Intolerant of Intolerance Except the Intolerance of the Intolerant.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Happy Easter


invite
Originally uploaded by raindogzilla.
Everybody likes Jesus. Leaving divinity aside- and that's not as big a step as it seems(ask Thomas Jefferson, Deist, who constructed his own version of the Gospels by snipping out all the miraculous stuff), as a politician, as a philosopher, Jesus was worthy of study and emulation. If more people actually believed and lived by that catchphrase; "What Would Jesus Do?", the world would be a much better place. Unfortunately, the answer to that ubiquitous question, no matter how many times you shake it up or "Ask Again Later", the answer never comes up "Vote Republican."

Because I like Jesus so much, I prefer to imagine the rumors of his horrible death as greatly exaggerated. I like to think of him as marrying the Magdalene- in a huge blowout party in Cana, before setting sail for the south of, wait for it..., France. My own belief in the entirely human nature of his blood kind of deflates the whole Merovingian balloon but I like to think of him and Mary, sitting on the porch, surrounded by their grandkids.

The crucifiction, especially in the hands of Mel Gibson, is just ugly. Happy Easter.

6 Comments:

Blogger durrati said...

I like to think the rumors of his death were false also. Sometimes the crucifix was used for punishments short of death...and he was seen walking around on Easter Sunday. But a martyr is better to found and propogate a religion upon.

April 16, 2006 9:45 PM

 
Blogger KidKawartha said...

I think I'm going to let you guys discuss this one among yourselves... ;)

April 19, 2006 8:30 PM

 
Blogger Private Partz said...

JD,

Caterers probably went broke on this one, what with the water turned into wine and endless baskets of sea bass and swordfish.
One question though - would the ceremony be Jewish or Christian?

Partz

April 19, 2006 9:09 PM

 
Blogger stacey said...

You are atrocious.

May 30, 2006 5:57 PM

 
Blogger stacey said...

Greetings. I am the one you called "atrocious"- though "blasphemous" or "offensive" might have been more appropriate.

First of all, I want to apologize for calling you atrocious. I should have clarified that I think your beliefs are atrocious, and yes, blasphemous.

Jesus was a rabbi. Rabbis were married, they were compelled to be. Mary Magdalene was, in fact, the "Blessed Disciple"- see Dead Sea scrolls, Jesus' friend and favorite among his entourage, and only made a "whore" or "prostitute" by the Council of Nicea, some three hundred years after the time of Christ.

The word 'rabbi' in Judaism simply means "teacher". Jesus was referred to as "Rabbi" in the bible in this context. I had no idea that teachers were "compelled to marry". Mary Magdalene was the woman whom Jesus cast seven demons out of. So the fact that she's not a whore and that Jesus was supposedly "compelled to marry" proves that they were married? Is that what you are trying to imply? Hmmm, interesting....

Further, there is every bit as much empirical evidence for a Jesus/Mary Magdalene marriage and offspring, for a live, post-crucifixion Jesus in, say, the south of France as there is for the existence of Jesus at all- i.e., none, zero, nada.

If there is no evidence of the existence of Jesus, then why is the bible (in which is written four eye-witness accounts of the life of Jesus) the most widely read, best-selling book in history? Why are there numerous churches built in honor of Him and why do billions worship Him?

Today's American evangelical Christians are the historical descendant of the Pharisees in the time of Herod. You know, the corrupt establishment that had Him killed?

Wow, you must be a master of genealogical study to trace my ancestors back 2000 years without even knowing me. God's divine plan was for Jesus to suffer the cross to save mankind from sin and eternal death. Even if this "corrupt establishment" had not "had Him killed", Jesus would have nailed Himself to the cross if He'd had to. The point is not who "killed" Him, the point is that He died for your sins, for everyone's sins, so we wouldn't have to spend eternity without Him. Sin separates us from God, so Jesus became the atonement for our sins so we can enter into God's presence blameless. The point is to accept Jesus' free gift of the cross, to accept Him as your Savior so you won't go to hell. It's kind of like having a grace period to pay your credit card; you don't deserve it, but it's offered to you. We don't deserve Jesus' gift, but He gives it because He loves us all and we are all precious to Him.

Were Jesus around today, he would fight, as am I, against this bastardization of his teachings we call the conservative christians of the right wing.

This statement makes no sense to me.
You say there is "zero, nada" evidence that Jesus existed, yet you claim to know how he would act toward and feel about "conservative right wing christians"?

Today's Christians are far too comfortable in the role made famous by Tomas de Torquemada and his Inquisition or those lovely witchburners in the Salem, Mass. area. Too much judgment, hatred, and intolerance, not enough loving their neighbor, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, just being "Christian" to the least among their respective communities.

Do you personally know any Christians? Have you ever been to a christian church? You talk about judging, intolerance, and hatred, yet here you are doing the same thing to christians. You are stereo-typing Christians by basically saying we are hypocrites by not "loving our neighbors, feeding the hungry, and healing the sick" and spending too much time bashing others. If you are interested in helping others, I'm sure a christian church near you would be happy to have you come and serve with them. For instance, my church has various ministries in which we collect food, clothes, and money to give to the needy. We have what is called the "Downtown Ministry" in which a group of from the church goes downtown and sets up tables of food and serve the homeless and poor people of our area.
As for being intolerant, well, I guess I'm guilty of that one. I am intolerant of any beliefs or ideas that go against my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Oh, and incidentally, the DaVinci Code is a work of fiction and not some sort of insidious attack on your religion. Quite frankly, if your faith is so weak as to be threatened by the existence of a movie or novel- or, for that matter, the gay couple down the street or the teaching of actual science in science classes, then perhaps you ought to reexamine your own relationship with your God rather than insult, shun, or hate that of others

FYI, my faith in God is quite intact, and I have a wonderful, loving relationship with Him. Thanks for your concern.
I am in no way "threatened" by the DaVinci Code, "the gay couple down the street", or "actual science being taught in science classes".
I simply believe the DaVinci Code is a work of crap..oops, I mean fiction, that, unfortunately, could possibly have the power to distort the beliefs of impressionable people who don't really know the truth about Jesus (of which I am convinced you are one). Fiction can have as much power as the truth. For example, look at the alarming rise of the number of people who are starting to practice Scientology. This is a religion that was created by a SCIENCE FICTION author.
As for the "gay couple down the street", their sins are between them and God. The bible says homosexuality is abominable, so that is what I believe. As far as people go, I love everyone, even you. That is why I am taking the time to write back to you and apologize for my behavior. I'm truly sorry for calling you atrocious, and I hope you will forgive me. I just don't agree with your beliefs.
As for science, God created science, so why would it offend me?
I sincerely hope that someday you will pick up a bible, go to church, and learn more about Jesus. He loves you, and wants you to be in heaven with Him someday. Please don't fall prey to Satan's ploys, one of which is the DaVinci Code story. Satan will use anyone and anything to get people to believe that Jesus was not and is not the holy, annointed Son of God, the One true Messiah. I will be praying for you.
Blessings,
Stacey

June 01, 2006 3:05 PM

 
Blogger Joe Don Martin said...

Stacey,

A couple things. Whether or not he ever existed corporeally- much as is the case with what we know of Socrates via Plato, there is no doubt that Jesus was a great teacher and philosopher. In fact, I pattern my life after his. Can you say the same? Thomas Jefferson, the visionary probably most responsible for the shaping of our founding documents and the creation of our nation, was a Deist and, in fact, cut and pasted his own version of the Gospels, leaving out all the supernatural mumbojumbo and sticking to simply the teachings and life of Jesus. In case you're wondering, Deism is the belief that a Supreme Being created the world and left it to play out as it would- hardly the "Christian" beginnings that the evangelicals would like to claim. Quite frankly, I have no problem with anything you choose to belief so long as it makes sense of the world for you and allows you to sleep through the night. Different strokes, you know? However, when the Radical Right tries to push it in my face in a manner the Founding Fathers expressly prohibited, it escalates from a quaint, idiosyncratic superstition into a problem- and a threat to the very existence of this nation. For the record, I am a recovering Baptist, have read the bible ten times front to back, and even attended several Billy Graham Crusades. So, I come not from a position of ignorance but from a position of experience, logic, free thought, and humanitarianism, which are nowhere to be found in the archaic practice of monotheism- of whatever stripe. I'll leave you with these gems:

"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society.
We have solved ... the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries."
-Thomas Jefferson;
to the Virginia Baptists (1808). This is his second use of the term "wall of separation," here quoting his own use in the Danbury Baptist letter. This wording was several times upheld by the Supreme Court as an accurate description of the Establishment Clause. And:

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes."

- Thomas Jefferson; to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813.

Just keep those quotes in mind the next time you're tempted to vote Republican. Peace to you and yours.

J.D. Martin

June 01, 2006 9:46 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home