I have a friend who pastors a little non demoninational church, a good man with a family who works a job, sometimes two, to support them rather than being supported by his parishoners – I have a lot of respect for that.
He never attempts to force his beliefs upon me or I mine upon him, but sometimes religion comes up in conversations – one time when it did I mentioned the “god fearing” aspect and asked if a child should fear their father or a wife her husband?
He replied no and he never liked the term god fearing, that he felt it was better to substitute fear with respect, I agree.
It’s a logical conclusion to base fear upon injury – a person could be afraid of being run over by a car, but should they live in fear of cars, or fashion their life around such a fear?
You know a knife can cause injury, should you live in fear of knives and rid your kitchen of them ?
I don’t think so, and imagine there’s probably some psychological syndrome associated with that if anyone did. Better to be respectful of both than fearful.
This “fear” of god, a creator, or spirits has led to ritual sacrifice, inquisitions, and dominance by religious hierarchies, not to mention manipulations – I can’t help but wonder if Christians find that acceptable?
Abraham was so “god fearing” when “tested” by being called upon to offer his son as a sacrifice he was willing to do just that.
So here’s a question ……. if you believe in a higher power and that power told you to kill a child of your’s would you? Is your “faith” such that you would? How about someone else’s child, any child?
Well, children are routinley killed in wars and regional conflicts, some at the hand of Christian nations, but I suppose that’s somehow different isn’t? Collateral damage is the euphemism.
It’s different that our children were, different that they were swung by their feet to bash their heads against a rock or tree…… different to those who performed the act but never different to the nations as a people.
Not different to Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, or anyone else when it comes to children of their own who are – then it is brutal, evil, an atrocity, a holocaust, and the commission of war crimes.
As a people, as nations, we’ve done our share of killing and I won’t pander to the romantic imagery that we were somehow above all that, but I believe it can truthfully be said we never did so waving a religious banner in front of us intent on “saving” anyone even if it meant killing them, or stealing their children to send away and be indoctrined by beating or sexually abusing them into submissive acceptance.
Fundamentalists are big on this fear, especially those who lead their congregations, it’s a tool some employ in being “anointed” much the same as priests and their church employ “confession”.
Christians want respect merely for being a christian, I don’t believe that’s ever been the way it’s worked, no one in my opinion is above earning it.
Their book says something about good works won’t get them into heaven but yet they’ll be known by their works.
I always thought there was something a little contradictory in that, but what it actually amounts to is an exclusionary clause – you can be good person, live a moral life, have integrity, and love your neighbors, but none of that matters if you’re not a Christian.It’s the same with with Muslims – if you’re not a Muslim then you’re out of luck.
There’s a coercive element in that as well demonstrated by the above photo.
And of course what is the implied threat? Personal injury delivered by the very one
they believe in.
That sounds really harsh doesn’t it? Well, turns out there’s something of a codicil for Christians at least – the terms vary depending on whose reciting them but the gist is when the end comes people will be raised from their graves and those who never “heard” the word will be given the opportunity to accept it.
Sounds fair enough doesn’t it? The circumstances could surely influence the decision making process though – here you are resurrected after who knows how long a time and the choice is to believe or return to the grave with the fear factor in evidence once again.
It may sound as though I’m anti christianity – I’m not per se, what I’m against is a large percentage of it’s history. I’m anti hypocrisy, the frauds who populate the media airwaves taking advantage of people to enrich themselves and denouncing everything and everyone who doesn’t agree with their particular interpretation, their “prosperity doctrine”, and the zealots who see demonic, satanic forces behind everything.
Most of all though I’m anti politicians whose professed and often times questionable
personal religious beliefs become a coin of the realm for them while pursuing their
Today’s Republican candidates and to large extent the party itself are the 21st Centuries version of Joe McCarthy and McCarthyism – it’s all about fear mongering and the terrorist/communist threat.
They’re not advising you to build a bomb shelter or for schools to terrorize children with film presentations of nuclear explosions, no they’re focussing on ISIS, Muslims, immigration, carpet bombing and basically nuking someone, and in lieu of bomb shelters a wall.
The “reds” aren’t coming, it’s those “raping, murdering, crime committing Mexicans” and every Muslim who is surely making a bomb in their garage or basement.
Communism and Putin are still the underlying threat, as an enemy to talk up they have a proven value, but now they get to add China, North Korea, and of course terrorists, all the while ignoring the fact that U.S. adventurism, policies, the “exceptionalism” of American Christianity, and corporate greed are in no small measure responsible for cultivating existing enemies.
The mantra is this a Christian nation and we don’t want no “damn Muslims” here , well, whats the difference in that and Muslims saying their’s is a Muslim nation and they don’t want no “damn christians” there?
If a Muslim were a Christian and a Christian a Muslim they’d be saying the same thing wouldn’t they, so again what’s the difference?
There really isn’t other than religious beliefs and sense of religious superiority when you get down to it – true believers vs idolators and infidels depending on which side you’re on.
Should we blame one and all merely on the basis of their religious beliefs, or what they actually do and say?
Muslims believe a mandate exists for them to proselytize the world – you don’t have to agree with them as I don’t, but Christians believe the same thing – which I also don’t agree with.
Furthermore when you resort to violence to accomplish that end as both Islam and Christianity have done then they can both talk to the hand as far as I’m concerned and neither can claim any moral high ground.
Jihads are Islam’s version of “holy wars” – the Crusades and genocidial policies directed
against the indigenous people of this hemisphere were Christian Jihads and again demonstrate the lack of a moral high ground.
In the 21st Centurys version of McCarthyism blacklists have become more encompassing, more sophisticated – lists compiled by rampant domestic spying and “politically correct”word police among other things.
Having dared to employ the words nuking, Jihad, and nuclear explosions in as innocent a
context as I have they nonetheless will be noticed and logged by the word police.
Other innocent word applications like if I were to say in the AFC playoffs the Panthers “bombed” the Cardinals that too would draw attention.
I say such things are proof that McCarthyism is alive and well and the Republican party being the party of McCarthy has beome the standard bearer with a personalized tweak of
making it all about evangelical Christianity.
Just as the nations have a fight on their hands to reclaim culture and traditions so too do Christians if they want to do something more than talk the talk – they can begin that process by understanding when they’re being played, when their “fear” is being preyed upon, when they’re being manipulated, and saying enough.
Christians say they believe relying on faith when they can’t really explain something, if that’s meant to be the ultimate qualifier then they’re kind of obliged to admit that the essence of all religions come down to a belief that relies on faith – apparently when taking into consideration all the existing religions and denominations faith becomes a matter of geographic and cultural influence.
I don’t believe all Republicans are fundamentalist evangelicals, if they aren’t it seems
like those who aren’t would be a little concerned and make an effort to have their voices heard.
They’d rid themselves of the “generation of vipers” who claim to speak for them.