Automotive Deals Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Crown the Empire Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Ruby jewelry Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Water Sports
Customer Discussions > Christianity forum

Jesus embodies the Unconditional Love of God for us.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Posted on Jan 20, 2013 12:23:01 AM PST
kaioatey says:
Ever since Nicea Christianity has become a haven for the power hungry and the morbid. Augustine, Ireneus et consortes did their best to manufacture the concept of sin which in a way was a brilliant ploy to exert social-spiritual dominance over the flock. Jesus' real message became diluted and almost disappeared....

... reading what some of these true believers have to say is horrifying, as is listening to Xian talk radio. I sometimes turn on a station purely to feast on delusion. In a way, obsession with sin/hell is *living* in a hell on Earth. Purity of the soul, on the other hand, is sheer happiness. It is loving your fellow man. It means seeing the sadness, the density, the ignorance of the hell-peddlers.It is what Jesus of Nazareth left with us.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 11:39:51 PM PST
Joe Anthony says:
"Here For the Music Says":

"'Jesus embodies the Unconditional Love of God for us.'...I'm still trying to understand why any Christian would want to argue with that."

I say:

No Christian here was arguing with it.

The thread is misnamed.

It's not about the love of Jesus Christ at all...

...it's about how Anne Rice feels about Christians; and if you go back and even skim through the thread, she says over again and again how she doesn't like Christianity or Christians for that matter.

The name of thread should be:

"What I say is wrong with Christianity"

It's bait and switch.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 8:05:39 PM PST
Anne Rice, To funny! Thankfully Louis Rupreght is not to be taken seriously, since he is not well versed in Holy Scripture, for John's gospel does also incline Christians to compassion, (John 13:35, John 5:29, John 8:11), and also has Jesus' anxiety about His approaching death as well. (John 13;38, John 13:21). PLUS, John's gospel, like Mark's and Matthew, also affirms Peter's primacy. So much for Luther's favorite gospel. Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 7:52:09 PM PST
Anne Rice, Jesus our God was kind enough to warn us of the reality of hell for those who do evil and show no remorse. Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 7:51:09 PM PST
Anne Rice, The incarnation is absurd, fallible, and insulting to God, as must be the atonement, for although BOTH are biblical, (John 1;14, Luke 2:11, Genesis 22:8, John 1:29, Exodus 21;7, 1 Peter 1;19, Matthew 1:21, Isaiah 53;10,12, 1 John 1;7), both were written by mere men, no? Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 5:36:50 PM PST
Anne Rice says:
I hear you.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 5:25:46 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2016 3:23:57 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 10, 2012 5:14:55 PM PST
Anne Rice says:
Oh, my dear friend,you would be amazed.
Read through the thread.
For many Christians, unfortunately the "Good News" of their
gospel is that the vast majority of all human beings born on this
planet end up in Hell.
Don't believe me? Just read through the posts.

Posted on Nov 10, 2012 4:55:47 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2016 3:23:57 PM PDT]

Posted on Nov 10, 2012 9:45:25 AM PST
Anne Rice says:
I'd like to talk a little more this morning about a book
I just finished, "This Tragic Gospel: How John Corrupted the Heart of
Christianity, " by Louis A Ruprecht, Jr. This Tragic Gospel: How John Corrupted the Heart of Christianity

I discovered this book
quite by accident on Amazon, ordered it and have now read it from
start to finish, and I heartily recommend it.

The book will provide amazing clarity I think not only on the
history of Christianity as a contentious and argumentative religion,
but also on much of what happens in the Christianity Forum.

Essentially Ruprecht argues that the Gospel of John
deliberately contradicts the Gospel of Mark in major theological
ways, and that the Gospel of John indicates its author wanted to
supplant the other gospels, and to supplant the authority of
other gospel figures such as Peter, Thomas or Mary of Magdala.

The author gives an interesting and detailed analysis of Mark
and John, pointing out the dramatic departures in John from Mark
(and also from Matthew and Luke). And suggests that Christianity has
been wrestling with these conflicting views throughout a lot of its
history.

Ruprecht also talks about Martin Luther's preference for John over
the other gospels and how this has influenced the Evangelical movement, especially in this country.

It is the author's view that Mark is a gospel which inclines Christians to compassion.
He argues that the Gospel of John is not.
In Mark Jesus prays fervently (in Gethsemane)
to have the cup of his passion taken away.
But submits his will to the will of God.

The Gospel of John essentially mocks this
suffering Jesus, in the author's view, by not having
any agony in Gethsemane at all, and presenting a resolute
Jesus in total command as He faces arrest.

But there is a lot more to the book than this.
A lot more.

I found this book powerfully illuminating,
and even if one does not agree with the author's conclusions,
it is a book that immerses one quite completely in the gospels it discusses,
drawing attention to aspects of these gospels that one might have overlooked in
the past.

The book though completely sound is for the popular reader,
and not laden with thick footnotes on every page,(the notes are at the end)
and very readable. The author has done a mastery job of
tackling an immense subject and doing it very well.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 2:16:35 PM PST
PJA, Well, there is ONLY one God, and this ONE GOD became man. That is indeed different! and not only did the Eternal God, the Word, become flesh, but He atoned for the Eternal punishment due our sins. (Matthew 1:21, Isaiah 43;3, John 1;1, John 1:14, 1 Peter 1;19). Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Christ

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 2:14:35 PM PST
Anne Rice, Indeed, as God even loves those in hell, YET, Jesus our God was kind enough to warn us of the reality of hell for those who do evil and show no remorse. Hell can be emptied if they repent of the evil they have done to others and want to be with God, but they don't. Peace always in the Most Precious Blood of Jesus our Great God and Saviour

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 1:53:02 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2012 1:53:37 PM PST
Jack Vix says:
Life isn't a test at all. I just care about the truth more than appearances. We didn't evolve to think logically. We listened to the tribal wisdom of the elders and it's generally a good rule to survive at first, but once we're old enough to think for ourselves it's not necessary to employ that method in determining what is true. It doesn't mean we need to fool ourselves and have unjustified beliefs. You can avoid pain that way but I don't think one should avoid anything uncomfortable, especially doubt. Whether we call ourselves "spiritual" or not, we don't need to believe anything on lack of evidence to live fulfilling lives.

I think desperately clinging to answers without regard to validity is a sign of suffering shoved down deep, not a virtue. It's sad. There are no answers, there are just questions. But people are too desperate for maps rather than accepting question marks.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 1:08:59 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2016 3:23:28 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 1:07:33 PM PST
Joe Anthony says:
Anne Rice says to Jack Vix:

"You're argumentative and aggressive and unpleasant."

I say to Anne Rice:

You're right. Jack is an argumentative and aggressive sort who is much of the time unpleasant; at least on these forums; perhaps not off-line.

Even so, if we go back to page 48; you and Jack were getting along FAMOUSLY with you saying, "Oh Jack, your so right" and "Oh Jack that was correct, what you just said."

As long as Jack was up there criticizing Christians and what we Christians believe and trying to make Christians look like a bunch of malicious fools, you and he were fawning all over each other; but as soon as Jack turned on you and started criticizing YOU; then all of the sudden he became "aggressive" and "argumentative".

There again, when you're up there hanging the Inquisition around the neck of every sincere Christian; that's also OK...right?

As the poet, Bob Dylan used to sing:

"How does it feel...to be on your own...like a rolling stone?"

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:49:15 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2012 12:53:22 PM PST
Jack Vix says:
See you always say things like this. I NEVER asked you to *prove* anything.

I was persistent because I wanted to know. I was curious why you believed. It's a very simple thing you could have just said the first time. Now I know. I thought it might be more impressive than the typical creationist reason is all.

Posted on Nov 9, 2012 12:44:49 PM PST
Jack Vix says:
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -Thomas Jefferson

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:42:00 PM PST
Anne Rice says:
Good points.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:41:21 PM PST
Anne Rice says:
No, it's more than just a conversation. You've been pounding
me with your demands over and over and over again.
I've told you in every way I know how that I'm not interested in "proving" anything
to you about my faith in God. But you simply won't accept it. You keep attempting
to force the issue.
You're argumentative and aggressive and unpleasant.

Again, this is not the topic of this thread.
And I'm not the topic of it either.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:34:58 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2012 12:39:47 PM PST
Joe W says:
I am not sure if that is possible, even for factually true beliefs. I will have to think about that.

EDIT: Anne's post brought it into focus for me. I do not think that we can get through our lives without doing harm, however close our beliefs may be to reality. The positively moral point to having as many true and as few false belief as possible is to be able to understand the effects of ones actions for good or ill. Usually both. Understanding allows us to mitigate the harm we do, if only by taking responsibility for it. With false beliefs, the effects of our passage is chaotic and ignorant.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:34:05 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 9, 2012 12:40:20 PM PST
Jack Vix says:
How am I irrational? I would, unlike you, correct myself if there was logical fallacies in my reasoning. Not being attached to an ideology, if you make sense I will change my mind on something right away. You deflect with things I'm explicitly and obviously not trying to do. I'm not "proving" anything, I'm demonstrating logical deductions. You projecting your emotions onto that is not "me" being emotional.

You can put yourself in the "good ones" box but that's not the point at all. I'm not worried about you doing anything crazy or harming anyone. This has nothing to do with anything, it's not like I'm attacking you. I'm pointing out irrationalism and questioning why and getting nihil.

I don't want anything more. You shouldn't be so defensive, this is just a conversation I've been TRYING to have with you that you wouldn't let up until now. To see your reasoning for believing, which is logically fallacious as I suspected. Of course I would get no real reciprocation from the conversation as I've learned in my attempts to discuss it.

You take things way too personally. Why don't you question your beliefs instead of just saying that's how you see it? Questioning and doubting is progress.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 12:19:19 PM PST
Jack Vix says:
Well, that's separate from whether it's true. To say that something is useful or makes you happy is not to say that it's true. That's intellectual suicide. Truthiness is not a fact based exercise. Either something is true or it isn't. If it is true you should believe it, and if it isn't you shouldn't. If you don't know whether something is true or not, you should suspend judgment. Holding a belief because you think it's useful, and not because you think it's true is only the belief in belief and not belief itself.

Sure it feels good to believe there's a Santa. It might feel good to get an A on an F paper, but is it best to live a lie? Should people just keep the Santa going into their 30's if it's useful?

One might believe because they think life would be intolerable without Him. Maybe life is just intolerable to them. A lot of things are intolerable, but it doesn't make them untrue. If you were starving, that might be intolerable but you won't make a stone edible by believing - no matter how passionately - that it's made of cheese.

Pragmatism isn't a reason to believe something is true. If I believe that it's useful to eat food when hungry, that's true and useful. However, it's not the same as believing I've instantly got a burger in my hand the moment I'm hungry. It would be easier and useful if it were true, and I would be really joyful about it, but I have no reason to believe it.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 11:31:03 AM PST
Anne Rice says:
I understand your concern, because religionists have done a lot of harm to others
with their beliefs. This is fully documented throughout Western history.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 11:30:35 AM PST
Anne Rice says:
I agree. The comfort derived from believing what like minded people
believe is proof of nothing really. The truth of a belief, the validity of it
cannot be "proved" by whatever psychological good it does for one, or social
good for that matter.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 9, 2012 10:46:45 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 15, 2016 3:23:27 PM PDT]
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 52 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Christianity forum

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1197 8 days ago
Mary was not sinless. 6272 1 minute ago
The END TIMES of ATHEISM and atheist forum bullies 290 33 minutes ago
moment-of-broken-ness, part 2 9655 1 hour ago
Eternal life is obtained through faith in the atonement Jesus made. 4908 1 hour ago
World leaders alone - and not Religions - can call to God for the end of this era 11 2 hours ago
If a man dies will he live again? Or, is physical death the end? 656 3 hours ago
This is why atheism is growing throughout the world... 74 4 hours ago
Christianity described as a 'profitable fable' by an early pope. 83 6 hours ago
The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-day Saints is Christian. 7491 6 hours ago
Tim Kaine, a Catholic who believes in good works is VP pick on the Hillary Democratic ticket! 1 6 hours ago
Transgender Individuals 7215 7 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Christianity forum
Participants:  49
Total posts:  1285
Initial post:  Oct 17, 2012
Latest post:  Jan 20, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions