NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/brother/619

Text File | 1992-12-22 | 4.2 KB | 75 lines

Newsgroups: alt.brother-jed
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!usenet.ucs.indiana.edu!psygate.psych.indiana.edu!nate
From: [e-mail] (Nathan Engle)
Subject: Re: A paper I wrote for a speech class
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: mushroom.psych.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]: Psych Department, Indiana University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:09:53 GMT
Lines: 62

[e-mail] (Bill Rawlins) writes:
>[e-mail] (John J. Turley) writes:
>|> If I might ask about this here: Why is it that people who claim that they
>|> somehow know what God wants always deliver the same poison? It's either
>|> 'God hates this' or 'God must destroy that'. Then they tell you that
>|> you must totally submit to their dogma, completely (with your mind, your
>|> heart, and let's not forget your WALLET). They say that failure to comply
>|> will result in eternal suffering. This is Jed's message.

>   Regardless of what you feel about the messenger, the message is a very
>   serious one.  Most of the Jed-haters hate being told that there are
>   divine laws - which they do not like; for example, laws against fornication.
>   There are many scriptures that warn of the eternal danger of fornication,
>   much less the chances of AIDS, Herpes, etc.  So you have a choice to
>   make regardless of how you feel about the messenger.  Some say, I will
>   not accept the message because I do not like the messenger.  Okay, the
>   loss is yours and your excuse won't help you on judgment day.  Jed's dogma
>   is the Bible.  Take the time to investigate its claims.

    I think that you are jumping to the same conclusion that Jed et al
have; i.e.- that the Christian set of "divine laws" are the only acceptable
means to avoid damnation. I speak from the standpoint of devout Taoist;
from where I stand Jed Smock looks like a hateful clown. His antics are
intended to subliminally propagate a message about Christianity which is
(IMHO) not very complimentary to Christianity as a whole. I honestly don't
believe that Christianity is as filled with intolerance and hate as he
tends to imply, mainly because I know about other religions which manage
to convey the spirit of that message without conveying the intolerance
and the hate.

>|> It has really gotten me down, and this is no joke. It is not about 'God',
>|> but rather man-made religions, which attempt to explain what we don't
>|> understand. It is these preachings of hate and intolerance which I can
>|> not understand. I think if more people saw that organized religion is
>|> the PROBLEM, and not the answer, that would be the first step, at least,
>|> to a better world.

>   You are right about intolerance.  You are wrong about hate.  You don't
>    understand or you are are merely throwing out a term to help you justify
>    your own rebellion to God. God loves you - yet he has a set of laws
>    that he will enforce.  Would you expect the police not to enforce
>    their laws that have been written?  Examine the Bible and repent
>    (which means to turn from your ways and surrender to God's ways).
>    Hold your anger back long enough to think about it.  And I won't
>    say, "I told you so" when you do.  I will rejoice, not for my sake,
>    but for yours.

    Don't hold your breath. There are other religious systems which are
older than Christianity and (IMHO as always) which are better guides for
the conduct of human society.

>    Read Romans 3:23-25, John 3:16.  Jesus is the one who can reconcile you
>    to God, if you turn to him.

    Thanks, but I prefer to stick with my stodgy old belief that there
is more than one way to skin a cat. Jesus is only one way to become
reconciled to God.

--
Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
Psychology Department               Indiana University
[e-mail]      [e-mail]