Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room TROLLS

If I am not mistaken Jesus rallied against people's obsession with the materialism in general. Bankers, moneylenders, etc. were the real life examples he used to show how the religion of the time had become polluted through material wealth and led astray away from its spiritual foundation. Even you must agree that Jesus had difficulty with the Phariseeic cult of the time. That I know is well recorded in Luke, John, Mark and Mathew. Yet, I cannot quote scripture here since I do not have the Good Book bucked out to the minute extent you do. Paul on the other hand, as Shantinik has repeatedly tried to point out, adds the moral lessons to the message of Jesus' recorded teachings. As such I do not see anyone here having a problem with Christ's message but rather Paul's addendums on morality. All I am doing is questioning whether people are mixing Paul's own teachings with the original message. If so, is not reasonable then to assume that to be a true "Christian" one must accept that Paul was infallable in spititual matters?

As to your observation of no scriptural reference of Jesus condeming or condoning corporations; in all sincerity, I find the statement absurd. Corporations didn't exist in antiquity. Commerce existed but it was nothing like what we have come to know as a modern day capitalism. Commerce until the High Middle Ages with the deveopment of the Italian banks was a pretty basic exchange of goods and services. Certainly there was trade between kingdoms but it often involved more barter than the actual exchange of gold and silver specie.

Likewise, no effort is being made by me or anyone else for that matter, to transform Christainity into some sort of "communist" message. There are however some believers who do however adhere to those aspects of Christ's teachings- they are called Franciscans, Amish, and Hutterites to name a few. Do they know something that none of us here do?

I am the President of the United States.

In fact, I've known for quite a few years now that I am the President of the United States. It is something that I not only felt, but knew in my bones to be absolute fact.

Some people have tried to deny that I am the President, by making claims that there are specific written standards within the Constitution, not to mention actual elections, to determine just who can be called the President of the United States. But their attitudes only reflect an irritation over the fact that I know that I'm the President, and that their opinions are misguided. There are many people, living and dead, who have claimed to be the President of the United States, and who have not met these people's interpretations of those written criteria.

Regardless of those differing interpretations, I know that I am the President. I will always know it. And I will die knowing that I am the President, and after I die no one will be able to argue with me any further about my knowledge that I am the President, much to their annoyance and consternation. I will have died secure in my knowledge.

Obviously then, I am the President of the United States.

Congratulations Dwain, I am glad to see an intelligent "Trotskyite" at the helm... now what are you going to do about the CEO's and Wal-Marts of the nation?

I believe the Bible is 100% God's word. God says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 God is infallable, hence the Bible is infallable.

To be a Christian you must only accept God's gift. It's as simple as that. Isn't that great?

And Dwain, you did that so well.

Then it stands to reason that God is perfect and creation must therefore also be perfect as He could not create imperfection.

Dwain Lee,

Vive le President des Etats-Unis d'Amérique !

Why not? I don't see how that follows.

Ok Renauda, the response was worth waiting for, although I still think the "tick-tock" comment was silly.

As to your response, and probably where the actual problem lies: I believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, therefore, Paul's writings carry that authority with them. It is not that they are to be given precedence over the words of Jesus, but they are to be considered as having the authority of God behind them.

If it says it's wrong, it's wrong, and I feel it would be foolish to argue with a clearly written statement, hence the quotation earlier in the thread. If it says Jesus was born of a virgin, I'm not going to tie myself into knots trying to explain how that could happen within my mortal frame of reference. If it says that Christ rose bodily on the third day, I'm not hunting in the corners to try to figure out whether the risen Christ was flesh, or Spirit, for Thomas checked that one out for me.

All I have to do is believe. And do the best I can to live a better life, inspired by the Christ, and trying to walk in his footsteps.

The problem is that I, and every other person before me, will fall far short of that goal. As the old folks say, though, nothing beats a fail, but a try.

Actually, to take your last point first, I DO take that into account (which is how I make sense of Timothy.) They had come to the conclusion that what Jesus had to say was simply unworkable if the end-time wasn't at hand.

Nice try though. You managed to do an entire exegesis without quoting Jesus once. Neat trick. Now Paul, he's worth quoting. Timothy, we give him three verses. But Jesus gets paraphrases, inferences, interpretations. You just have to bend him because he makes you so, so uncomfortable.

But if you choose Jesus condemnation of "covetousness" and "hoarding" as worthy of inclusion in your Biblical indignation, I hope to see that carry over to all conversations of corporate capitalism, corporate executives, corporate fleecing, health care policy, you name it. You've used Paul on homosexuality enough for the past 12 months; now let's see how willing you are to use Jesus when it comes to economics.

Jesus had nothing to say about money, much as he had nothing to say about gay people. Nothing. Zippo. So let's not be selective. He had sometime to say about rich people (regardless of how they got their wealth) -- you're the Bible man, want to quote it?; he had something to say about what rich people should do with their money (regardless of how they got it, and it wasn't "throw it away", so now I have come to distrust your Biblical reading) - want to quote it?; and he had something to say about what ordinary people should do around saving and investing - want to quote it? And his disciples understood him loud and clear -- they took him at his word (Paul and Timothy included), and did what he said.

I don't expect you to be a disciple -- that's totally up to you. That they were primitive communists is not really true -- they did not share in the ownership of any means of production, from what I can see in Acts. They were simple communitarians -- like many thousands (Christians and otherwise) I know personally in the U.S. (check out my friends at Jubilee Partners http://www.jubileepartners.org/index.htm ) And you can twist and turn your book anyway you like -- hey, it's your book. But the next time, and the next time, and the next time, you make a Paulist crack about homosexuality, expect to be called upon it. And the next time we engage in conversation about corporate greed, I'll ask you to get out your WWJD bracelet.

I am sooooooooooooo relieved! Thank the God that I have doubted.

(Just hearing what I want to hear . )

President Dwain,

Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Green Party?

Left or Right?

Where do you stand on abortion, pro-life, pro-choice?

Do you really think Iraq had WMD's?

Did you really cook the books?

What kind of underwear do you wear?

We peons really have a need to know!

Originally posted by George W. Bush: Mr. President, we've been through that Electoral College Bit and the Hanging Chads in spades. NO ONE, I repeat NO ONE, is contesting your legitimacy to be in office now.

But if you continue to use Dwain Lee of Piano World.com as a Sock Puppet, you may have even more trouble than already, getting people to trust your credibility.

And then, bye bye, Second Term!

Ariel

P.S. I realize you have the best Media people in the history of the world - as well you might, having hired most of them from the major networks. But forgive me, Sir, I do think this time your photograph is a bit too flattering.

Ariel,

I think you have it wrong. I think LP is GWB's sockpuppet. But then, isn't LP actually Dwain? It's all so confusing.

I don't know about that. He created me. :p

Jolly -- asked and answered. Jesus said not one word about money (from what I can tell), much as he said not one word about gay people.

To quote from the Book of Shanti,

"Jesus had nothing to say about money, much as he had nothing to say about gay people. Nothing. Zippo. So let's not be selective. He had sometime to say about rich people (regardless of how they got their wealth) -- you're the Bible man, want to quote it?; he had something to say about what rich people should do with their money (regardless of how they got it, and it wasn't "throw it away", so now I have come to distrust your Biblical reading) - want to quote it?; and he had something to say about what ordinary people should do around saving and investing - want to quote it? And his disciples understood him loud and clear -- they took him at his word (Paul and Timothy included), and did what he said."

We've know gone 30 posts or so on this round, and you are STILL unwilling to quote Jesus (as above).
You won't either -- it just makes you squirm too much.

Would Jesus be proud of us? Oh, I doubt that very, very much.

My wife and I lived for 14 years as "simple communitarians". And I took that a step further, and ran a million-dollar publishing business as a simple small "c" communist. Means of production held in common; each according to abilities, each according to needs, the whole nine yards. I left when it became too successful, (and it is still flourishing today), and I spent more time handling money than I liked.

My Indian "parents" (long story) have lived as Gandhian communitarians for their entire (70-year) adult lives. I'm busy finishing a book about them that will be out next spring called "The Color of Freedom"). My mother collects children off rubbish heaps. If you ask her how many children she has, she'll look you right in the eye and ask back, "how many are there?"

Jesus proud of us? Since I have lived in the world of Christian communitarianism, and know the current size of my bank account, I doubt that greatly. Outside of that, I think he'd have some especially stern words for followers of Mr. Paul.

So in essence what you are saying when you wave your nose in the air at the Pauline writings is that you consider them not devinely inspired and not worthy of inclusion into the Bible.

You can leave snot tracks on the theoretical Coffee Room ceiling as long as you want.

In the realm of Christianity, I think most would agree that Paul belongs in the Bible. I know he's in mine.

Benedit, you said:
As coincidence would have it, while surfing the web for articles on Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation last week I stumbled upon these 2 sites, if anyone wants a diversion (I can start a new thread for this if you think I should):

Neurotheology & Cognitive Liberty

Your Brain on God


Disclaimer: This stuff is all new to me, I know nothing about it yet.

You're read before what I've said about Paul (and the entire book) -- that it IS divinely inspired, just not uniquely so, and I have no information whatsoever about Irenaeus' inspiration though I think he would be scandalized by the deification of his work -- he only meant (from what I read) to be taking on the Gnostic heresy, not to tell us which books were uniquely divinely inspired.

Still not willing to quote Jesus, ay? Still squirming? He's not good enough for you, that you've got to take him second or third hand?

(My Jesus is perfectly fine with squirming -- from the Friendly way of thinking, that was precisely the point -- to set a "pattern" that we could seek to mirror, knowing in advance that we were likely to fail along the way, pick ourselves up, and keep squirming.)

There is no squirm here, my friend. Where do you want to go - riding camelback through needles with rich young men?