Muslim Mindset: 'The hatred is in Muhammad himself'

[stu]

Quote from I am...:

Stu, he was framed. Scribes shoved words in his mouth just as Roman soldiers shoved nails in his hands. This accounts for the schizophrenic tone of words that we are told came from Jesus. Jesus did not endorse OT mythology much as we are led to believe. The NT misrepresents so awfully that it constitutes a kind of subversion. It buries the truth even as it alledgedly tells the truth. Don't think for a minute that it transfers any understanding of the original, authentic message of Jesus. Most of the personalities surrounding him did not understand, even after three years sojourn. So it's more probable that in their enthusiastic zealotry, they propogated a mixture of preconcieved notions and nationalistic prejudices with an authentic, truthful message. To this extent, it is good for "clues"...a reference for a good detective to begin research, not end it. Jesus was consistent. It's those who traded on his coattails who were inconsistent (contradictory, schizophrenic).

Christ!

They all say that, don’t they. Let me guess... Scribes and Roman soldiers were not framed.

If Christ didn't say those nasty things, by the same token, Christ didn't say those nice things.
Then Christ didn't say anything at all.
I think that might be your first "clue".

No amount of honey flavored curlicue verbiage hides the unremitting delusion of helplessly trying to wave-away the outright nastiness in some things Jesus Christ says. No different really to others perpetuating the same delusion over the Muhammad guy.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

How long did you train to become such a master of self righteous "knowing" what happened thousands of years ago?

Quote from stu:

They all say that, don’t they. Let me guess... Scribes and Roman soldiers were not framed.

If Christ didn't say those nasty things, by the same token, Christ didn't say those nice things.
Then Christ didn't say anything at all.
I think that might be your first "clue".

No amount of honey flavored curlicue verbiage hides the unremitting delusion of helplessly trying to wave-away the outright nastiness in some things Jesus Christ says. No different really to others perpetuating the same delusion over the Muhammad guy.

 

[rcaldwell]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

How long did you train to become such a master of self righteous "knowing" what happened thousands of years ago?

Lol. Stu probably is a decent guy, but man is he ever bitter.

 

[trendlover]

I think Stu is saying if someone say Jesus did not say the bad things of the bible (is interpreted wrong), then the good things are not true too.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Like a lot of the raging atheists, stu probably has the Jesus juice he was forced to swallow as a child still stuck in his craw...

Quote from rcaldwell:

Lol. Stu probably is a decent guy, but man is he ever bitter.

 

[stu]

Quote from rcaldwell:

Lol. Stu probably is a decent guy, but man is he ever bitter.

You asked.... " Stu, why do you quote the Bible out of context?".
I gave some reasons why I have done no such thing .
How come you find that as being bitter?

If anything sounds bitter here , I'd suggest it's the Jesus Christ in the Bible who wants to "not bring peace" and introduces a threat of hell to anyone who won't toe a line.

 

[I am...]

Quote from stu:

They all say that, don’t they. Let me guess... Scribes and Roman soldiers were not framed.

Sure they were. Just about every character in those dusty stories are framed, including Adam and Eve and the Jewish leadership (in terms of their involvement with the crucifixion of Jesus). None are really portrayed truthfully, including Jesus. The stories lend themselves to an agenda.

If Christ didn't say those nasty things, by the same token, Christ didn't say those nice things.

How do you figure? What logical model would conclude this? Have you studied much the concept of "spin"? Spin is sin with a "p" in it. The "p" stands for propaganda. Here's a wiki link to jumpstart a better understanding of what spin is all about, how it functions.

SPIN

Then Christ didn't say anything at all.

It does not follow. You are jumping to conclusions faster than a good detective would.

I think that might be your first "clue".

I only have a clue that you are jumping to a conclusion that does not follow. We may not know, from such a text (spin) what he said. But to conclude he did not say anything must ignore a controversy about what was said and meant. It's more probable that something controversial was said. It's the detectives task to discern what was probably said. This can be done by looking at motives...the reasons why a scribe would want to change the sayings and the meanings of a great teacher. Ignorance may be one reason. Prejudice may be another. There may be others. Why would a spinner be ignorant or prejudiced in the first place?

No amount of honey flavored curlicue verbiage hides the unremitting delusion of helplessly trying to wave-away the outright nastiness in some things Jesus Christ says.

Hey, I acknowledge the nasty contradictions. However, I would rather wave away the entire book from which the contradictions are propogated/perpetuated, rather than wave away a great teacher.

No different really to others perpetuating the same delusion over the Muhammad guy.

Not really. Jesus was sane. Muhammad was insane. One book (the bible) would make the sane look insane. The other book (the koran) would make the insane look sane.

 

[I am...]

Quote from stu:

If anything sounds bitter here , I'd suggest it's the Jesus Christ in the Bible who wants to "not bring peace" and introduces a threat of hell to anyone who won't toe a line.

OR, we are hearing/reading the bitterness of student/scribes who projected their feelings on the world at large by projecting them on Jesus, and by projecting their feelings out of Jesus' mouth. Not possible? C'mon. These are the same people who are projecting their sins on Jesus in hopes they may be taken away.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

When the topic of religion is in play, here is what stu looks like:

<img src=http://smartcrow.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/bitter_mccain2.png>

Quote from stu:

You asked.... " Stu, why do you quote the Bible out of context?".
I gave some reasons why I have done no such thing .
How come you find that as being bitter?

If anything sounds bitter here , I'd suggest it's the Jesus Christ in the Bible who wants to "not bring peace" and introduces a threat of hell to anyone who won't toe a line.

 

[stu]

Quote from I am...:

OR, we are hearing/reading the bitterness of student/scribes who projected their feelings on the world at large by projecting them on Jesus, and by projecting their feelings out of Jesus' mouth. Not possible? C'mon. These are the same people who are projecting their sins on Jesus in hopes they may be taken away.

The only words you have to go on are those in the Bible which Jesus is supposed to have spoken . There are no others , unless you 'spin' some up yourself.

Jesus said some nasty things in the Bible.

You can't reasonably accuse student/scribes (ie storytellers) of projecting their feelings out of Jesus’ mouth and at the same time project your feelings , without being accused of hypocrisy.

What is it that you cannot face up to about what is actually written down in the New Testament, that you have to deny against all rationality to the point of delusion that Jesus said them. If he didn’t say the bad things he didn’t say the good things either.

btw if you want to read bitter.. just look at Optional77TrollZZzz posts.