Cartoon exhibition cancelled in London

Phil V said:
I'd say in exactly the same way that you do :), you distance your beliefs from the Old testament, which you describe as 'pre christian' IIRC.

BTW I'm not being argumentative, I'm pointing out that there are many variants of 'Christian belief' and they all think they have it about right, yours is as valid as Hugh's... and Steve's :confused:
Click to expand...

I don't distance myself from the Old Testament, it is all a part of the inspired Word of God, though pre-Christian they pointed forward to the coming of Jesus Christ and the sacrifice he would make in behalf of mankind and they tell us a great deal about God's ways and requirements, his purpose for mankind and what we need to do if we want to please Him as our Creator.
However a Christian is no longer under the Mosaic Law, Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Law and replaced it with the Law of Love.
The 'validity' of anything surely depends on the standards set for the subject ... in photography a photo of a parrot on a stick would be unlikely to be seen as a valid entry in a Landscape Competition, no matter how much the photographer claimed that it was valid ... similarly there are set standards for a 'Christian', i.e. a follower of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.
Quite simply one cannot reject this and say "I am a Christian" and expect to 'win the prize' ... the standards are set and a rejection of the standards means one is disqualified as a 'Christian', not by me or you but by what the term 'Christian' actually means.
Yes people can call themselves what they like, I can call myself a nuclear scientist if I want, but when it actually comes to the time of testing I will be found wanting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
gramps said:
I don't distance myself from the Old Testament, it is all a part of the inspired Word of God, though pre-Christian they pointed forward to the coming of Jesus Christ and the sacrifice he would make in behalf of mankind and they tell us a great deal about God's ways and requirements, his purpose for mankind and what we need to do if we want to please Him as our Creator.
However a Christian is no longer under the Mosaic Law, Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Law and replaced it with the Law of Love.
The 'validity' of anything surely depends on the standards set for the subject ... in photography a photo of a parrot on a stick would be unlikely to be seen as a valid entry in a Landscape Competition, no matter how much the photographer claimed that it was valid ... similarly there are set standards for a 'Christian', i.e. a follower of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.
Quite simply one cannot reject this and say "I am a Christian" and expect to 'win the prize' ... the standards are set and a rejection of the standards means one is disqualified as a 'Christian', not by me or you but by what the term 'Christian' actually means.
Yes people can call themselves what they like, I can call myself a nuclear scientist if I want, but when it actually comes to the time of testing I will be found wanting.
Click to expand...

A reasoned argument without the sermon would be nice.
 
gramps said:
I don't distance myself from the Old Testament, it is all a part of the inspired Word of God, though pre-Christian they pointed forward to the coming of Jesus Christ and the sacrifice he would make in behalf of mankind and they tell us a great deal about God's ways and requirements, his purpose for mankind and what we need to do if we want to please Him as our Creator.
However a Christian is no longer under the Mosaic Law, Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Law and replaced it with the Law of Love.
The 'validity' of anything surely depends on the standards set for the subject ... in photography a photo of a parrot on a stick would be unlikely to be seen as a valid entry in a Landscape Competition, no matter how much the photographer claimed that it was valid ... similarly there are set standards for a 'Christian', i.e. a follower of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.
Quite simply one cannot reject this and say "I am a Christian" and expect to 'win the prize' ... the standards are set and a rejection of the standards means one is disqualified as a 'Christian', not by me or you but by what the term 'Christian' actually means.
Yes people can call themselves what they like, I can call myself a nuclear scientist if I want, but when it actually comes to the time of testing I will be found wanting.
Click to expand...
And like I said, that happens to be your version of what Christianity means.
And like I've said, people with other variations on the Bible believe there version to be the right one too.
This is going round in circles now.
 
Phil V said:
And like I said, that happens to be your version of what Christianity means.
And like I've said, people with other variations on the Bible believe there version to be the right one too.
This is going round in circles now.
Click to expand...

Well I don't think it's my version ... check any reference material, you will find that Christianity is based on Jesus Christ who formed the Christian Church ... check the historical activity of his early disciples, who followed his example, from the bible account or from historians like Josephus.
Of course others will seek a way to find a version of christianity that fits in with their personal requirements...
3 For the time is coming when [people] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold,
Click to expand...
2 Timothy 4:3
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
ST4 said:
Why is the Christian faith here and its believers getting a good bashing but not the Islamic one? I find that in itself curious.
Click to expand...

Because there are so far no Muslims here to put forth their beliefs / interpretations of the religion.
 
viv1969 said:
Because there are so far no Muslims here to put forth their beliefs / interpretations of the religion.
Click to expand...

I just see scorn, and this isn't just aimed at you, on the internet poured on moderate law abiding christians by "intellectual types" but where is the outrage over the effects the mass movement of Islam and its practicioners into western europe in the last 50 years. To pour scorn on Islam, the growth of it in western europe is described as racism, bigitory and xenophobic but law abiding christians are fair game for the same treatment. Just seems odd. The greater evil and worry is Islam, not christianity in western europe.
 
ST4 said:
I just see scorn, and this isn't just aimed at you, on the internet poured on moderate law abiding christians by "intellectual types" but where is the outrage over the effects the mass movement of Islam and its practicioners into western europe in the last 50 years. To pour scorn on Islam, the growth of it in western europe is described as racism, bigitory and xenophobic but law abiding christians are fair game for the same treatment. Just seems odd. The greater evil and worry is Islam, not christianity in western europe.
Click to expand...

The greater "evil" now is NOT Islam, it is Islamic extremism.
In the past it was various interpretations of christianity.
I know you're incapable of accepting that, but it doesnt alter the facts.
 
ST4 said:
Given the events alone in France in the last 8 months, what do the three atrocities have in common. I'll give you a clue, its a religion, but not Christianity. HTH.
Click to expand...

No it's not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Islam is a cancer, it spreads, grows in size and potency and ultimately it kills. It needs cut out of European society. Christianity has been reigned back, controlled and moderated so it is benign. Islam is malignant.
 
ST4 said:
Islam is a cancer, it spreads, grows in size and potency and ultimately it kills. It needs cut out of European society. Christianity has been reigned back, controlled and moderated so it is benign. Islam is malignant.
Click to expand...

So did christianity.
And it will eventually die the same death.
 
ST4 said:
Islam is a cancer, it spreads, grows in size and potency and ultimately it kills. It needs cut out of European society. Christianity has been reigned back, controlled and moderated so it is benign. Islam is malignant.
Click to expand...
I really cannot agree with that at all. I'd like all religion to be fully separated from state, education etc. not just single out one. Besides most extremist actions are already illegal and acted upon. Again no need to single out out one particular kind.
 
dejongj said:
I really cannot agree with that at all. I'd like all religion to be fully separated from state, education etc. not just single out one. Besides most extremist actions are already illegal and acted upon. Again no need to single out out one particular kind.
Click to expand...

Given what is going on and the threat to our own culture, way of life I think we must I am afraid.
viv1969 said:
So did christianity.
And it will eventually die the same death.
Click to expand...

And what cost before it does die off. If it really gets a foothold and these ISIS militant types grow in number its one hell of a force to be reckoned with. Underestimate this at your peril...
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
Given what is going on and the threat to our own culture, way of life I think we must I am afraid.


And what cost before it does die off. If it really gets a foothold and these ISIS militant types grow in number its one hell of a force to be reckoned with. Underestimate this at your peril...
Click to expand...

:runaway::runaway: The end is nigh!! :runaway::runaway:
 
ST4 said:
Apathy and giving in to Islams excessive demands and ways will see it gain in strength and in a couple of generations time we could be living in a Caphilate.
Click to expand...

And if that happens, my head won't ache.
 
ST4 said:
It will more than ache, one these militant boys get a foothold its stonings and beheadings for non believers. Everything about modern life you like today is everything these guys stand against.
Click to expand...

Of course it won't ache Steve, I'll be long gone :lol:
 
ST4 said:
It will more than ache, one these militant boys get a foothold its stonings and beheadings for non believers. Everything about modern life you like today is everything these guys stand against.
Click to expand...
I find it amazing that someone who takes such wonderful landscapes, writes interesting and informative blog posts can come out with cr@p like that.
 
gramps said:
Well I don't think it's my version ... check any reference material, you will find that Christianity is based on Jesus Christ who formed the Christian Church ... check the historical activity of his early disciples, who followed his example, from the bible account or from historians like Josephus.
Of course others will seek a way to find a version of christianity that fits in with their personal requirements...
2 Timothy 4:3
Click to expand...
When did Jesus Christ say you can't use condoms to prevent getting ill and spread disease? Come on gramps the majority of Christianity just like any other religion is filled with rules made by people who put their own interpretation on it. You describe a wonderful utopia like, assuming he did live, what someone said over two thousands years ago hasn't been contamination.

Heck within minutes in the same thread people's comprehension and interpretation are different. Let alone something like a religion. And then it is human nature to start fighting and arguing about who's the best and proper interpretation. Exactly like what you are doing, what Muslims are doing what everyone is doing about anything.

It just doesn't exist this pure and real form.
 
jakeblu said:
I find it amazing that someone who takes such wonderful landscapes, writes interesting and informative blog posts can come out with cr@p like that.
Click to expand...

Perhaps then if you consider the brain power to write about photography and produce images like me, then you might consider theres enough brain power to work out exactly what is going on and likely to happen in our society.
 
Phil V said:
OK :)
Mass killings either performed by or sanctioned by your God from your book.
................................
Click to expand...
But that assumes that you take a work of fiction, written many years after the supposed events, as fact. ;)

The events mentioned in the thread are happing now, and in our life times ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Phil V said:
I appreciate you're a nice bloke Toni and your faith is important to you, but...
We can reinterpret what the bible said about slavery, and it's a long time ago.

But this, not such a long time ago, and more along the lines discussed above.
Click to expand...

"The Church of England last night said sorry for the role it played in the 18th century in benefiting from slave labour in the Caribbean."

As indeed it should, and then some. In a new testament context there's more evidence that Christians should seek for slaves to be released than just knuckling under, and Wilberforce acted to have the slave trade abolished out of his Christian convictions - without that slavery would have continued much longer and western society as a whole would now look very different. If you've not read Uncle Tom's Cabin then it's a worthwhile exercise: Lincoln apparently suggested to Harriet Stowe Beecher that her book (written out of Christian conviction to oppose the slave trade in America) was one of the key causes of the American civil war that resulted in slave emancipation. The ruling church did things considerably worse than slavery at times, but that doesn't mean that all Christians automatically support those actions, any more than all atheists automatically support the worst atheist excesses of North Korea, China and Russia.
 
dejongj said:
When did Jesus Christ say you can't use condoms to prevent getting ill and spread disease? Come on gramps the majority of Christianity just like any other religion is filled with rules made by people who put their own interpretation on it.
Click to expand...


I can't say I disagree much with that.

People like rules. You know where you are with a rule, you can control people with a rule and when the ones you have don't do what you want then you can make some more up. Set up a ruling elite and carefully control access to that (and especially, prevent ordinary people from seeing the 'official' guidebook) and you can run kingdoms and manipulate populations. In case you hadn't guessed, I am not a fan of what happens when Churchianity controls governments, even when they start out with good intentions (and many times that has not even been the case).
 
ancient_mariner said:
"The Church of England last night said sorry for the role it played in the 18th century in benefiting from slave labour in the Caribbean."

As indeed it should, and then some. In a new testament context there's more evidence that Christians should seek for slaves to be released than just knuckling under, and Wilberforce acted to have the slave trade abolished out of his Christian convictions - without that slavery would have continued much longer and western society as a whole would now look very different. If you've not read Uncle Tom's Cabin then it's a worthwhile exercise: Lincoln apparently suggested to Harriet Stowe Beecher that her book (written out of Christian conviction to oppose the slave trade in America) was one of the key causes of the American civil war that resulted in slave emancipation. The ruling church did things considerably worse than slavery at times, but that doesn't mean that all Christians automatically support those actions, any more than all atheists automatically support the worst atheist excesses of North Korea, China and Russia.
Click to expand...

Harriet Beecher Stowe.
 
Cobra said:
But that assumes that you take a work of fiction, written many years after the supposed events, as fact. ;)

The events mentioned in the thread are happing now, and in our life times ;)
Click to expand...
Some of which by Christians... ;)
 
ancient_mariner said:
"The Church of England last night said sorry for the role it played in the 18th century in benefiting from slave labour in the Caribbean."

As indeed it should, and then some. In a new testament context there's more evidence that Christians should seek for slaves to be released than just knuckling under, and Wilberforce acted to have the slave trade abolished out of his Christian convictions - without that slavery would have continued much longer and western society as a whole would now look very different. If you've not read Uncle Tom's Cabin then it's a worthwhile exercise: Lincoln apparently suggested to Harriet Stowe Beecher that her book (written out of Christian conviction to oppose the slave trade in America) was one of the key causes of the American civil war that resulted in slave emancipation. The ruling church did things considerably worse than slavery at times, but that doesn't mean that all Christians automatically support those actions, any more than all atheists automatically support the worst atheist excesses of North Korea, China and Russia.
Click to expand...
Wilberforce may well have been a Christian and been following his faith (as he believed), but the Bishops in the House of Lords all voted against the bill to abolish slavery (again, presumably following their Christian doctrine).

If it was black and white we'd not be discussing this. For every good thing done in His name, there's something mean, or just plain wrong. You can't just pick out the good stuff. The people who commit genocide or abuse children believe as strongly as you do that they're following their Christian conviction.

And there's no causal link between groups of Atheists who do abhorrent things. If 2 people who smoke get lung cancer, there's a causal link, if 2 people who don't smoke get lung cancer, we don't suggest there's a link between not smoking and cancer. In exactly the same way, there's no link between not believing in a deity and commiting genocide.

Horrible people do horrible things, giving them to blame a belief system to prop up those behaviours is something we should grow out of, it's unhelpful for all of us.
 
ST4 said:
Why is the Christian faith here and its believers getting a good bashing but not the Islamic one? I find that in itself curious.
Click to expand...
Because someone suggested that one religion was superior to another, which led to lots of people aiming to disprove that.

No one in this entire thread has either excused or supported Islamic extremism. Some people have tried to excuse Christian extremism when it's been responsible for exactly the same behaviour.

So why has the focus shifted Steve? Killing in the name of God is wrong whichever God is used. In fact killing other human beings is wrong whether it's done for religious, cultural or political gain.
 
dejongj said:
When did Jesus Christ say you can't use condoms to prevent getting ill and spread disease?
Come on gramps the majority of Christianity just like any other religion is filled with rules made by people who put their own interpretation on it. You describe a wonderful utopia like, assuming he did live, what someone said over two thousands years ago hasn't been contamination.

Heck within minutes in the same thread people's comprehension and interpretation are different. Let alone something like a religion. And then it is human nature to start fighting and arguing about who's the best and proper interpretation. Exactly like what you are doing, what Muslims are doing what everyone is doing about anything.

It just doesn't exist this pure and real form.
Click to expand...

Actually the real form does exist but as you describe, people put their own interpretation on the bible andJesus' message and decide they will make a religion out of it that suits themselves ... such has been the case since the death of Jesus and the Apostles.
Of course Jesus didn't speak against contraception and for that matter the bible also foretold something else you might be familiar with...
The Spirit clearly says that in latter times some people will turn away from the faith. They will pay attention to spirits that deceive and to the teaching of demons. 2 They will be controlled by the pretense of lying, and their own consciences will be seared. 3 They will prohibit marriage and eating foods that God created—and he intended them to be accepted with thanksgiving by those who are faithful and have come to know the truth.
Click to expand...
1 Timothy 4:1-3

Jesus said "I am the way, the light and the truth, no one comes to the Father except though me", take the teachings and example of Jesus Christ out of the picture or dilute his message by your own interpretations and you have lost the meaning of Christianity.
The bible's message is clear and available to all, despite man's attempts to muddy the waters.
I'm seriously not arguing about best and proper interpretation between men, I'm saying that the source of Christianity is Christ and deviating from him is a deviation from Christianity ... whatever you might think about that I think it is seriously difficult to present an honest argument against that.
'You' can decide how 'you' want to have 'your' particular religion or 'you' can have no religion at all but if 'you' try to hijack Christ for 'your' own purposes then you will come to an erroneous view ... it's like entering a portrait in a competition for a motorsport photo, you can believe what you want about your interpretation but in the end the judge will kick you out of the competition.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget that the new testament has been through what is now effectively Google translate several times after being written down for the first time many years after any of the events described therein... Not forgetting also that the gospels that got published were cherry picked from a much larger selection of sources than will ever be admitted by those who hold the manuscripts. The Quran may have been transcribed from their prophet's actual words but is also probably the edited highlights.
 
It's a convenient argument Nod but if you believe in an Almighty God it is hard to accept that puny men could prevent Him from preserving His message intact.
 
IF there is one god, all gods are valid.
 
Phil V said:
Or that landlords are the actual recipients of housing benefit?
Click to expand...
Just to pick you up on that point Phil. Not all landlords are money grabbing bigots ,renting substandard housing to poor unfortunates.

Bad landlords are as bad as bad tennants, both of which are plentiful.

In my experience as a landlord, people on housing benefits should have the rent paid direct to the landlord. Why? Because, in a lot of cases, paying the rent is not as important as going out at the weekend to a lot of people on benefits. That is not a made up Daily Mail opinion, it is fact based on solid experience Phil. That means me chasing rent and tennents ending up in arrears.

As in most things, there are two sides to each story, good and bad people involved. Generalising does not help.
 
fracster said:
Just to pick you up on that point Phil. Not all landlords are money grabbing bigots ,renting substandard housing to poor unfortunates.

Bad landlords are as bad as bad tennants, both of which are plentiful.

In my experience as a landlord, people on housing benefits should have the rent paid direct to the landlord. Why? Because, in a lot of cases, paying the rent is not as important as going out at the weekend to a lot of people on benefits. That is not a made up Daily Mail opinion, it is fact based on solid experience Phil. That means me chasing rent and tennents ending up in arrears.

As in most things, there are two sides to each story, good and bad people involved. Generalising does not help.
Click to expand...
I'm not slagging off landlords, and nowhere did I mention 'bad landlords'.

The political point I was making is that we lifted the ceiling on housing benefit, which encouraged 'buy to let' which helped fuel a housing price hike, which further increased rents, which increased the cost of housing benefit.

The upshot of which is the right wing press see 'benefit claimant in half a million pound house', where that's as cheap a house as is available, it might be far from a nice house and the only person actually 'benefitting' is the landlord, who gets to build a property portfolio paid for by the state. The landlord is doing nothing wrong, it's a politically motivated badly thought out policy.

I'm neither on the side of the tenant or landlord, I'm an observer who sees both of them as pawns in a political game not of their making.
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
It's a convenient argument Nod but if you believe in an Almighty God it is hard to accept that puny men could prevent Him from preserving His message intact.
Click to expand...

I find this kind of blind following as abhorrent as that demonstrated by the scum doing the beheadings in the name of Islam. They only difference is that they act on their desire to rid the world of those that don't share their beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top