Quoted from Andrew ...I've definitely seen some very lopsided evaluations of what's OK to discuss with religion. On the one hand, posting pro-religious comments is deemed unnecessary, and yet, calling religion out for being nonsense is accepted because it appears to be the general consensus of the board.

I readily acknowledge the truth to this -- and from a moderator perspective -- this is one of the key issues that makes this topic difficult.

Quoted from Andrew The right to expression goes both ways.

But there is also the double-standard that goes unrecognized by the other side of the aisle.

When Faith-based scripts are posted -- you have to look, but they're around -- the non-believers NEVER jump on there and start trouble -- bashing the author and stirring up debate -- "utter garbage" or "What a horrible person you must be!"

But post a satire of faith, and here come the rightous -- boldly proclaiming that it is their God-given right to spring into action -- as if an all-powerful deity was somehow in need of their defense.

This is the other double-standard I struggle with.

Unless it's billed a "true story", it's just not in fair territory to judge a script based on personal religious beliefs that conflict with the fictitious material.

The reviews of Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter were poor because the film was arguably poor, not because there was any debate over whether Lincoln actually hunted vampires.

Seconded that Jesus, human male, existed. There's no reasonable doubt about this.

This is no proof whatsoever that Jesus, magical being, existed. Or performed miracles.

(I hope this part of the discussion isn't off topic.)

Quoted from bert When Faith-based scripts are posted -- you have to look, but they're around -- the non-believers NEVER jump on there and start trouble -- bashing the author and stirring up debate -- "utter garbage" or "What a horrible person you must be!"

Bert that was one incident. And I'm referring to the "utter garbage"  post.   And nobody ever told anybody 'they're a horrible person".  You threw that in as an exageration, IMO.

You're taking one recent isolated incident and making a mountain out of a molehill  

Now if you're gonna drudge up crap from two years ago, then that's a whole different story, but personally I think I've done very well on biting my tongue as of late.   Anyhow, I know these discussions give you a headache so I'll try to let sleeping dogs lie.  Have a great day.  

Quoted from Andrew Whether it's intentional or not, I've definitely seen some very lopsided evaluations of what's OK to discuss with religion. On the one hand, posting pro-religious comments is deemed unnecessary, and yet, calling religion out for being nonsense is accepted because it appears to be the general consensus of the board. .

Totally true.

I may not have worded that correctly. I meant Christianity as a movement would not survived if based on a figment of imagination.

If the stories you referenced had not survived I would have been stuck reading a lot more James Joyce in college (that might have driven me to switching to a Business minor...the 9-1 female-to-male student ratio wasn't working for me anyway despite the odds).

Christians have had a problem over the years of feeling threatened too often. I've never understood the insecurities if one is grounded and has a grasp on what they believe.

Don't forget that there was a time when Christianity was the big bully in the known world.


Phil

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIK3GXdkxL0

According to video scripture, Jesus worked at a video store:

Gospel of Seth, 4: 8(season 4 episode )

So it was drawn, so it was done.
-------------------------------------------

I was raised a Catholic. The image of Jesus given to us was more love and not so much hellfire and brimstone.

I prefer my Jesus with a sense of humor.

Boy it's gettin'  hot 'round here.



http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+20&version=KJV

Quoted from KevinLenihan I prefer my Jesus with a sense of humor.

I remember hearing a comedian, years ago, who discussed Heaven and Hell.  He said (paraphrasing) that the evil people who gambled and drank and had sex all the time went to Hell.  In Hell, they drank and gambled and had sex all the time.  All the good people who prayed all the time went to Heaven... where there was harp music.

He added that, since man was made in God's image and we had a sense of humor, then God must have a sense of humor.

This comedian doesn't like God's sense of humor.


Phil

The Jews expected their messiah to be a kick a$$ kind of guy who would lead armies against Rome.

The image we have of Jesus is nothing like that. Though the image is not consistent from gospel to gospel. The Jesus of John is more loving, the Jesus of Luke is more angry and bad ass. Maybe that's Michael's Jesus.

But overall, the message of Jesus that emerges is a more spiritual one. Mohammed led armies, Jesus would never have. The 'love thy neighbor' philosophy seems to be the  strongest and most consistent message to emerge, and is probably closest to historical reality.

In any case, a more human and humble Jesus would be able to laugh at himself. In the end, those that can do that bring more peace to the world. Which I thought was the goal.

...and Christianity as the bully wasn't the result of anything Biblical. Twisted the Word, maybe...I've never said The Church's history was perfect. There's a long, sad, violent history. Several modern televanganlists haven't helped the image either.

It's easy to look at all that and discount the religion. Those actions aren't what Christianity is all about.

And there really is non-Biblical and non-Christian sources about Jesus performing miracles, his execution and speaking to hundreds of people following his death. Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus...and others.

Quoted from KevinLenihan The Jews expected their messiah to be a kick a$$ kind of guy who would lead armies against Rome. The image we have of Jesus is nothing like that. Though the image is not consistent from gospel to gospel. The Jesus of John is more loving, the Jesus of Luke is more angry and bad ass. Maybe that's Michael's Jesus. But overall, the message of Jesus that emerges is a more spiritual one. Mohammed led armies, Jesus would never have. The 'love thy neighbor' philosophy seems to be the  strongest and most consistent message to emerge, and is probably closest to historical reality. In any case, a more human and humble Jesus would be able to laugh at himself. In the end, those that can do that bring more peace to the world. Which I thought was the goal.

Sure, Kevin, Jesus is all about love but he's also come with a sword.

http://biblia.com/bible/nasb95/Matthew%2010.34-36

http://search.yahoo.com/search.....top&fr=yfp-t-900

Furthermore if I see a blind man walking toward a cliff and all I say is "Jesus loves you have a great day", but I don't 'try" to warn him of his impending doom, then that's not love.  Of course that blind man also has a God-given right to refuse the help.  

Quoted from CrusaderVoice . And there really is non-Biblical and non-Christian sources about Jesus performing miracles, his execution and speaking to hundreds of people following his death. Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus...and others.

Those "accounts" were written at least 100 years after the events based on oral tradition stories.  Using the same logic we can say that something like Beowulf is true.   There is no way to verify what actually happened based on what Tacitus wrote - in a court of law it would be considered hearsay and not admissible as evidence.    

Arrrhhhhhhh!!!!

That's all I have to say on the issue - I trust you have all learnt from my wisdom.

Strange, I thought we normally discussed scripts on this site,  oh and why Jeff's in a bad mood etc etc

Ok, ok, ok....one last word...

Respect

It's all we ask. You don't need to agree, or understand, or believe,  but also you don't need to offend. Likewise respect doesn't need to preach - that applies to either side- or try and convert. Besides, it never works.

I don't intend to return to this thread.

Sleep well folks.

Ps Will - nice idea, sorry it hasn't worked out. Not your fault.

From the link Michael gave.

"For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law"

I want no part of that Jesus. You want to look me up, I guess I'll be where it's pretty hot.

The bible has many inconsistencies, as most people know. The gospels were written long after Jesus, long after the disciples, and the texts were written with their own purposes in mind.

Jesus with a sword? I prefer the one that works at the video store on the Family Guy. I'm not really into Jihad. If that puts me in brimstone, so be it.

And if Jesus came down with a sword to kick some a$$...how'd that work out for him? I prefer the loving Jesus. You can keep the Ghenghis Jesus and smite the world all you want.