I have a potty mouth, but I’m no troll.
And what people stated in this thread was not trolling.
Well, you are. So you would know best I suppose.
Carry on keep not responding to anything meaningful anyone’s said. I guess in your own mind you’re a marvel superhero huh. Funny. Then again it takes all kinds doesn’t it.
Keep saving the universe 
you’re a true hero.
Maybe you’ll get your own franchise someday. Exmandu the Brave, saving the universe one hyper-dimensional mirror at a time. Lol.
Cringe much? Naw. I didn’t think so.
Great, just what we need here! Another pinhead!! 
Thanks for proving my point. 4:0 so far.
No wonder no one gives a shit about random online forums. You guys have zero standards at all.
Corona wrote:
Well, you are. So you would know best I suppose.
Carry on keep not responding to anything meaningful anyone’s said. I guess in your own mind you’re a marvel superhero huh. Funny. Then again it takes all kinds doesn’t it.
Keep saving the universe you’re a true hero.
Ecmandu replies:
The universe need no saving… it never dies, and neither do we. But it can be changed. But it needs all of us, not just me.
ExtraCoronas
So then you think the Romans crucified Jesus because they misunderstood and thought he was being political when in fact he wasn’t?
And four centuries later they misunderstood Christianity again when they made it Rome’s official state religion?
So Jesus’ use of the word translated kingdom was merely a spiritual metaphor?
Or do you suppose Jesus was talking about an afterlife in heaven or an eschatological kingdom in the future and not a kingdom right here and now on earth with the political implications that would have?
Jesus is quoted as saying that the last shall be the first. What do you suppose that would mean to people in power?
Or is your position none of the above? Please elaborate before you put me on “ignore”.
I find it strange that we have recently had several people joining us in our discussions, purporting to be devoted to Jesus Christ and staunch believers in biblical revelation, and yet their behaviour is strangely aggressive and insulting. Especially when joining a group, I would have thought that one would be a bit reserved, listen a bit, ask questions, but no, we face a full onslaught of how stupid (and worse) we are, we ask stupid questions, give stupid answers, and are just too stupid to understand.
Somehow, when I was reading the Gospel, I was enthralled by the gentleness of Jesus, and shocked by the occasional outburst, but understood the context. I remember Paul saying how Jesus “emptied himself” in his service to God, and it was because he was the lowest of all, that he was raised up. He wasn’t a zealot, but a healer, a preacher, who came to free people. He encouraged us to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, visit the imprisoned, bind the wounds of the injured, and generally be kind. Sometimes Christians come across like the henchmen or hitmen of Christ, militant and disturbing.
The Jewish authority executed Jesus. Pilate washed his hands.
As I remember, although there are discrepant accounts, he was tried by the Sanhedrin for claiming to be King of the Jews , and for false teachings.
But defo political.
Christianity is what it does.
Jesus was not a Christian and neither were his followers, not explicitly anyway. Christianity is an ever changing slippery worm. Tricky since its claims are supposedly based on an immutable and eternal truth.
The Romans crucified Christ. The Jews in power at that time were the ones who were cooperating with their Roman conquerors. The Christian writers tend to blame the Jews and excuse the Romans like Pontius Pilate who according to non Christian sources was not the thoughtful nice guy the gospels make him out to be.
“The true purpose of mature religion is to lead you to ever new experiences of your True Self. If religion does not do this, it is junk religion. Every sacrament, every Bible story, every church service, every sermon, every hymn, every bit of priesthood, ministry, or liturgy is for one purpose: to allow you to experience your True Self—who you are in God and who God is in you—and to live a generous life from that Infinite Source.” Richard Rohr
I’m sure ALL religions adherents will insist that their religion led them to their True Self, so it’s one of those statements that might seem deep in some abstract sense but isn’t useful in practice. Ask a Scientologist if Scientology helped them experience their True Self, for example…
Unless that was the deep meaning of religion, including Christianity…
I don’t know what your post means. Your earlier post distinguishes between two types of religion: those that help you “experience your true self”, and those that do not. I’m just saying that that distinction is… entirely undetectable and doesn’t actually provide any measurable difference between really any religion.
That’s basically my point about the True Christian God above:
Let those religious folks here who are in sync with their True Self bring that to my own “main curiosity” about God: theodicy.
Or, sure, not of course.
Aha, “measurable difference between religions”, not experienced maturity of religions, which seems to me to be more important… and why modern movements are mostly not mature enough…
The evidence speaks for itself…
Which means …?
Maturity itself incorporates all religions and subsumes them all.
Here I see dueling worldviews. According to one the self is standing outside of religion and judging it. According to the other one is standing within religion and defending it. Are these stances more than illusions?
The premise of this thread is about “conservaturds”. That implies another duality. Are politics downstream from religion or is it the other way around?
To iambiguous: Wouldn’t it take a good man to honestly consider the theological problem of evil? But where is the good man in the nihilistic world? Hasn’t that possibility already been denied as an assumption? The world is meaningless and therefore valueless-right? Or values are merely a product of dasein’s particular thrownness. So that dialogue is a failure before it starts.
What interests me is the question: Can we say with certainty that the gods are the inventions of humans rather than humans the playthings of the gods? Who here knows?To me the answer depends on whether you take the POV of modern natural philosophy or ancient metaphysical philosophy. Coherent arguments can be made for both depending on one’s assumptions.