i do not believe in organized religion or "the Church" i believe they
are inventions of men to control other men !

On Oct 16, 8:12 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
> 3 Reasons Why You Can’t Trust a Christian or a Jewby Allan Stevo"Whoever 
> comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers 
> and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple."
> Where’s this quote come from? A jihadist manual on terror? One of the Surahs 
> of the Koran? Maybe Mao’s little red book? Was it spoken by the terrorist 
> prophet himself, Mohammed? No, it comes from the Gospel of Luke.
> It was read to millions of Christians a few Sundays ago in churches around 
> the world. I wonder how many people in the pews heard it and thought "Wow, 
> that really wouldn’t sound too good as a sound-bite in the media of the 
> Muslim world" (or in atheist media, or even secular media for that matter). 
> In the same way that lines from the Quran are taken out of context, lines 
> from the Bible can also be taken out of context.Do Christians hate 
> life?Christians that I know personally do not behave as if they hate life. As 
> an industrialized country with such a high level of church attendance, the 
> U.S. is a statistical anomaly. Many Americans identify themselves as 
> Christian, 78% according tothis Gallup poll.We are by multiple measures a 
> Christian country.
> This Christian country of ours has a very high illegal murder rate, 
> especially when compared to other industrialized countries. Preventing those 
> murders is an issue of much contention. This Christian country of ours also 
> has a very high rate of "legal" extraterritorial murder in undeclared war 
> zones all over the world. Those murders are not so difficult to avoid. For 
> example, if an American soldier is not outside of the U.S., that American 
> soldier will not be able to shoot or be shot by anyone outside of the U.S. In 
> reality, despite my loved ones showing no outward signs of hating life, the 
> argument can be made that Christian Americans do hate life based on the 
> behavior of the society in which we live. We Americans tacitly agree to 
> extraterritorial "legal" murders.
> Murder is the ending of life. Surely a case can be made for Christians, at 
> least American Christians, not realizing the gravity of life. I’m unable to 
> argue that life is "hated" as opposed to "disliked" or even worse, simply not 
> appreciated. Or maybe it’s just the value of other people’s lives that is the 
> problem. I suspect an American does tend to recognize the importance of his 
> or her own life.
> I know quite a few people who call themselves Christians and quite a few who 
> aren’t Christians and I don’t see a clear hatred of life among the one group 
> more than the other. At its surface, those people I know don’t seem to have 
> very effectively followed Jesus’ command to "hate…life itself."
> It’s a strongly worded statement written in the Bible that doesn’t look good 
> as a sound-bite taken out of context, away from the centuries of schools of 
> Biblical scholarship that exists and that many of us now read the Bible 
> through. Perhaps it’s intellectually lazy of a person to try to do the same 
> thing with the Quran and to speak like some kind of Quranic scholar because 
> he knows a few ideas from the Quran that he read inUSA Today. I supposed in 
> general we all know better than to trust self-proclaimed authorities. 
> However, the fact that a single person watches the network news or buys a 
> major newspaper indicates that there are many people who are comfortable with 
> putting faith in those self-proclaimed authorities.
> On Sept 19, again Christians heard another confusing verse. It can quite 
> effectively be taken out of context when one imagines the corporatist 
> American government, like a greedy octopus, slithering around the world 
> taking things by force."And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means 
> of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the 
> eternal homes."~ Luke 16:9
> Christians agree that Jesus actually said that.
> This upcoming Sunday, the many Christian churches that use the Revised Common 
> Lectionary will hear a reading from the book of Genesis where the patriarch 
> Jacob wrestles with God. During this reading, God changes the unfortunately 
> named Jacob’s name to "Israel." Jacob, one of the patriarchs to which Judaism 
> and Christianity trace their faith, literally means "he who grasps the heal." 
> Figuratively, this name has an even worse meaning: "He who deceives." Israel, 
> his new and improved name, means: "he struggles with God."
> To me, there can be a beauty in a faith that lets you struggle with God. At 
> the same time, it’s easy to take this out of context. To struggle with God is 
> to be opposed to God, to challenge the Almighty and His ways. This presents a 
> rather unflattering talking point about Israel. The word Israel, the name of 
> the most problematic state in the Middle East, was chosen by leaders of that 
> country as a way to present itself to the world – "struggle with God." For 
> the billions of people out there who believe in a God that’s about the worst 
> name you can come up with for a country.
> Let me just restate all that in a nine-second talking point about 
> Judeo-Christian culture:Jacob means "he who deceives"; Israel means 
> "struggles with God"; Jesus commands his followers to be dishonest and to 
> hate life. Are these the professed values of a good people? What more does 
> one need to know distrust Christians and Jews?Do these facts make me not want 
> to go to church? No, they just make me realize how important it is to never 
> trust the media about anything. Nine-second sound-bites are alluring and 
> deceptive. Just like my religious proclivities seem very strange to others 
> when taken out of context, the religious, political, athletic, emotional, and 
> physical proclivities of nearly any person seem strange when taken out of 
> context. For shock value, the hate mongers of American society love taking 
> religion out of context, as long as Christianity’s not that religion.Filter 
> the MediaOnalltopics there is an agenda. Base your understanding of 
> situations on your relationship with people. Use the media to try to 
> challenge yourself and to seek out differing perspectives.Never let your own 
> experience be overshadowed by the words you read from some unknown 
> journalist.I’ve sat down with enough respected journalists to realize that 
> they are not as critically questioning and decent as their readers seem to 
> believe.Slovak-Hungarian Hatred?In Slovakia Hungarians are said to be hated. 
> There’s a long history in which Hungarians (Magyars) controlled the land 
> known today as Slovakia. That history spanned a good thousand years and had 
> some very ugly moments, akin to a soft genocide, that sought to snuff out the 
> existence of Slovaks.
> It is said that Slovaks hate Hungarians. I can attest that some do.
> However, when I am invited to visit a Slovak family that has Hungarian 
> neighbors, I recognize that relations between Slovak and Hungarian neighbors 
> tend to be quite hospitable. Just as hospitable as with any other neighbor.
> The media and the whispers of popular culture, especially around election 
> time, are quick to tell ugly stories about how bad those ethnic relations 
> are. This no doubt actually influences some relationships. However, 
> experience in the intimate relationships of a handful of diverse people tells 
> me that the media is likely incorrect in this matter. I choose only to speak 
> from my own experience on this topic, which also has its shortcomings, but is 
> far more honest than pretending myself an expert just because I’ve read lots 
> of work from some far-off journalists.
> When it comes to neighbors, my Slovak acquaintances tend to be quite 
> welcoming to the Hungarian minority that still live in Slovakia. Forced 
> language is a sign of oppression. The Hungarian authorities used to force 
> Hungarian language on Slovaks and understandably that period in history still 
> impassions many Slovaks today. Freely spoken language, on the other hand, is 
> a way to build a bridge into a friendship. I often hear Slovaks throw around 
> a few Hungarian phrases with their Hungarian neighbors. Such relationships 
> are in the best interest of neighbors.Good relations are not in the best 
> interest of those who 1. want to sell papers, 2. are filled with hate, and/or 
> 3. have no other issues on which to win an election.The nationalist parties 
> of Slovakia and Hungary don’t like these amicable relationships among Slovaks 
> and Hungarians. They like to poke at the very real wounds of the past. The 
> more they can get people to foremost remember those wounds, the more they can 
> get their audience to forget that these are living breathing people they are 
> asking them to hate and to mistreat, the more votes, the more media time, the 
> more influence, the more money there is for those nationalist parties. They 
> have a formula and they wield it effectively.
> A political consultant by the name of Mike Rothfeld,linked to here, gives a 
> great speech on political participation that I saw at the Leadership 
> Institute in Arlington, VA. In his speech, Rothfeld makes a request of his 
> audience:Whenever you listen to a speech, whenever you read a newspaper, 
> whenever you are watching TV, or even just talking face-to-face and see 
> someone trying to get you to believe something, you’ve got to ask yourself 
> ‘How does it benefit this person if I believe what he’s saying?’Cui bono? In 
> whose interest? Is the old concept that he restates. We all know that people 
> don’t often exert great effort just for the heck of it. Receiving 
> communication through the media, from some person you don’t know intimately, 
> let alone have never met face to face, makes the answering of that question 
> considerably harder.The Effective Stereotype of the MuslimAre all Muslims 
> secretly terrorist time-bombs waiting to go off? I don’t know, I can’t answer 
> that one for you, but I can tell you that it’s a pretty effective line – 
> repeated ad infinitum in the media. In that little idea of the Muslim 
> terrorist time-bomb, you are told 1. You cannot trust a Muslim, 2. It’s 
> worthless to get close to a Muslim, 3. the closer you are to a Muslim, the 
> more in danger you are, 4. Muslims are unreliable and may try to kill you at 
> any time, 5. Be on your guard around Muslims, 6. Muslims live to kill, and 
> especially to kill you, and of course 7. A Muslim sleeper cell may become 
> active and detonate itself and those around them at any time and without 
> notice.
> If you buy into this, you involve yourself in some self-fulfilling 
> prophecies. You can’t really believe numbers one through seven above without 
> eliminating the possibility of a friendship with a Muslim. Muslim terrorists 
> do kill Americans. It’s true. But from the perspective of a non-American 
> Muslim in the year 2010 things must look very different than from that of an 
> American Christian. As far as I can tell Muslims are a very forgiving people. 
> After all, there are many Muslims who have, for some reason, not risen up 
> against the United States, despite the very aggressive action taken by out 
> American government seemingly randomly against Muslim civilians.
> Muslims seem so forgiving that I am somehow still able to travel the world 
> and find a man or woman who does not think America is running a Jihad on 
> Islam. American behavior – 1.4 million Iraqi Muslim civilian casualties over 
> the last seven years according toJust Foreign Policy– is enough to leave me 
> thinking that our Christian nation does not value Muslim lives. Once again, 
> that is in Iraq alone, and in the last seven years alone. Expanding the focus 
> would make America’s treatment of Muslims appear much worse.
> Political rhetoric might be expected to tell a different story. It might be 
> the way that Americans offer a soothing smile to the Muslim world on 
> television as the soldiers ransack the countryside roughing people up. Under 
> Bush, even the political rhetoric made America look like a nation that does 
> not value Muslim lives. George Bushin this videoaddressing the media 
> unscripted on Sept 16, 2001 referred to the pending war as a "crusade."Here 
> he isaddressing U.S. troops in February 2002 from a script again using the 
> same language. Those who learned something in World History know that 
> "crusade" is literally a battle fought under the cross of Jesus, and 
> effectively took place in the past to take land and treasures from the Holy 
> Land where Muslims, Jews, and even Christians lived. Many Christian, Jews, 
> and especially Muslims were killed by European invaders. Despite the 
> treatment, despite the language, I’m able to find decent and welcoming 
> Muslims. Reality doesn’t match the rhetoric of the media.Make Your Own 
> ChoicesDo you genuinely hate your Pakistani neighbor that you’ve gotten to 
> know well? Fine. I’m not going to try to talk you out of building a nice tall 
> wall between your family and his. At least you’re being more intellectually 
> honest than a person who ignores reality.
> One example of a person who ignores reality might be the proverbial bleeding 
> heart liberal who seems to infinitely ignore the bomb being built next door. 
> He doesn’t seem to be in touch with the fact that people do actually do real 
> bad things. Another example might be the 
> Huntington-preaching/thumping/wielding conservative who has never spoken 
> with/met/known a Muslim. She may have a hard time acknowledging that human 
> beings are capable of behaving like individuals. Neither of such persons seem 
> to take the time to know or understand his or her neighbor. Both are blinded 
> by significant intellectual biases that the media seeks to convey.
> Overwhelmingly, the mainstream media can’t be trusted to report anything to 
> us with authority. Which is a good realization, because in all honestyfew 
> sources should be trusted as authorities.A thinking person should analyze 
> multiple sources on every issue, trying to derive multiple perspectives 
> before coming to any conclusions. Grandma can be trusted as an authority on 
> baking delicious pies and breads, but not on immigration laws. Dad can be a 
> trusted authority on fixing the furnace and on whatever it is he does best, 
> but not on campaign finance reform. You know that the people closest to you 
> have certain talents in some areas and have little more than unstudied 
> opinions in other areas. At least that much due diligence ought to be done 
> before you decide to trust an unknown out there in the media.
> In the year 2010, using exclusively mainstream media sources to find those 
> multiple perspectives is likely to leave you with a big bowl of thoughtless – 
> but generally appetizing and surprisingly pleasant to swallow – mush in front 
> of you.http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/stevo7.1.1.html

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to