she was a devoted wife who washed his feet with her hair and was first at the tomb. in that religious society she was shocked the stone had been moved on the sabbath, but if she had not been his wife she would have not been allowed to approach the tomb. christians believe what their preacher tells them. calling her a prostitute and telling you the virgin birth is truth?!?! christians obey their churches all male fascist hierarchy in suppressing women and preaching onward christian soldiers into illegal wars! you are told 911 was a terrorist attack to justify war to steal muslim oil. you buy veterans day poppies but they are NOT HEROES they are war criminals. you support the police in YOUR COMMUNITY but they are violent freemason thugs attacking OUR COMMUNITY. for example do you believe Lt JOHN PIKE is a psychopath? we can all SEE that he is. you are agents of the fascist elite who are the ENEMY. child protection will destroy christianity just as surely as womens liberation will destroy islam. LETS HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES then you can explain your INTENT in teaching the horror to children. you are BRUTALISING THEM WITH BS! but you are only repeating what you have been told by a man! no sensible person believes in a virgin birth, walking on water or resurrection after crucifixion. do you tell your children jesus died for their sins???!! laying a guilt trip on them?!?!
Whatever, as I said believe as you wish, and I will believe what I do.
This conversation is over.
That's quite a mouthful, sufinaga...and while I share much of your contempt for xtianity, I don't find your rationale for attack on the one side consistent with your wildly unorthodox ideas on the other...that is, ideas on your perceived enemy, which have some rational validity, with your own religious ideas, which appear so hyper irrational as to be patently absurd. But that's the nature of religious convictions, in my estimation...and I see you applying two different analytic standards, which indicates to me some measure of duplicity at least, certainly a good dose of cognitive dissonance. Maybe that has something to do with smoking dope...I don't know; but it lends the impression of a kind of mental/spiritual rage that does not at all resemble to me a soul at rest or at peace with life. As a personality, I find your presentation here to be convincing only of one thing...that you are not to be taken seriously.
There are many ongoing movements that aren't inclusive of majority support. People know what they want to support. The youth are more inclined to support the things that are immediate and volatile while older people are more inclined to support things with structure that will be enduring. Everyone has their comfort zone for what they're most inclined to support and everyone pretty much understands the issues being voiced. You don't have to speak in anyone's ideological language to have them understand. There are simply going to be a lot of people who are either against or apathetic towards OWS. If someone is going to try to speak to a particular group in their own language, it's going to have to be someone of the OWS movement who is already apart of that particular group. Any outsider trying to approach a group to persuade them in their own language is going to rightly be perceived with suspicion and reacted to with hostility. The best anyone can do is to make their cause clear for everyone to know for themselves and react to in accordance with their own inclinations.
I like to think that I can talk to Christians in their own language, having once been a part of that tradition (at least the progressive version of it). I think you really have to speak to people in the own language in order to persuade them. That's why OWS hasn't done a great job of reaching Christians and people outside the cities.
OWS doesn't need to do it. As an individual convinced of your own method, you can go to the churches on behalf of the OWS movement and speak to them in their own language. You will either meet with success or with failure. If successful, you can post your succes for others to replicate. If failure, you can learn from what doesn't work and why and let everyone else know what to avoid.
Either way, OWS really doesn't need to be anything other than what it is. It may continue or it may fissle out. What's important is that positive things arise from it whether those things remain apart of OWS or not.
Good point! You may be right that individuals like myself can try to reach out to Christians without the involvement of OWS.
You have a good point when you say that the movement is not speaking the language of many potential constituency groups, but I think it is a matter of the message being too broad and too nebulus. I've said is several times here that we need to have a definite message that people can understand and get behind. To me, the essential message of the movement is simply that we are tired of being owned by Corporate America -- of having everything we think, do, say and buy directed by someone who sits atop a financial empire and who manipulates the people for their own profit. The individual issues can all be planks in a platform -- to put it in political terms -- but we need a central message to deliver to get people behind us.
I am not part of a a relatively youthful urban population but I am here to improve my country and improve my government this OWS should be representing 99% of the population or it should stop declaring to be the 99% if you represent the 99% you better be asking them what direction they want OWS to go. If you do not ask, OWS will surely fail
Occupy the soccer fields and see what happens. You'll get your ass kicked by soccer moms.
forget them, they are stuck in their houses believing the media. we must seize power over the media. the revolution will be videoed on this site!
I am not religious but I think many of Jesus' teachings are in line with OWS and many of the things the trolls and haters are saying are in contrast to Jesus' teachings. For example:
Psalm 12:5 Because of the oppression of the weak and the groaning of the needy, I will now arise, says the LORD, I will protect them from those who malign them
Colossians 3:12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
Luke 6:20-21 Then he looked up at his disciples and said: 'Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
I don't think Jesus would be too happy with the people who are ridiculing the poor and the unemployed...
I know very few professed Christians who are remotely capable of loving thy neighbor as thyself or doing unto others as they would have done unto them. There is one other line they seem to ignore studiously, and I'm paraphrasing, God said that however you treat the least among you, so you treat me. Of course, many organized religions have little to do with spirituality and more to do with power, control and, of course, being right. (I know, I know, far right).
Yes. Look at most of the wars that have been waged throughout history. My religion = I am better than you = I want the power = I want the land = I don't care about you.
I would argue the point... but I won't bother. Le sigh... I guess us more liberal Christians can't really make any friends.
Oh, I'm sure you have plenty of friends. Arguing the point about the people I know would, indeed, be pointless. There must be good, honest believers in any religion, liberal or conservative, who do their best to practice the tenets of their religion. But, unfortunately, most attention goes to blatant hypocrisy than to those who live according to their beliefs.
no because of your schizophrenic belief in your imaginary friend. jesus isa dead jewish king. used to terrorise by the fascist elite. i am suck of this christian muslim war. the truth is both christian and islam are BS.
YES! I think many Christians understand this concept. It is important that God wanted people to have freewill too.
Werd. And 1 Tim 6:10 "For the love of money is the root of all evil." What do corporations love? Money.
His pacifist teachings about turning the other cheek, loving thy neighbour, and his teachings about giving up treasure on earth, go completely ignored and it has always boggled my mind.
I think the problem is less what Jesus said and more that his followers don't actually read the bible, they listen to their Ministers who for whatever reason take the teachings of Paul (who wasn't even around in Jesus time) more seriously than Jesus. The religion should be called Paulianity, Jesus is just a side show.
Oh, and everyone needs to check out Jefferson Airplane's song "Easter." ... "coulda sworn he said to kill was a sin... soldier where you been? All I'm gonna do this Easter, is paint some eggs!" Such a neat little tune.
Thanks. I'll check out the song.
If you're going to point out how the values of OWS align with religion, then you also have to point out how they don't. For example, all mainstream religions are fundamentally patriarchal and are responsible for abhorrent oppressions of women and girls, which is a major reason why poverty, social and economic inequality and exploitation impact most severely on women and girls.
I accept that people have their own personal beliefs, but many aspects of religion are contrary to the stated ideals of OWS and have no place within the movement in my opinion. Also, religion is not a prerequisite to acting with love, care and compassion and is not neccesary to get these messages across.
Further reading.
http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415596749/
http://www.sacred-texts.com/wmn/wcs/
Just remember there was a time when Christian ministers and priests were at the forefront of the civil rights movement and the anti-nuke movement. I've met many Catholic sisters, for example, who are some of the most radical people I know. So I don't think I can agree with your generalization.
I do agree, however, that quite often religion serves as a force of social oppression....just not always.
You can also look at the ways in which Christians were working to end oppression and evil in other places. Much of the church was pretty complicit with the Third Reich, but there were a handfull who saw what was coming before it happened, and sought to bee a prophetic voice to the German government. Heck, Bonhoeffer was even a part of the resistance, and was executed for his involvement in conspiracies against Hitler.
Good point. I have a a problem with those who only the religion as a force of evil and injustice!
You are right about that and certainly this is not a religious movement. If it was I wouldn't be a part of it. But, it is important to note the hypocrisy of the religious right that spews hatred toward the poor and the unemployed while spewing their Christianity at the same time.
Jesus tells us to obey the superior authorities, but this will prove to be Gods war. The final battle between Good & Evil. The UN is the resurrected League of Nations, which suffered a death stroke, but was resurrected from the abyss, & worshiped. The Ten headed beast. The Anglo-American Union is the 2 horned beast that gave rise to the Beast that rules us will its Iron will, I think the expression is. The representative image Daniel saw of the figure with a Gold head, silver shoulders, copper legs, & feet of clay mixed with iron are the previous governments that tried to dominate the world. Gold was Babylon, Silver was Persia, Copper was Greece, & the feet is the UN. The Iron is Government, the clay is the people, & they give way, & the whole image is destroyed, ending man's governments.It makes perfect sense considering it is becoming common knowledge that the elite & tptb do not worship God the creator, but Lucifer. The clay is what makes it fail though, so I do wonder if this is how God is going to allow it to be bought down. By OWS & the people. It does look like it though. The people will realize the power that God gave us as a whole. Nostradamus warns about this 'Entity' too, that they will wear blue hats... quite scary, but it is the vindication of God's right to rule because man does a piss-poor job when he is permitted to govern himself. All Government has failed, & this one will too. Just good to know....Jesus was sent to teach.Maybe it's time we listened. The prophets are actually fascinating depictions of this time in history, & if we want to, we can understand what is happening, what God's purpose is, how this all came about,& how it will end... It also tells us to listen to Jesus. God isn't happy with it. He loves all of his creatures...
So I'm a progressive, non-fundamentalist Christian who is on Social Security (yeah that old) probably in about the 90th % wealth wise. Sorry I don't fit your profile. I think there are lots of liberal Christians, Jews, Muslums etc. that are with you but have no voice. Regarding Christians, the only ones who get any press are the fundamentalists. Unfortunately many of these have been bought off by the anti-abortion, anti-gay rhetoric of the political right. Wars for profit are OK, Abandoning the poor is OK, Bowing to the almighty rich and begging for a job is OK as long as you hate gays and want to keep women you don't even know from exercising choice. Regarding Jews, it seems the Israel Lobby has bought off all of DC. And as for the vast bulk of Muslums who are, good, peace loving Americans, they're probably just trying to keep quiet for fear of being labeled a terrorist. I think it's completely appropriate to hear the voices of Christians or other religious people when the political machine (I personally think mostly on the right) are trying to occupy their minds and twist their beliefs to their own ends.
It seems as if many have the perception that fundamental Christians hate gays and choice. As for myself and most of my Christian friends, since I made the choice to be a Christ follower, and am trying to live by His teachings, I would not be one who would choose abortion as an option for an unwanted child, nor participate in the gay lifestyle. I/we don't hate gays or those who've had abortions, that is their choice, just don't DEMAND that I consider your choices as right or normal.
I'm with you.
You raise many good points. But I think you do fit my profile of what a Christian is, only, as you say, that kind of Christian doesn't get any press. Or maybe it's just that conservative evangelicals are willing to speak out in a louder voiec than progressive Christians.
It absolutely makes sense to point out the fact that the true teachings of Jesus are clearly in line with the objectives of OWS . A huge percentage of the American population identifies with Christian teachings. Anyone who honestly reads the words of Jesus would be hard pressed to deny that he was a non materialistic pacifist who disapproved of the excessive accumulation of wealth ( i.e. the 1%) and believed that the rich have an obligation to help the poor. He despised economic corruption (he drove out the "money changers" from the temple - who would the "money changers" be in today's society ? ) Bottom line is that Christians (especially fundamentalists) need a reality check on what Jesus really taught about these things. They need to face the economic, political and militaristic injustices in this world and ask themselves "What would Jesus REALLY do?"
see this amazing painting that says it all: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CiY7m2yuxvI/TsDF9lJ3NTI/AAAAAAAAHFk/26pwQFnGSSI/s1600/boris-olshansky-jesus-and-the-money-changers-2006.jpg
I don't know if it is a waste of time or not.
I've been saying for a long time:
George Washington Was a Liberal
Emancipation was Liberal Policy
and Jesus
was both a Liberal
and a Political Dissident.
.
z
If you really honestly want to win over the thiests and show that Jesus was against the Roman Empire and their use of violence and wars on other nations, then OWS need to be vocal and speak out against war-mongerers, be they Christians or Republican politicians.
I speak out against war mongers all the time. From Bush to Obama it's still the same war monger.
Not to mention that the "rebels" that Obama and NATO supported in Libya are actually terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda, that have slaughtered blacks and have savagely tortured Libyan soldiers. Oh and the Al Qaeda flag has been spotted over Benghazi Libya. Google it. A congressmen did an entire presentation on it backed with facts and pictorial evidence. Yet this never made the national news.
The wars are based on lies. Iraq and Libya especially.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-G0pUEU603Q Video on Al Qaeda and Libya, facts presented in congress and brushed aside like all the other real issues.
Where does Jesus say He is against the Roman Empire and their use of violence and wars on other nations?
If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.“I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
Telling His followers to be peaceful has absolutely no bearing at all on the behavior of the Romans or others who do not accept or view Him as their leader, example.
There is no question that Gandhi got his approach from Jesus and that many on this site admire Gandhi. So, there is definitely common cause between the Occupy Wall Street people and Jesus. Take, for example, the teaching on the web site linked to in the opening post:
""Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life”."
Jesus did not tend to side with the money crowd. He turned over the commerce tables that had been set up in the temple because they used religion to exploit the poor and raised commerce to the level of religion. He said it would be harder for a rich man to get into heaven than the crawl through the eye of a needle because he'd have so much baggage strapped on, he wouldn't fit. He suggested the rich man, if he wanted to be a follower, should first divest himself of his goods and give tot the poor and then become a follower ... as if taking care of the poor came before following Christ.
Unfortunately, many conservative Christians have come to identify Jesus with conservative politics. If you want to persuade them that they can identify with this movement, you'll have to focus on those teachings of Christ that emphasize being a society that takes care of its poor. They will likely still argue that is best done by churches and not by governments.
I doubt that Jesus would have had any issue with governments also being socially just.
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
I advocate that poverty be a high priority agenda of the cities, the State, and at the federal level. However, it's becoming more and more clear that our current leaders such as Obama has not raised poverty as a top political issue. In fact, he's only increased the military budget with the tax payers' money. At least guys like Dennis K or RonPaul has said that a better use of that money would be to put it into Medicare/Medicaid and to ensure social security will be feesible for seniors today and in the near future as the baby boomers start to retire (though RonPaul wants to give options for younger people) I think if you want our governments to be more accountable, our voices would be loudest if we protest on their behalf to our mayors or governors. Never in U.S. history has the Federal government, the FBI, or the CIA advocated on behalf of the poor.
Might I suggest you do some research and learn that "conservatives" give more money AND time to charity than liberals/progressives. It's a proven fact.
which has nothing to do with whether they are adherants to the spirit and testimony of the Nazarene...."for not all those who say Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom; but those who do the will of my father." Seems to me that he also said that the widow who gives a mite to the temple gave more than the rich who poured gold into the temple...the testimony always being that "what is much esteemed among men is worthless before God"...and what actions matter are those that flow from the heart. I personally applaud all acts of generosity from whatever quarter that benefits those, our neighbors, in need, and I can't guess the motivation one way or another; but that doesn't mean that mere giving is a sign of anything essentially good, anymore that praying in public to be seen by other self-righteous religious types is a sign of piety or rightesousness.
I welcome conservatives to the Occupy Wall Street movement. I see nothing inherently liberal about its desire to see Wall Street cleaned up, see politicians get out of bed with Wall Street and other big money influencing them unduely, etc. If so, that's a sad reflection on conservatives.
Those seem to be the goals of the Tea Party, but most OWSers flip out when that is mentioned. They seem to insist that "their" ideas about who and what people are-Christians, Tea Party members, conservatives, Republicans-are the only correct ones. In fact, if any of those groups DARES to disagree with OWS-(see opening post) get called jack-asses, narrow minded, a waste of time....war mongers....and those that "spew hatred towards the poor and unemployed".
Gee.....I just cannot imagine WHY "conservative Christians" aren't just begging to join this movement.
Thank you Dave for at least your welcome.
You are welcome for the welcome ; )
I have witnessed quite a bit of that dislike and even hatred for Christians on this site, too. On the other hand, the level of total hatred by Christians and conservatives toward the Occupy movement even before they knew who was behind it, is astounding. Let me give you some examples from an article I wrote on my blog, which I began collecting shortly after the Occupy Wall Street movement began:
The movement is a “growing mob” (House majority leader Eric Cantor) or “shiftless protestors” (The Tea Party Express) or “pure, genuine parasites,” “bored trust-fund kids” (Rush Limbaugh) or is engaged in “class warfare.” “This is a coordinated movement on the part of unions and Obama supporters to distract the American people from the real problem.” (GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain) or the movement is made up of… people who need to “take a shower and get a job.” “There really isn’t a uniform theme here. They don’t know what they want.” (Bill O’Reilly) or “If you put every left wing cause in a blender and hit power, this is the sludge you’d get. It’s basically anti-capitalism, and they want to redistribute the wealth.” (Jesse Watters, FOXnation) “700 left-wing, radical hippie protestors.” “The people [in the movement] take a crap on cop cars and have sex in public.” “It’s a pig pen out there.” ”They’re trust-fund babies.” ”This radicalism is class warfare inspired by leading Democrats.” “Who gets the bailouts? It’s Barack Obama!” (Sean Hannity) “These are the spawn of the worst excesses of the ideological left…. This is manufactured chaos, manufactured crises. It has been since day one, and we’re seeing all of the ugly, wretched, criminal manifestations of it.” (Michelle Malkin) They have even been called… “nuts and lunatics and fascists” (Karl Rove), “demonic loons” (Ann Coulter), and “Radicals, revolutionaries, Communists and Islamists that are working together to destroy Capitalism and the Western way of life. They’re calling for the violent overthrow of the United States government.” (Glenn Beck)
Beck further stated that the only thing that can bring an end to this movement “will be the Night of Long Knives. It will be a purging of this country.” (Apparently a reference to the political murders carried out in a few nights by the Nazi’s in 1934.) He added, “Capitalists, if you think that you can play footsies with these people, you’re wrong. They will come for you and drag you into the streets and kill you… They’ll kill everybody…. It’s terrifying!” Nothing like blatant fear mongering, but Beck’s hair-raising claims are disproven when he says in the same talk that his observations of these so-called facts of the movement all occurred while going on a nice walk with his little daughter through an area that was under occupation. If it was really that dangerous, why did he not have her in his arms while running in the opposite direction? (http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger )
--Knave Dave
As I recall, there was quite a bit of hatred expressed towards the Tea Party as well, and you can get a "money quote" on the hatred towards conservatives off of the news almost every day, when they aren't "doing" anything in particular as a group. Just saying.
As far as the Glenn Beck quotes-the comments you highlight were said on air on November 10, 2011-one month after OWS started. Glenn Beck actually predicted the movement was coming 3-4 months BEFORE it even existed physically, AND he also accurately predicted who would be behind it at that time. So it's not exactly accurate for you to represent these particular comments as if the movement had barely begun days prior or that this was "even before he knew who was behind it".
As Glenn Beck has LONG said, predicted, and spoken about movements such as this happening, he has also compared them to movements that took place historically and what happened in those, and TO those, movements in the past. His reference here was to the fact that the Nazi party started a "movement" using it's own people, and that movement stirred up the populace and caused all kinds of problems. When the citizens finally begged Hitler to "do something about this mess", he sent in his own soldiers to KILL the people HE had used to start the movement to "appease" the citizens and make it look like he was concerned for the country AND was protecting it's citizens. The night those people he used for his own purposes were massacred is called the "Night of long knives".
He was saying to those politicians who think that "they can control" this movement or even influence it in the slightest, that they are wrong. And that if the people BEHIND this movement (not the participants necessarily) decide to get rid of those who oppose them-they will try to do just that.
I see. So, the hatred given to one side justifies their more-than-obvioius-and-odious hatred toward the other? It's O.K that Conservatives HATE OWS and lie about its demographics, identifying the whole with a few of the freakiest individuals they can find? Lying or intentional misrepresenting a whole group of people "for the cause of truth" is O.K.?
As for Glen Beck, I would think that it is obvious that his comments, which I posted came AFTER the movement started. Of course they did. I certainly don't think he was a prophet who knew how to insult and hate a group of people before it even existed! Prophetic hatred?
The fact that he hated them with a vitriol beyond belief and lied about how dangerous they were (so dangerous that he felt no qualms about walking past them with his little daughter) ... none of that makes his hatred any better than the hatred some others have for Conservatives. Beck is a vehemently hateful and violent sounding man when it comes to hating anyone he disagrees with. He is a "hatred for Jesus" kind of guy. Jesus was a "love your enemies" kind of guy. Beck is a hate-them-bash-them-smash-them-misrepresent-them kinda guy. He is FILLED with grossly exaggerated lies about the OWS people. Anyone who reads the above quotes from Beck and cannot see that his descriptions (such as "terrifying") do not fit 99% of the OWS crowd, is looking through their own lenses of hatred. The only thing terrifying about OWS is Glenn Beck's description of it.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
I wonder if he takes his medication for his maniacal condition?...it's clear he should.
I never said that hatred on either side was ok. That is pure inference on your part.
The problem as I view it, is that the vast majority of things GB says about people, INCLUDING OWS, is positive and very Jesus like. Those clips never get aired. Does that bother you as much as it does that the positive OWS footage doesn't get shown? Or is it ok when others lie about and "identify Glenn Beck based on a few of his freakiest comments?" I'm sorry I can't agree with you BECAUSE I've heard Glenn say MANY times that we should treat people with love and respect even if we disagree with them.
He's personally said that he asks his staff to do the same thing. HIS employees were the ones who ran to aid the OWS protester this weekend who had the seizure in front of one of his book signings. ONE OWS protestor caught his head so it didn't hit the ground, and when NO OTHER protesters jumped in to assist her, THEY raced to her aid. When another OWS protester saw that it was Glenn's people helping he shouted "What did you people do to him?" as if his rescuers were somehow to blame for his condition. That was his first response to what he saw.
If you want to be accurate about describing ANY person or group, you have to be dedicated enough to the truth, to take the time to examine ALL of their behavior and determine who that person is as a whole. You can take ANYONE's words and twist them to suit your own beliefs or agenda.
But you cannot do that with people's ACTIONS. Some actions are just inherently "bad" and some are inherently "good". If you believe in and honor the laws of your land (doesn't necessarily mean you agree with them all 100%) and respect the rights of ALL people-which includes the guilty by the way-you don't consider "actions" like shouting, blocking traffic, disrespecting cops, destroying property, preventing OTHER CITIZENS whose rights are EQUAL to yours, from entering buildings or moving about their lives without being slammed, vilified, screamed at as GOOD. Jesus was the one who instructed humanity that it was possible and EXPECTED for us to judge a person's actions as good or bad but to LOVE those people at the same time.
Jesus Christ was judged and convicted by the PUBLIC. Pilot washed his hands of the matter. His enemies decided his actions were evil and worthy of death and THEY demanded "justice" from the law. What happened was ANYTHING but just. OWS might want to stop and think about how their ACTIONS portray to others who and what they really are. Are they humble, quiet, teachers, tender, and service oriented like Jesus was or does the way THEY ACT seem more like the jeering, demanding, screaming, crowd that condemned Jesus?
To use your own logic, if anyone who reads the above quotes from Beck and cannot SEE that those quotes do not fit with 99% of what he says, is looking through their own lenses of hatred. People who have a totally different experience with Beck, because they've heard more of what he's said than what his haters print about him, find OWS just as terrifying as OWS finds Glenn Beck and FOR THE EXACT SAME REASONS. A LACK of information and personal experience.
And for the record-I don't have to AGREE with you to love you. I don't have to consider you my friend BEFORE I will treat you with the exact same respect and consideration I expect from you in return. But you cannot DENY the overwhelming evidence of how OWS "treats" their enemies. I've seen how willing they are to condemn and demand punishment of people they've never met and condemn everyone they have categorized as "wicked" whether they are innocent or not. I've WATCHED how they treat their fellowmen and women and children who aren't standing with them, along with the property and peace and environment that BELONGS to all those people just as much as it belongs to OWS. Your actions speak louder than your words, no matter how loudly you chant your words.
The comments I have taken from Glenn Beck are not a few of his freakiest. They were taken out of an hour-long segment he ran and are completely representative of his views throughout the segment. In it, he said NOTHING positive about OWS.
Perhaps you can post some of the positive things he has said about OWS to show the balance you claim is there. I take my Beck statements straight from his own productions. I find him extreme and vile. There is nothing in the words I quoted from Beck the misrepresent or exaggerate his views. They are his own words and are completely representative of the context in which he spoke them as well.
If you look at my posts throughout this site, you will see they are consistent in their standards. Over and over, I have spoken against violence and against any breaking of laws as means of protest. In some cities, the Occupy movement has worked with cities, gotten permits to occupy parks, etc. If the city is willing to give the permit, then that is their right. In others, they have defied laws, and I have been very outspoken against that while being balanced in showing those who are doing good.
You cannot deny the OVERWHELMING evidence of how Beck and other Conservatives routinely treat OWS as their enemy with words filled with contempt and hatred. The quotes I posted were only a small representation. I did not post all of the many I've heard. In every case where I was able to find the context, the full talk given by any of the individuals quoted above matched with the excerpts for shear vitriol. In most cases, I found the quotes by listening to large segments of shows and pulled only one or two representative examples out of things the host often repeated in order to establish the point.
It has been truly awful to see how wickedly many leading commentators on the right have castigated the Occupy Wall Street people.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
Do me a favor and hold your nose and go to this website-and READ-all the way to the end.
http://biggovernment.com/lstranahan/2011/10/24/glenn-beck-was-right-ows-wants-violent-revolution/
In it, an OWS planner and known activist, Malcolm Harris , made very open comments that were filmed at a private meeting of OWS shorty after Glenn Beck taped the show in question. He ADMITS (listen to the video yourself and read the entire article-ALL of it-including who Malcolm Harris is):
"Well, and I think that’s–that’s one side of what people want, right, ’cause that’s not the only thing people want, they also want to take the banker out of his, you know, fucking tower and string him up in the public square, right? [Applause] That’s not–that’s not, like, just the crazy left. That’s everyday folks talking about their experiences.
"And, like, this is America, right? We want to talk about “we’re the 99%” as if we’re also not the 99% that loves Transformers 4, right? [Laughter] As if this is the 99% that doesn’t also, like, feel passionate anger. “All we want is, like, you know, our little appropriate piece of the pie and we just want to be friendly.“
"And the capitalists know that’s not the case, right? If you want to read what the capitalists think about this you can go look at what Glenn Beck says, right? He’s got a better analysis than most people on the left about where this could go, how threatening this…—
When another reporter accused the author of the article of "wild speculation" for saying that Malcolm was referring to Beck's comments about "dragging people out into the street" when he said what he did, MALCOLM HARRIS responded HIMSELF and confirmed that indeed the author was completely correct.
Now, if one of the major players and planners in the OWS movement-I'm not talking about innocent protesters who have no knowledge of who and what is behind the movement-will CONFIRM that what Glenn Beck is saying about the movement IS INDEED very possible-your argument that he's wrong pales in comparison.
I don't think Glenn Beck's rhetoric is one bit better nor one bit less violent than this guys. They're both violent idiots. They're simply on opposing sides. But neither one of them speaks for the Occupy movement. This is just ONE guy standing up and speaking at an assembly, and I don't see any sign that anyone is even more than half-listening.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
Monopolies and virtual Monopolies where all the oil companies get together and fix the price to jack up profits are anti-capitalist. This type of thing stifles entrepreneurs and small businesses. The he with the most money can operate in the red until the bank forecloses on everyone else, wins and gains a true Monopoly stinks. Monsanto shouldn't have run around buying up all the small seed companies, no one should be encouraged to monopolize the world's seed. Now I think if you want to appeal to Christian Values an anti-consumerism movement would be way more appealing than Occupations. Christians put a lot into their homes and kids and can't camp out. They can and do do volunteer work, if you go out and donate time at local thrift stores and food pantries, you'll find of them! You need to tell them the kind of unregulated Free for all freemarket certain people are pushing would be a bad thing. And the low down dirtiest thing big Corperations have done is buy our politicians and make it legal to engage in unfair trade with the American Citizens! They need to know this what OWS wants to fix, and we are willing to change our lifestyle so our dollars stop ending up in the wrong kind of pockets. And yes, OWS wants to make it illegal to bribe politicians with campaign contributions and yes without money perks a lot of politicians will quit and go home but they were not serving anyone but themselves anyway. Yes, people will protest but they will donate time to their community too. As a Christian, I think its important to include Christians in the 99% and not make it something they don't want to be a part of. As a Christian, I am perfectly fine with the Goals of the movement. They support people having freewill, I can decide if I want to marry a woman or not my own self. If people aren't free, whether they are good or not doesn't mean much to God because they didn't make those choices of their own freewill. A Christian can disagree with me all the live long day, but I they can understand where I stand!
Jesus is perceived as a "first century libertarian" by "conservative Christians" because this is what the majority of them hear about Him every Sunday. Just listen to a Christian speak and you will know where they learned their view: the Book or the pulpit. As for trying to “win over the theists” we should already have the backing of the educated Believer.
[Removed]
In old western movies, on occasion, the gunslingers had to check their guns at the door. The same rule should apply here, check your gods at the door. IMO, religion is the oldest tool known to mankind for dividing the masses, and it's still effective today. Christians are against Muslims, Muslims are against Jews and Christians etc. etc. etc. This is by design, we have to be protected against our enemies who weren't enemies until we were told they were. The big three religions are all intolerant of the other religions. Religion divides us, period, and if we have any hope of being successful in this movement we have to become united. That doesn't mean that there isn't a lot of spiritual truth to be gleaned in the scriptures and texts but that isn't religion. Religion is an interpretation of those scriptures and texts. It doesn't take a lot of biblical scholarship to come to conclusion that there are spiritual truths to be found in all of major religions. There is also a lot of bullshit. The points that emphasize tolerance, kindness, forgiveness an the like should be promoted and the opposite points should be shot down promptly. The better rule found in Christian doctrine that we should promote is the golden rule "treat others the way you would like to be treated" I'm not sure what the Muslims and Jews equivalent saying is, perhaps they would like to share that. There are many stories that show progressive nature of Jesus but you have to be careful as you can find others that would suggest just the opposite. here is one that I haven't seen anyone talking about and that is the story about Jesus leaving the 99 sheep to save the 1. On it's face it seems innocent enough as everyone would want that individual attention, but when you think about it it doesn't make much sense. If you were a business man with 100 accounts and you came to one that you couldn't get done you wouldn't waste any more time on it, you might try and set it up to get done later but you wouldn't dwell on the 1 account, you would quickly continue on the other 99 knowing that is what will pay the most. In regard to changing long held beliefs, "you can lead a horse to water...". Happy Holidays!!!
I think it's high time that moderate xtians and those raised in the tradition move to coordinate and development a community of Occupiers precisely under a Banner as described here by sophiaomni.
I've been arguing since October on other Occupy forums that the movement should be encouraging the development of various camps whose stated goal should be the re-occupation of various aspects of our culture and communities...Occupy our Schools...Occupy our Local Governments...Occupy the Land (community gardens)...Occupy Health Care, and the like, as a way of propelling and propogandizing the core notion that political/economic interests have captured and corrupted these social interests and bent them to favor a minority over against the majority. This single notion of corruption by political/economic interests, corporatism, is what unites many in a common cause and is capable of developing a unified movement untoward this shared end: re-occupation in the interest of the many.
For these camps to develop on the public stage and call themselves by Occupy, appending their particular emphasis, is a way to highlight the central Care of the many...that We understand how political/economic forces that do not have the interests of the many at heart, have corrupted society and is on the way to enslaving mankind on behalf of the very few...a call to action based on this observation that taps into a widely held belief that the many have been shut-out and their interests misrepresented and whose communities have been manipulated to serve interests contrary to their welfare of the many.
I can think of few widely held, life-relevant, issues that are more at the heart of our experience on this issue than Religion, and even fewer that can be the subject of re-occupation efforts and organization, clear communication and cogent arguement by those who are genuinely animated by the theme, than the re-capture of xtianity from the clutches of political/economic interests. Something like 60% of Americans identify as xtians, while among them less than half (I'm fairly guessing but I think this is more-or-less accurate) are self-described evangelicals...that sect of xtianity least available for sensible dialogue on the topic of brotherhood and freedom as described by Jesus. But that leaves a majority of self-identified xtians who may well be receptive to such efforts as described here and who may, just may, become animated by precisely just such efforts, potentially bringing them closer to understanding Occupy as a movement, and perhaps more importantly, closer and more intimately acquainted with the heart of their own, avowed religious tradition.
The effort as described here should be launched as a separate website under the title suggested: Occupy Christianity, with an introduction along the lines described about the corrupting influence of political/economic clique of interests that have organized a concerted effort to distort and manipulate the tradition for effectively nefarious ends, literally destroying the religion for all intents and purposes (using the testimony of Jesus as the yardstick, not so much the Pauline emphasis).
There are groups of xtians that are attempting something similar, and there are very intelligent, educated people within the tradition who would rally to contribute to the effort...I'm sure of that. Essays could be offered on the many ways this corruption has occured, historical studies on the process including how political powers have always used religion to control and herd honest believers into serving interests contrary to their own welfare, and tracts emphasizing the various points in the Gospels that stand in stark contradiction to the emphasis which these corrupting influences have captured from the tradition for distortion and manipulation of the less well informed.
It would be a project of re-occupation by those who are animated by this concern...OWS needn't have anything to do with it, needn't sanction it, and certainly cannot prohibit such a movement from calling itself by the name of Occupy; but I think that such a drive to re-occupy would perform an important, certainly interesting purpose among many in the xtian community who recognize that corrupting, manipulating, controling forces are at work in the world to enslave the mind and heart on behalf of maliceous cliques of powerful interests not their own. The perhaps not so subtle additional function would be to publically align re-occupiers of xtianity with the core message of Occupy Generally, helping to propel an awareness of how, by example, these powerful cliques of political/economic interests insinuate themselves into our society to manipulate us to their own purposes...just another important prong of attack in the arsenal of Occupiers who share the awareness that a minority is attempting to enslave us and has succeeded in important ways which must now be resisted and overcome.
The time to Occupy Christianity has come. I would lend my every support to such an effort and pray that this project begin as soon as possible.
Virtually every believer falls into one of two groups (Christians & Jews & Moslems .... )
1} Their book is the exact word of God
2} or it is not Those who believe "their" book is the word of God still ignore what they want to ignore - slavery, stoning, how Noah got kangaroos to Australia - have taken what they wanted - what they were trained to take - and ( inmho ) will not be receptive to what they have already rejected.
Those who believe in God - but not in books written by man - may be far more open minded to sanity.
I passionately agree. A principle tenet of their religion being Mathew 25 . Matthew 25:31-46
New International Version (NIV)
The Sheep and the Goats 31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
You used to hear and see bumper stickers "WJD what would Jesus do" , not any more.
On and on the teachings of their savior teach them environmentalism, and socialism. At minimum Jesus would have been a progressive.
I do think it is worth the time to tactfully and respectfully challenge them on this. The right wing has co-opted them and brain washed them. With the god,guns and gays talking points. Most of them know in there heart your right. The churches in general do great things for community, we need to help them connect the dots between the goals of there church's out reach programs and the goals the officials their electing. Respectfully! In general they are a defensive bunch and will block you out very quickly if they feel cornered. Leading them into your point maybe a good tactic.
Are you this concerned about the political leanings of all imaginary characters?
The problem is that the government uses religion to control people. And what I mean by that is when "conspiracy theorists" claimed that Bush set up the 9/11 attack, a representative of a Christian church publicly announced that is against God and blasphemes to believe that Bush attacked his own citizens. This has made many hate religion all together, but it is not the religion's fault; it is the way the government uses it to control the Christian population which is fairly high I presume in the US. When debating about OWS, I think the best way to debate about this is that Jesus was against the government during His time; the government was Jewish and taught wrong ways to people (according to Jesus' God). While I am not saying that OWS is Jesus, I am saying that OWS is doing no different than what Jesus did fundamentally. Also, the people who OP is speaking with are probably accustomed to thinking the government is God in all of its ways rather than God never publicly adorned the US making it just another government. The whole 'Under God' and 'In God We Trust' is what gets people. I am in no way trying to be offensive or suggest a conspiracy theory, however I am just stating the facts I have observed.
I agree with LeoYo. Get the idea refined so it is understandable by the masses, say it often, say it loud and lead by example. That is how you build a movement into an action.
Just posted this before i saw your thread;
Well, the way it appears to me is that this goes back the Bible. You have a disgruntled being demanding that the Landowner "share the wealth" so to speak, and trying to install a victim-entitlement mentality into others, and much succeeding. And while the analogy is wanting due to the fact that those who "have" are not all benevolent, or are all rightful owners, and make restrictions based on what is best, yet in substance there is much that i see as analogous in your protests to the "original occupy movement". If you will bear with me...
This original "occupy movement" was that of the "occupy the throne of God" initiative by a selfish being, who like many protesters i believe, basically have an animus against the idea of want striving lawfully for rewards, (2Tim. 2:5) but seek to "climb up some other way." (Jn. 10:1) See Isaiah 14:12-14. As the devil would have God divest Himself of His rightful power and position (not out of selfishness but as that is what is right and best) , to "share the wealth" with one who selfishly lusts after such, so these souls are at war with the principles of gaining position, and demand those who are worthy of their reward relinquish it so that the indolent can live as a wealthy man, seeing everyone as a victim of the former.
In the Garden the devil sought to instill the same victim-entitlement mentality he evidences, working to convince Eve she was victimized due to the solitary restriction, and basically demanded that God "share the wealth," that of Divine knowledge which innocence needed not was not best to have.
As in the 60's, it largely seems there is a lust is for a Garden of Eden without God, in which no one has to work, or wear clothes, or where such commitments as marriage are required to enjoy sexual union, and other restraints against the sinful proclivity of fallen men.
Instead all just eat from the trees which grow food and whatever else is needed while smoking bongs (which also hang from trees). But in this case the government is as God, and provides all for these elite class, as earning things is unnecessary. And in essence much of the the protest today is actually against the failure of this ideology, of the government to provide what this fantasy demands, and thus louder demands are made, using the legitimate failures of capitalism to demand a socialist state, but whose elite rulers end of being worse than what they replaced.
As this is a rebellion against the principles of earning position and power, and of consequences for rejecting it, in which context mercy is mercy and is appreciated, then ultimately it is a rebellion against God.
The end of which is Hell, and its absence of anything positive and realization of the opposite, in contradistinction to those with God, who were redeemed by God/Christ on His expense and credit, on His blood and righteousness in God's mercy; Not by rejecting that there are consequences for sin, but by God making reconciliation, and is given to those who repent and believe on Him, (Rom. 3:8-4:12) with a faith that effects love and works, and who will be recompensed with rewards according to their labor. (1Cor. 3) To the glory of God who gave His Son, and is still giving.
reading this post of PBJ creates a clatter in my brain and just leaves me thinking...this is really goofy.
The best defense of Christianity I've read, in terms of libertarian and other progressive ideas, is Peter McWilliams' Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country. It dispels many myths from the conservatives' notion of the religion. McWilliams was persecuted for his role in writing this book, and because of this he ultimately died from being denied medical marijuana - without its help to suppress the nausea induced by his chemotherapy, he died choking on his own vomit (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_McWilliams ). I thus contend he deserves to be counted among the martyrs of Christianity, where what is right is what will be.
Sounds like an interesting book. Thanks for sharing the link!
Arrange for a day when everyone stops what they are doing and repents against their evil ways and begs forgiveness from GOD.
They must all VOW not to go back to life until GOD has made his presence known to all the world. THEN we can go back to consuming products so we can get this economy moving.
GOD was very present all throughout history, he was found up in a bush writing some commandments for us, he was all over the place burning cities, flooding people. I'm pretty sure he, she, it, whatever would not have any problem showing up for us now that we need it most, would GOD ignore us, begging for forgiveness?
Are Christians, Jews, Muslims, and whatever else willing to show true faith or are they scared that no one will show up and we'll all die waiting?
you rightly attack the absurdity of religion...but I don't see any effect that has upon the worthwhile testimony of the Nazarene, does not invalidate any of his avowed purposes, and really has no bearing on this thread.
Are you aware that many churches, clergy, interfaith organizations, etc. are supporting OWS? Please read:
http://www.ecusa.anglican.org/79425_130515_ENG_HTM.htm
http://www.occupyfaithnyc.org/
If it were that simple we could and would have more people involved in movements against inequality. The problem is that Religion can be twisted, primarily because those who were part of say the New Testament cannot argue lies about them.....such as Jesus's take on any political matter. Which the GOP pretend like Jesus is on their side. As if Jesus Christ would approve the rich taking advantage of the poor. No, if more christians actually read the bible they would be standing up with the 99 % against corruption. Though you do have a good idea, you should make a call to christians to stand up for Christ not money. You should right a blog, challenge the blind christians to remember the values of Christ.
That's exactly why I think Christians should be challenged to defend their political beliefs based upon what is actually written in the NT, not what they'd lile to find there.
I have, in fact, been trying to do just this on my blog: www.michaelsrusso.org. feel free to stop by and challenge anything you disagree with!
Occupy Christianity? Freaking how, rewrite the Bible?
You don't need to rewrite the Bible. You just need to recognize that most of the ideas of the New Testament--pacifism, social justice, care for the poor--is expressed today would be considered leftist. Much further left, in fact, than anything even remotely being advocated by the Democratic Party.
Don't let yourself be offended by the viceous attacks of detractors...sophiaomni...you have the right idea, but you will not sell it here. I've had precisely the same thought you have expressed here and am working on something similar, but OWS will have none of it...that much is clear. Take your project to the xtrian communities you are able to penetrate...compile your arguements and write a book...publish it on Amazon through createspace.com.
CHRISTIANITY is the 1%'s #1 TOOL!
http://www.occupywallst.org/forum/real-reason-why-libertarians-love-property-rights-/
" ...in a patriarchal culture in which women function primarily as daughters, wives, and mothers of particular men, women have virtually no property rights. Unmarried women inherit from their fathers only if they have no brothers; and, in such cases, they must subsequently marry within their father's clan to prevent the dispersal of tribal property among outsiders (Numbers 36:2‑12). [This was the case with the daughters of Zelophehad, who successfully petitioned Moses and God for their father's inheritance.]
Queen Esther Widows do not inherit from their husbands at all, but are dependent on their sons or the generosity of other heirs. According to the practice of levirate marriage, childless widows are the legal responsibility of their husband's oldest brother (Deuteronomy 25:5‑10)." http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Gender_and_Feminism/Traditional_Views/Biblical.shtml
"Christian Patriotism is the result of the confluence of the far- right tax resistance movement, regressive Populism, and Identity doctrine. The Christian Patriot branch of white supremacy traces its explosive growth back to the rise of William Potter Gale's Posse Comitatus, a virulently anti-Semitic paramilitary movement which began operating publicly in 1968. Founded on the principle of all-out resistance to federal authority -- which has marked all white supremacy since the rise of the Ku Klux Klan at the end of the Civil War -- the Posse carries the notion of anti-federalism to new extremes. Most racist politics has its legal and philosophical roots in the "property rights" and "states rights" clauses in the Constitution. These sections of the Constitution were a compromise necessary to enlist the cooperation of the slave-holding states in replacing the unworkable Articles of Confederation with the federal Constitution. The exaltation of the rights of property over the rights of people is a common denominator of the entire right wing of American politics." http://www.albionmonitor.com/freemen/ci-roots.html
Don't you think it's possible at all to be a Christian and not be repressive of women? I think that you probably haven't met some of the hard-core feminist who I have met in the Catholic Church, for example. These are people we need to win over, but if we simply dismiss their entire religious perspective off-hand, we loose them to the right.
It is possible "to be a Christian and not be repressive of women" if you are the kind of Christian that doesn't follow the Bible.
I don't consider myself a Christian any longer, but as I recall, there is nothing that Jesus said that could possible be construed as misogynistic. In fact his fist disciples were women. I think that you could make the case that Christian churches have corrupted the actual teaching of the Gospels to make them hostile towards women.
i'd say that organized religion and mega churches are the problem, and to single out the faithful with one swipe of the pen is not a wise tactic. un less you are just trying to guilt them into doing what Jesus would do.
I do what I do to make a point. Not everyone is religious, I DO criticize the Bible.
Well, like all good literature there will always be critics.;)
It is not literature to me, it is a tool of oppression, to be fought against.
Well, as long as you fight it with your words and not with your fists and your laws that is OK with me. Cheers!
If anyone is interested in reading what more moderate and progressive Christians have to say, here are a couple of places to start: http://www.thechristianleft.org/ and
http://www.sojo.net/ Please check them out.
Thanks for sharing that. I hadn't seen these sites before!
The Revolution has a new song!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P89PlNkk0eY&feature=related
http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/
The Revolution starts here!
If you think you can "win over" the brainwashed anything - rotsa ruck!
remember Jane Brodie -
"Give me a girl at an impressionable age, and she is mine for life!"
These lemmings got started at birth - its a lost cause
Some Christians definitely have been brainwashed from an early age, but many others can be "converted" to our cause by appealing to the very clear messages pertaining to social justice in their own book. I really don't think that we can succeed if we dismiss the majority of Americans who have some kind of religious outlook, do you?
I'm a Seminary Student at a pretty conservative school. Well, academically we're conservative. We believe things like "King David and Saul were real people" and "The Bible isn't made up." My grandfather who is a pastor would call the professors a bunch of liberals.
Any way, I am an Evangelical Christian, and I would LOVE to make dialogue with OWS. I want to know what scriptures have to say specifically to Christians about the things that the Occupiers are discussing. I would love to publish what I learn from that dialogue SPECIFICALLY for a Christian audience. I find that the church is largely uneducated about OWS, myself chief among them, and that's just plain silly.
So, I'm here. I'm checking this thing pretty regularly. Convince me, and I'd prefer if you start with a pretty representative list of what exactly it is that OWS wants to happen. I've found two or three lists of demands, and the comments sections are so bloated with unrelated crap that I simply don't have time to wade through it all.
You seem pretty darn open-minded to me, and I for one would love to engage in a dialogue with you. As for OWS, however, I think that at this very early stage in the movement there are a lot of different ideas floating around and not so as much consensus as I would like to see (especially about solutions and concrete action steps that need to be taken).
I've been addressing some of the issues that I think are central to OWS on my faculty website (www.michaelsrusso.org) and would be delighted to enter into a dialogue with you about any of those issues. Of course, I don't claim to represent OWS. Nobody really does!
That's something I disagree with. You DO represent OWS. You're not anymore representative of OWS than any other occupier, because the movement hasn't given any one member the privilege to be more representative, but in the eyes of people who aren't occupying wallstreet, you represent the movement simply by being a part of it.
But, really, for me, the issue isn't that no one represents OWS. It's that noTHING really seems to represent OWS.
A movement with out a unanimous goal is not a unified movement. Without that set goal that every one agrees on, it's too easy for group-think to take over, and for demonstrations to become meaningless mobs. Even if there is discussion and debate on how to get to that goal, OWS would be MUCH more successful in communicating if the occupy movement knew exactly what it wanted.
I'll be checking out your site, and probably talking with you there. But I also think that there needs to be a movement to Occupy the Occupy movement. Without some more unanimity, people who want to be open to and conversant with you in efforts to make something change (like me) will only end up frustrated with the lack of clarity. I'm not to that point yet, but I can see that place from here.
Don't be shocked, but I agree with just about everything you said! It was a pleasure chatting with you!
I think I would practice attraction, rather than promotion . . . .
Jesus was not a communist or a socialist.
In fact he was pretty much anti government and anti establishment.
if more people had paid attention to what religion teaches, for example be not a borrower or a lender.... Why did Jesus tip over the tables in the temple? How did he feel about charging interest?
did Jesus use force?
I am under the impression that OWS does not take a position either for or against religion. Personally I am torn between abolishing religion and reforming it. I can see good arguments for both.
That being said, there are good New Testament arguments for being pro OWS. Jesus was the one who threw the money changers out of the temple. Jesus and his disciples even did something similar to Occupy when many gathered to hear him and he gave them the loaves and fish. He and his disciples wandered about and occupied from place to place. It seems the OWS lifestyle and method was the one used by his followers during his entire ministry. The current right wing church has nothing in common with the original Jesus at all. The prophecies of Revelation and other passages speak of a false church that would dominate during the end of days. That would fit the current Wall Street infested church. This Christian movie got it right. Here is a Youtube snippet:
http://youtu.be/A9xdxfcrkyc
http://youtu.be/mhqCFVKnorg
The part I refer to is toward the latter part of the first snippet and part of the second.
Yes it makes sense to me. Appeal to their better nature. Remind them that Jesus threw out the money lenders from the temple, and that many of the values espoused in Occupy correlate with many of those of Christians, like charity, selflessness, love thy neighbour, against greed, etc. etc. I think it is important though at the same time to respect their religious beliefs and draw attention to the common ground.
I do think many Christians of the fanatic and fundamental type may be harder to win over, just because there is a certain amount of fear, denial, etc. going on, waiting for God to take care of everything or something, but isn't it worth starting a sincere dialogue?
I actually had this idea at the beginning of Occupy, and joined a Christian forum to take the temperature and debate in favor of Occupy, and there was actually a significant amount of support, at least on that particular forums, though critics and detractors as well which i expected.
Unfortunately, religion has a very corrosive effect on one's congnitive abilities that is why it is a favorite of the ruling class in any class system because it postpones the costs of oppressive rule to a fantasy after-life relieving significant stress from the economic system and the political regime significantly helping the bottom line. It is so very effective because it is supercharged politics, i.e., so political that it denies being political. Because it is ultimately based on faith - i.e., blind submission to a higher authority - it is by nature conformist and pro-authoritarian even among its most radical or progressive proponents. Nonetheless, because it is in total denial of reality, a sophisticated continuous and repetitive regime of indoctrination is necessary to build up and keep up the faith, preferably starting with infancy under influence of the parents to adulthood with a wide range of activities from economic (charities, religious communes) to political (election campaigns, swearing an oath using the bible, religious laws) to cultural (use of religious themes in language, arts and music) to moral, spiritual, and ideological.
That said I would never judge people by their beliefs / ideas unless obviously fanatic / impulsive / extreme. But because it is generally difficult to argue with most such people especially based on evidence (i.e., economic motive and evidence - since most advocate "freedom of choice / spirit" and "human nature" as the primary motive for human decisions / the state of affairs and see little usefulness for any social activism except for religion itself) I do not advocate direct political engagement. The youth are easier to approach in general because they have been less indoctrinated.
I believe most will have a difficult time to deny the increasingly harsh reality despite their increased religious activities to shield themselves from the economic onslaught of the self-destructive catastrophic capitalism, yet they will be late-comers to the movement, and likely best persuaded by example - i.e., by observing a better quality of life in the lives of the members.
This is so much more the reason that the OWS movement should engage in more meaningful economic action especially by implementing sustainable economic principles that help the lives of the poor and marginalized, e.g., unemployed, poor, especially among immigrants and racial / ethnic minorities of the working class many of whom resort to religion for virtual and even some practical economic shelter. I propose as antidote, providing similar self-help relief in a cooperative communal format using the productive skills of the unemployed labor / and self-funded science and technology including adapting sustainable ecological measures, distinct from the charity model of dependent authority and conformity, enabling and rehabilitating the oppressed and weakened bringing dignity to their lives and ours.
The experience of Black Panthers is one among many we could learn from both in terms of weakness (charitable hierarchical tendencies, early armed conflict, focus on limited politics of racism rather than pervasive politics of economic apartheid) and strength (self-reliant community service tendencies and aggressive militancy).
They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them.
-- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781-82
No doubt. Jesus would never turn his back on the poor. Never.
But libertarians would do it in a heartbeat.
Very Good and Valid Point!
Personally, to your question of dealing with the bible thumpers. Don't bother debate with them, their collective heads are so clouded with fantasies and myths they can't let go. I usually deal with them with some heavy handed questions about rational thinking. That dispels them and sends on their way with seeds of doubt that are hard to forget. The seeds sprout later, years down the road when they could confuse it as their original which may free them from the bondage of religion.
Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. **Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must approve the homage of reason rather than of blind-folded fear.** Do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of its consequences.... If it end in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise and in the love of others it will procure for you.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to Peter Carr, 10 August 1787.
Good Luck Sophiaomni!
a) Wouldn't a person who espouses Christianity usually know a BIT more about their religion than someone who doesn't? It is probably more effective to let them teach you. b) Is OWS going to be multi-theolistic? As in Occupy Islam, Occupy Judaism, etc?
c) should one plan be formulated to handle all the religions as one occupation, or should separate plans be formulated to handle each religion separately? d) what about spin off religions? Catholic dogma is different than methodist in many respects. Should subset plans be made for Occupy Episcopalian, Occupy Presbyterians and Occupy Lutheran?
e) Should Jehovah Witnesses be treated as allies, as they already go out to people's homes? f)what about LDS? Glenn Beck is one.
Correct me if i'm wrong. This movement is an All inclusive moment. We have an UNITED purpose. To put an end to the corrupt politicians on BOTH sides the aisle and to put an end to corporate greed!! While you guys are busy arguing about who shoul be included in the movement and who should not, there are many American families who are going hungry and losing their jobs and homes. Put your daggers away for another time.This is not the time for hate bigotry and divisive talk. Remember that bigots of any persuasion, hate other peoples bigotry but love their own bigotry. The press loves to see any kind of dissension in the moment and you are handing it to them on a plate!!! Perhaps that's your main purpose, to turn this forum into nothing more than another Craiglist rants and raves section!! Get over yourselves people, go take a can of food to your local food bank! United We Stand..Divided we will most definitely fall! Occupy Oakland supporter.
Discussions on this board of the great meaning, support and the direction of OWS has nothing to do with ANY people's religion. ( as in Christianity)
Besides Christianity is ultimately about mankind's soul.....
I respectfully disagree. My faith was pretty much that way before I actually started to think about what faith should look like and how I should treat my faith.
Christianity, more than about people's souls (which sounds to me like an implication of Cartesian dualism, which is not something that is a part of my faith), is about the Kingdom of Heaven and about being the image of God.
You see, Jesus spent time with people who sufered, and aleviated their suffering. He said "Whatever you do to the least of these, you have done to me." If I don't see Christ among the suffering, then I need to wonder about the legitimacy of my baptism.
Jesus also said that "The Kingdom of Heaven is [i]near[/i]." He didn't say "It's on its way, so you better be ready before it gets here!" He said [i]near[/i] as in proximity. when he stands in front of you, you can reach out and touch the Kingdom. The Kindgom is wherever Jesus is. So if Jesus is among the suffering, then the Kingdom of Heaven is among the suffering.
Not that the suffering makes the Kingdom of Heaven, but that the work of Christ makes the Kingdom of heaven. What is the work of Christ? "to bring good news to the oppressed, bind up the broken hearted, proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners."
To top it off, Christians are supposed to be like Christ. So if we're not doing these things, and doing them in such way that doesn't diminish the humanity of the suffering, then we're not very much like Christ at all.
I'm a Christian, and I'm conservative (libertarian) but moderate (socially), maybe liberal even, and support OWS. For the record, I absolutely hate when neocon republicans manipulate people via their faith, so were someone to try to do the same to me, even if I agreed with their perspective, it would probably piss me off.
On the other hand, I'm kind of surprised to to hear the question "should we win over the theists?" as if "we the theists" over here, were not part of the club, or not invited to the party. ...I feel so ...excluded.
Please forgive me for making you feel like you are outside the club. For what you say about yourself you would definitely be part of it! I have absolutely no problem at all with libertarians who are socially liberal. My problem is with those people who use libertarianism as an excuse to support a conservative social agenda. It's very hard to find a consistent libertarian (i.e., on both economic and social issues), but whenever I have found one, I've had some great discussions with them!
Welcome to the club!
Try and win over everybody
Religion is just totally irrelevant to me, in terms of my local area and the people I interact with. I don't actually, definately know who is Christian, there might be a few, but most people that I socialize or work with are totally ambivalent towards it.
As far as Jesus. I don't regard him as a historical figure really. I think it's a mythological, syncretic character (and please, don't anyone freak out, that's just my views. Respect mine and I'll respect yours.) But as far as it goes, what's being preached is certainly not libertarianism! The foundation of libertarianism is that self-interest is the ultimate good, which the philosophy in the Bible vehemently denies. And yes, communal organization is promoted (to the point that if you don't give all of what you have to the religious community, God might kill you, like he did Ananias and Sapphira). But I don't think this is really a socialist sort of communalism. I think it's more like what the Amish and Mennonites do, or even the early religious communes of the Shakers and similar groups in the colonial US.
Which, in a roundabout way, did give rise to socialism via Robert Owens, but that's a whole other story ...
I do not see how personal religious beliefs even fit into this. That's what it is. It's personal and has no place in the public realm.
This season of Dexter is horrible...
Everyone has "personal religious beliefs," even if they are atheists. Therefore, you cannot discuss political issues without also discussing faith issues.
I think that Conservative Christians are a waste of time.
-Jesus was a Communist, (No man can serve two masters, you cannot love both God and Mammon (money)). -a Pacifist, -an activist, -one of the first 'Wall Street occupiers' (he kicked the money changers from the temple). -Jesus healed the sick, FOR FREE. -Jesus understood the subversive power of LOVING YOUR ENEMY. -Jesus also thought you should pay your taxes. (Render unto Caesar).
I did hear a very intelligent speaker on the radio that was once a Catholic monk. He said that the right-wing of the Christian church has completely distorted the original Christian message. For two thousand years, Christianity was meant to help the poor. That message has been distorted in the United States in the last twenty years to mean the complete opposite.
This former monk also said he quit the 'left wing' Catholic church, because they said nothing against the right wing. (Yes of course they are corrupt too.)
I teach English as a Second Language. One of my students is a Korean minister. He told me that Christianity became popular in Korea and the east in general specifically BECAUSE they were charitable towards the poor. (Buddhists aren't, in his opinion.)
I think that is the reason that Christianity became so popular so quickly throughout the world. When the Christians came to Ancient Rome, they gave voice to the voiceless and hope to the hopeless, the slaves. The Romans knew they were in trouble, so Christianity became the only religion they tried to ban. It didn't work, and the Roman Empire fell.
During the rise of industrial civilization, the Christian church was there to help the poor with food, clothes and comfort. This is one of the reasons why capitalism has gone on for as long as it has without collapsing. Those who couldn't make it in the system could rely on the church to give them enough crumbs to keep them from breaking out into open revolt.
Now, even the Christian church (in the US anyways) has abandoned it's role as the helper of the poor. The Government isn't doing this either, so of course the people have no other option than to revolt!
So, consider the Occupy movement as 'The New Christianity', in the new Roman Empire of the United States. LIke the early Christians appealing to the Roman slaves, the Occupy movement has united the poorest, the voiceless, the homeless, those who have fallen through the crack, into one strong worldwide movement.
Just as Rome couldn't function without it's slaves, the 1% can't function without the support of the 99%. Just as the Christians were persecuted at first, so are the Occupiers being persecuted against.
FYI, here in Canada the Anglican church and the Catholic church have been generally supportive of the movement. St. James church let the Occupiers camp on land partly owned by them, using their electricity, etc.
Hails to a fellow ESL teacher. I'd personally refrain from calling a group of disillusioned people a waste of time, but they should review their base philosophy. It seems following the works of Christ has taken a back seat (at a minimum) to ritual and accumulating time posterior to pew. Organized Christianity would hold a lot more weight with me if I saw some real action.
Yes I agree with you on that. I think that was what Martin Luther attempted to do when he nailed the 99 Reformations to the church door.
In Luther's time, the Catholic church was (still is, IMHO) a corrupt organization more focused on profits than on teaching the works of Christ. In fact, I think of the Catholic church as being the very first international corporation.
The penance that Catholics say today in church, in the form of 'hail mary' and 'our father', used to be payable in coin. Sermons were held in the latin language, which only the educated nobles could understand. Bibles were expensive, and chained to the pulpit so they could not be stolen.
Martin Luther 'democratized' Christianity, his goal was to make the Bible more accessible to the average person. He used the printing press to mass produce Bibles, make them affordable, and write them in German instead of Latin. For the first time in Medieval history, the people did not need either the priest, or the Pope. Now, with their own bible written in the common language, each person could have a personal relationship with God.
The televangelists and mega-churches we see today in the USA are essentially an organ of the Republican party. They have effectively co-opted Christianity. This has only happened in the last twenty to thirty years.
All good points and very true about Martin Luther. I'd say it's time for the Christian church to get back to the basics and walk the walk. It is rather bizarre how Republican Christians can pick and choose from the Bible to make it fit their own agenda. They treat it like it is some sort of religious buffet.
I've heard of that expression before.
"Cafeteria Christianity". You choose what you like and put it on your tray, ignore the rest.
Well isn't that convenient? Lol. Perhaps the next edition of the Bible will be a Choose Your Own Adventure book.
I think that's largely the point of this thread...that xtians should retake christianity from the political manipulation/capture it has suffered, re-own it, as it were, to re-Occupy essential christianity and point out how political interests have warped and corrupted it from what is Humane in the tradition. I happen to agree.
Agreed. A meeting of Xtians should be a precursor to some kind of Xtian action (free of political/corporate influence). In fact, with business ethics and government control being what they are today, a Xtian action will likely be something quite opposite.
Excellent post. You've clearly spent some time thinking about this subject, and I pretty much agree with everything you've said. Glad to hear that the Anglicans in Canada are supportive of OWS.
As a direct decedent of the Hebrews, I quote Isaiah [YESHAYAH]61:1
The Ruach [Hakodesh] of '' Hashem is upon me [Moshiach], because Hashem mashach (hath anointed) me [Moshiach] to preach besurah (good news, glad tidings) unto the anavim (meek, poor, oppressed); He hath sent me to bind up the nishberei lev (the brokenhearted), to proclaim deror (freedom, liberty) for the shevuyim ([Golus] captives), and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
In more English words:
The spirit of G-D is upon me; because G-D has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
take a look at http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-the-grand-juries/ and pass it on.
Mine says ' The Spirit of Jehovah is upon me.'... Does it matter?
Jehovah, is another name for God, There is only one God of Abraham and all Christians, Jews and Muslims follow that God.
God has one name. He is not duplicitous. He is not human that he is dishonest. Jehovah says 'This is my name forever & ever'. & 'They will HAVe to KNOW that I am Jehovah'. But his name was removed from most Bibles. His angels abbreviate it to Jah when praising him. That suggests friendly familiarity, or closeness & knowledge of what is acceptable, so it would be acceptable for us. 'Our Father' or 'Adonai', those titles are what he is, but not Who he is. He gave us his name so that we could address him as he wants to be addressed. He is God, but that is not who he is either. It's what he is...
Engage with them - Jesus said "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." Matthew 19 : 24 Tell them to read Mark 10 and suggest that when " Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, 13And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves. " he was Occupying the Temple
noobs, read a bible then comment. /thread
Go with Jesus main message: LOVE. disregard everything else because its all just a book with NO PROOF. Start wearing upside down crosses for Love. Lets make Christians flip out
What Churches you taking about they all joke, republican build the churches to preach capitlism
Institutional religion cannot afford inspiration and provide leadership in this impending world-wide social reconstruction and economic reorganization because it has unfortunately become more or less of an organic part of the social order and the economic system which is destined to undergo reconstruction. Only the real religion of personal spiritual experience can function helpfully and creatively in the present crisis of civilization.
Institutional religion is now caught in the stalemate of a vicious circle. It cannot reconstruct society without first reconstructing itself; and being so much an integral part of the established order, it cannot reconstruct itself until society has been radically reconstructed.
Religionists must function in society, in industry, and in politics as individuals, not as groups, parties, or institutions. A religious group which presumes to function as such, apart from religious activities, immediately becomes a political party, an economic organization, or a social institution. Religious collectivism must confine its efforts to the furtherance of religious causes.
Urantia book 99:2.1-99:2.3
its ultimately going to be a big waste of time. the mental gymnastics that these folks use to still call themselves "christians" is well, mind-boggling.
I see it this way. First I have to say that I am not affiliated with any religion and if there is a god it is inside everything and is a part of everything. There is a passage where Jesus supposedly said that you can't serve two masters. Either you serve the god mammon (money) or god. You love one and hate the other.
This is from the book modern wealthy church goers claim to base their belief system. I suppose it reveals the true god they worship in the end.
Another quote I remember, again supposedly from the mouth of Jesus. "It would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to pass through the gates of heaven."
I guess we all need to see what god we worship.
http://urantiabook.org/
Here is a list of Biblical references to USURY. 'Usury' is a term you'll want to know if you're going to use the Bible to defend the movement: http://www.tentmaker.org/lists/UsuryScriptureList.html
i think its a big waste of time. my knee jerk reaction when this topic comes up is to whack the mole. Christianity in the USA is a fascist mental cage without meaningful redeeming value. There is a lot of good to be taken out of that paradigm, but they wouldn't know what Yeshuas actual teaching were if they were bit by a tanakh. Christianity is a clear and present danger and enemy to the people, and its not a useful place to try to take things in a public forum devoted to politics. Its time to focus on science and truth and knowledge and just plain step away from crooked religion, if we are going to study christianity that needs to happen on a wiki and operate according to axiomatic analysis and formal logic, instead of being a christian debate or chit chat sesh.
I'm all for diving deep into and resurecting real christianity- but i think thats going to have to happen AFTER the revolution, because until then it is merely one of the tools of the elites and one of the mental cages which they use as a utility.
feel free to dive deep on the wiki tho... don't get me wrong. But i think its madness to try to have that conversation HERE.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/THE_99%25_POLITICAL_PARTY
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.followthemoney.org/?gclid=CMbY87bB-qsCFUPt7Qod9HE8mQ
http://maplight.org/us-congress/guide/data/money?9gtype=search&9gkw=list%20of%20campaign%20donations&9gad=6213192521.1&9gag=1786513361&gclid=CP61oYbB-qsCFQFZ7AodcTF0jw
http://www.opensecrets.org/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/our-new-wiki/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/non-violence-evolution-by-paradigm-shift/
I have learned over many years, and having had many conversations these ignorant, closed minded people who think they are Christians (Christ like) that it IS a waste of time. The ultimate irony I have found is that this religion is made up of mostly selfish conservative republican people trying to follow the teachings of a liberal leader. It would seem to be difficult to be Christ like when you are perusing the republican's "greed is good" agenda. Seems like a desire to" serve two masters" to me, and highly conflicted.
You have been misled, & clearly, whoever you were talking to, was not following Christ if you came to that conclusion about them. True Christians are Christian because of their humble attitude towards God & his son, & their commitment to represent God in a way that reflects his goodness. Greed is unchristian.
I wish that were true. I have met many Christians, and I used to be one. Any time you make something corporate, including religion, people find a way to "work the system", and it always is rationalized. How can you explain the conflict with republican Christians? They are selfish and serve the corporate agenda but claim top be following the teachings of Christ.
republican is political. Being Christian & republican at the same time is a contradiction. They are diametrically opposed. God isn't a politician. His word is not a debate or discussion. It is open to interpretation, but that is more to do with free will than with 2 parties trying to prove themselves better equipped to know what it's meant to mean. Politics is man's way of postulating men as superior than the men they govern. God never approved it. Nimrod tried to make himself a God, but God dispersed the people to stop the city being built. It was never said that it is ok now..Man is not meant to live penned up as we are now. Politicians are not Christian, any more than the Pope is. The Papal office backed the world wars. That is contrary to the nature of God, so they are politicians, not christians
I agree with you whole-heartedly. I don't think that I remember Jesus ever saying anything like, "screw the poor" but apparently that is the message that many Republicans take from the Gopels!
I am sworn to uphold the highest law of the land, the United States Constitution. This means that I will fight to protect your rights clearly granted by this document.
All protesters should take the same oath, after, and only after, fully reviewing and studying this document and passing a test to prove they understand.
If you want honorable men to protect your rights, even the first right assured you by the first amendment, understand it before even remotely inferring others should not have the same protection.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_ ...
You may also find this thread interesting as it points out the methods used by corrupt lawmakers to criminalize all of whom they desire absolute control.
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/hendersonville-tn/TVQKU6DMHRTNE339T
Yes absolutely, I have experience the same with family. Their faith has become right wing indoctrination. Forget about the biblical evidence that Christ would be at Zucotti park because Glenn Beck said it isn't so. I have a strong Christian background and my answer is yes. Good post
Christians are mostly the 99%ers what are you talking about. The freedom of speech dose not mean step on the other 99%ers to get to where you want to be. That is there religon let them have it. None of them are stepping on the yoga's buddist or any other religon. When did this become a protest of christianity or religon attack wall street and banks bnot peoples beliefs www.occupywallstreetbaby.com www.askamillion.com
http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/frank_schaeffer_evangelical_christianity_ruining/
Frank is THE source for the truth about the lemmings who call themselves Christians
Whether or not Jesus actually existed is a question for historians to spend time on. But I think the big difference between the Jesus of the Bible and progressives/socialists/communists etc. is that Jesus encouraged voluntary action by his followers. I don't believe he ever encouraged his followers to take money out of the pockets of other people (even bad people) and give it to the poor. I don't believe he ever advocated violent revolution (in fact, didn't he stop one of his followers who suggested a violent response at Gethsemane?).
Anyway, I am not a Bible scholar, so you can correct me if I am wrong.
It has been firmly established that Jesus was a real historical figure, documented by: The Talmud Tacitus Suetonius Thallus. These are references outside the Bible. He did heal the soldier whose ear I think Peter cut off...To me, the Bible says that there will be violent revolution, but the people will prevail... Pliny the Younger
Jesus did not bother with instructing government to help the poor and to be just because his purpose was to work with the religiously minded people of his day and his culture, as Sophia is talking about. Unlike today's conservative Christians, he had no faith in government to create great change. He worked with individuals. Conservative Christians have come to think that they can best change and or protect their society and their own views through political power.
That said, I see no reason Jesus would be against a government being fair. As for taking away from others, he said, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's" when asked about paying taxes and then paid his own taxes. I doubt very much he'd be in favor of government taxing the poor more than it taxes the rich; yet that is what we have here in the U.S. The top 1% make more than 50% of all the income in the U.S.; yet they only pay 45% of the income taxes. So, they are clearly paying a smaller percentage of their income than the 99%. (For more in-depth argument about this, you can refer to this: http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/bushwhacked-by-the-bush-tax-cuts-for-the-rich .)
--Knave Dave
Hmmm... Didn't Santa Claus ask Rudolph to lead his sleigh?
No historian argues whether or not Jesus walked the earth. You are correct though, He never advocated taking from the haves and giving to the have nots. The bible in many places instructs to take care of the poor. It also instructs people to work.
"No historian argues whether or not Jesus walked the earth."
Some do, actually. There are fascinating debates on the subject which you can follow or contribute to online (you can Google it if you are interested). The meme of a virgin-born divine savior sacrificing himself for humanity goes back way before the era of the New Testament. Some think that Jesus was a creation of Paul of Tarsus. But I fear we will divert the thread.
Actually, he claimed to be the messiah and, therefore, his teachings are authoritative (Christians are obligated to follow them for their salvation). So the prescripts of the Gospels should not be taken as purely voluntary. And his commands are to care for the poor, give away your wealth to those in need, and live an essentially pacifist life. Quite liberal ideas, I think!
I think you are right, however, on your other points.
His "commands" were not enforced at the point of a gun. So they are voluntary. It is no different from any other private citizen preaching gloom and doom unless you turn over your worldly goods (we've seen that scenario more than once in recent decades). You are free to follow them or not, regardless of who they say they are.
God says to follow Jesus, not religion...
He claimed to be the messiah, therefore his teachings are authoritative? What kind of reasoning is that? Hell, Jim Jones claimed to be the messiah as well, care to drink the Kool Aid?
If you are a traditional Christian, then they are authoritative. You are the one making the connection between this way of thinking and Jim Jones', not me.
I personally believe that the teachings of Jesus need to be put into context and reflected upon. But then I'm no traditional Christian.
My point is simply why do Christians who take the bible literally grab onto all the stuff about homosexuality and pre-marital sex and leave out all the stuff about distributing wealth and turning the other cheek. Either you accept the teachings as authoritative and have to follow them when they apply to economic issues or everything should be up to debate and discussion--and I mean everything. I'm ok with the latter if you are.
The whole thing is silly. The collection of texts called 'the Bible' is just a bunch of stuff put together by a bunch of Bishops in Turkey in the 4th century. They decided what to declare canonical and what to be discarded or branded 'apochryphal' for contemporary political and theological reasons. There's just no 'there' there.
Reading the bible is like staring at clouds. If you want to see endorsement of slavery in it, you can. If you want to see condemnation of slavery in it, you can. If you want to see the legitimization of monarchy in it, you can (quite easily). If you want to see socialist messages in it, as you apparently do, you can. It's all bullshit.
Then that's not a Christian Bible... God gave us free will to choose for ourselves the path we wanted to take. Follow God, or Follow Satan into rebellion.. Why would he endorse slavery? God gave no king, until the Israelites told Samuel they wanted a ruler, because they wanted to be like the surrounding nations. God considered that Idolatry, but he allowed Joshua (pretty sure, but could be wrong)to rule as the first judge.. David was the last king, & nobody else would be ruler of his people until Jesus returned as King in' Heaven & over the earth'... So until then, only Jesus has authority from God to rule us. The rest is our own silly fault..
After usurping King Saul, David was the first king of the House of David, a dynasty that ruled for over 400 years until the Babylonian Exile. After the Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks, the Hashmon priests ruled as a dynasty of kings followed by the Herodians under the Romans.
The biblical god is portrayed as promising a king to Israel long before Samuel (Genesis 35:11, Deuteronomy 17:14-15).
As for slavery, it's clearly endorsed in the Bible (Leviticus 25:44-46) and comes with instructions in the Christian scriptures (Ephesians 6:5, Colossians 3:22).
Thanks for an intelligent discussion on the topic. We may not agree with one another completely, but I really appreciate your thoughtfulness.
Jesus was claimed to be the messiah before he admitted who he was. The apostles told Him who he was when he asked.... His teachings are quite brilliant because they apply just as much today as they did then
I am Orthodox. But, at one time came into conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church. What caused the conflict? The church, unfortunately a lot more concerned about their welfare - than about the welfare of the People. How does this looks? Between truth and power, they will on the side of authorities. And, it's not only simply egoism - in terms of Christianity. This is a theomachy.
I guess that I'm in a minority in wanting to see this movement spread beyond the city and into those places where the majority dwell. If we want to build a sustainable movement we have to go beyond young hipsters from Brooklyn and reach those living in suburbia as well. And that means people who are a bit more socially conservative in their outlook and who profess some kind of religious faith.
These people can definitely be reached. And they're as angry as those involved in OWS. We just have to start speaking their language.
Why should blue collar suburban Christians look to the Tea Party, when the real solutions to their economic difficulties are being proposed by OWS? The problem may be that we lack confidence in our ability to win over these kinds of folks!
You may be a minority...I get that impression about OWS at times...it's unwillingness to consider how to most broadly expand the scope of its core concerns to include other groups and build alliances, if but to propogate the concept of occupying on behalf of reversing the corrupting influence of moneyed/powerful cliques upon all aspects of society, religion included. This will have to change, and it will be an uphill battle as this thread demonstrates.
Good points, Sophia. There are many Christians who hate what Wall Street has done and how their government bailed out billionaires.
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
True Christians wouldn't hate OWS. They would sympathize that people have been put in this position, & really, we HAVE al been put in this position... What other options are there? I do think they will be manipulated to their deaths as an example of how they will treat us if we don't just lie down & take it...But it seems like the only thing to do.
ows is funded by soros, soros is for one world govt. Agenda 21. ows is not your savior.
Many are suspicious of organised religion because they cover up for organised paedophile networks with the organisation.
Protect the children from pathological predators within the rank and file of religion, and people might take you seriously.
the age of consent in the vatican is 12!!!!! what is their INTENT in putting images of crucifixion in children's minds? they GROOM children by telling them their mothers are sinners!!! fishers of men are predators of men. ALL CHRISTIANS ARE PREDATORS! they even tried to "save" me but failed.
I'm suspicious of organized religion myself, but that doesn't mean I simply want to ignore the millions of Americans who identify themselves with organized religion and not present them with an alternative to the Republican Party.
Personally, I think the world would be a much better place if we were all Buddhist. Now that's a much more tolerant and peaceful religion!
Oh, and by the way, I hope that the "you" that you were referring to in your last sentence is the Catholic Church and not me. Because I don't think that anything that I've said could lead you to conclude that I don't want to protect Children from predators--whether they are priests or football coaches!
The "you" is any predator of children. They come from all walks of life, and both genders.
The disturbing trend is that people within organisations turn a blind eye to one of the most heinous and destructive crimes that anyone could inflict upon another human being.
Distrust of religious leaders is not helped by the recent rantings of the Pope. What a turkey.
Can't believe what came out of that mouth. Stuck in denial.
Personally, I think the world would be a much better place if we were all Buddhist.
Ain't that the truth. But I suppose each person might think that of his own faith...
Most Christians I have known think pedophilia is as horrible as you do. So, I'm not sure whey the 1% among Christians who are soft on pedophiles should convince you that the other 99% are beyond hope and would have no interest in this movement.
The challenge in getting them interested is not pedophilia, but the fact that they identify so strongly with the Republican party. I, however, have still not figured out why many in the Republican party should not join this movement. You don't have to be a Democrat to hate seeing rich people bailed out with tax dollars!
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
I wasn't talking aout pedophilia in general, I was just saying that most people think their religion is the one most people should be following and that the world would be a better place if everyone just agreed on that point. But as an ex-Catholic, I absolutely detest the covering up and shuffling of abusive priests from one parish to another. It was the final thing that made me excommunicate myself from the church. With everything else (birth control, premarital sex, abortion) I could hope that god would have mercy if I sinned, but having an entire religious organization actively take part in protecting their own and putting these abusive priests back into the community where they were free to abuse again, sometimes several times with the same abuser... I just can't get past that. I have no hared for individual Catholics, but for me... Maybe Jesus was good and kind and encouraged us to "love one another," but I don't think he meant it like that. (not to trivialize the abuse that took place with a bad joke)
I detest the covering up and the moving of priests to other communities where they can do it all over again, too, but I don't see what that has to do with whether or not one could or should reach out to Christians and get them interested in this movement -- the question posed here. (My comment, though, was in reference to the first one in this sub-thread by Builder.)
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
Oh sorry! It popped up as a reply to my reply. :)
Easy to do : )
Was Jesus condoning the use of force to get his way?
Separation of church and state? If you are trying to change government, religion if of no relevance.
I think it's a big mistake not to educate yourself as to the world around you. There are some 29,000 organized religions in the world, many of them of similar theme, with certain commonality; consider that "theist" itself represents spiritual evolution in light of territorial expansion...
Consider that as an American you are possessed of a certain life perspective almost entirely born of religious dissent... "freedom of conscience" as freedom of repression; of those thoughts expressed as "freedom of expression"; individualism; "in God We Trust" meaning deference only to an other - some higher power - and not monarchy or government; the sparing of women and children in warfare... I mean, we can go and on all day here - if you live in America, regardless of individual belief, YOU are a Christian, and whether you actually believe or not is somewhat irrelevant. And what's even worse, you are possessed of certain ideals that you yourself feel worthy of even death in their defense.
All that you defend here as OWS is the result of a cultural mindset hundreds of years old. And are we not sill possessed of this desire as a moral imperative to "light the world"? Three hundred years and we're still doing it...
How can we expect others to understand us when we do not understand ourselves? History and philosophy are but two eyes of the same being; they both seek some to gain greater understanding, to answer the question of who and what we are...
You cannot co-opt the Christians because the Christians are YOU.
And you cannot throw the baby out with the bath water because it is integral to the mindset.
I agree with you completely. Religion is a complex phenomenon and is not to be reduced to either completely left or right. But it was precisely for that reason that I raised this issue in the first place. I think conservatives have co-opted organized religion and have distorted much of its meaning. I assume you would agree with that, wouldn't you?
I definitely agree with that sophiaomni. Thanks for the comments.
Religion is so intimately intertwined as to be almost indiscernible, composed of a dual element - spirituality and, as organized religion, the rules of our spirituality...
But without writing ten pages here, it is definitely not accurate to describe it as a phenomenon. There is nothing that exists in this world, animate or inanimate, and this includes even the world itself, that is not a uniquely human creation as defined through the eyes of our rather discerning, unique, perspective. And there is absolutely nothing in this world that does not exist as the result of human desire... the laptops and cell phones we use, even the chairs we sit on, are the result of innate evolutionary desire... this includes religion: it IS evolutionary.
The theists (and there are no true theists) are possessed of rather specific and discriminating belief; they are therefore "conservative" but to suggest that they have co-opted the political sphere would be to disregard the Roman Catholic, the Jew, the African American Muslim, etc., all of which are possessed of sufficient force, or power, so as to also occupy a political sphere of influence (and they do, although you might describe these as more "moderate" conservatives).
Whether we are speaking of the Spanish in South America, Mexico, the southern United States... or even the Teutonic Knights throughout all of Europe, religion has always sought to lockstep the militaristic arm AND the militaristic arm has always sought to lockstep religion. Together they occupy the two seats of power; in the medieval village we find that the religious element or monastery was quite literally on one end of the street, the warriors or Knights occupied a separate structure at the other end of the street; power shifts in accordance with circumstance, and so it is throughout all of human evolutionary history, it's nothing new.
Those who you would probably describe as the "Religious Right" have sought to employ the militaristic arm; in the US today that militaristic arm could be better described as "force of law." But as possessed of rather discriminating belief, in a world repugnant, they see it as a defensive measure - mass media, education, government, have all become derisive and far too intrusive, therefore detrimental to their particular flavor of Jesus.
The movement throughout the Reformation has always been one of greater egalitarianism... those who dissent of the Dissenter are those who rise to say, "Well, what about us?" It began with "Salvation through Grace" but in any case, today, the Gays, the Abortionists, even the Corporate Greedy, or in other words, virtually all of those we might describe as "liberal," are in search of a greater egalitarianism.
Has the message been distorted? Well, most certainly... while evolution has infused us with a desire to believe it has also enabled us with an ability to dissent... but this is not what you are asking me - you are asking me if these are corrupt and evil people, and I think that rather depends on your perspective, on whether you are within or without.
I'm not sure what you mean by "win over the theists." Theism is actually an evolutionary religious advancement, the result of territorial expansion; "win over the theists"... you are suggesting what, a regression, a return to our formerly paganistic self, a resurrection of the poly-gods?
You know... indifference, denial, dismissal, do not equate to disbelief. And although the Richard Dawkins or the Nietzsches of the world may be very intelligent intellectuals, they are far from brilliant; there is nothing profound to be found here. Choose a god, any god... a coffee can, a rock, paint it pink... put it your pocket, twice a day take time to pray, to your New Found God.. place your faith in this object as a higher consciousness, a higher power, and only conscience shall be your guide. And for whatever deeply ingrained reason, you will find you are a much happier person.
As the Bible informs us, "I am the Great I Am"; label me and color me as you will.
There are the ONLY words in the Bible that serve to define "God"... the rest is entirely up to you.
Wow! I can see that you've put a great deal of thought into this question. Although I am by profession a philosopher, my area is ethics, not the philosophy of religion. I do have two objections to the points you raised:
1) Religion is a phenomenon. I'm using the term phenomenon in the general sense of "something observable," something tangible in the in the material realm. Organized religion is certainly that. And it is complex, if by complex we mean something multifaceted and not to be reduced to simplistic platitudes.
2) Theism is not simply a matter of "evolutionary religious advancement." It is a particular worldview that often is fixated on the transcendent realm. That's the strength and weakness of religion: at their best believers are able to avoid getting sucked into the superficial temptations of this world; at their worst, they become life-denying.
Thanks for sharing your reflections!
Religion is not a phenomenon in any sense of the word; it is tens of thousands of years old, therefore NOT readily observable (although we do have a couple millenniums of recorded history to aid us in this study).
And if you are considering ethics without considering their source in innate desire, then your philosophy will be rather shallow.
I think you misunderstand my statement regarding theism; the progression is always one of polytheism to monotheism - it is evolutionary, a tool of territorial expansion. But in any case, to say that it is "often fixated on the transcendent realm" is, as you yourself suggest, to grossly over simplify.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
What does this have to do with our mission? Are we trying hard to shrink to 40% overnight? Why would we diminish our message by antagonizing a large population who could be with us?
I suggest, you show them Michael C. Rupperts "Capitalism - a Love story" and the LaRouche Movement... http://www.larouchepac.com
Lyndon LaRouche is a Christian Humanist...and for a rational protectionism instead of free trade
Ron Lawl - a good republican against the FED
http://www.bilderberg.org
9.11. and Peak Oil
http://www.fromthewilderness.com
[Removed]
All organized religion is a control mechanism of the ruling class. The interpretation of the "old books" they worship is ever changing and always purposefully selective. The faithful are willfully ignorant, and proud of that fact, by the very definition of 'faith'. They shun facts and reality in favor of fantasy and dogma. The often use their faith to justify actions that are obviously immoral to anyone not in the 'faith', and relate to those outside their chosen fantasy system of believing, as lesser humans not worthy of the same respect as their chosen brethren.
Using such a system of willful ignorance in any way, is not a moral act IMHO. Even if we cherry-pick the good stuff, to point out the wrongness of their actions we would still be using a misleading anti-reality control system to do so. Obviously as an atheist, I am still in the minority here, and many people will cling to these invisible-man-in-the-sky fantasies from noble positions as well as the selfish self-serving ones, however seeing that it is not reality based and can be used in both directions, proves religion is essentially a meaningless control structure of the ruling elite. They don't use these flock-and-shepherd metaphors for nothing.
Religion is 1% propaganda. One quick example; turn the other cheek. This is what good servants and slaves are supposed to do. There are thousands of verses that are good examples of the fact that Jesus was a progressive but he is a sword that cuts both ways as there are verses that say he doesn't bring peace but the sword. At the heart of the big 3 religions is a need to bless the believers and condemn and curse those that don't believe as they do. We don't need competition we need cooperation. We need to bless everyone and curse no one. When dealing with conservative Christians it is always important to point out contradictions in their holy book, there are thousands of them if you look. In fact if you were mining for contradictions you would never run out. The problem is, it's blasphemous to even question ones religious beliefs, so even with all the contradictions most will ignore your points. Stevie Wonder says it best "superstition, people believe in what they don't understand".
How to convert a christian? you can't. The best you can do is show them the fact, ALL of them. Make them read the god delusion. Get them to read some of Darwins work, and some of Hitchens work. Make them read the god delusion. Every stupid little argument they put out, fight it with facts and science.
This only works like 10% of the time though. Christians don't ''believe'' in science. LOL
Faith is something everyone has, not just the Christian. According to the Christian Bible faith is defined thus:” Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see.” Hebrews 11:1 (New Living Translation (NLT)). You exercised faith when you posted your comment. As for Christians not believing in science I suggest you broaden your research or narrow your allegation.
Christians can hope to live up to Jesus as a man. If they reach that level of compassion and wisdom, then they will be in a position to look further. One step at a time.
I absolutely agree.
You can lead a horse to water....
[Removed]
It is very difficult to deal with people that are heavily indoctrinated. Though sadly there are so many of these people, and they then have so much control over elections due to their vast numbers, it could be useful. It is just sad that so many vote for politicians based on things like stopping gay marriage than on their actual economic policies. I think politicians definitely keep the religious in mind in their statements and many seek out their votes by saying some crap that appeals to them. It is sad what a sham politics is.
But well, if you can reach people you can try, but many are just so fearful of what will happen when they die they will do whatever their religious leaders tell them to do.
I admit that many of these folks probably can't be reached because, as you said, they are so fixated on the next life. I guess I'm just a dope who keeps trying, though!
Indoctrination works both ways.
Occupy Judaism
If those who practice Judaism feel like their religion has been captured and corrupted by political interests and have distorted what they believe are the core tenets of the religion, I think it's appropriate that they move to publically re-occupy their religion, just the same for xtians and muslims.
The problem with all of you is that you have never studied the particular brand of Christianity that created this country in the first place. It wasn't the Roman Catholic and it wasn't the Pentecostal of today. - they were a highly educated and enlightened people who applied not only a rather specific exegesis but also developed - invented - an entire supportive structure.
Strip it all away, secularize, and what we are left with is an American government and American ideals, which were never intended to be so highly corrupt as they are today.
So what have we done?
the christian church is a male-only hierarchy preaching a religious war against muslims. so their agents do not have OUR COMMUNITY at heart, they are hypocrites among us, doing good, but recruiting for their divisive religion. all christian preachers GROOM children by telling them their mothers are sinners! they call it original sin. all christian preachers MONEY SHARK by tithing the poor and vulnerable. they call that doing the lords work!? fishers of men are predators of men. we must protect our children's minds from violent and horrific images like crucifixion, rising from the dead and eating dead human flesh. we must protect our community from BAD MENTAL HEALTH practises of reliving the crucifixion at every church service. we must have a religion of eternal joy not this christian horror story. christianity is a roman invention not a divine revelation. they crucified jesus then grafted on the cult of mithras doctrines of virgin birth and resurrection.there was no resurrection, it is not mentioned in the early gospels. the gospel is a snare to trap men, we are here to set you free.
Take it from who's studied history, Christianity is nothing like the myth of the Mithras, Mithra was not born of a virgin, and not born in a cave. Mithra was born out of rock, leaving a cave behind. There was no resurrection in Mithraism, in fact, Mithra didn't even die, Mithra's one 'dangerous task' was to slay the bull of heaven. Furthermore, 'early Gospels' are irrelevant, because we see clear evidence of a developed belief in Jesus as Messiah/God, and Jesus' Resurrection as early as 50 AD in Corinthians 15 which was an Early Christian Creed.
study the history of psychotic christian behaviour. the tortures of the inquisition. the psychotic stigmata of the "saints", burning 5 million witches, the war on terror, 911 INSIDE JOB, The treatment of the poor, homeless, sick? by christians. christian loom down on those who are not saved, know the gospel is a snare for our vulnerable people so you can money shark them with tithes. christianity is a dangerous cult of predators cintrolled by their fascist masters. the queen is head of one church and a well known fascist tyrant. the pope is a hitler youth. jesus is the antichrist!
You say all Christians, but really, Is that behavior Christian? Then it is wrong for them to claim they are, & it makes it a lie for you to say they are Christian. That is NOT Christian. Christians obey Jesus Christ, hence the name. It is disobedient to steal, & to extort, & to say women are sinners when God nor Jesus said it. & any branch, sect or body that does, is, by their falsehood, not Christian. They just claim to be. I could claim to be 6 stone, but you would look at me & know that wasn't true by what your eyes see, & what you know about the law of physics.It's the same with Christianity.. look with your eyes, compare the law of Christianity, & know they are not what they claim to be.
thats the point christians obey "jesus christ" but that is the word of the pastor and bishop. your allegiance is to your cult. you say we are sinners. that man is bad! you do not value our community in your heart but see us as prey to believe in "jesus"!?!? the gospel is a snare to bully the vulnerable into your belief. we must protect our community, our vulnerable people and our children from the christian horror story.
I have never been in a church that preached religious war against anyone. I have heard a few on the radio or T.V. that preached in favor of such things, but it is not common in my experience.
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
so why do you condemn muslims, and all the rest of us to hell for not believing in the jesus horror story. see the treatment of the iraqis in abu ghraib and you will see many parallels with jesus' treatment at the hands of the romans. so christian preachers teach that is how to treat prisoners. christians see us as prey for their pastor and imaginary friend. they are an evil influence in our community. the crucified jew is a RACIST ABOMINATION.
I"ve never heard a Christian preacher say anything remotely like that about how to treat muslims. I'm a Christian. I had a Muslim friend from Turkey over for Thanksgiving. I didn't preach at him or try to convince him of anything. Just had a nice time together enjoying dinner and then playing cards..
I'm sure there are some idiots out there who have said such things about how to treat Muslims, particularly in the lunatic televangelist fringe, but it is not something I've ever heard in a church. There are always a few lunatics in any philosophy or religion.
As for hell, they'll all tell you the choice is yours. Many who might be more enlightened will say, as C.S. Lewis did, that the gates of hell are only locked from the inside by those who simply don't want God in their experience after this life anymore than they do during this life. It's their choice now, and remains their choice later. If they can choose not to believe in God now, there is no reason they should be deprived of that choice later. So, hell is seen as simply a space God stays out of so they can enjoy their own little reality the way the want. If they make it into a hell -- a place of squalor and corruption -- that, too, is their choice. Hell is anarchy.
Could well be. I wouldn't know. I've never spent any time there that I can remember. I do know that I've seen enough examples of hell on earth to know that people do lock themselves into their own little hells create their own squalor and lock God out of their lives all the time by choice. I'm referring to people with drug/alcohol habits, whose lives become a living hell. Then they lose the state of mind to do anything about it. On the other hand, they were warned their life would go that way and did nothing about it then either. I'm talking about people who simply get trapped in depression and will not allow themselves to believe anything good. A great example of this kind of understanding of hell can be found in the movie What Dreams May Come.
Anyway, I don't wish to sidetrack the overall discussion toward religion, but that happens to be the topic of this particular thread, so I suppose it is O.K.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/
the point is christians teach that man is bad, that we are sinners, that jesus is the only way. so you are judging us, subverting our community. you owe your allegiance to your cult. you believe you are saved and we are lost. get lost! talk to your imaginary friend! your cult is controlled and invented by an all male hierarchy and a blind obedience to that fascist authority. so you are not a free agent to join our community. indeed the jesus BS and "orginal sin" are a threat to our families.
Why should you care where Christians believe you go after death? It doesn't affect you. You're free to ignore the belief. No one can send you to hell, and it's rarely ever Christians who are wishing you were there!
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
christians tell my children i am going to hell. they teach all children that their parents are sinners and are going to hell.
So. You are free to tell your children you are not going to hell. if Christians want to believe that ALL people are sinners and that no one can be in heaven who does not submit to God, it is their right. You are free to believe otherwise. Frankly, I don't see how heaven could possibly be heaven if people there are allowed to thumb their noses at God. So, I don't think God sends to everlasting torment to teach them a lesson. I think God simply maintains an area of existence where God is not present, so people are free to live without God if that is what they want. Obviously, that is true in this life. I don't know why it shouldn't be in the next. That place becomes hell because that is what its anarchistic occupants turn it into. God lets it go to hell because he lets everyone there get away with absolutely anything they want to. It turns out they're not very self-policing, so the biggest gangster runs the place and makes it hell for everyone.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
the christian church is a SEPARATE organisation that separates its "saved" from the rest of humanity then sends members out to convert and recruit from the vulnerable in OUR COMMUNITY. they are ruled by men and suppress women. they terrorise children with their violent horror story. they relive the crucifixion at every church service. christianity is BAD MENTAL HEALTH and we must protect our community from its evil influence.
With respect to the "ruled by men and suppress women," you speak of a limited number of Christian churches. With respect to recruiting, that's called freedom of speech. It's also called the free marketplace of ideas. I'm for unlimited freedom of ideas. May the best idea win.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog
fishers of men are predators of men. the gospel is a snare to trap the poor and vulnerable into tithing to the pastor so he doesn't have to work. preaching the gospel is a scam. christians are a bunch of psychos reliving the crucifixion and talking to their imaginary friend. the pastor jerks you all off with the FAKE resuurection, it is not mentioned in the early gospels. then he asks for your money! then he tells your children you are sinners. i call that grooming and a threat to our community. then he terrorises them with the horror of crucifixion, the horror of rising from the dead, the horror of imagining you are eating dead flesh and drinking blood. this i s BAD MENTAL HEALTH for our community. child protection will destroy christianity just as surely as womens liberation will destroy islam. these are the TRUTHS THAT WILL SET YOU FREE from the BS we have been brutalised with for 2000 years. these are the ideas we must debate!!
All good ideas deserve sharing. Good ideas are not predators nor are those who share them. Please tell me what teachings of JESUS do you reject? But know that you'll need to be able to support those ideas from the gospels so that you are not just repeating mistaken beliefs ABOUT the gospels. I have seen not a word anywhere in the gospels about giving money to the church. That's what I mean by a belief about the gospels that cannot be found IN the gospels.
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
it is the gospel that i reject. the crucified jew is a RACIST ABOMINATION. the gospel is a snare to brutalise and enslave men. i reject these evil ideas of virgin birth and resurrection and will stop this VIOLENT RELIGION of war mongers from our children's minds and our community life. reliving the crucifixion obsessively at every service, pretending you are eating dead jesus, talking to your imaginary friend is BAD MENTAL HEALTH. jesus is the antichrist! Luke 16 v26
You're entitled to your opinion, and I will not try to change it. It is NOT my experience of the gospel and how beautifully it can transform one's life.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog
Regarding your response below, which I'll post here because the thread has reached its limit, I can say from personal experience that the image of Christ nailed to the cross never once frightened me in my entire life, and I grew up with it. : ) Neither do I look down on you. While I know from personal experience that all men and women are sinners (do wrong things to one another), that does not cause me to look down on them or to believe that they are entirely bad. None are purely good. That is the message of the gospel. All have flaws and all have, at one time or another, caused harm to another individual which that individual did not deserve (called sinning). The message of the gospels has never been that we are too look down on others for this nature, but to recognize that it exists within ourselves, too, and, therefore, to forgive others when they act that way toward us.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog
the INTENT of putting an image of a man nailed to a cross into children's minds is to FRIGHTEN them. the INTENT of telling children their parents are sinners is to GROOM them. we all know of the resultant ABUSE! the INTENT of the "virgin birth" is to disguise the blatant human sacrifice. the INTENT of the gospel is to brutalise and enslave. the INTENT of the resurrection is to jerk you off and give you a happy ending. the point is christianity is a CORPORATE RELIGION. (the church is the CORPUS of jesus) you are following the orders of your church. you are here to recruit and undermine our community. you look down on us and call us sinners. you believe that man is bad. we have had enough of your BS.
it is BAD MENTAL HEALTH to go to church and relive the crucifixion. it induces PTSD and makes you suggestible. why else would you believe in a virgin birth? it is nonsense! why else would you believe in the resurrection? it did not happen! it is not mentioned in the early gospels. no resurrection means your faith is in vain. the crucified jew is a racist abomination. child protection will destroy christianity just as surely as womens liberation will destroy islam.
Fuck, there's a lot of hating on Christians in this forum.
christianity is a tyranny under the fascist queen of england or the hitler youth pope. christians are taught to look down on unbelievers, to condemn us to eternal hell fire. conversion is bullying into the fear of death. child protection will destroy christianity just as surely as womens liberation will destroy islam.christians come here to save us from ourselves. they are a fascist infiltration of our community. ALL WE HAVE IS THE COMMUNITY OF LOVE AND ABSOLUTE EQUALITY IN OUR HEARTS.
I'm a Christian, that isn't why I was here. And as much as you're saying you value love and absolute equality, apparently none of that extends to us. You seem to be very angry about our presence. Have some tea. :) It lower's cortisol levels, helps you relax, and improves focus.
I think its a backlash for years of oppression, probably not entirely undeserved, but at the same time entirely unnecessary. (especially in OWS).
Oddly enough, some of the most ignorant and intolerant people I know are self-righteous Atheists who have an unwavering faith in science; and this bizarre Evangelical zeal whereby they feel compelled to convert everyone to their mode of thinking.
Don't take it personally; some people like to pin labels on things and then throw sticks at them because they don't grasp the concept of individuality or the importance of diversity. I'm sure they have their reasons, but they should really keep their prejudices out of an inclusive movement like OWS. The people united will... what's the last half again?
Incidentally, ever read The Spiritual Guide by Michael de Molinos? His method of quiet contemplation and inner prayer (something like meditation) became so popular in the 1600s that he almost caused a schism in the catholic church... but before he could change history they killed him. Incredibly interesting read and very influential despite the fact that it was out of print for a few hundred years... if you want the original you still to this day need to get it off Microfilm or in PDF format.
Anyway, I'm not Christian, but I mention Dr. Molinos because there is something he stumbled onto that sadly our dear atheist friends, nor most members of the religious right, will never know in their lives; and that what it actually feels like to have direct knowledge and experience with whatever you want to call the great spirit which binds us together.
Ya can't really fault people who've never experienced true inner peace, they are still living in a world of separation; which is a bit of a fantasy-land itself, created by the boundary defining function of human ego (mine/yours, us/them, blah blah).
Kind of coincidental that you mention that, I just got that book a few days ago. No kidding. (it was actually paperback believe it or not)
Awesome! Such an amazing read, do check out the pdf online tho. It's kinda old englishy, bit of a chore to read but its a lot more more accurate than the Seedsowers version... and I just love the ridiculously long titles from books in the 1600s. :)
(haven't read the 2010 modern English, maybe that one is not so bad)
then you owe your allegiance to your cult and do not have OUR COMMUNITY in your heart. christians are predators saying man is bad and trying to save us. total BS. to quote Son House "i am going to be a baptist preacher so i don't have to work" i am v sorry you have fallen for the christian BS please seek a deprogrammer urgently. you have been deceived and ripped off. the crucified jew is a RACIST ABOMINATION. look at history 400ce rome decides jesus is god as the empire falls. 1870 rome decides the pope is infallible as the papal states become a democratic italy. see its just roman power. a roman invention.
Take the best from Christianity and it's fine to follow that. Love thy neighbor and help those less fortunate. I don't understand spending countless hours of ritual every Sunday in inaction. The time and resources involved are massive and could be used to make real positive change in this country and the world. Come on Christians, realize you are losing touch with your founding principles just as much as our politicians have lost touch with our Constitution.
no that is letting this dangerous cult of predators into our community to terrorise our children and vulnerable people with horrific images of crucifixion, a medieval human sacrifice, rising zombie like from the dead and eating dead human flesh. we must protect our children's minds from these violent images.
Hi sufinga. I appreciate your point, but I fear this is the least children have to worry about when it comes to violence. That can turn on the TV today and see what corrupt regimes and militarized police are doing to the people of the world. I worry that sheltering children from the savageness of our current reality will leave them unprepared for (unless we make major changes now) will be an even more bleak life. Although, you certainly have the right to guide your children in other religious views (or none at all) as you see fit.
we must protect our children's minds from violent images. that's why we have cinema and computer game age classification. for example the passion of jesus was given an 18+ certificate but that shit is fed to our children undiluted by the jesus crucifixion cult. look how they twist their minds. first the baby jesus and presents then a crucifixion and easter eggs! the psycho spiritual disturbance to their precious minds by this jesus horror story must be stopped. their EVIL INTENT is to recruit and dominate our children and divide our families and community. I for One will not tolerate them and their BS DELUSIONS.
Maybe if they were out helping their communities instead of putting in posterior time on a church pew, they'd have less time to fill children's heads with unnecessary violent imagery (they might see real tragedy that exists in the present). I think Christianity does have some good tenets, but they don't seem to take the forefront. I think if you want to be a Christian, live as Christ did.
jesus was the king of the jews married to mary magdalene. living as christ did is a myth, a fairy story. no one wants to be a christian with their history and teaching of psychotic violence.
It may not be a completely accurate account of history, but there are still plenty people that have faith in Christianity. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that, it's just the way it is. Terrible things have been done in the name of Christianity (i.e. the Crusades), but we all have a lot of past ills to heal. After all the country just got done celebrating Thanksgiving. If you feel a Christian is impeding your rights or pushing their beliefs on your children, let them know. If it is in a school, go to the institution for help.
our community is based upon ABSOLUTE EQUALITY. christians are agents of their cult ruled by a male-only hierarchy. they do not have our community at heart. they say man is bad and we are sinners. they are here to exert their influence, recruit believers to their human sacrifice personality cult. they believe in original sin which means telling them their mothers are sinners. christians relive the crucifixion and imagine they are eating dead human flesh. this is bad mental health and a serious threat to our community and families. we must not tolerate their jesus BS among us!
You are entitled to your opinion. I don't believe in the male domination involved in Christianity and I don't believe in the guilt complexes either. That being said I express my opinions, but Christians are entitled to theirs as well. I will stand my ground on what I believe and try to do so tolerantly. I hope you can find a compromise that works for you and does not attempt to infringe on others rights. Good luck to you.
what is important is the fulfilling of prophecy. the stone cut out without hands of daniel2 is the SILICON CHIP which grows into a great mountain that fills the whole earth is the WORLDWIDE WEB. this destroys this babylon of slavery. in revelation there shall be no more curse means MASS UNEMPLOYMENT. the tree of life for the healing of the nations is CANNABIS marijuana. which is growing in the midst of the streets ie INSIDE THE HOUSES and on both sides of the river ie ON BOTH SIDES OF THE TRACKS in all classes of society. so join our community with cannabis as our communion! the meek shall inherit the earth. your religion is the past. the church is no longer at the heart of the community. i will not compromise on protecting vulnerable minds from violent images. the passion of jesus the christ had an18+ certificate! we know that children's imaginations are more vivid so we must not tell them horror stories.
If you want to be a Christian, live as Christ did. Indeed.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/
[Removed]
Jesus never advocated charity as social policy. He told individuals to take care of the poor. He did say to render to ceasar what is caesars, and to God what is Gods. Most of the liberals I know don't give too much to charity, except united way, which many corporations expect their employees to give to. Most of the Christians I know give a lot to organizations besides the church. That's just the people I personally know maybe libs give a lot too. I prefer to spend my money on charities I prefer to give to, not to state or Washington buereacrats and what they call charity. Taking money and redistributing is not charity. Charity is something that is not taken by force.
Jesus was actually an ethnic chauvinist whose teachings of "love thy neighbor" et al were intended exclusively for his fellow Jews. Christianity only became universal with Paul.
In any event, who cares what some primitive, pre-scientific Bronze age superstitious kooks thought about anything anyway?
Iron Age. They were pre-scientific Iron Age superstitious kooks.
[Removed]
Many people do, obviously. When you face the creator of the universe and all that is in it, you will be horrified that you were not a "superstitious kook" too.
In addition to Farley's note, I'll point out that what people believe and how old the beliefs were has nothing to do with the question. The question was whether it was worth trying to include the millions who have those beliefs in the movement. There is certainly nothing within their faith itself that is against social fairness. Just the opposite, but it hard to separate their faith from their politics, the two have become so strongly linked in the last thirty years.
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
Knave, I know so many people that would probably not join the movement, but agree with a number of the points of OWS. One point that is a sore spot was bank bailouts. The derivative debacle as well. Easy credit cards, with high limits, followed by lowering the limit to nothing, and now the account is maxed or nearly maxed because of the lowering of the limit.
Many people, for example myself, just are not the "protesting" type when it comes to holding signs, etc. I protest, but do it online on my website. I encourage others to hold the signs, and I may at some point do it myself, but I have never done that sort of thing in fifty-two years, so it is not as natural to me as to someone who has joined many protests.
Such people, however, can be friends of the protest and supporters of it in many ways that are equally a part of its success -- giving it good press, encouraging people, contributing ideas for successful protest, writing letters to the editor, etc. There are many ways of coming alongside the movement without holding signs or standing in blockades.
Like you say, Farley, many should be able to agree that there is something seriously wrong with the bank bailouts. All those things you point out are a part of the problem. Unfortunately, the government's answer has been to try to encourage even more loose credit. (That has been the answer of both Obama and George Bush II.)
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
Nice blog Dave, thanks for the link.
Thanks, Farley. (I was serious, by the way in another question as to whether you really are Farley Mowat. If so, I love your writing.)
I guess I must hang my head in shame. I am an imposter. I have read all of his books, some several times. My favorites are, The People of the Deer and The Desperate People. Walking on the Land, makes me cry.
Beautifully written books. Wonderful use of language. (But I digress ; )
No doubt about it.
It is a sad truth, that the people in power, on the federal, but also on the state and local level too, are bought off by the special interests. I think most freshmen have good intentions, but power and greed quickly corrupt. Money talks, loudly.
I have much experience with the Evangelical movement. I can assure you that it is indeed a waste of time. They have one goal in mind and one only. To turn this democracy into a theocracy.
they will abolish all religion, it has already started, & create a new God for us all. This will be done using imaged reflected on the clouds to show Jesus, Buddha, muhammed, & Ghandi (?) merge into one & that will be who we have to worship. Those who refuse will be killed. this image will be achieved with project blue beam,apparently.
I know of none who want a theocracy. Most want their beloved friends to know Jesus and serve him for eternity, along with them. A very could plan considering our souls need to follow the Jesus.
That sir, is a lie. and here's proof.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
I know of none sir.
Well I know of plenty. Promise Keepers, Christian Coalition, Moral Majority, Army of Joel are just a few examples.
You know of people personally, individual human beings?
Nice try, I am not falling for that.
Falling for what?It's any easy question to answer. I will tell you, I dont even know any people who are members of the groups you cited. What is Army of Joel?
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/joels-army-and-call
Don't give me a link to some kooks. I'm talking about regular everyday people. You linked me to a freak show website.
You are right about evangelicals. They claim to take the bible literally...except those parts that are pacifist and socialist in nature. Those they somehow ignore. There's probably no winning them over.
The Bible is sufficiently vague and contradictory to be interpreted as supporting whatever you want it to. However, Christianity's teaching that authority figures are put in place by God has been a boon to tyranny for centuries. Time to let these Bronze Age fairy tales die.
You obviously have never taken a look at the new testament. Jesus will return, and all who turn away from his gift of salvation will be weeping and gnashing their teeth. It's your choice. Everyone has a decision to make. Serve the creator of the universe, or reject Him.
ROFLMAO!
Have you ever seriously studied the word, for yourself? I highly doubt it. Jesus said to his followers that the world would hate them because of Him. That is obvious in this thread. Satan is the master of this world, so I expect the responses in this thread to be anti-Christian.
Well Every denomination seems to hate Jehovah's witnesses... Just saying...
Are you really Farley Mowat or a cheap knock-off?
There is some obvious hatred here for Christians, though, and then there are some completely legitimate comments about how the political right has co-opted conservative Christians to think Jesus was a Red Republican (but not a Red Communist ; ).
--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog
I have...quite thoroughly and would be happy to debate you on the fine points of the Christian message any time.
Debate what?
The actual meaning of the Gospels. If you don't think that Jesus was a pacifist and favored giving away wealth to the poor, then I wonder exactly what Gospels you are reading!
He commands his followers to take care of the poor. He never told the roman government to do so. The gospels( or good news) tell people to repent of sin and believe on the Lord Jesus so one might be saved. Satan is the controller of the principalities of this earth, currently, and as a result, we have the evil spiritual realm working to keep people from following Jesus, and try to get His followers to lose their focus on what He has taught us. The time we spend on earth is nothing compared to the eternity His true followers will spend with Him, or the rejectors will spend in the lake of fire.
Aren't you at least a little concerned that he will condemn you to that very same lake of fire for being so little concerned about "the very least of [his brothers and sisters]. Isn't that why he put us on this earth in the first place: to love God and to serve our fellow man? Your lack of concern for those most in need in our society is going to cause you some might big trouble when you arrive at the pearly gates. Remember this little passage?
"..and he will say to those on his left, depart from me you workers of iniquity for you did not clothe me when I was naked, feed me when I was hungry, visit me when I was in jail, TEND TO ME WHEN I WAS SICK. And they will say unto him, But lord when did we not do such? When you did not do so onto the least of your brothers you did not do them unto me. But lord lord we cast out demons in your name. DEPART FROM ME YOU WORKERS OF INIQUITIES into the ever lasting fire prepared for the devil and his minions."
I'd be very, very nervous, if I were you. But don't worry. If I'm there on that lake of fire with you, I'll be sure to bring some marshmallows for the two of us to toast!
Aren't you at least a little concerned that he will condemn you to to that very same lake of fire for being so little concerned about "the very least of [his brothers and sisters]. Isn't that why he put us on this earth in the first place: to love God and to serve our fellow man? Your lack of concern for those most in need in our society is going to cause you some might big trouble when you arrive at the pearly gates. Remember this little passage?
"..and he will say to those on his left, depart from me you workers of iniquity for you did not clothe me when I was naked, feed me when I was hungry, visit me when I was in jail, TEND TO ME WHEN I WAS SICK. And they will say unto him, But lord when did we not do such? When you did not do so onto the least of your brothers you did not do them unto me. But lord lord we cast out demons in your name. DEPART FROM ME YOU WORKERS OF INIQUITIES into the ever lasting fire prepared for the devil and his minions."
I'd be very, very nervous, if I were you. But don't worry. If I'm there on that lake of fire with you, I'll be sure to bring some marshmallows for the two of us to toast!
Thanks for your quotes. It is interesting that the people who" did to the least", didn't even realize they were doing it. And the people that got sent into the lake, never noticed the poor around them. I am not nervous, but if we do by some sad chance meet up there, could you bring a porterhouse and some potatos instead. Marshmallows give me heartburn.
I guess that's the least I can do. I suppose we'll have to settle for well-done, though!
The rejectors will die when they hit the lake of fire.. The 2nd death. They won't live once they are in it. God will kill them outright, not torture them. He is just, not cruel. also, life is a gift. He will take back the gift, so the dead will definitely be dead. that's what dead means in the Bible. Else there would use a word that doesn't mean dead..
Also most are Christian-Zionist and have weird love of israhell.
At best, the bible is ambiguous in nature so arguing Jesus' political stance is stupid. The least leaping assumption though is that he was for personal liberty and choice.
It's a waste of time. Those who would be worth winning over are the extreme conservatives since they would then speak for OWS and possibly convince their friends. The problem is their minds are all shut. They can't be swayed in our direction. They are vehemently anti-anarchist and anti-communist and could cause problems if they believed OWS was trying to gain their support. Liberal Christians can be won over with the tactics Occupy is using at the moment.