Religious Hypocrisy

[Zacha341]

Point well stated Papasito....

ATHIESTS, protesting against a cross like thing or something at ground zero. Now really , why? If they are true athiests and don't believe in anything, they should not even care about a cross , a star of David, Budhha, or any religious thing, they believe in none of it, so how can they possibly protest against ANY RELIGIOUS BELIEF ON THIS PLANET?

[Steve bennet]

I'm not a huge Bill Maher fan [[although he does have his moments), but his movie Religulous is actually pretty good. It's good religion bashing, but not in a hateful manor.

[oladub]

"Maryland was founded for the purpose of providing religious toleration of England's Roman Catholic minority." -wikpedia

Wikipedia has a good article on this. Lord Calvert, a Roman Catholic, wanted to establish a haven for Catholics. Catholics, though, were never the majority. The Puritans burned down some Catholic churches, Puritans defeated Catholics in a couple of military battle, and twice Catholicism was outlawed in Maryland before the American revolution. There was some persecution of catholics in England.

William Penn, meanwhile, invited Huguenots to his colony who where being persecuted in Catholic France.

[maxx]

And some good "god-fearing" colonists felt obliged to hang Quakers and Baptists. Religious freedom my big toe.

[G-DDT]

I know I'm bringing up a discussion that should've been left dead. However, the errors are just too profound to go unchallenged. First of all, Hitler was a cultist-a firm follower of the Thule society and other dark orders [[I've read books that tie him with beliefs with the Knights Templar and then attempt to distance him from Masonicism).

Second of all, most of the victims in Jonestown [[mostly black-not including the senator-a Democrat-and his consorts killed outside the chopper) did not drink "kool-aid". That just made for an interesting ironic twist for the media to snarl in the listener's minds. 914 of the 942 folks who died, died from being shot, stabbed, strangled, and injected and their bodies left in a uniform laid-out fashion in the sun. A Guyanese doctor was the first on the scene and examined many of them. Not found among them was Jones's right hand man who worked for the C.I.A. After the story broke, many family members pleaded for the return for the bodies. However, the bodies were left to rot in the hot sun for three months and then promptly cremated. Oh, and it should be noted that Reagan and the conservative mayor of San Francisco offered their support for this Bible & Monkey salesman turned cult leader when he had his operation in San Fran, before the investigations into child and member abuse got too hot for him-so, he moved it all down to Guyana. Read the "Black Hole of Guyana" by John Judge for at least one source into this matter.
Is everybody ready for the picnic in the jungle?

[G-DDT]

The third most popular teaching in the Bible [[especially the Christian New Testament) is to beware. Beware of one's nature, beware of those outside of the church, but more over, beware of the false brethren, false prophets, and "wolves in sheep's clothing" [[Laughton and company were wise to make that a central theme to "Night of the Hunter"-a movie most people don't know the "LOVE/HATE" on the knuckles thing came from) within your own faith. The Bible warns to avoid [[if not mark out and warn about-after all St. Paul spoke of those that did him wrong-like Alexander the coppersmith-after all, the Bible is an unflattering account fo many men-just the Herodians alone....) the vain babblers [[uh-oh for me), the flatterers, the deceivers, the cunning, those that turn God's house into a "Den of Thieves" [[got Jesus good and pissed off), those that say gain is close to godliness [[Health & Wealth or Prosperity faiths like Olsteen, Hagin, Copeland, Meyers, "Bishop" T.D. Jakes, Crefulo Dollar, Myles Munroe, and scores of various hustlers), busy bodies, the contentious, the angry, disorderly [[watch out whoopin' screamin' Holy Rollers-know not what the scriptures say about meekness and quietness?), and bad company that corrupts good morals. The fact that Jesus's attacks were against the fundamentalist religious entities [[Pharisees) of that time and how they conspired against him should speak for something.

[G-DDT]

I see a lot of immature mentalities attacking religion. They criticize the Bible as being something "spoon-fed" to others, yet, without investigating one bit as to what the Bible actually says on many matters, they go by the assumptions they see in media, piss-poor comedy specials, bad representations in movies [[remember there was a time when gays were portrayed as hideous limp-wristed, mincing effigies? Even an accurate point about history-like with murderers like King James, Prince Felix of Russia, Leopold, Loeb, John Dupont, William S. Burroughs, Himmler, Goering, Rohm, Funk, Roy Cohn, J. Edgar Hoover, Caliguala, Tiberius, Mwanga, etc. or even a sly mention to "cleft A-holes" would not fly well in today's climate.), or all of the hideous representations of Christianity in the wide and corrupt path of televangelism or the most popular websites online. So who's being spoon-fed there with populist tripe?

There is no one way to get Christianity right, but man.....there are a lot of hideous ways it can go horribly wrong. All it takes is to have the Bible ask to do this [[help poor, be merciful, be diverse, be abiding, be humble, seek justice, seek peace, adhere to old wine, avoid lucre, avoid rank and file-actually the "higher ups" in the Catholic church are to be "ministers"-hence servants to all below-they know this and remind themselves of this with the footwashing ceremony-though it should be for poor folks who really need it., etc.) or not do this [[factions, arrogance, materialism, idolatry, chasing after visions, forcing a diet in any direction-more of a 7th Day Adventist thing not a non-compulsory "Fish Friday" thing, being virus minded, warlike, retributive, segregative, cunning, asking foolish questions-I'm looking at you Mr. Kirk "cuff n' collar" Cameron!, etc.), and someone has to come along and go against it. This is why Jesus warns about that wide path and what is "exalted by man". This is not to encourage isolationist elitism, nor is it to push an esoteric faith. In fact, the Bible is quite for the "common faith", and one dead give-away a church or faith is bad is if they carry themselves with a we're the "True Church" attitude [[that is the very initial offense that causes Christianity to avoid 7th Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons).
Just mentioning God [[like Hitler or the masonic, slave-owning deists that started this country) does not make one a Christian.

Read the Bible. That is all there is to it. My advice is to start from the center [[the Gospels), and work your way out. Are you afraid you might get "contaminated" and converted by the slightest exposure? If so, you are no less superstitious than the religious folks you criticize. Can't deem it a valuable souce of reference? Than you are severely limiting yourself [[like someone whose never read Dicken, Shakespeare or glanced at a Funk and Wagnal) intellectually.

Biblical illiteracy is at an all time high in this country with both Christians and Atheists. Yet, the worst representations of Christianity get press [[Westboro Baptist, Terry Jones being fine examples), where as humble, business-as-usual struggling, "non-glory-seeking" charitable churches get overlooked. What else gets misrepresented? Nutritionalism, vegetarianism, orthodox faiths, sex [[does porn give you an accurate look at sex? I think most women would cringe at that notion), and many other aspects I can expound on are hideously misrepresented online. Christianity helped start hospitals, orphanages, universities, and homes helping aged/lepers/handicapped when folks were living raucous peon lives in a Bruegel paintings or being the effete elite wig-wagglers at a Mozart concerto. Folks forget that.

What are the motives for athiesm? Is it "sexual liberty"? I can tell you how Maher is a "shnook" rubed into the "sexual appeal" manipulation that gets him shaking and thinking religion is the cold shower that prevents a homely logic-bully [[I know, I can smell my own kind) like him from getting the "right sex he deserves". Is it science? Do I have to go into every God-aweful thing that has been done in the name of science towards humanity?

Does the Golden Rule truly seem abhorrent to some? Did they try it for a day and give up at the slightest stress it causes? I can go on, but atheism seems more profound [[with populists like Chritopher "2-fisted drinking man" Hitchens and Dawkins) about professing it's hatred towards religion nowadays, than being abiding [[a central virtue for all ideologies). Hypocrisy is found in all things. This is why fundamental makes a better adjective than a concrete noun. Any ideaology can be made fundamental [[science at the expense of others, Communism, Capitalism, Republicanism, Technocracy, Democratic parties, U.F.O.-ism, etc.) and go to extremes.

[G-DDT]

I may not claim to be one with all the answers [[Van Impe and Hanegraaff-a capitol punishment enthusiast who uses what the unrepentant thief said on the cross to justify his position-they are the ones who boast they are "Walking Bible Answer Men"-what did St. Paul say in 1 Cor. 8:2? "Those who think they know, do not yet know as they ought to know"). I only know what I know. Passionately being studious in the Christian faith requires constant maintenance. It isn't a "Got it? Good." kind of thing. A person's understanding of the wide variety of issues is like a smaller than required fitted sheet, while what God presents us in scripture is like a very huge mattress. You get one corner, and you get one corner, and if you strain hard enough, you can get three, but attempting to get that fourth will cause one of the other corners you got covered to slip off. It's a constant state of matters that elude and evade us.

Yet, I'm not trying to discourage scriptural pursuit. It's just that here is one of the most popular and widely distributed books. It has all that is needed to meet the mental capacity of any human being [[thus, eschewing the exclusionistic and esoteric concept of "redemption through an elitist gnosis) to any who bother to read or actively pursue hearing it-he who has been given much, more will be asked. It is as if God, in all of God's loving grace sought to give us all a fighting chance. Sure, it seems a weird thing to rely on scripture. Yet, Christianity is more than that. It's more than signs or safety in numbers.

One can be apologetic to a fault [[and while I'm not advertising my faith, I certainly feel due to the hideously intolerant tone of this thread and the oppressive nature in today's social climate, that I have a right to speak up in response to ugly misnomers parading as facts just to support one's opinions, beliefs, or lack there of. You want to "fit in today"? You want to be a part of the faceless mob? Love conformity? Hate rebelliousness and being an individual? Than just keep prattling with the overwhelming popularists out there who find it
more than safe and fashionable to attack Religion, thus Christianity, thus the Amish or the Catholics. You would think some folks would have the discernment to sniff out that something isn't right with this much of a homogenous enthusiasm to seize on the matter as it has been of late.), and while I'm ready to address any issues brought up needing redress [[evolutionism, diet, factions, regard to outsiders, the matters of redemption, Old Testament Vs. New-with the whole "angry O.T. God vs. loving N.T. God" debate, sex, secular culture, liberation theology, capitol punishment, regard to prisoners, regard to race, etc. etc.) by anyone who thinks they know what Christians are "supposed to believe", there will always come a drop off point where one finds that it boils down to faith [[well, love above that, and God moreso, but...).

Folks forget how often they apply faith in everything: knowing they are going to wake up alive in the morning and not have a aircraft fuselage laying on top of them. Knowing that their car is still safely parked outside. Knowing that their loved one is staying "faithful in heart" to them. Knowing that you aren't going to have an aneurism right now as you read all of this lengthy text. Fact is, there isn't any knowledge. From all the strange and wondrous courses life took from eons of creation, slime coming up to fish up unto man [[South Park assumed Catholics don't agree with evolutionism or Halloween-wish they had been as theologically adept to tackle that as they were with LDS and Scientology), who met who to beget who all down the line, so that you can sit in front of a glowing screen and huff at some "superstitious" fool of faith from podunk Wayne County.

Some think that there is no right or wrong [[how they forget what Nazism was or are the quickest to hop up and down in anger about how unfair it all is when someone breaks into their car). Some feel they have no sins. Yes, they think that they have no inconsistencies or hypocrisies [[and I will not dispute that the original intent of this thread was incisive and relevant, for the Bible warned heavily of hypocrisy within the faith, and as a critical examiner of the Western faiths I will bury folks in names and examples in that area-just read Balmer's "Encyclopedia of Evangelicalism"). I think they are just folks who don't sit down long enough to hear how blind, contradictory, or unthought-out a lot of the core of their own beliefs are. Heck! it doesn't take long for me to paint myself into a corner, but usually I can unintentionally [[and quietly) catch it within five minutes of conversing with someone. We all seek to validate, redeem, or justify ourselves in some manner. We want our existence to mean something. I believe it's a drive that sublimely surpasses what Freud and Darwin's fused "Sex/Procreation and Death/Self-preservation" drives claim. Some hope for post-humous fame through art [[snicker). Some think that their family can be their pride [[families, even bloodlines can die off. People shamed and jailed. No flesh is trustworthy.). Maybe we don't see just how ephemeral, unstable, pointless, and fallible are the things we put stock in being the foundations to our lives.

We all can't be everywhere at once. We all can't be on top of our game. All is vain. Flesh is failing. Eventually we must face up to the grist of our emptiest existential doubts-either by a long process of arduous questioning or by a traumatic "fox Hole" situation that evokes our faith.

Thanks for suffering with me this much, and I will be willing to address [[within reason) those who care [[genuinely-I won't waste pearls anymore than I have already) enough to hear what I believe the scriptures mention in regards to this or that.

[G-DDT]

The strawman approach is one I can prattle on until the cows come home on any issue [[hmm, does anyone mention King's work on the "Jesus's wife" gnostic crud scrap of papyrus anymore? Nope.), but it never validates a point in completion. I will be willing to cite many examples to be just as scathing towards science and atheism, as others would towards Christianity. I do like that someone cited Robertson with Sun Myung Moon.

Yet, Jim Bakker is one rare example of someone who actually did a full 180 turn around. He recanted and attacked a lot of the Evangelical fallacies [[like apocalyptic dispensationalism and Health & Wealth ideaologies) he once espoused [[said he learned more about the Bible in jail than in any "led-by-the-nose" Bible college.

[Pam]

What are the motives for athiesm? Is it "sexual liberty"? I can tell you how Maher is a "shnook" rubed into the "sexual appeal" manipulation that gets him shaking and thinking religion is the cold shower that prevents a homely logic-bully [[I know, I can smell my own kind) like him from getting the "right sex he deserves". Is it science? Do I have to go into every God-aweful thing that has been done in the name of science towards humanity?

Does the Golden Rule truly seem abhorrent to some?

I didn't read the whole post but this stood out to me. Personally I have no "motive" for being an atheist. I just don't have proof god exists so I choose not to believe. I don't have a problem with religious people as long as they don't tell me what to believe. As far as the "golden rule" I think secular humanists can and do follow that as well. It's not an idea exclusive to religion.

[G-DDT]

True. I have no problem with "moralistic atheism". I was only defending against the hardliners on the side of fundamental reductionism and those unabiding types who define themselves against others [[which is why I will gripe against Mormons, because they make the initial offense by declaring themselves "the true church-and all others can go to blazes"....). Without being overly-compliant or ecumenical, I don't see relativism as an "evil" [[the way Chuck "let's kill Jack Anderson and plant Angela Davis literature on Bremer-indicted?-no wait-I'm 'born again'" Colson suggested). Relativism best befits the Golden Rule [[giving everyone their fair say-though I tend to take more of a platform in my SAAAAAY) and "becoming all things to all people".

I personally have a vast problem with religious fundamentalism [[no fun, all damn, and completely mental-as us level-headed Christians say). Yet, I can't help but feel backed into a corner to defend an unpopular position, when you got guys killing Muslims over their intolerance to religion [[and despite conflicting reports the media pushes the insistence was merely over a parking space). When you got huge billboards in Times Square during the Christmas holiday [[hmm, does that word breakdown into "Holy-day"?) attacking religion [[not materialism, mind you) in an unabiding manner and exalting Santa Claus. When you got hideous shows on cable stations that stray from their topical format to attack the Amish. When you got a media that rehashes abuses in the Catholic church but skims past stories with coaches [[looking at you Grosse Pointe), cub scout leaders, day care workers, and just as much abuse in the Protestant faiths. Especially, when you got mental midgets on this thread sounding off that the Catholics were directly in alignment with Hitler [[Oladub just scratched the surface of what Catholics have been through.) or that religious folks are stupid, immature, or unstable [[isn't that a tactic many hardline Republicans use-if you are a liberal, you must be an idiot who needs to wise up or require medical intervention-right? feh.).

I don't doubt that there are atheists who cringe at the antics of the fundamental athiests [[yet, I didn't see them among the garishly epitomized personas I saw in Boston). Imagine how that feels as a Christian, a Catholics, or a homeless person. I'm my own animal [[as I've been told many times)-a rare breed of politically liberal Christian. I'm a scruffy, urbane Catholic who blows his top occasionally and lets lust wear at him, at times. Heck! maybe I'm just being a projective hypocrite myself [[no replies ya' dinks) who is compensating with fanaticism [[after all a "fanatic" is one who doubles up their efforts after the originally genuine motivation that spurred them on has since dissipated-a priest once said "it is knowledge without compassion") after such weaknesses on my part....bear with me, please.

Oh by the way, for those "Hitler-Catholic" glibbers: don't forget about the Dorothy Days, the Berrigans, the Sister Helen Prejeans, the Maximillian Kolbes, the Oscar Romeros, and countless others who may lack "sex appeal" [[Marilyn Manson-of all folks-had the best thing to say about that in "Bowling for Columbine"), but gave of themselves for God and others [[even their enemies). If you are still not impressed, here's some extensive reading-you may recognize at least one name-Spielberg made a movie about the dude: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_..._the_Holocaust

[G-DDT]

I still highly recommend folks get a copy of the underpublicized "Encyclopdeia of Evangelicalism" by Randall Balmer. It may be dated [[without inclusion of the more slipperier snakes that have infested popular Christianity today), but it gives insight to the roots and names that make up a lot of the abhorrent forms of "religion" today [[with, of course some true winners in Christianity like Clarence Jordan or Jonathan Blanchard). Also, compiling your own list of exorcisms "gone wrong" can be an interesting an arduous project.

However, on a lighter note, I also insist folks check out any of the videos featuring Joe Bob "John Bloom" Briggs and his "God Stuff" [[very early Daily Show-but avoid the stuff with Dan Bell. It can be both amusing and as disturbing-as is reading about exorcisms-if you know the backstory on that guy.).