Jesus Was An Arab

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

jesus look at some of these. the golfer one?

http://jesus-withyoualways.com/

rebornFixer

MrSmith wrote:

jesus look at some of these. the golfer one?

http://jesus-withyoualways.com/

Haha ... Dental assistant? WTF??

Byrnzie

'And Jesus did come forth and speaketh: "You spend waay too much time on the Pearl Jam Message Board!"

http://jesus-withyoualways.com/images/S ... 24x768.jpg

rebornFixer

http://jesus-withyoualways.com/images/B ... 24x768.jpg

Jesus appears to need the aid of a personal trainer ...

Shawshank

Byrnzie wrote:

I base that assertion on the fact that 99% of so-called Christians don't live according to the teachings of Christ in any way whatsoever.

How many Americans live their lives according to the example set by Jesus? Is it higher than 1%? I doubt it. I think I was being kind by stating 99%. I should have said 99.9%.

DING DING DING DING DING and we have a winner winner chicken dinner. Spot on with this. As a Christian myself, this is probably the one thing that bothers me most in this world. It's Christians preaching one thing, and doing another. Or twisting the very word of God into some perversion.

Byrnzie wrote:

But you raise an interesting point. Why is Christianity the major religion in the West? It's a Middle Eastern Religion not an American religion. How come Americans didn't choose to adopt the native religions of the Americas instead?

They came here with their religion which spread to Europe via the Roman empire. Then they proceeded to kill most people that didn't believe as they did.

michelleelise

rebornFixer wrote:

http://jesus-withyoualways.com/images/BODYBUILDER_1024x768.jpg

Jesus appears to need the aid of a personal trainer ...

Well, Jesus was a bit of a chubby, after all

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZWq6k5TA7s

WindNoSail

Byrnzie wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

I don't see why a given group of people should need to explain why one of their religious figures looks like them. That's pretty basic human nature ... Wouldn't it be odd if a given tribe of people in Africa had a deity that happened to look like a Viking?

It's pretty basic human stupidity.

But you raise an interesting point. Why is Christianity the major religion in the West? It's a Middle Eastern Religion not an American religion. How come Americans didn't choose to adopt the native religions of the Americas instead?

By Western you must mean Europe, which is west of the Middle East. From the Biblical perspective it was Paul that took the message to the west instead of east. There are some scriptures relating that the divine interventions led him west, and led him to spread the message of the New Testament but that this also led to his ultimate demise, in the west. It wasn't like he was gaining great acceptance that led him that way, just more a leading by God. Alot of Christian churches were established during that time, but were thought of as religious insurrectionists since they competed with paganism and hedonism and in some cases Jewish rule, and also the power structures of that time such as kings and princes. But this injection of Christianity also brought about change in Europe, and over time some would say civilized Europe. After the dark ages, which I don't have a good understanding of, Christianity became the official religion in many nations of Europe, and the Pope became quite powerful.

Eventually, the Protestant Reformation occurred after centuries of the Catholic church spreading all over Europe and the world, taking money from people to build their cathedrals and churches and some say they became quite corrupt. A rebellion of sorts against the concept that a common man had to go to the local priests to get to God, while having to pay pennance, and owing allegiance to the Pope was a stress on society. So Martin Luther, who started the Protestant information really transformed Europe from the singular Christianity of the Catholic Church to dual Christianity of Protestant and Catholic. Protestant being more of direct relationship with God via Jesus without the priest and Pope as go betweens. Which I would only add my opinion that this concept from Protestantism seems to me to have alot to do with our current system of government, which establishes the individual as a meaningful term with God given rights and freedoms.

Somewhere in all that the Church of England was created, it was Anglican which I can't define well but it was something like the Catholic church in terms of rule and power aligned with the state, but I believe is considered a Protestant form of Christianity.

I guess we all know that the original colonists that came to America weren't imperialists coming here to establish England and the Anglican church, but to eventually be independent of England and the rule of the Anglican Church along with King George. So I don't think they were exactly interested in escaping Christianity as much as they were escaping monarchial rule and the state run church. But of course they saw the American Indians as pagans, and weren't so keen on following their strange gods, but apparently the women were hot enough that they did eventually assimilate them into our bloodlines. Sex is a powerful force in mixing of cultures. Many people I know have a full blooded American Indian in their heritage from like 3 or 4 generations back.

In final, almost all the original founders of this country were at least diests, Christians, and Protestant, and maybe Masons, and seemed to believe more in the intellect of man than just religion...but believed that God had given them the mind of man to do good rather than evil, and that allowing the people to be free to choose as individuals was a higher calling than to live under oppression and totalitarion or monarchial rule. Of course this mostly applied to white Europeans and not neccessarily Africans or American Indians, because they were often viewed as less than...not nessassirily inhuman but not as developed as those with European heritage.

The American Indian religions had nothing to offer to an organized society with a strong fundamental belief system of the Christian church, and wasn't going to gain acceptance from white Europeans escaping the King. Justified or not, they just didn't see American Indian religion as intellectual or developed enough to even consider following their religions. In fact, i don't think we even know much about the religion of any of the American Indians because they were disjointed, tribal, superstitious, warring, and only a few of the American Indians tribes had an alphabet. But they definetly knew the land, and respected it. We coulda learned alot from them.

But its always easier to kill what you don't understand. And that's pretty much what happened.

dpmay

Byrnzie wrote:

dpmay wrote:

my problem is with claims like these: "99% of christianity is a joke."

I base that assertion on the fact that 99% of so-called Christians don't live according to the teachings of Christ in any way whatsoever.


How many Americans live their lives according to the example set by Jesus? Is it higher than 1%? I doubt it. I think I was being kind by stating 99%. I should have said 99.9%.

boo. who made you the arbiter of other people's faith and lifestyle?

i know you're just trying to kick shit up - and to a certain extent i can respect that - but these sweeping denouncements of huge groups of peope just don't fly.

you probably believe christians are overly judgemental (i grant you have not explicitly said this). well, you are guilty of the same.

redrock

I'm not going to go through your whole post because there's a lot of waffle going on. Two points I can't let pass though:

WindNoSail wrote:

Somewhere in all that the Church of England was created, it was Anglican which I can't define well but it was something like the Catholic church in terms of rule and power aligned with the state, but I believe is considered a Protestant form of Christianity.
.

The Church of England has it's roots in the Gregorian mission. It's not a protestant form of Christianity but more a reformed catholic form. The Church of England was under the authority of the Pope. We all know what happened when Henry VIII wanted an annulment and it was refused. Henry was a catholic when he made himself head of the church. If you know your history, you will remember that Protestants had a hard time during his reign. No reforms were made during his time. His son tried to change things, but then Mary came along. Fast forward to the union between the Irish and English churches, then Ireland leaving again, etc. Since then, whilst there has been reform, the doctrine is essential reformed catholicism. All you have to do is attend a High Mass and this will become obvious. Church of England has a long and windy history.

WindNoSail wrote:

In fact, i don't think we even know much about the religion of any of the American Indians because they were disjointed, tribal, superstitious, warring, and only a few of the American Indians tribes had an alphabet. .

Actually there is a lot known about Native American religion (though they did not see this as an organised religion as we do but spiritualism). A lot is known of their beliefs, their rituals and their traditions which, I may add, are still in place for some. Though Native Americans did not have an alphabet, as we know it, until the white man came along (at which time it was adapated to their language), they had symbols (pictography/ ideography) and oral tradition. There were records, etc.

Byrnzie

dpmay wrote:

these sweeping denouncements of huge groups of peope just don't fly.

I just said 99.9% of so-called Christians don't live lives based on the example of Christ at all. I've said some controversial things in this thread but I don't think this is one of them. The society we live in is one based on materialism, money and entertainment. Seriously, how many Americans do you know who's lives follow the example set by the Biblical Jesus?

Byrnzie

fife wrote:

considering that your 1st post was that Jesus was an Arab and you second post states that he didn't exist, doesn't that mean that you are wrong. a person that doesn't exist can be Arab or anything at all.

I meant the Biblical Jesus didn't exist. The historical Jesus is something else altogether. Confused? Complain to the early Church Fathers - it was them that made this shit up, not me.

rebornFixer

redrock wrote:

Actually there is a lot known about Native American religion (though they did not see this as an organised religion as we do but spiritualism). A lot is known of their beliefs, their rituals and their traditions which, I may add, are still in place for some. Though Native Americans did not have an alphabet, as we know it, until the white man came along (at which time it was adapated to their language), they had symbols (pictography/ ideography) and oral tradition. There were records, etc.

Not sure how the American situation compares, but fairly recently in parts of Canada there has been a very positive revival of interest in the "old ways". More of this stuff has been preserved than many people realize. Its almost easy to attend a sweat lodge around here, for instance. In some cases its become a business that caters to people interested in "getting in touch with nature", which is probably more positive than negative if you ask me. At least the ideas are getting some modicum of respect, and people are getting a different spin on interacting with nature.

know1

Byrnzie wrote:

dpmay wrote:

these sweeping denouncements of huge groups of peope just don't fly.

I just said 99.9% of so-called Christians don't live lives based on the example of Christ at all. I've said some controversial things in this thread but I don't think this is one of them. The society we live in is one based on materialism, money and entertainment. Seriously, how many Americans do you know who's lives follow the example set by the Biblical Jesus?

You have an extremely close mind or very little exposure to Christians,then. I go to a church attended by 10K people every week. The entire message almost every week is about helping people who need it and trying to be more like Jesus. Sure - nobody's ever going to do it perfectly, but there are a lot of us out there trying and your statements are basically ignorant of that fact.

fife

Byrnzie wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

I don't see why a given group of people should need to explain why one of their religious figures looks like them. That's pretty basic human nature ... Wouldn't it be odd if a given tribe of people in Africa had a deity that happened to look like a Viking?

It's pretty basic human stupidity.

But you raise an interesting point. Why is Christianity the major religion in the West? It's a Middle Eastern Religion not an American religion. How come Americans didn't choose to adopt the native religions of the Americas instead?

So you complain that the west is narrow minded but then say they should follow only those religions from the west. does that make sense? I say let any one follow or not follow what ever they want.

Pepe Silvia

i think the point was those that dislike arabs worshiping a guy who was born over there so he most likely looked like them

fife

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i think the point was those that dislike arabs worshiping a guy who was born over there so he most likely looked like them

then it has to be more clear. just to play devils advocate could you not make the argument that what you just stated shows that people in the west don't dislike Arabs. I think you could.

fife

Byrnzie wrote:

dpmay wrote:

these sweeping denouncements of huge groups of peope just don't fly.

I just said 99.9% of so-called Christians don't live lives based on the example of Christ at all. I've said some controversial things in this thread but I don't think this is one of them. The society we live in is one based on materialism, money and entertainment. Seriously, how many Americans do you know who's lives follow the example set by the Biblical Jesus?

this is fun. let make up stats. I say that 50% of the world likes the NY Yankees.

so now i know why FOX news anchors seem be having a great fun time.

know1

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i think the point was those that dislike arabs worshiping a guy who was born over there so he most likely looked like them

So the OP is stereotyping everyone in the West as being Christian AND hating Arabs.

He's only right on one count in my case. I am Christian, but I do not hate Arabs or anyone from the middle east for that matter.

Again...ignorance and stereotyping. Really shows a lot of intelligence.

Pepe Silvia

know1 wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i think the point was those that dislike arabs worshiping a guy who was born over there so he most likely looked like them

So the OP is stereotyping everyone in the West as being Christian AND hating Arabs.

He's only right on one count in my case. I am Christian, but I do not hate Arabs or anyone from the middle east for that matter.

Again...ignorance and stereotyping. Really shows a lot of intelligence.

wow, did you even read the OP????

...just in case any right-wing, Republican voting, Anti-Arab Christians out there have forgotten.


Talk amongst yourselves...

that seems far from saying everyone in the west

know1

Pepe Silvia wrote:

know1 wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i think the point was those that dislike arabs worshiping a guy who was born over there so he most likely looked like them

So the OP is stereotyping everyone in the West as being Christian AND hating Arabs.

He's only right on one count in my case. I am Christian, but I do not hate Arabs or anyone from the middle east for that matter.

Again...ignorance and stereotyping. Really shows a lot of intelligence.

wow, did you even read the OP????

...just in case any right-wing, Republican voting, Anti-Arab Christians out there have forgotten.


Talk amongst yourselves...

that seems far from saying everyone in the west

I read it originally, but didn't go back to refer to it. Technically, you are correct in that it doesn't say anything about the west, but that doesn't mean it's free of stereotyping and ignorance.