WWJD	Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author Message   Todd W. McLain (Ganryu) Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 07:07 pm:    Anybody catch NPR's All Things Considered this afternoon? They had an interesteing monologue about the What-Would-Jesus-Do thing. Excerpt from web site: Prince of Peace A growing cadre of religious leaders is claiming that Jesus would certainly veto a war against Saddam Hussein. As an anti-war coalition put it in a full-page ad in The New York Times "it is inconceivable that Jesus Christ... would support this proposed attack." Commentator Joe Loconte says that the teachings of Jesus make it clear that evil can possess individuals and entire regimes, and that evil must be resisted, sometimes by force. I wonder if this type of thinking might have any effect on the What-Would-Jesus-Drive crowd? Maybe they should try changing their message to include M1 Tanks and HMMWVs.   GregH Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 10:40 pm:    There were alot of "peace at any price",and "let's stay out ot Europe's war" mentality prior to Pearl Harbor too. I guess OBL and Saddam have to have blown NYC off the map before it sinks in for some people... Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition!! GregH   Carter Simcoe (Carter) Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 10:43 pm:    Considering the fact that the majority of the world could give a damn about Jesus I am inclined to not give a damn about these WWJD freaks.   Phillip Perkinson (R0ver4x4) Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:10 pm:    I think Jesus would drive a Td5 D-90 with an OME lift snorkle and 33's   BW Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:41 pm:    He wouldn't be a wood worker either. Definitely an independent rover mechanic.   Peter Carey (Pcarey) Posted on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 11:47 pm:    Yeah Carter, that's what I was thinking. But that's part of the American Way, to assume that the majority is what everyone else must be doing (all over the world too). One day the majority of the US won't be white Christians, but the white Christians will still think it is and think the US should be doing the "Christian Thing". Maybe they missed that part in History about separation of church and state. pwc   Leslie N. Bright (Leslie) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 12:29 am:    lol.... Peter, What's funny about that is, it was set up so you could do your own Judeo-Christian variety... you didn't have to be a Catholic, you could be a Methodist instead, or a Baptist, or a Lutheran, or Jewish, or a Mennonite, or a Puritan, or a Unitarian.... All of our laws, the whole justice system, is set up on a foundation that the morals presented within the Judeo-Christian value set are "right". Is theft wrong? Is murder wrong? What if there was a religion that required you to think of everything that is a material good as being your own, and that you should kill at least one person a day.... to stop them from doing that then would be imposing a different value-set on them.... I, for one, am glad that this country was built under a Christian value set. IMHO, FWIW, YMMV..... -L   Peter Carey (Pcarey) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 12:58 am:    Leslie, Not sure what my point is. Not many religions out there say murder is good (although Christianity says it is in the right circumstances) and theft is good. If there was a religion like the one you explain, there wouldn't be many people left to have a religion. LOL (for the record, that's the first time I've used LOL on Dweb, I think). I too am glad about the original set of rules and laws and that they seemed to be morally right, except for some big things like slavery and such. But since it is a government by and for the people, there isn't much to say we can make it legal to steal from people. I mean, it's just some words written on paper that say you shouldn't steal. How'd they get there? Some people came up with the idea and voted on it. Silly thing about religions, none of them are right. pwc   Erik Olson (Jon) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 01:19 am:    LOL Leslie - lots of people have died and are dying at the hands of the Judeo-Christian "values" you celebrate. By the way, every mainstream religion has these same values inherent to their core teachings. Hitler liked those values too - and like most of the JC set I know and have known, liked to pick and choose what values and interpretations suited him at the time and in his moment. About six-million people died based on his particular take on WWJD? We subsequently had God on our side when we went in there and cleaned-up the mess. China's understanding of Judeo-Christian beliefs has done a lot for the Tibetans - right? Oh, and the savages that lived in North America before our forefathers arrived - our beliefs (and greed in the name of God and country) really benefited them in the end too (they had to go - they worshiped the earth!!!). Organized religion has done its fair share to persecute, plunder and punish since the beginning of time. I'm 100% for our freedoms, and wouldn't make my home anywhere else, but let's be honest about religion and what it has accomplished for us. Anyone more educated than me know what percentage of the world's conflicts have been due to land-grab versus religiously-motivated / decreed? Lest we forget, Osama has God on his side too. e   BW Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 01:24 am:    Interesting points guys. What I find remarkable is that many religions don't call it murder. They call it martyrdom, and many here in the U.S. just don't get it because they've never experienced it. I don't think the media nor the goverment did a very good job in explaining why 911 happened.   Erik Olson (Jon) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 01:31 am:    A few of the news orgs. tried to explain it a few months later, but it's a tough sell in Podunk, MO. Nobody wants to hear that our nation-building isn't popular everywhere - hey! now we can get Big Macs in Moscow!!! At least during the cold war, we had an empathetic enemy in the U.S.S.R., another country who's citizens didn't have the conviction to die for their god.   Greg French (Gregfrench) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 07:37 am:    I'm with you , Eric. Looking through history would have one believe that more people have been killed and wars fought in the name of religion than not. Look at the crusades and the Spanish Inquisition and the lot. "Thou shall not kill...unless you claim it is in the name of religion." Which brings up an interesting point- Many religions believe in pre-destiny and that God is allmighty and controls every aspect of what we do. Basically we have no choice. So does that mean that if I go and shoot up a Hardees and kill 23 people, I should be arrested? How can it be wrong for me to do that if it was God's will? I had no choice. It was pre determined. I should be allowed to do it, right? I think Ned Flanders said it best when his house was destroyed by the hurricane: "What do you want from me, oh Lord? I have done everything you asked...even the stuff that contradicted the other stuff!"   Greg French (Gregfrench) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 07:37 am:    W.W.J.D. Who Wants Jack Daniels?   Dominik Chrzan (Dominik) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 08:24 am:    WWJD? unquestionably something budget conscious. your new favorite website: darwinfish.com   Dominik Chrzan (Dominik) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 08:25 am:      Carter Simcoe (Carter) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 09:53 am:    Jesus saves........... Passes to Moses........ and SCORES!!!!!!!!!! 2 points for the God-Squad.   Jaime (Blueboy) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 10:14 am:    Carter you definately have been in the bible belt too long!! of course Tulsa is the buckle of the bible belt. Jaime   Carter Simcoe (Carter) Posted on Friday, January 17, 2003 - 10:51 am:    Yeah and I've only been here 3 years!!! Sad isn't it?   Leslie N. Bright (Leslie) Posted on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 04:48 pm:    Ah, Erik, You're absolutely right, many attrocities have been done in the name of Christianity. However, I will staunchly stand by that although done in the name of it, it was not done in the spirit of it. If someone truly is a Christian, they wouldn't try to eliminate millions just because of skin color or because they're another race. There needs to be a distinction drawn betweeen what Christianity is SUPPOSED to be and what some churches have done in its name. It's not the values that are messed up, it's people claiming to do things in the name of those values, that do things that aren't of those values... they may have some distorted reasoning in their minds to justify their actions, but that does not make it acceptable to do such just because. History is supposedly written by the victor, but it's still possible to look back with 20/20 hindsight and see where the victor was in the wrong... And no, Hitler did not value the moral of "love your neighbor". Absolutely not. He may have acted in the name of, but most definitely did not act withhin those morals. It's not Christianity that is the problem, it's problems with some Christians. Same as with Osama, it's not all Muslims that are problematic, it's some Muslims...... IMHO, FWIW.... -L   M. K. Watson (Lrover94) Posted on Sunday, January 19, 2003 - 08:34 pm:    i believe there is a real confusion over christians and christainty. without doing a whole lot of preaching Jesus taught forgiveness and tolerance. those who fight proclaiming that God is on there side and they are the moral right havn't read much of the Bible. on the otherside as a nation we have a human right to live without the fear of being invaded, bombed, nuked or otherwise harrassed. now this is the hard part....we must apply those same beliefs to those we (a people of this country) to peoples of other nations. bitter pill that is. wars are not faught over religous beliefs, it seems to me that war is faught over CASH. to blame slavory for the civil war is a nutty as blame hitlers dislike for Jews as the basis for the european part of WW 2. it all came down to the other guy has more than me and i want what he has and thats that. econmics are what wars are faught over. so don't blame christians for what happens in the world blame man's love for the dollar. now for those who are big into seperation of state and goverment, show me where in the constitution that has the written down, i have read that great document and i can't, i do find that we as a people have the right to excerise our beliefs, no matter how whacky they may be. christians like many other religous have been oppressed and as a "majority" have been tolerant of all those heathens out there. if you think i am wrong when was the last time that a school teacher faced a lawsuit for teaching darwinism. let that teacher take a moment of silence allowing those who care to pray, pick their nose or simiply just sit do so and the hounds are on them. you may preach patriotism, when was the last time you saw a kid give the pledge of alligance, do you stand and cross your heart when the colors pass? ok i am done flame on! mike w   Erik Olson (Jon) Posted on Monday, January 20, 2003 - 09:45 pm:    Leslie, Those that bore crosses, are the same that brought forces. The problem is - organized religion is inherently flawed in that it judges all others by one absolute standard. Selective interpretation of the bible, koran, torah - whatever - has definitely led to millions and millions of deaths. Your point that some nutcase has misinterpreted the scripture is flawed - frankly a moot statement. Look at the facts - slavery happened, the Spanish Inquisition and Crusades happened, as did the holocaust. All in the name of God - doesn't matter if the guy was short three eggs from a dozen because all of those people are dead just the same. What is amazing is that most of the modern religions share a common central figure and we still manage to tweak ourselves into international conflict over it. The Jews are effectively pulling a land-grab on Palestine now, and the fuck if we're going to do anything about it because who can argue with the level of persecution they have suffered at the hands of Christianity since the beginning of time? So now, this land-grab is about religion by extension. I grew up in an evangelical church which is known internationally and subscribe to the core values of the bible. I also have embraced other religions' core values when I think that they make sense in my life. If crossing jurisdictional lines of religious sects gets me a one-way to hell, then so be it. Mike, Don't confuse my statements about organized religion with my position as a Patriot - please. Should we defend our way of life against the Muslim extremists - certainly. I'd also prefer not to personally support the war machine over oil, or George senior's old grudge and the further spread of "western ideals" throughout the rest of the world. The best part about living in this country is that we are endowed with (to a certain extent) the right to have our own thoughts and beliefs without fear of prosecution or persecution. Even Thomas Jefferson (a founding father) thought it important to clarify his position on the rather limited articles of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution with respect to the dangers of organized religion; "One of the amendments to the Constitution... expressly declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,' thereby guarding in the same sentence and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press; insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. Or... "From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise necessarily a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also, and so reciprocally, this establishes religious liberty." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Mike, what freedom or liberty is there in religiously-motivated crimes against humanity for the victims? For the record, I fly the Bennington in front of my house and I don't see why the teacher in any public school needs a mandatory moment of silence for anything except to grade papers. e   Todd W. McLain (Ganryu) Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 06:37 am:    One of the great things about buddhism ... it's sort of all inclusive. Ask a buddhist what the think of Jesus Christ, they'll tell you that he was a good buddhist. Ask the same question about Mohammad, you'll get the same answer. I'm hard pressed to think of any battle throughout history that was sparked by buddhists monks trying to convert somebody else. Sort of funny when you think about .... one of the oldest religions and probably about the most peaceful. Since I started this thread, maybe I should try changing the topic to WWBD (What Would Bodhisattva Drive). Answer: proably nothing, he'd be content to just sit under his Bodhi tree.   Carter Simcoe (Carter) Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 09:38 am:    And if he gets pissed off he would just light himself on fire not kill a bunch of other people.   TPH (Snowman) Posted on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 10:02 am:    Whenever I reflect on a specific religion I try to separate the actual religion from the institution which grew out of it. I feel they are truly two separate entities. As simple as this may sound, often often people do not and rush to judgement. S- (Catholic School Survivor)