next »

[dark_globe]

What appears to me, and this is only wild conjecture, I admit, is that you are posing as a Christian in order to make Christians look bad.  If so, you are succeeding admirably. This may be far from the truth, and if so, I apologize profusely, but that is the appearence to my eyes.

That's what I think, too.

I've talked to many fundamentalist Christians, and the vast majority of them are very nice, sincere, concerned people.

[kaysixteen]

Enough, already.  I have answered Untenured's lame questions repeatedly.  I am now forced into defending my status as a 'Conservative Christian'.  But of course, just as anyone can claim to be a 'Christian', so anyone can also claim to be a conservative one.  Words mean nothing, as also does anyone's interaction with any other self-professed Christians.  And anonymous cyberfora are hardly the proper venue for serious analysis of a person, his claims, and his character, anyhow.  I think many of the people who regularly post here are Christophobic liberal nutjobs, and lame scholars too, and, of course, I know what the majority of the regulars think of me, as well.  Probably neither opinions are exactly correct, but who can tell?  I am convinced my faith is true, and my understanding of that faith superior to those who do not profess it at all, as well as to those who claim to do so but regularly deny interpretations thereof that have been standard throughout church history.  I could be wrong, of course, but the onus lies entirely on the revisionists to prove the accuracy of those revisionist claims.  Notice, however, that I do not claim that anyone here is NOT what he claims to be (i.e., that he's really a spoiled 15yo smart aleck,  or a fifth-columnist working against the community he claims to represent).  Jesus Christ himself clearly teaches that the world hates Him, and on that basis hates and persecutes those who claim to be his followers.  One need not pretend to be a Christian to see that this is true enough.

[untenured]

Enough, already.  I have answered Untenured's lame questions repeatedly.

Where?  Where???? Please dear Lord show me where you have answered them.

Give me a link, anything!  No, those previous posts don't count.  They are not answers but part of the attack, distract, ignore response I've heard plenty of already.

Do you want me to post the question again?

Untenured

[pyshnov]

This article is not a satire, as some say. The article is a sadistic and absolutely stupid writing.

That someone who claims to be a Christian would drag in political arguments seems crazy. To say that "academic feminists" should hate this article more than anyone else is crazy. Kaysixteen stands as far from reason and morality as this article from a satire.

Fundamentalist Christians are now used for dishonest political purposes, this is an epidemics. Some of them must start objecting to these uses. I have not seen any such statements, but may be I missed. Certainly, such objections would not be much publicised by neo-cons editors.

This article is consciously written in a spirit of smashing everything. And this spirit is felt everywhere. 

[new_maisy]

Here's an article where the article's author describes his intentions:

Student Writer Faces Angry Audience
 Petroski Apologises For "Satire" On Rape

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-angry-group,0,2696299.story

[hcx100]

I wonder what the response here would be if the article had advocated male rape as a way to "loosen up" conservative Christians.

Which brings me to another question (in all seriousness)... can someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me? Because, although I am not Christian,  I always viewed Christ to be pretty liberal himself. I mean, the whole "it's easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle" malarky sounds pretty downright Communist to me, and I've never heard a political Conservative with that kind of view.  Is it some kind of selective Conservativism, or what?

I don't live in the USA, and I must say that as an "outsider" I've always looked at the American Fundamental and Conservative Christians with a bit of confusion and curiosity. How can someone who believes in sharing, love and forgiveness as their basic tenets be so full of hate, vengeance and selfishnessness? Can anyone explain this to me?

[infopri]

I note that Petroski (a sophomore, by the way), has been removed from his editorial post, but will be allowed to continue writing for the paper on a limited basis--presumably under the supervision of the new opinions editor.  That strikes me as an appropriate outcome, assuming that the new editor has some actual judgment.

A lot of people apparently don't believe Petroski's apology was sincere.  I wasn't there, so I can't judge, but I can certainly believe this following statement is true:

"I didn't understand the harm it would cause, how it would reopen all these wounds for people," [Petroski] said.

My guess is that it never occurred to him how his column would affect readers who had experienced rape.

I said in an earlier post that I don't know what kind of person this Petroski actually is.  That's still true.  But I hope that, in any case, he is the type who can learn from this experience and become a better person. 

[pyshnov]

case_insensitive:

I doubt these days that any reasonably intelligent folk believe that the Bible (taken as a whole) teaches us to condone slavery of any kind.

The Bible as a whole? Old Testament approves acts that are inconsistent with Christ. On the other side, Christ said that He did not come to violate the Law (i.e. Old Testament), but to uphold the Law. On the third side, Christ clearly did not respect the Law when He said that what is coming to your mouth is not as important as what is coming out of your mouth. And so on and on.

I would say that Christ may be meant this: what was in the past was good for the past, but not good for the times to come.

After His Earthly life ended, Orthodox Jews became even more radicalised, but some Jews adopted parts of Christian custom and ideas never, though, admitting this. They were scolded by the Orthodox Jews. Christians also differ in the degree of acceptance of Old Testament. Now, fundamentalists/conservative Christians in US make it a huge point to support Israel, as they say, from Biblical viewpoint. But, I think, - it's political.

I think when taking the Bible as a whole we should admit the fact that in the beginning, it, indeed, approves acts that today are crimes. And, the two parts of Bible are not without a bridge: the prophets at the latter parts of the Old Testament (not recognized as the holly text by Orthodox Jews) made grim predictions about the future of Israel, seeing in their own way what Christ later preached.

[francie_]

Petrosky's column may be the stupidest, most offensive thing I've read in quite a while.  If it's intended as satire of overly-sensationalist media, there's not even a whiff of that exuding from the rest of that vile heap of excrement.  In his apology and statements, I think he's clinging to the hope that any attention is good attention.  I'm not sure it will help him in because there are limits on the use controversy to launch one's career.

What saddens me is that he actually seems to have paid attention in his ancient history course, and maybe even in his art history courses where images of the Sabine women abound.

However, this thread turned quickly into referendum on k16's character, and I feel the need to comment a bit about that too.

Jesus Christ himself clearly teaches that the world hates Him, and on that basis hates and persecutes those who claim to be his followers.  One need not pretend to be a Christian to see that this is true enough.

Oh k16.  Is this how you view Christ, and what it means to be a Christian, that is, to be the eternal victim?  That is so narrow, and so sad.  Here on the fora, I can't help but notice you frequently state you feel persecuted or victimized.  I hope it is not the same for you in your real life.  Truly I do.

[crazybatlady]

I agree, Francie.

Related to Petrosky's believe that he should have ownership claims to his girlfriend's uterus, here's another gem--this time, from Ohio:

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/state/16469999.htm

Shall we re-consider the Wal-Mart controversy, or should pharmacists have this kind of power over women's lives?

cbl

[gennidad]

Which brings me to another question (in all seriousness)... can someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me? Because, although I am not Christian,  I always viewed Christ to be pretty liberal himself. I mean, the whole "it's easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle" malarkey sounds pretty downright Communist to me, and I've never heard a political Conservative with that kind of view.  Is it some kind of selective Conservatism, or what?

I don't live in the USA, and I must say that as an "outsider" I've always looked at the American Fundamental and Conservative Christians with a bit of confusion and curiosity. How can someone who believes in sharing, love and forgiveness as their basic tenets be so full of hate, vengeance and selfishnessness? Can anyone explain this to me?

The rich man "malarkey" is referring to the two deadly sins most closely tied to money, Pride and greed. 

As for how Christians being so full of hate, vengeance and selfishness; the are no perfect than any other human being.  The goal is to be full of love and forgiveness but we often fall short of that mark.  It is extremely hard to love when all you receive back is hatred or ridicule.  And then there is the problem of the loudmouths who claim to be Christian but usually trigger the aforementioned hatred and ridicule with their unchristianlike behavior.

[adhoc]

[C]an someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me?

Don't hold your breath waiting for an answer to this one.  At least not for an answer that makes any kind of sense.  I was once told by such a person that it was, by defintion, not possible for a Christian to be a liberal.  Part of what makes this so nuts is that one particularly derogatory phrase in their verbal arsenal is "bleeding heart liberal."  Now, while I do claim to be a Christian, I do not claim to be a Biblical scholar.  I have, however, read enough to believe that the "bleeding heart" part is a reference to Christ. (I am open to discussing this if actual Biblical scholars disagree.)

Anyway, I think that in the US "conservative Christian" has  become more of a political identity than a religious one.  It has little, if anything, to do with being Christian and everything to do with supporting an extreme right-wing agenda.

[dark_globe]

Which brings me to another question (in all seriousness)... can someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me? Because, although I am not Christian,  I always viewed Christ to be pretty liberal himself. I mean, the whole "it's easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle" malarkey sounds pretty downright Communist to me, and I've never heard a political Conservative with that kind of view.  Is it some kind of selective Conservatism, or what?

I don't live in the USA, and I must say that as an "outsider" I've always looked at the American Fundamental and Conservative Christians with a bit of confusion and curiosity. How can someone who believes in sharing, love and forgiveness as their basic tenets be so full of hate, vengeance and selfishnessness? Can anyone explain this to me?

The rich man "malarkey" is referring to the two deadly sins most closely tied to money, Pride and greed. 

What do you mean by malarkey? That Christianity does not frown upon the rich? Because these verses seem pretty straightforward:

Luke 6/23 "Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their fathers treated the prophets.
 24"But woe to you who are rich,
      for you have already received your comfort.
 25Woe to you who are well fed now,
      for you will go hungry.

Luke 18/18A certain ruler asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
 19"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone. 20You know the commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.'"

 21"All these I have kept since I was a boy," he said.

 22When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

 23When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was a man of great wealth. 24Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! 25Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

[dark_globe]

Which brings me to another question (in all seriousness)... can someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me? Because, although I am not Christian,  I always viewed Christ to be pretty liberal himself. I mean, the whole "it's easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle" malarkey sounds pretty downright Communist to me, and I've never heard a political Conservative with that kind of view.  Is it some kind of selective Conservatism, or what?

I don't live in the USA, and I must say that as an "outsider" I've always looked at the American Fundamental and Conservative Christians with a bit of confusion and curiosity. How can someone who believes in sharing, love and forgiveness as their basic tenets be so full of hate, vengeance and selfishnessness? Can anyone explain this to me?

The rich man "malarkey" is referring to the two deadly sins most closely tied to money, Pride and greed. 

As for how Christians being so full of hate, vengeance and selfishness; the are no perfect than any other human being.  The goal is to be full of love and forgiveness but we often fall short of that mark.  It is extremely hard to love when all you receive back is hatred or ridicule.  And then there is the problem of the loudmouths who claim to be Christian but usually trigger the aforementioned hatred and ridicule with their unchristianlike behavior.

On the other hand, I so agree with your last point here. The overwhelming majority of Christians I have known have been the most wonderful people--as have the overwhelming majority of Muslims I have known. The loudmouths in both faiths are, unfortunately, loud, and certainly do give these faiths reputations they most certainly do not deserve.

[gennidad]

Which brings me to another question (in all seriousness)... can someone explain the concept of a "conservative Christian" to me? Because, although I am not Christian,  I always viewed Christ to be pretty liberal himself. I mean, the whole "it's easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle" malarkey sounds pretty downright Communist to me, and I've never heard a political Conservative with that kind of view.  Is it some kind of selective Conservatism, or what?

I don't live in the USA, and I must say that as an "outsider" I've always looked at the American Fundamental and Conservative Christians with a bit of confusion and curiosity. How can someone who believes in sharing, love and forgiveness as their basic tenets be so full of hate, vengeance and selfishnessness? Can anyone explain this to me?

The rich man "malarkey" is referring to the two deadly sins most closely tied to money, Pride and greed. 

What do you mean by malarkey? That Christianity does not frown upon the rich? Because these verses seem pretty straightforward:

Notice that malarkey was in quotes.  I did not use the word first nor do I agree that the idea is malarkey.   It was merely the word already used, sorry if I did not make it clear that I did not agree that it was malarkey.