Christianity

[Dubious]

Well, what a strange impasse. I will try to recapitulate what has happened here, what seems to have been exposed.

The only thing "exposed" is that nothing has changed. Christianity is a reformed and revised Judaism to allow for the incorporation of Gentiles. As for IC, over whom you've obsessed so often, he remains the most static of all posters here, a literal believer in the bible to whom every fact is counterfactual if it contradicts its literal message. There's no mystery here! People like him have more to lose in accepting your arguments - and those of others who have made the same long before you arrived on the scene - than you could possibly gain in him accepting any part of it. The more cannonballs fired at his mental fortifications the thicker its walls will become regardless of what anyone thinks or facts enclosed. Though arguing may be fun at times they're all futile and invariably fail against those whose beliefs are absolute.

Nothing is new and nothing has changed in all these 640 pages. If we now arrive at the point where we don't even know what Christianity is, in spite of being established in its sources, what was this stupid crap all about? Without such context, anything discussed relative to it has no meaning. Not least, speaking only of "god" has no relation to Christianity or god ultimately since Christians only know god's name and story within the confines of the Jewish saga. One can believe in god and still be an atheist according to Christian dogma.

[Alexis Jacobi]

You miss the point, Dubious. I am not concerned about IC and what he believes or doesn’t. I am here exclusively for my own purposes. That is, to achieve my own results by sorting out things relevant to me, for me.

Nothing was ‘exposed’ for you (though you seem to have stuck around) because it seems you had already concluded things. Yet your conclusions seemed rather limited. No work was undertaken that you could respect so you only expressed dissatisfaction that any conversation was going on at all.

What you say about Judaism for the Gentiles is true but there is another dimension too and that is that Occidental Europe took hold of otherworldly Christianity and adapted it to its purposes. So there is the aspect of the emergence of Indo-European sensibility despite the Christian damper. That has hardly been talked about but it is relevant.

Immanuel plays a ruthless game which at bottom is ultra-manipulative and no one here has ever spoken about how this expresses a diseased element that extends into other domains. That too has not been discussed. Henry should have been all over that given his ethical concerns. (Walker is incomprehensible).

There is a great deal of mystery if that is taken as convoluted details needing to be sorted through. Where were you?

My intentions were never to demolish IC’s fortifications. It only had to do with myself (which is what I said all along).

[henry quirk]

Henry should have been all over that given his ethical concerns.

Like you, I am here exclusively for my own purposes.

[Lacewing]

What kind of Universe would it be if all of this was a mistake?

What "mistake" are you talking about?

Please explain what you are referring to in that statement.
_______

Whatever mistake someone might think of in regard to human life and the experiences resulting from that.

I do not think it's a mistake. But there are various reasons that other people do, apparently -- especially when they talk about the need to escape or get beyond it... as if it is a mistake.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Henry should have been all over that given his ethical concerns.

Like you, I am here exclusively for my own purposes.

Fine. But in my opinion you have not acknowledged or addressed the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity as Emmanuel vehemently defines it. That was my point.

[Belinda]

Alexis Jacobi wrote:

My intentions were never to demolish IC’s fortifications. It only had to do with myself (which is what I said all along).

"Fortifications" is an apt metaphor because it suggests lack of trust. Trust in its guise of generosity is essential to love, to caring. We know this because lack of generosity in caring indicates fearfulness.

[attofishpi]

I couldn't care less

https://youtu.be/sRrZ4mW7bV0

[henry quirk]

in my opinion you have not acknowledged or addressed the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity

As a matter of fact, not opinion, I haven't acknowledged or addressed what you describe as the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity and I'm not going to.

[Alexis Jacobi]

in my opinion you have not acknowledged or addressed the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity

As a matter of fact, not opinion, I haven't acknowledged or addressed what you describe as the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity and I'm not going to.

And that is why I note that this position is inconsistent with your extremely adamant stance on personal sovereignty.

Just noting that this is so . . .

[Lacewing]

People ignore that which doesn't support their favored claims. That creates inconsistencies all over the place... and dismisses lies.

Christianity clearly relies on ignoring a lot.

[henry quirk]

in my opinion you have not acknowledged or addressed the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity

As a matter of fact, not opinion, I haven't acknowledged or addressed what you describe as the religious-tyrannic underpinning of Evangelical Christianity and I'm not going to.

And that is why I note that this position is inconsistent with your extremely adamant stance on personal sovereignty.

Just noting that this is so . . .

I simply decline to comment on what appears to me fictional, sumthin' you made up. Best I can tell: there is no religious-tyrannic underpinning to Evangelical Christianity. There are certainties there, some perhaps rigid or even petrified, but no leashes. Not a soul is held against his will. Now, I'm perfectly willin' to accept I may be wrong, that my eleutheromania immunizes me from, or blinds me to, some truly corrosive elements in evangelical thinkin'. You, however, haven't offered anything to open my eyes or even have me think they're closed. Your observations aren't convincing.

[henry quirk]

People ignore that which doesn't support their favored claims. That creates inconsistencies all over the place... and dismisses lies.

Christianity clearly relies on ignoring a lot.

I'm quite open to explorin' my inconsistencies, lace. Please: offer one for examination.

[Gary Childress]

People ignore that which doesn't support their favored claims. That creates inconsistencies all over the place... and dismisses lies.

Christianity clearly relies on ignoring a lot.

I'm quite open to explorin' my inconsistencies, lace. Please: offer one for examination.

There are certainties there, some perhaps rigid or even petrified, but no leashes.

Matthew 11:29 "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls."

[Gary Childress]

There is no part way in evangelical Christianity. You either follow Christ or you're going to hell.

[henry quirk]

Matthew 11:29 "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls."

You get to choose to accept the yoke (burden): it isn't forced on you, and, as you will, you can lay that yoke down and walk away.

There is no leash, and I haven't been inconsistent.