Phil O'Bates wrote on Jul 1, 2008 6:05 AM:
" Eddie,
...as for intellectually limited...well I guess I will be as long as people like you don't explain why you post.
....as for narrow minded...That's because Jesus says that the way to Heaven is narrow (ONLY one way through Jesus), so YES, I have accepted the narrow way.
Matthew 7:13-14 "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jul 1, 2008 6:00 AM:
" Eddie,
It's you who is trying to control the open forum not me. It's ironic that you say "I have no business asking..." yet claim it's me who is setting rules.
The topic of the article is about violence or non-violence based on the person of Jesus (which we know about through the Bible). You and Senior Advocate believe Jesus is either unknowable or not real. Fine, but how does that deal with the question of violence or non-violence? Me asking that question is legitimate. It is not me trying to control anything.
It's also ironic that you think you can read my mind ("you want only believing Christians to post on these blogs"). I want open discussion, but discussion is one where people explain their reasons for their posts. It is you that doesn't want open discussion. "
Eddie wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:34 PM:
" Phil, you have no business asking anyone why they post here. Every time you ask people why they post here is a direct implication that you expect them to answer you....and you know it. You know full well that you want only believing Christians to post on these blogs. Your passive-aggressive bullying is not succeeding. Believers and non-believers will be posting on these blogs, so just deal with it. Also, if you can't handle commenting on other religious figures just because you don't believe in them, then that is your problem. It shows you to be narrow-minded and intellectually limited. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:19 PM:
" Eddie,
If you reread my post to Senior Advocate, I ask him WHY he posts if he doesn't believe in the Biblical Jesus. That is a logical question to ask. If there was a article on Agastya the Rishi and if his actions sanction violence against evil, I would ignore it because I don't believe in Agastya the Rishi.
If I did comment on such a thread, I would say say something along the lines of supporting defense of innocence or punishment of evil based on the Bible.
Do you now see the basis for my questions? "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 30, 2008 7:18 PM:
" Eddie,
Please reread my posts to you and Senior Advocate. NO WHERE do I say you have to answer to me. NO WHERE do I say that you can't read and respond to the article. I am NOT 'bullying' anyone, but simply asking "WHY?" Apparently you don't want to answer "WHY?" and so I can only guess why you post what you do. "
Eddie wrote on Jun 30, 2008 6:11 PM:
" Phil, nowhere does this article say that it's only asking people who believe Jesus was real and the Bible is accurate. Joe Orso has made no such declaration. The article is open to everyone to read and consider. Your transparent attempts to bully people off of this blog are extremely weak as well as rude. Again, no one here has to answer to you or explain themselves to you. We shall post as we wish. Mentioning the unreliability of the documents regarding what Jesus said or believed is a completely valid response to Joe Orso's article. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 30, 2008 4:52 PM:
" Senior Advocate,
I get that you don't think that Jesus was real as per the Bible, so why are you commenting on this article?
Are you saying "We don't really know Jesus, therefore you can be violent or non-violent if you can justify it by other means."?
This article is asking people who believe Jesus was real and the Bible is accurate, was Jesus violent or non-violent? Or can you be a follower of Jesus and kill your enemy?
It doesn't make any sense to me why you would comment if you don't think Jesus was real or knowable.
BTW, your belief that the Bible is inaccurate or untrustable is based on your faith in very weak conspiracy theories. Faith in the Bible's accuracy has far more evidence to support it, but you are free to believe what you wish. "
Senior Advocate wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:43 AM:
" Mankind lost the great library at Alexandria so I belive the library at the Vatican is perhaps the best we have available. Yet it is not open and available and much is hidden their,that will never see the light of day for it could destroy the Vatican dogma. If not,then their is no reason none whatsoever to not open up this library, digitize it for all to see and translate. Their may be other important writtings hidden in non-vatican yet religious buildings. Make no mistake the Vatican is powerfull and ruthless, just not in the open as in the past. By the way Burke was the perfect choice for that position, he can now rule in the footsteps of the inquisition, which still exists only under a different generic name. "
Senior Advocate wrote on Jun 30, 2008 10:36 AM:
" We really do not know the true story of Jesus.
We can surmise from the writings that he or someone like him did exist, yet we have no proof. We do not even know in what language the original writings were in. All we have is tranlations. the translations came long after his life. Paul himself had an agenda and it certainly does not seem to be to preserve in its pure form the teachings of this Jesus. When one begins to read all the various studies done it becomes clear that the original teachings were bastardized. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 9:02 PM:
" Eddie,
I never said you didn't have a right to comment. I was honestly wondering why you chose to comment on a subject whose basis you think is fictional.
If there was an story about how does the invisible spagetti monster's view on Marvel comics character the Hulk affect the level of violence in our society today, I would see it as idiocy and ignore it. Based on that, I believe that you really don't see Christianity as idiocy. I think you know there is something true in Christianity and your attempt to stir the pot is your way of seeking the truth.
I could be wrong, so that's why I asked for clarification. If you don't really want to clarify, then I guess I will just ignore you as per your desires. "
Eddie wrote on Jun 28, 2008 5:46 PM:
" Phil, I don't answer to you or to any other poster on this blog. I responded to Joe Orso's article because I felt like it. I gave my opinion on the subject. You have a right to your opinion, just like the rest of us have a right to ours. If you don't like my posts, then don't read them. Regarding huge egos - you know what happens when you point your finger at someone; you have three fingers pointing right back at you. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 5:09 PM:
" Eddie,
This question by Joe is for those who believe Jesus was real and/or the Bible is true.
I get that you think the Bible is false or unreliable. I get that you don't believe that Jesus was even real. So Eddie, why do you post on the FAITH page?
Either you can't really shake the yearning your soul has for it's savior and the truth...OR you have such a huge ego that you think you can convince us Christians that we are really insane and that you have the truth...OR you just want to 'stir the pot' as it were.
Please tell us why you post, so that we know how to respond or not respond.
Thanks. "
Eddie wrote on Jun 28, 2008 4:33 PM:
" It is impossible to know what Jesus really believed about violence, as we have no first-person writings from him. We don't even know for sure if he actually existed. All we have are a handful of hearsay accounts of what he allegedly did and said during a few months of his life. The best thing to do is to decide for ourselves that violence and warfare are immoral, and that they will not be supported in any way. We don't need a mythical superhero to tell us that. "
Michael Welch wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:40 PM:
" Early church 'fathers' such as Tertullian and Origen even felt a Christian could NOT be a soldier; and in the centuries before Constantine, Christians were periodically (not constantly by any means) persecuted for their refusal to perform what was considered a patriotic act (a 'loyalty oath' of sorts) -- the honoring of the emperor as a 'god' and symbol of the state. But once the state became the ally of Christianity (and later declared it the ONLY legally recognized religion) the strictures about violence, war et. al., HAD to be loopholed aside. The state, as long as it was deemed religiously meritorious, had the 'mandate of heaven' so to speak; its violence could then be divinely sanctioned -- see in particular the 'crusades,' which were actually termed PENETENTIAL rites, i. e., a Christian soldier LITERALLY (THAT word again!) killed a Muslim for Christ AND his own salvation... "
Michael Welch wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:14 PM:
" By the way I see that Fay Peaslee died; he was a prolific writer of religious 'tracts' to the Tribune in the form of letters to the editor and while I often winced at the cant aspect I admired him for his tenacity and obvious sincerity of purpose. As someone LONG disparaged myself, first on the Trib letters page, now on its blog(s), I recognize a fellow in stubbornness who got told time and time again to 'shut up.' Peaslee wouldn't and neither will I -- until now for Fay O and in time for me too. Fear not! -- it's only 'natural'; it's only Darwinian!... "
Michael Welch wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:06 PM:
" OF COURSE a Christian can ignore Jesus' pacifism and be as violent as the state tells him to be because the loopholes are built in; Paul's letter to the Romans 'permits' the state to 'fight evil' (how that's decided is a matter of political expediency and calculation but never mind) so Jesus' admonitions about violence are sequestered to public order, personal life (excepting the second amendment that you can pop away at home) and to a kind of fuzzed idealism that doesn't really 'work' or need to be taken seriously. Jesus says I bring a sword and Go buy a sword and that can 'trump' Peter put up that sword I told you to buy; I regret that now because it won't do any good because now I see that those who live by the sword die by it. Cold dead fingers indeed... "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 9:36 AM:
" Mack,
Where do you get your definition that evil is the absence of love? Not from the Bible, I can tell you that much.
A few quick examples: Jeremiah 23:10 tells us that adultery is evil. Many people involved in physical or spiritual adultery are experiencing love, love of sin. Micah 3:2 backs up the idea that some "love evil". In fact 1 Timothy 6:10 says that "the love of money is the root of all evil."
The rest of your post is a political discussion. This article is asking a deeper spiritual question, "Can a follower of Jesus support violence?" My answer, supported with Scripture, is yes. What is your answer and why. "
Mack wrote on Jun 28, 2008 8:41 AM:
" Phil has the yips, again. Evil is not an entity but an absense of love. It cannot be fought or stamped out. Why are we not at war with Saudi Arabia and why did God tell George W. Bush to unjustly attack Iraq? Because we have enough people following the two biggest drama queens in the world, GWB and Bin Laden. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 7:50 AM:
" As for justified war, and whether Christians should be for or against actual physical violence, that is between the individual and God.
Jesus is the same "I AM" of the Old Testament. The "I AM" of the Old Testament had peaceful preachers like Samuel and warrior leaders like David. There is a need to protect the innocent and punish evil. Paul even tells us that rulers who do such things are ministers of God. (Romans 13:3-4) "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 7:45 AM:
" So how do these verses work together?
If you truely love your neighbor as yourself, you will tell them of their sins and the results of sin. This gives them the opportunity to repent of their sins and accept Jesus as their savior. If they do that, you have shown them the greatest gift God has offered to all people.
The reality is that people don't like being told of what God calls sin and the punishment for sin and that will set Christians at odds with family, friends, and neighbors. You see it on these blogs almost every day, and you will surely see that on this blog. "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 7:40 AM:
" Matthew 5:43-44 "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;"
Matthew 22:37-40 "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." "
Phil O'Bates wrote on Jun 28, 2008 7:36 AM:
" Matthew 10:34-39 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man's foes [shall be] they of his own household.
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." "