When Adam was placed into the garden of Eden, he was instructed by God and Jesus not to eat from a certain tree. Eve failed to abide by that instruction and 'she did partake'.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.

When Eve tasted the forbidden fruit she liked it so much that she just had to get Adam to try it. Eventually Adam 'did partake of it' and so he too was disobedient.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.
(note: Mormonism doesn't accept this and portrays this disobedience as 'all part of the plan'. In essence they tricked Satan into tricking Eve into tricking Adam, which is what They wanted in the first place despite telling Adam the complete opposite - is that lying?)

When Adam and Eve were cast out of the Garden of Eden they 'begat Cain and Abel'. As the story goes Cain decided to kill Abel. So, the equivalent of God's first grandchildren committed a cardinal sin.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.

Now, generations pass and the world falls into apostasy, so much so that God decides to send a flood to wipe out all the men, women and children on the planet (who must have all been wicked) save it were for Noah and a small number of others. In effect, God cleaned house leaving only the righteous few alive.
However, within a few generations the world once again falls into apostasy.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.

No problem, this is all part of the plan and now God sends in the big gun. Jesus comes down to earth to 'redeem' the world.
Well, we know how that worked out. Jesus crucified, Apostles murdered, Church in full apostasy.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.

Still no problem because 'other sheep have I' said Jesus. Over on the American continent Jesus sets up His Church with the literal, erm I mean principle, erm I mean among the ancestors of the Native Americans, the Nephites and Lamanites. In fact he conducts a personal visit and calls and sets apart 'tweleve'. But once again, it ends badly. All the good Nephites killed leaving only bad Lamanites, in other words, yet another full apostasy.

God and Jesus lost out to Satan.

So, that brings us up to the present day and once again Jesus is having a go at defeating Satan. This time with Mormons on his team.

In whatever measure you care to throw at it

God and Jesus are still losing to Satan...

This is what some Satanist cults say too. :D

Though when I was reading Milton's Paradise Lost for a class our teacher pointed out how it seemed that Milton was portraying Satan as the hero. He was doing things we'd expect of a human glory seeking hero. However, it's Christ who is the true humble hero and who will triumph over Lucifer in the end. Satan may have his moments where it seems he wins battle after battle, but it is God who has the final trump.

But history is full of examples where those that promoted the lost cause claimed they will prevail in the end. They still lost.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 06:49AM by MJ.

"Consider the source Son!"

Easy answer: Jesus is not losing. Humane values continue to spread around the world. These values do not insist that you give money to a particular church. In fact, Jesus was opposed to money changers in the temple.

Jesus had no buildings. The Pharisees had buildings. Today, people are taking to the streets and demanding freedom. The people have no buildings. Maybe the real Jesus, or the ideal Jesus, is winning after all.

The people that claim to believe in Jesus have buildings, EXTRAVAGANT buildings, the Vatican for example. The people demanding freedoms that have no buildings are not always Christian. Some of the groups claiming to follow Christ have money changers in temples, many of those that are "taking to the streets" to demand freedom are not Christian, indeed some that are demanding freedom are demanding freedom from theocratic laws being pushed by many Christians around the world.

Yes, the HUMAN values are winning, but NOT lead by CHRISTIAN values. The HUMAN values are wining DESPITE the people that carry the word of Jesus.

The Human values are wining because they are HUMAN not Christian values.

Aren't you familiar with Hollywood movies and Mexican soap operas?

The good guy has to suffer TONS throughout the story, but he triumphs in the end. If he does not go through all kinds of trials and defeats, it is not fun, it is not thrilling, it DOES NOT SELL.

So it is all part of the show. Jesus has it hard until the very end, and then he triumphs and is happy ever after.

Clap clap clap! The show must go on!

Amen, Lord!

If the values are kind, generous, and good...they are "Christ-ian."
If they are against prejudice and hatred...they are "Christ-ian."
If they serve to help people and not hurt them...they are "Christ-ian."
If they look on others' wellbeing equally with one's own wellbeing...they are "Christ-ian."
If they are for the benefit of humanity...they are "Christ-ian."

Don't be taken in by the BIG NAME on the box, look closely at the ingredients. Many of the best "Christ-ians" are part of other churches, faiths, or of no church or institution. This is a very old observation, first made by Christ himself: not those who wave banners and bellow praises but those who love each other and follow their own highest self--those are Christians.

Railing against "christian" churches (called "churchianity") is actually arguing against a spiritual straw man, since by Christ's own definition they are often not behaviorally Christian at all.

Right. What a bunch of self serving BS. You have no right to claim anything done by people that do not believe in Christ are Christians. What a disrespectful attitude to have towards those that do not believe in Christ yet still do good.

I do lots of good and I am a ATHEIST and it has NOTHING to do with Christ, Christs God or Christianity and it is an insult to me that you want to claim me as some sort of Christian or that Christ has anything to do with the good I do.

What next, gonna try to convert me after I'm dead? Perhaps via baptism after I die?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 11:05AM by MJ.

And stop doing bad things like insulting those that do not believe in your nonexistent god.

Seriously how pathetic is your god if it has to take credit were credit is not deserved? What go(o)d is that god if people that don't even worship it are still just as good with or without your God?

And why is it that you feel the need to be derogatory to others beliefs with your "go(o)d" BS any way? Is that the sort of go(o)d your god preaches?

Sorry, but you started this by trying to claim that I was something I was not. That was wrong of you to do. You tried to give credit for my deeds to a religious figure I do not agree with nor even believe existed. Why would you need to do that? Are your beliefs that insecure?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 04:02PM by MJ.

Christian Humanism dates from at least the 2nd century A.D. and became a dominating cultural force in the Renaissance. Some modern movements of this say that belief in God is not necessary. Obviously the "Christian" part of this has to do with social idealism, freedom and equality, and the value of the individual, not the oppressiveness of church organizations. You are not the first revolt against the misdeeds of institutional religion, and many before you and even now do this precisely in the name of Christ himself.

Nice try at trying to justify your belief via the ol' appeal to popularity logical fallacy though.

Freedom and equality CHRISTIAN ideas? Nope. Sorry. The idea of democracy and its value of the individual and allowing each individual a voice in how the state was run was a PAGAN GREEK idea, not Christian. Christianity became dominate in Europe, but not in Asia, the Americas, or most of Africa.

I see once again that you are trying have Christianity take credit for something it should not.

Guess what Richard Foxe, the majority of the world population DOES NOT BELIEVE in Christ, never has. And a great number of people have fought against repression. In the USA, over all, I do not see Christianity fighting for individual's rights, I see it fighting to impose theocratic law at the expense of individual rights.

Oh, yeah, the dominate force of Christianity (in EUROPE) during the middle ages was ohhhh so much about freedom and individual rights, yeah, right Ummmm Hmmmm. If you want to continue to try to make a case that the middle ages and Christianity was about individual freedoms, you will lose what little credibility you had left.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 08:42PM by MJ.

Especially 15th century Italy and spreading from there. The humanist part comes from the revival of ancient PAGAN GREEK learning.

Also interesting that the Age of Democratic Revolutions, beginning with the American, began in the "Christian" West, and although some like the French were violently anti-church & clergy, these sentiments could only arise in cultures primed for them by the Reformation and similar religious movements that empowered the individual and eliminated the need of an institutional intermediary to God. (By the way, this was my university major field.)

"Especially 15th century Italy and spreading from there." Ah, I see, you ignore 14 centuries (nearly 3/4 of Christian history) of repressive dehumanizing Christian theocracy to pick out out ONE century to try to claim Christianity was sooo good, but then admit " The humanist part comes from the revival of ancient PAGAN GREEK learning." The humanist part wasn't even Christian. The humanizing factor did NOT come from Christ, it was still a pagan Greek idea, an idea that was NOT originated by Christians or Christ, but suppressed by Christians for nearly 3/4 or Christian history.

"Also interesting that the Age of Democratic Revolutions, beginning with the American" You mean the West that FINALLY through off the Christian theocratic rule and the Christian idea of the divine right of kings in favor or laws written by man, principals that were inspire by pre-Christ pagans and the concept of secular governments that respected different religious views? That west?

Sorry, you are not making a good case for Christianity.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 09:56PM by MJ.

Sorry MJ, but debating with Richard Foxe is like sparring with the wind. He comes in like a fog and goes out like a cloud. I think he's maybe some kind of a mystic.

I think we're on the same page as far as Jesus and humane values. MJ seems to have no memory of any information I previously shared (never mormon, no member of any church, christian or otherwise, not a believer in any personal/anthropomorphic god). And sparring with the wind (via his own hurricane) while shunning any reconciliation seems to be his forte.

You gotta be kidding. I have been addressing each and every one of your points but you can not come up with a valid reason why we should credit Jesus with ideas and values put forward by greeks well before the time of Jesus.

I personally have not talked about what your beliefs are, I have only addressed the ideas that you have put forward. But it seems you now have abandoned debating the issues and are going after me personally, seemingly saying that because I do not agree with you that there must be something wrong with me or that I don't get your point. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The bottom line, what you try to attribute to Jesus should not be attributed to Jesus.

And actually, you and I are closer together, we both agree that the humanist values of individual freedoms come from the greeks, not Jesus as don suggests.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2011 01:20AM by MJ.

...about Greece being the source of democracy (to a limited extent: Athens only, for a period only, and then only for "free men," not women or slaves). But Greek (Socratic) thought entered Christianity rather early on through Neoplatonism, and Renaissance Neoplatonism "combined ideas of Christianity with a new awareness of the writings of Plato" (wikipedia--check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplatonism ). Evidently thinkers of the time considered the two compatible. Along with the metaphysical side of the soul and an Oversoul which is its source and destiny, they believed that human perfection and happiness were attainable in this world, without having to wait for some afterlife.

I see this as a major factor in helping steer Christianity from a "sweet hereafter" religion to one focusing on human progress and improvement. Like it or not, many social reform movements were guided by Christianity, culminating in the Social Gospel efforts of the late 19th and early 20th centuries in areas of social justice, inequality, alcohol abuse, crime, civil rights, slums, bad hygiene, child labor, workers' rights (labor unions), poor schools, and anti-war activism. One way to see it is that believers in the return of Christ thought it could not occur until humanity rid itself of social evils BY HUMAN EFFORT. Another way is that the only real way to serve "God" is to serve fellow humans (who are all "Christ" in many disguises). Whatever the thinking behind this was, it is the actions themselves that have helped transform (especially Western) society from a rather fatalistic and static structure to a more just and upwardly mobile one.

I do not want to debate, especially when different set views are like "The Blind Men and the Elephant Poem" (http://www.naturalchild.org/jason/blind_men_elephant.html ):
"Though each is partly in the right,...all are in the wrong."

The simple fact is, the humanism influence did not originate with Christ. To imply or state that it did would be wrong, period.

Yes, Christianity was INFLUENCED by the humanist views originated in Greece, but that does not change the fact that it was NOT CHRISTS IDEA to begin with. To give credit to Christ for humanism being his idea an not a preexisting idea of the time is nonsense. It was an idea available before and at the time of Christ and Christ deserves no credit for its existence. The fact that that a pagan idea was accepted and spread by the Christian movement is an example of the success of a PAGAN idea, not Christian idea.

Let me say it again

The fact that that a pagan idea was accepted and spread by the Christian movement is an example of the success of a PAGAN idea, not Christian idea.

Humanism is not the success of Christ and Christ's ideology, it is a success of GREEK ideology. Christ or Christians adopting the humidistat ideology was a SUCCESS of the the Greek ideology as was the acceptance of humanism by the USA, it was an acceptance of GREEK ideology, not Christian ideology. The founding fathers talked more than once about the GREEK model of humanistic ideas, and I do not know of them every talking about the Christian humanistic ideas.


Bringing up the blind men and the elephant is a non sequitur.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2011 04:38AM by MJ.

A blind man with an elephant - that's going to get messy one way or another...

I'm not touching it.

LOL...!

Of the story of the blind men and the elephant? Did you read the last stanza (the moral)?

Please tell me, honestly, because this will certainly affect any further responses I would make to you.

And democracies are really working well aren't they? NOT!

Do we need something else?

stormy

Democracies are not perfect, but when I look at all the other forms of government, a representative democracy is the best I have seen.

It is really easy to point and say "'X' is not working we need something better" any whiner can do that. The difficult thing is to present something that would actually be better. It would take a person of incredible insight to come up with something better than a Representative democracy. So, which are you stormy, a whiner that just points and whines that there should be something better or an insightful person that can actually put forward an idea that actually is better?

Isn't it interesting too that God has killed more people in the bible and the BofM than Satan ever did...

Just a thought.

You don't have to be dicks about it.

Jesus isn't losing because he's not real.

Besides, why would Satan, (who's also fake) who is supposed be brilliant, fall for a trick that allows everything he opposes to work out? Doesn't make any sense. Maybe because it's all made up fairy tales.

Yup, you'd think Satan would've sussed the double bluff by now, packed up and gone home. Him opposing good with evil is just playing into the hands of the other team...