It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Stop hating Jesus, lets talk about mutual respect.

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on May, 11 2015 @ 09:06 AM

originally posted by: Ritter327

Jesus sounds like a cool guy to hang out with

Hahaha, you sound like your trying to sell your point to a bunch of 10 year olds at christian camp.

would you rather prefer to hang out with bloodthirsty Cesar

Haha, because my options are either jesus or Caesar? Are we still at summer camp? This sounds like the heaven/hell option all over again.

Give me a break, and give Jesus a break will ya.

I'll give jesus a break when he comes and asks me for one.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 09:35 AM
a reply to: Ritter327

So what that you think Jesus was just a man. That "man" was still telling people that slavery is wrong,

Where exactly did you get the idea that Jesus said slavery was wrong? If you claim it was the bible then exact quotes please.

That will require you to actually read your bible.
edit on 11-5-2015 by Grimpachi because: durp

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 10:08 AM
a reply to: Ritter327

f you are activist today you get a beating from police and you get 6 months jail. Some get suicided but not many.

In roman times if you got a problem with the state and government you get fed alive to lions.

For that reason ALONE Jesus deserves respect.

That's logical...

Perhaps we should declare war on Rome....I never did like Italians; with all their pasta, pizza pies and shiny brown shoes.
edit on 11-5-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 10:51 AM
a reply to: Ritter327

I think Jesus could have lived in want of nothing due to his position but he chose what they call voluntary poverty, he had what he needed to live and work but he gave everything else to taking care of others. He really set the bar for leaders of all kinds in this way, we mostly have leaders who just do what they do to get privilege for themselves, many would rather have the people serve them rather than them serve the people, especially economic leaders, but leadership should be a profound responsibility and duty, not an opportunity to exploit.

I think if leaders do a good job for the people then the people will reward them, but otherwise leaders should ultimately be willing to be slaves, in practice they wouldn't be but in principle they should be willing to be.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 10:56 AM
a reply to: Ritter327
I greatly respect Jesus. He was clearly a great spiritual master to his followers. He was able to transmit the Spirit Light of the Divine to his closest and most devoted followers, and that he was their spiritual master is indicated in the Bible as the disciples called him Master.

The disciples communed with the Divine through Jesus' transmission of this Light which Jesus was One with. Jesus' confession that he and the Father are one, is the confession of his profound sacrifice of self into God - no separation - only One Person. So he testifies that He is One with God.

This process of Spirit Transmission of the Divine Conscious Light is the ancient "secret" or esoteric way of how all great realizers taught those who recognized the realizers' enlightenment. The ancient means has always been through surrender of separate self to the Divine through the Spiritual Master.

Jesus gave everyone his two great commandments as the exoteric means to such living, and also esoteric communion with God. What's not to respect about this?

But unfortunately this understanding of Jesus' Teachings is not commonplace and has mainly been looked at as a moral means for perhaps trying to live a better life, and later coupled with a future salvation myth not originated by Jesus - rather than understanding that Jesus was looking for those that were ready to live in heaven (via realization of the God-Light Above) even while on earth. This is the ancient way of spiritual masters.

When Christians and others understand more of Jesus as a true spiritual master and what he intended to do for his followers, Christianity could change radically and for the better, on this basis.

I think what is not respected is a widespread misconception by many Christians that they are somehow elite and the only ones worthy/capable of a life in God.

edit on 5/11/2015 by bb23108 because:

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 11:17 AM
a reply to: Ritter327

Jesus is the coolest.

I also don't understand how anyone can read what he said and NOT think that that he's awesome.

He spoke truth. And he was NICE. Like, the nicest. I mean, think about what he did in his time period--he was SO MORALLY GOOD.

Not even Socrates was as cool. And that's saying something.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 11:50 AM
Yeshua is cool and I have no problem with him or his teachings. I cannot say the same for Paul or Muhammad. And that is the problem Yeshua knew what he was talking about, and Paul and Muhammad should not teach what they do not understand. And people follow their teachings more than Yeshua and therefor usually miss the point totally.

They do not seek the light that Yeshua taught about and create laws and do everything to make sure nobody else follows:

Matthew 23:13

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

edit on 11-5-2015 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2015 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 01:11 PM
a reply to: Ritter327

I don't have any issue with Jesus, real or imagined. In fact, the esoteric teachings (that you will never hear come from the church) helped me carve out a great life. Very magical teachings when read with eyes that can actually see. As long as one gets something tangible from it, than that is all that matters.

I personally do not care that the most common accepted image of Christ was the Pope's son. A regular Joe Blow. The church wanted an image to depict Jesus, so the Pope nominated his own son for the campaign. I guess even back then it all comes down to who you know. The Pope's son had an incestuous affair with his sister, was the lover of Da Vinci and also molested little boys.

The layers of mind-fudgery involved there is crazy. The idea that some people have this child molesters face automatically enter the mind's eye when the name is mentioned and when they bow their heads in prayer just shows how perverse things can get.

...but all that matters not, it is the teachings that hold the power (when applied). Whether one believes he is an allegory or a real person of history does not matter as long as they get something that can be empirically weighed or applied from it. I know I did by accepting the former as my truth. I know some who received much value from believing the latter. I know much more on both sides who haven't got anything from it other than a belief.

Cesare Borgia is in the book entitled Triptych of Poisoners, and is also in the book entitled Cesare Borgia His Life and Times by Sarah Bradford. Between 1502 and 1503, he employed Leonardo da Vinci as a military architect and engineer, in which him and Leonardo da Vinci became intimate instantaneously, they were lovers. To express his love towards Cesare, Leonardo painted many pictures of him. Cesare's Father Rodrigo Borgia, who later became Pope Alexander VI, under the authority of the Catholic Church Elite, had his son picture put up as Jesus Christ in the Western World. Cesare had sex with his own sister Lucrezia, and he killed his brother Giovanni in 1497, and this is the man whom the Catholic Church gave their consent to allowing his picture to be put up and portrayed as Jesus Christ to deceive the whole world to think Christ was European. See what most people don't know is, there was a competition during the time called the Renaissance period, between Leonardo da Vinci and the well known Michelangelo. The competition was to see who could impress the king by a making a new image of the King's son that would deceive the world, in which Leonardo da Vinci won the competition.

Handsome fella, huh?

As a Gnostic, I believe in the living Christ that dwells within all.

That is what I believe the true Immanuel taught.

In other words: I concur with your entire post.

Give me a break, and give Jesus a break will ya.


edit on 11-5-2015 by Involutionist because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:12 PM
a reply to: Ritter327

I've yet to meet anyone that hates jesus.

However the people that follow him....


posted on May, 11 2015 @ 02:29 PM
a reply to: grey580

I've yet to meet anyone that hates jesus.

However the people that follow him....


LOL...yes, there are plenty of fanatics that follow Jesus that will have others crucified for their beliefs if they had the chance.

Kind of like what happened in the past.

The golden rule of "do unto others..." has been replaced by "those who own the gold rule".

Vatican has lots of gold.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:01 PM

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Ritter327

i dont hate the meme of " jesus "

but if you are calling for ` mutual respect ` - how about followers of christianity have respect for those who dont want to follow thier dictates ????????????????

How about liberals/progressives who think every one should
not say certain words
not think certain thoughts
not hold any belief they disagree with?
Militant atheists, most liberals and progressives have zero respect or tolerance for those who don't want to follow their dictates and remove from American society any reference to or any symbol of or any public discussion of the Christian faith.

I hold great respect for atheists who are not so insecure in their non-faith that they really don't care about what others believe and believe in live and let live.

But there are atheists and liberals who believe quite strongly that their doctrine
of speech and thought
are the only correct speech and thought
that anyone in the US should hold.

How about the Climate Change Worshipers who call for the death or jailing of disbelievers?

How about those that say even in private no one can think LGBT is against their value system, or must be punished for having the thought or expressing it in private?

What happened to the liberal I admired in the 1960's and 70's
who used to defend freedom of thought and speech no matter how heinous the thought or speech?

They have now become totalitarian watchdogs
who persecute those who even in private conversations
with absolutely no racist or anti-LGBT behavior
on the part of the politically incorrect speaker
demand that people who dare to refuse to follow
the dictates of the totalitarian facist idea of
best behavior and thought, die, or be jailed,
or lose their jobs, or be persecuted
to the fullest extent possible either socially or legally?

Or how about the liberals who make a living off
making race relations the worst they have been in over 40 years?
Al Sharpton, Jessee, and even
Obama and Michelle are into dividing the nation rather than healing.

There are awful people who don't believe in Jesus
there are truly heinous people who persecute those who disagree with them who are atheist, liberal, progressive
and refuse to even consider freedom of speech or thought as an option in the US in this day and age.

I find those people appalling and hypocritical
(when they talk of love and not hurting anyones feelings and the rights of everyone, except the people they disagree with)
as you find those who are followers of Jesus

I find the original liberal philosophy admirable
the live and let live philosophy
the freedom of speech no matter how heinous the speech
the importance of freedom of thought and expression who fought vigorously for it in the 1960's and 70's,
the urging of people to love one another and come together.

However, I find the followers of current and vile liberal philosophy to be repugnant and dangerous to society.
I do not want to be forced to follow their dictates that they are trying to make law and even snooping on people though social media etc to force people to follow their dictates when it comes to the neo(faux)liberal philosophy and radical atheist philosophy which espoused suppression of speech, extreme thought control, and emphasizing the differences between races and classes rather than trying to unite.

edit on 3Mon, 11 May 2015 15:18:05 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: addition

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:10 PM

originally posted by: Shadowstalker
I don't hate Jesus. I hate people who consider themselves Christians and Christ like when all they are are hypocrites. If Christians were more like Jesus, I might not have such an issue with them. I'm being very general. I know not all Christians are like that. The majority in my opinion are. I'm an Atheist borderline agnostic. I hate hypocrites and hypocritical teachings.

I don't hate liberals or atheists. I hate people who consider themselves liberals or atheists and when they are all hypocrites.

If liberals were more like the original liberals
who espoused love
and emphasized coming together
and who fought for freedom of speech
regardless of how heinous the speech

But I hate the hypocrites and the hypocritical teachings
of the current bunch
who through political correctness supress freedom of speech
through constantly emphasizing division and differences
between the races (ie white priviledge/all white cops are evil)

I find original liberal philosophy of live and let live admirable
but hate the hypocrites who search out people to persecute
and goad them into saying politically incorrect speech
in order to drive them out of business and humiliate and degrade them

I find the old fashioned agnostics and atheists who
used to believe it was ok for anyone to believe whatever
they wanted when it came to faith or non-faith
to be admirable.

I find agnostics and atheists who demand
to be free from being exposed to any
religious speech or symbol;
and go out of their way to get people
fired for talking positively about faith;
or fired for having a bible on their desk;
or fired for wearing a small religious symbol;
I find these people as oppressive as the worst totalitarian regime possible
because they refuse to allow people to have ideas different than theirs
in the public arena.
In so doing they force their non-religous doctrine and dictates on others.

edit on 3Mon, 11 May 2015 15:21:46 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: addition

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:12 PM

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Ritter327

It's not Jesus people have a problem with, it's the hypocrisy and political power SOME of His so called followers have that we have a problem with.

It's not liberals or atheists that people have a problem with,
it's the hypocrisy and political power of the followers
that we have a problem with.

See my above 2 posts.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 03:23 PM
a reply to: grandmakdw

Way to "bait and switch" Gramma!

Your posts are perfect examples of why believers will never respect non-believers, because they're ALL liberal/progressive, militant atheist, totalitarian watchdogs who worship climate change and are trying to force you to think like them!

Of course Christianity and Christians have never been guilty of any of those charges, and Jesus would never support any of the causes that you've listed above!

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 04:04 PM

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw

Way to "bait and switch" Gramma!

Your posts are perfect examples of why believers will never respect non-believers, because they're ALL liberal/progressive, militant atheist, totalitarian watchdogs who worship climate change and are trying to force you to think like them!

Of course Christianity and Christians have never been guilty of any of those charges, and Jesus would never support any of the causes that you've listed above!

What I did was simply point out the hypocrisy of what you were saying.

I never supported any "cause", I even implied that some of the ideas
you claim I championed were henious. You misread.

For ALL ideologies there are hypocrites and the ideology
should not be judged on the fringe and militant elements,
but on the ideology and philosophy itself
and in the case of Christianity,
the actual teachings of Jesus himself
in the New Testament which did away with much in the
Old Testament.

I have yet to see one person on ATS who is not a Christian
say Jesus' teachings are good and
he was a good example of what people should strive for,
without also saying that Christianity itself is "bad"
because of the people who are imperfect within Christianity.

All people are imperfect
All people fall short of whatever ideology they hold.
It is the nature of ALL humans.

So stop saying Christianity is good but Christians are horrendous people
so no one should follow Christianity
because it is the same as me saying
Classical liberalism is good and its ideology is good
but neo-liberals are horrendous totalitarian people
so one one should follow Liberalism.

I was pointing out the rampant hypocrisy of
liberals and radical atheists saying
Christianity is awful because practicing Christians are awful,
when there are as many practicing Liberals
and Radical atheists are also awful people
who insist that everyone follow their dictates, or else.

edit on 4Mon, 11 May 2015 16:11:23 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: format

edit on 4Mon, 11 May 2015 16:13:08 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: format

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 04:38 PM
a reply to: grandmakdw

What I did was simply point out the hypocrisy of what you were saying.

What I was saying? No you didn't.

I never supported any "cause", I even implied that some of the ideas
you claim I championed were henious. You misread.

No. You misread. I never claimed you championed any cause.

For ALL ideologies there are hypocrites and the ideology
should not be judged on the fringe and militant elements,

Jesus is an ideology? Title of thread: Stop hating Jesus, lets talk about mutual respect.

So stop saying Christianity is good but Christians are horrendous people
so no one should follow Christianity
because it is the same as me saying
Classical liberalism is good and its ideology is good
but neo-liberals are horrendous totalitarian people
so one one should follow Liberalism.

The problem with that line of thinking is that no one is claiming that neo-liberalism whatever that means, died for your sins and without it you're doomed to eternal damnation.

You can't stand your god and your religion being criticized here, so you're defensively throwing out a litany of hatred in every direction to distract and derail, as usual, thinking that some of it will stick and people will stop criticizing Christians.

Your a fine example of the kettle calling the pot black, Christian hatred wrapped in faux righteous indignation. I don't hate Jesus, but I think he plays a BAD role model, and you're a perfect example of that, in my opinion.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 05:17 PM
The multitude of “Jesus” that Christianity believes in is a caricature of a persons belief.He does not exist.The Christian have created a God in their own image.That is why most non Christians do not like Jesus.The often misquoted and misunderstood.
“And you shall be hated of all men for my name's sake, but he who endures to the end shall be saved"

“Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for my names sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you”.

Both of these scriptures Yahoshua is speaking exclusively to his disciple.The fact is the majority of all of the Gospels Yahoshua is speaking to the disciples only.Christianity has extrapolated the “great commission”

“Then he told them, "go into all the world, and publish the gospel to everyone”.

This was told exclusively to the disciples.He never said men after you or Christians will do this.As a matter of fact Yahoshua warned the disciples before he said this:

“Do not be deceived for many will come in my name and say they are christ and deceive many”.

There are only one group of many that come in the name of “Jesus” and say they are “christ” and are deceived…Christianity.John also wrote of Christians in his letters and called them “antichrists”…which means in place of the anointing(christ). Christianity had already started to be virulent in Johns time and it was one of the main reasons John published his eye witness account of Yahoshua.Johns book more than the others exemplifies Yahoshua’s relationship to the disciples with long discourses(like 14-17) that are specifically to the disciples.

John later understood the influence of Christianity very well as his writings proclaims more than the other synoptic(which means seen together) “gospels”.John was the closest to Yahoshua and knew him the best.His book is different than the others and has more detailed accounts with him as an eye witness to them.It is John who sits at Yahoshua right hand not Peter.It is John who witnesses the crucifixion. It is John who is given care of Yahoshua’s mother.

The Jesus of history is painted in the image of Christianity which is full of contradictions and flaws.Christianity has a Jesus that tells them to “follow” a new religion to be saved.That is not what John says about Yahoshua because he understands the inner working .His preamble in his gospel outlines a very different Jesus than Christianity has extrapolated. He accurately describes Yahoshua as the “word” because John was “given” to know the mystery of the kingdom (ruled by authority) of his heavens (mind).Yahoshua explained the parable of “the seed” sown in the 4 soils to the disciples ONLY…and they still didn’t understand it!The crux of his parable is the seed(son) was the living word of the creator God.

John wrote in his eye witness account this “seed” became flesh and lived as a man.Christianity turned Jesus into the creator God when John said no such thing.He said Yahoshua was the seed/son/the living word/ the light(the christ..the power) of the creator God.He said no man has “seen”God at anytime but that Yahoshua was the son/seed/living word/light.John doesn’t say all things are made “by” Jesus he said they are all made by the creator God.He is setting the eyewitness account context of the man Yahoshua is not just a man but is also the seed /son of the creator God.

Johns opening statement echoes Genesis1..In the beginning.The Hebrew word re'shiyth is translated beginning and means firstfruits(a seed).John also calls Yahoshua the light which is also the first act of creation.John is deftly setting up the context of the “name” of Yahoshua because a name is a central theme of the Good news.

A name is the nature and character of the person or thing that is “named”.Yahoshua(there are variations of Hebrew spellings) in Hebrew means ….Yahweh is deliverance/salvation.Every place Yahoshua or the disciples (or even Paul) say in the name of Yahoshua they are not just referring to the man Yahoshua.They knew saying “in the name of Jesus” is not an incantation said in a prayer as Christianity believes.They knew in the name of Yahoshua is an act of the will of the creator God.These are two completely different things.

Christianity”invokes” the name of Jesus as an incantation (sorcery) the disciples and apostles come in the “name(nature and character) of Yahoshua proclaiming the “Good news…Yahweh IS deliverance. Christianity comes in the name of Jesus and proclaims the bad news of believe “my” doctrines of Christianity or be tortured in hell for infinite time unjustly and mercilessly.

These are obviously completely different names.The significance is not in the pronunciation it is “knowing” the name(nature and character)of Yahoshua.As exemplified in the gospel of John the name of Yahoshua cannot possibly “condemn” ANY man to hell it is completely against the name of Yahoshua.In the name of “Jesus” is that “other Jesus” Paul wrote of and is the name the many come in who say they are christ (Christians) that Yahoshua warned the disciples of.

This is all clearly documented but unfortunately theology is a realm Christianity proclaims to have authority of knowledge of when they clearly do not because it is all theoretical conjecture by extrapolation.Those non Christian unbelievers that do not believe in Jesus have seen through this travesty(in their own way).The gospel as preached by Christianity makes no sense and is not Good news and surely not the Good news Yahoshua the disciples and apostles proclaimed at all.They all proclaimed Yahoshua IS the savor of ALL of mankind…no exceptions.(which many will hate for many reasons).It is impossible for the creator Gods “will” to be thwarted in any way.As John stated clearly:

He gave them the power to become the sons of God, to them that believe on his name which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Yahoshua is the deliverance that came as THE seed/son of the creator God.There are no details given as to “how” this “seed” works to cause a birth.Christianity believes in a convoluted pagan ritual of blood sacrifice and substitution atonement(magic).If tthe Good news were true it would only make sense it can’t be understood what’s going on underneath the hood.For millenniums woman gave birth and the actual process was not know.All that was know was a man sowed his seed in a woman and they sometimes became pregnant.It was a miracle to them.Many of the parables of Yahoshua have a “seed” as the subject.The parable of the seed and soils is the “key” parable.Yahoshua told his disciple rhetorically…if you cannot understand this parable how will you understand any of my parables.”

The more deeply Yahoshua is understood by truth the more clearly he is not the duplicitous Jesus of Christianity.He does not condemn people to hell and in the next breath say(prove by acts) he is Yahoshua the seed/son of the creator God.The bottom line is it doesn’t matter if someone “believes” in the person Jesus as portrayed by Christianity.That person never existed.It is a figment of their religious minds imagination they have made in their own image.That is the Jesus most people who are not Christian and unbelievers despise as a fraud and rightly so.


posted on May, 11 2015 @ 05:18 PM
Yahoshua on the other hand is someone completely different.That Yahoshua is what most people who are not Christians but have no problem with a Jesus believe because it is mans instinct to know this(believe in a benevolent creator God).However the downside is the “many” deceivers Yahoshua and John spoke of..Christianity who have perverted the name Yahoshua (the creator Gods deliverance) to mean nothing.That is no surprise to the non believers of Jesus of Christianity.They have been shouting this from the rooftops for years and the religious Christians kill them just as the religious Jews murdered Yahoshua.

Unfortunately religious Christianity is totally blind to their blindness!They will not give up their perversion because they “believe” they are righteous because of their belief!Irony of irony’s.I guarantee you religious Christians are deaf as a rock.It is futile trying to correct them and present the truth.The only thing that can and should be done is to deny their ignorance.(if only there was a public forum to do this!).However it must be done with truth not more doctrines of man.Christianity multitude of sects (40,00 and counting fast) has tried to do this but it is always with a “my” Jesus agenda and goes off the rails into the gulley.

Fortunately non of these religious acts and beliefs will change the fact ALL of mankind will be delivered from Hades(the realm of death and imperception/religion) SOLELY by the creator God BY Yahoshua.That is the essence of the Good news of Yahoshua not the Jesus of Christianity.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 05:28 PM
a reply to: tothetenthpower

I've not met a single person who is against religion, that is against Jesus.

Jesus was awesome. What most anti-religious folk wish is that people were more "Christ Like", instead of "Christian".

I'm an atheist, bordering agnostic, and I would never talk down about Jesus.


Why? He is one of the worst literary characters ever conceived. The only thing noble about him was that he could take a lickin'. But his "wisdom", his insight and dogmas were utterly tedious. I'll say it, I hate him.

posted on May, 11 2015 @ 05:41 PM
a reply to: windword

First FYI:bait-and-switch: the action (generally illegal) of advertising goods that are an apparent bargain, with the intention of substituting inferior or more expensive goods.

What I did was called semantics, not bait and switch.

The problem with that line of thinking is that neo-liberals
are not condemning people to damnation,
instead they are calling for the death or jailing or
actually go out and make people lose their jobs and reputations
of people who simply don't agree with their value system or dogma.
Simply because they disagree.

What is worse in your eyes, since you are an atheist,
sending someone to a mythical (according to you) place
that is not really a place but just a wishful fantasy;
OR getting people fired, causing people to lose their businesses,
destroying peoples reputations,
suggesting that people should be sent to jail or killed
for not agreeing with you?

I don't know about you, but I'd say the real and concrete actions
taken because people simply disagree with you
is much much worse than "cursing"
them to a fantasy land that that you don't even believe exists.

Christianity IS an ideology. i·de·ol·o·gy
a system of ideas and ideals

What is a religion but a system of ideas and ideals?
Since you consider Jesus words to be mythical nonsense
then it certainly is a system of ideas and ideals.

I also seriously doubt you have ever read the actual words of Jesus
but just fall for what people tell you about Christianity, before
you condemn anything you have the responsibility to learn
to read the original thought,

I dare you to read just the "red letters" in a red letter bible,
those are the actual words of Jesus.
But I don't think you have the courage or the intellectual
will to do so because it just might challenge your
bigoted and prejudiced mindset.

Just because you don't think religions aren't ideologies
doesn't negate the fact that they are.

I can stand the criticism but it is quite clear
you can not
because you are coming back with such an undercurrent of rage
about someone believing in something you think is a myth and not real.

However, just because I am a Christian doesn't mean
I have to stand by and allow people to ridicule my faith.
I call out the people who are self righteous just like Jesus did
when he called out the Pharisees for
being such legalistic hypocrites (who are today's neo-liberals).

So I follow his example and stand up for what you consider a myth
and I consider real to me
and don't give a rodent's anus if you believe it or not.
You can be as atheist as you want and hold all the weird
ideas you want,
I believe in live and let live - until
you think that you are judge and jury over my
speech and thought and want to do real
(rather than imagined) harm to people who
don't agree with your ideology.

I just want the respect you give everyone who isn't a Christian,
and I demand and will take the right to defend what I believe in.

If you don't believe in Jesus as Christ I honestly don't care,
it's none of my business.

But I'll turn over the tables and say the harsh truth
to defend my right to believe
and my right to be
as respected
just as you respect a poor person on generational welfare,
or an LGBT who wants to get married.

But you obviously won't give Christians that respect,
so I call out hypocrisy when I see it and call a
metaphorical Pharisee a metaphorical Pharisee
when I encounter one, just as Jesus did.

FYI: Pharisee: a member of a Jewish sect of the intertestamental (between the old and new testament time) period noted for strict observance of rites and ceremonies of the written law and for insistence on the validity of their own oral traditions concerning the law :
in easy to understand language: they insisted everyone had to follow their laws, ideas, traditions or else, and their consequences were often flogging and stoning or public humiliation (sounds like what the neo-libs are doing today to me)

Metaphorical: a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance; something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else;

My indignation regarding the nasty things people say about Christians on ATS is not faux,
it is quite real, it is not righteous,
it is demanding equal and fair treatment,
something that neo-liberals claim is at the core of their ideology.

My indignation is quite real and definitely not righteous
when people think that Christians should just be passive
and take all the abusive language heaped upon them.

My indignation is quite real and definitely not righteous
when atheists who think Christianity is a myth
want to harm others over a myth.
Over a myth, how paradoxical.

Paradoxical: self contradictory

No matter what ugly things you throw at me for being a Christian,
I will fight back because the ugliness is
it is prejudice
it is the opposite of what neo-liberals preach
(tolerance of others - it is extreme intolerance)
and I will not bend to the dictates of those
who want to ridicule and act in a bigoted prejudiced manner
toward people for simply having a different point of view
on life and different ideas.

Wanting to take away a persons lively hood for holding a different point of view is dangerous and the person who does that is dangerous to society, hunting down business to close and goading them into saying something stupid is dangerous and the people who do that are dangerous to society. Punishing people with job loss and permanent reputation loss for something they say, even in private when they never act on the words is dangerous and totalitarian.
I will be self-righteous and I will be indignant and I will fight against this real and true damage to people and I will fight when someone calls for the killing or jailing of people for not believing in climate change. That is truly extremely dangerous to society and is fascist totalitarianism.

The US and classical liberalism used to stand for the freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom to believe or not believe as you wish, that is not longer the truth or case in the US and I for one will fight with my last breath to restore classical liberalism.

The neo-liberal can say or think what he/she wants; but they have no right to force others
to think exactly the same way, or else,
and the or else are real and concrete negative consequences;
not a (you say) mythical "curse" that comes out of a fairy tale and is in no way real.

edit on 5Mon, 11 May 2015 17:51:15 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: format

edit on 6Mon, 11 May 2015 18:00:55 -0500pm51105pmk111 by grandmakdw because: addition format

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in