What's up with the attempt to distance liberal Xians from fundie Xians?

[Modem Butterfly]

Why is it that liberal Xians often try to discredit or disown conservative and/or fundie Xians as somehow not real Xian? Isn't that offensive to other Xians? Isn't that just knee-jerk partisianship? Isn't it possible, even likely, that these people are followers of Christ who simply have a radically different interpretation of his teachings?

I'm not an Xian, and would never presume to define who is and who isn't an Xian. If a person considers themselves a Xian, shouldn't we take their word for it and try to work with them on that level instead of insisting that somehow they are wrong about themselves?

[bryant69]

1. It's complicated.

I'd agree with you pretty much, but i have a pretty wide open interpretation of Religion. Someone with a more narrow interpretation will see it differently.

To use an example from politics, we all have an idea of what a liberal is. So ask yourself, can a liberal be anti-choice? Or in favor of free trade? Or oppose affirmative action? Or against gay marraige? Or would a liberal who takes such positions, be, in effect, kidding himself about being a liberal?

Some would say that a liberal can disagree on one of those issues and still be a liberal, and others would say that you can't really disagree on those issues and still be a liberal.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Freedom_from_Chains]

9. Which is why the terms liberal and conservative have become meaningless

In fact, I have quit using them at all for the most part and instead use Democrat and Republican as that has a more concrete definition.

To my way of thinking this abomination that the GOP is selling as conservatism has nothing to do with conservatism.

[Book Lover]

31. Gee, I would reverse that entirely

and say that the terms "Democrat" and "Republican" are void of meaning, because A) at any time, the Party apparatus can change a plank, and B) two or three generations ago a Southern Democrat supported segregation. "Liberal" (or "Progressive" if you will) and "Conservative" though, have dictionary meanings not subject to whim. My two cents...

[PATRICK]

13. Left, right and loopy

There are actually many complexities but there is generally a left right split in most faiths with moderate conservatives or moderate liberals vying at the top. Almost all the orthodox are against the "so liberal I am atheist" oddities or the special revelation fundies. The rise of the nuts is due to the blandness of the mainstream and the violent power rise of the nuts.

Now when we get down to fundamentalists themselves it is also not so easy as not all of them by any means are crazed exclusivist cult jobs. It is trendy reporting and political opportunism that has made the scene so insane. Arch conservative Catholics abhor the "Left behind" offshoot for its virulent anti-catholic and wildly heretical roots. The latter have more in common with Muslim crazies except that personal cowardice is more a virtue in the perversion of Christianity here- for the time being.

The relationships between the powers at the top has its own sober poisons as Churches cooperate with politics. Politics also mixes like oil and water on all levels farther down. Everyone purports to agree on certain basics that in themselves are BOTH liberal and conservative or neither but in practice it just is the old cultural or personality divide with blinders on.

The crazies have just aggravated the fissures as a catalyst for the right wing.

What we need is more people of faith with critical insight before getting caught up in the growing chaos. The debilitating confusion of ideologies and hypocrisy is much more deadly than the over the edge fanatics.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Oooooh, but Mommie, THEY started it....

Actually, I don't see much in the way of fundie bashing out in meatspace.

What I do see are just the usual reactions to some of the churches pushing their views, religious or political. Most Christians simply prefer to mind their own business about these things, and would prefer others did, too.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CrispyQ]

7. LOL

Corporate Jesus! I love that!

[Warpy]

4. I think such distancing may be necessary now

because the fundies have strayed so far from the core message one finds in Matthew and Mark. It's difficult to find anything but Christ's name in fundy churches and teachings; they're equal parts Leviticus, Paul, and John Calvin.

I'll be watching the whole thing from the sidelines with a great deal of interest, as befits a very bad Buddhist who is waiting to see if the Buddha nature of the core message triumphs over the stinkin' thinkin' of the fundies.

There are going to be a lot of internal battles all over the place, and this is only one of them. There's the battle within the DNC for the soul of the party, the battle within the GOP to wrest the party back from the brink of sheer lunacy, and the battle within the Christian community.

Our times are going to be very interesting.

[mermaid]

11. LOL

Stinkin' thinkin'...i like that phrase... :P

[silverlib]

5. Definition

I think the Christian religion is in the process of defining itself. As a Christian, I am certainly worried about the face of Christianity. To me, the fundamentalist are only focused on personal salvation and neglect the message Jesus brought (through word and example) about how to live our lives. The power struggle is very necessary and may the best side win! It is a battle, and an important one IMO.

edited to change redifinition to definition, although I'm not sure which word is appropriate.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. We try to work with them, but there are times when they need to be

told when they are in error. Yes, this can be very subjective but the bottom line is: if a fundy church promotes **'s war as a good thing, should those churches that are opposed to the war not try to explain how the others are wrong and not doing what Christ would?

[sam sarrha]

8. Who would Jesus bomb..??

[mermaid]

10. I'll Tell You what's Up With It!!!

As a liberal and a Christian...I WANT NO PART OF BEING CONFUSED WITH FUNDAMENTALIST NUTBALL RIGHT-WING WHACKJOBS!!!

My religion has been wrongly associated with right wing, so-called "Christian" values...and this has been so demagogued that fully 73% of respondants in a word-association exercise at Princeton University associated the word "Christian" with the word "intolerant."

My religion has been hijacked, and I'm pissed off about that. Others like me are, likewise, pissed off that our good religion has come to symbolize many evil things. We are pissed off that we have to almost be EMBARRASSED to say that we are Christians, on forums like this...because we are rightly afraid we will be accused of...or believed to be...lurking Freepers, or sympathizers or apologists for our mutual enemies.

On to the second part of your question...NO...not anyone who calls themselves a Christian is in fact, a Christian! Sorry, I don't buy it. What, exactly IS a Christian? Well, a Christian is one who follows the teachings of Jesus. Now ask yourself if the fundamentalist right-wing whack jobs are actually following the terachings of JESUS. Are they following the JESUS that you have read and heard about? Would JESUS advocate the actions of these people? I think NOT!!

For further evidence to this point, visit the following web sites, I think you'll find them informative...

http://www.liberalslikechrist.org
http://www.JesusNoRepublican.org

Lastly...while the Bible does tell us, "Judge not, lest ye be judged" it also does say "By their fruits, ye shall know them." I know a real, true Christian when I see one. I know by their actions. Byt heir words. and how their words and their actions square with one another. They do not have two sets of rules...one for themselves, and one for "everyone else." They do not say one thing and then do something different. They do not say "peace be with you" on Sunday, and then stab you in the back on Monday.

If they are Christians, they are Christians all the time, not just on Sundays, or when they are trying to make a political point, or trying to justify a specific political agenda. They are Christians always...even when to be Christian is inconvenient to their needs and desires. Ask yourselves if these right-wing nutjobs ever worry about those parts of the Bible that deal with THEM changing or altering THIER behavior...or those parts requiring THEM to sacrifice or otherwise inconvenience themselves....or do they concentrate solely on those parts of the Bible requiring OTHER people to do these things?

A good friend once put it to me in the best way I ever heard it: "If someone has to TELL you that they are a Christian...they probably aren't." Think about that for a minute.

It APPEARS to the general public that most of the so-called Christians in our society these days are the Bible-thumpers, they beat their breasts and loudly proclaim their "Christianity" for all to hear, while condemning various hated groups, enemies of their own choosing. They are the modern-day Pharisees. The Bible tells us in the last days there would be many false prophets. Unfortunately for us, many of these false prophets also have a lot of followers.

Jesus spake against the Pharisees and Sadducees of His day...and were He to come again, He would speak against many of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of our modern day. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees, saying to and of them (and this is paraphrase as I am not looking directly at my Bible) that they wash only the outside of their cup...so that they appear clean and shiny to everyone who sees with only their eyes...but the INSIDE of their cup is filthy.

I think you can follow this methphor to get at what Jesus was saying to the Pharisees here. And so, in our modern day, have we not seen many of the Pharisees fall because the filth on the inside of their cup was discovered and displayed for all to see? Did we not see the fall of Jim Bakker, for example? Did we not see the fall of Newt Gingrich? Are we not witnessing the implosion, right now, of Tom DeLay? how many more will follow...and how many will it take before the sleepy public, the demagogued public...will wake up and relize that they have been duped?

We liberal Christians are very strident about not being confused with the Pharisees for good reason. We see them for what they are. By their fruits, we know them. and don't wish to be associted with them...or confused with them.

That answer your question?

[xchrom]

12. it's a liberal christian thing.

those who haven't been flogged with conservative christianity throughout their lives -- can't know why we feel like we do.

i'm pretty sure fundies want a real fight -- kinda like what mopaul has been talking about.

but mostly i try to stay out of these conversations.

[oneold1-4u]

14. The X is for Xtreme

When a certain church doctrine declares that they are the best,and only believers, and for many of these, their followers are taught that they must help others find that "one church",because God has condemned all others!
For just today though it is OK and "good" to condone the other radical churches for the purpose of mass strength and power to help rid the world of those who can't follow the fearsome doctrine of damnation.
They need to understand that Catholics, Mormons, thousands of Protestants, and all Islam each "KNOW" that they are the only inheritors of heaven! If each "ONE" gathers more power they will strike out at the others with the same weapons they all use today against GLBT, Women's rights, abortion, and DEMOCRACY itself.
It is sad that these extremists are turning so many worthy, caring, loving, people from their pulpits and churches with their hate mongering. The "political pulpit" is the worst use of all religious people of any faith.
Make sure of "WHO" is in command if you wish to follow!

[LynneSin]

15. ask yourself this: Do you think regular Muslims want to be associated...

...with the Taliban or Al-Qaeda? It's the same thing.

[ComerPerro]

16. Exactly. You nailed it

[Modem Butterfly]

19. I haven't seen Muslims declaring each other non-Muslims

Rather, they criticize the interpretation of Islam and the Koran. Declaring that someone is a fake Xian is a really good way to further entrench anyone who might be on the fence.

[recoveringrepublican]

46. Are you joking? "Real muslims wouldn't do this" m

"these people weren't REAL muslims, because this isn't following the teachings of the Koran". Those are the kind of quotes I have heard over and over.

edit to add, I agree with those who had said this. I haven't read the entire Koran, just little bits, so I'm going to go by what my few Muslim friends have told me. Seems like it is the Bible, easy to take little bits an snippets to further an agenda, but when read whole "their" (people I don't considered to be following Christ's teachings, at least as read by myself) actions are really damned by the Words.

[Modem Butterfly]

49. Do you have any citations?

[recoveringrepublican]

52. Here are some

I was just going by what I remembered in little interviews following 9-11 and from the Muslims I know in real life, but here are a couple. I'm not searching through all the google links, but it's not hard to find many people responding to CAIR saying that real Muslims would not participate in 9-11.


I googled "Muslims wouldn't do this"


http://www.islamonline.org/English/In_Depth/Iraq_Aftermath/2003/08/article_10.shtml

“This is the act of Israelis and the White House,” screamed a young Shiite cleric to an Al-Jazeera TV crew.

“Muslims wouldn’t do this, but Jews definitely would.”


then I googled "Real Muslims" Lots of discussions, some from Muslim sites.

http://www.google.com/search?q=+%22Real+Muslims%22&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&start=0&sa=N

here is an entire article on it.

http://www.islaminterfaith.org/jan2005/article3.htm



Here is what I found after googling CAIR and "Real Muslims"

http://www.ershad.org/Programs-2004/Overcoming-Barriers.htm

"Those who committed these atrocities were not real Muslims filled with faith; they were pure monsters filled with hate. The terrorists that attacked the World Trade Center and Pentagon do not represent the true Muslim faith, just as David Koresh, Timothy McVeigh, and the Ku Klux Klan do not represent Christianity."

[Pacifist Patriot]

48. Oh no!

Muslims have been accusing one another of being infidels and heretics since the earliest days of their religion. "Excommunicating" entire groups of Muslims because their interpretation isn't the right one is par for the course and no different from the squabbling that goes on between "true" Christians.

Immediately following 9/11 I had several Muslims emphatically tell me that the hijackers could not in good conscience refer to themselves as Muslims given their actions. The hijackers would beg to differ of course.

[QC]

50. Google up Sayed (Sayyid) Qutb and get back to us on that one.

He's the father of modern Islamism and best known for his argument that non-fundamentalist Muslims aren't really Muslims and it's thus OK to kill them.

[Doc Bottom]

111. I've seen Muslims do that quite regularly

Not that my experience is vast, but calling other Muslims kufir seems to be a popular hobby among Muslims. At least as popular as it is for Christians to call other Christians non-Christians.

[TWiley]

17. Well, what would be wrong with that?

Would it be a bad idea for moderate Muslims to distance themselves from the Tali-ban? No, it would probably be a good idea.

Conservative fundamentalists (you know, the icky ones) are the minority. They are nothing more that loudmouths cursing from within a crowd. They have done it for so long, and have become so obscene, that the crowd is beginning to turn on them.

I think it is a great idea myself.

[Modem Butterfly]

21. Declaring that someone is not an Xian because they disagree with you...

...is a little like telling someone they're not really gay because you grew up together and you didn't turn out gay.

Disavow their organizations. Tell them they're wrong. Debate the Bible. Discuss history. But don't attempt to re-define who someone else is. It's insulting silly and besides, it's fascist.

[TWiley]

26. Well, the good news is that it is not our battle.

It seems the level headed Christians are tired of being lumped in the same group as the Klansmen and their sister groups. Yes, the KKK is a Christian organization. Check out the Christian Identity Church. This is one of a half dozen or so Christian Churches that appeals to the extreme racist right wing.

Here peck on these:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/cr_ident.htm
http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu/nrms/identity.html

And, don’t forget to click on your home state here:
http://www.tolerance.org/maps/hate/index.html

Maybe this is what they are talking about. Myself, I figure they are a Christian if they call themselves one. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

[Modem Butterfly]

67. Most fundies don't want to be associated with the KKK and CI either

For what it's worth.

[TWiley]

88. You might be shocked to find out

how many Christian Fundamentalists actually do align themselves with the philosophy of the Klan. When you get out to the Christian Right, you wind up with racists.

Why do you think Fundamentalist Christians overwhelmingly supported the war in Iraq? Well maybe it is because this is a war against non-whites and non-Christians who happen to be sitting on major wealth.

Take another look at that third link I posted. You will notice that the majority of violent racist groups in America are located in the so-called "Bible Belt". There is a correlation between conservative fundamentalists and racists.

[Modem Butterfly]

91. Again, I disagree that Xians = KKK

I live in the South. The Klan has largely died out here, thanks to an agressive effort by the Justice Department and by the success of the civil rights movement. Large public demonstrations of the Klan now require police protection from angry non-Klan members. Racism is publicly disavowed, as is violence. Does it still exist? Certainly. But it's form as changed.

I believe support of the Iraq war has much more to do with religion than racism. If it were about race, why wouldn't the fundies be screaming for us to go to war with Sudan and Korea? Also, the right-wing has so successfully demonized liberals and democrats, and conflated support of America with support for W, that support of W's policies has become a knee-jerk reaction. Finally, the fundies identify strongly with Israel due to the role Israel plays in the "end times", and so have a strong antipathy toward Palestine and any supporters of Palestinians (such as Sadam Hussein).

Correlation, of course, does not equal causation.

[TWiley]

94. The fundies ARE screaming for more war.

Primarily in Iran. It is difficult to seperate religion from racism. You will notice that many muslims (probably a majority) have dark skin, and many Budists (again, probably a majority) are oriental.

To wage war on someone due to their religion is really not much different that waging war on them due to race. The point is, they are not US.

Of the active racist organizations, a majority do exsist in the "bible belt". http://www.tolerance.org/maps/hate/index.html

If you examine the number of active groups in relationship to the general population, you will find that there is a much higher percentage than "normal". This number increases when you factor out the minority population as they are not likely to join these groups.

Nobody said that Christians = KKK except you. My point is that there may not be that big of a seperaton between many members of these two groups in some parts of our country; both north and south.

"Correlation" is not the same as "equate".

<on edit> Why condemn a group for wanting to distance themselves from those who do feel that Christianity does = white supremacy?

[Modem Butterfly]

98. North Korea is not a Buddhist nation

North Korea is officially an atheist state. Sudan is, I believe Muslim. But I see your point on Iran and Syria, though once W stopped sabre rattling in their direction, the fundies largely stopped.

[TWiley]

96. You are saying that KKK's are not = Xtians? ......... You're Busted.

Evidently you are guilty of your own pet peeve.

[Modem Butterfly]

97. No. Xians do not = the KKK, but some KKK are Xians

[TWiley]

103. So, there is NO criteria which defines a Christian?

Then how on earth can they decide who goes to HELL?

After all, the primary function of a Christian is to send other people to hell. How do they decide who gets to go?

Maybe it is that 15 second magical prayer said one time only that sorts everyone out.

[Modem Butterfly]

108. Xian = Follower of Christ

Simple as that.

[TWiley]

112. What happens when they claim to follow Christ but do not?

How does that weigh in? Are they still Christians?

I know somebody who believes that "once saved, always saved"; that all their sins, past, present, and future are forgiven. In fact, I believe there is a large segment of the Baptist community that believes this.

So, are they still "Christ-like" (defination of Christian BTW) if they are not "Christ-like"?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

18. Do you think Zell Miller should continue calling himself a Democrat?

[Modem Butterfly]

20. I do

I live in Georgia, and even voted for Zell once in my wayward youth. Zell considers himself a Democrat. He's wrong on nearly every issue you care to name, but only Zell should have the right to define himself.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

23. After his speech at the RNC, DU was calling for him to be ousted from the

party. Same thing basically.

You are consistant in your defense of one's right to label themselves. For what it's worth, I agree, especially after the religious wars surrounding the pope.

[Pacifist Patriot]

44. I disagree. It is deceitful to claim to represent a group of...

people whom you villify and disagree with on virtually every issue. He can call himself a female, but it still won't make it true.

[Modem Butterfly]

68. We call him Zig Zag Zell for a reason

Zell used to be a bad Dem, then he became a good Dem, then he became a bad Dem again. Zell reverses course constantly. I wouldn't be surprised to see him embrace and endorse John Kerry in 2008. At which time, Dems will be singing his praises.

"You never can tell with old Zig Zag Zell"

[Pacifist Patriot]

73. Oh I know. I used to be one of his constituents.

Still don't think calling yourself something makes it true.

[rman]

93. He's not fooling very many people, others however

may be harder to spot.
If anything Zell Miller is evidence that political imposters do exist.

[Avalux]

22. Those who profess to follow the teachings of christ

but lie, steal, cheat and don't give a damn about others are not christians. They are not following a radically different interpretation of his teachings - they're using his name for their own selfish gain without any regard for his teachings.

OH - and that thing about "we're going to heaven cause we're saved and you're not". Yeah - that one boils my blood.

[Modem Butterfly]

24. Hm... that's what they say about liberal Xians...

This is exactly the same line of argumentation the Freakers are using against liberal Xians.

As far as I can see, if it says it's a duck, it prays to the duck god, reads the duck bible, attends services at the duck pond, it's a duck, whether it's black, white, blue or red.

[Avalux]

25. It is?

Projection I think.

I have read the New Testament and all the stuff written about Jesus. When I compare it to what I see the fundamentalists doing, I don't agree they are following his teachings. Fear and greed are their Gods.

[Joe Power]

27. So, basically...

...we're all idiots for believing what you are too enlightened to believe? :eyes:

[Modem Butterfly]

37. I call that a radical interpretation of the text

I'm not sure where you would get that from what I wrote.

[Joe Power]

39. The extreme condesension

But I'm sure you're a very nice person aside from that.

[Modem Butterfly]

40. I think you're projecting

But thanks for the back-handed compliment.

[Joe Power]

61. Would that be a duck projection?

Btw, have you seen my duck bible? Perhaps I left it at my duck church. I hope that one of the other ducks picked it up for me. Well, if they could muster the intelligence, that is.

[Modem Butterfly]

75. You're not a real duck

You see, you may think you're a real duck, but I, a complete stranger, know better than you. Furthermore, only I and people who agree with me get to define what a duck is, and we say you're not a real duck. So stop pretending to be a duck and accept our definition of who you are.

[Joe Power]

85. LOL!

And here I always thought people were just using the wrong vowel sound. ;)

[Malva Zebrina]

28. As an observer

I fail to understand how anyone can accuse fundamentalists of not following the teachings of Jesus and accuse them of being not "real" Christians, while the fundamentalist makes the same accusation against their accusers.

It begs the question: How can this happen if all claim to be followers of Jesus?

The Bible, contains not only the sayings and teachings of Jesus, but also contains the teachings and philosophy of Paul,A Roman citizen with all due rights, who never met Jesus and refers to him only once in all of his letters or epistles. All of the organisation of the new church named Christianity, was defined and solidified by Paul and not Jesus, nor his followers in Jerusalem, with whom he distanced himself and who eventually disbanded when the temple was destroyed in 70AD.

So, did Paul not follow the teachings of Jesus also? He, after all, did away with the sacrament and custom which Jesus, a Jew, as well as all Jews, followed, which was the circumcision. Indeed, it was necessary to do so in order to increase the membership in the new religion. Jesus said nothing about doing away with circumcision and was indeed, as was the custom in his reigion was circumsized to honor the religion. Paul admitted the gentiles into the fold, while Jesus said he would not preach to Gentiles. So, in the early formation of the religion of Christianity, changes were made by Paul and there, right there, was the first split--Fundamentalists are most likely to quote Paul, and ignore the more gentle Jesus, according to the NT, (although some do dispute that Jesus said most of those things the scribes recorded as Jesus sayings) (see the Jesus Seminar), because it fits their goals and it also fits their concerns about "others" who are not real Christians.

But isn't that what Paul also did? And don't Christians all follow the Bible--or do they just pick and choose, which wisdom, out of all the wisdom present in both NT and OT? Maybe. Did not Paul do that also?

Which begs the question: How can any Christian declare, according to the traditions present in the Bible, some followers not "real" followers of Jesus without appearing painfully hypocritical?

[mermaid]

29. Because

The REAL Christians...the liberal ones...the ones following the concepts of peace, love, hope, joy, forgiveness, tolerance, mercy, and understanding...are the ones who are following the teachings of JESUS.

The fake christians (lower case intentional) are the ones who are promoting a radical, fundamentalist, supremcist, imperialistic, patricarchal, hate-filled,, fear-mongering political agenda, and they are using Scripture out of context in order to justify and excuse their intolerable acts against enemies of their own choosing.

They are promoting a political agenda, and are masking it with the mantle of CHRISTIANITY...when in fact, the teachings of JESUS are almost completely opposite to what these people are doing. They are followers, as you rightly say, of Paul of Tarsus...rather than Jesus of Nazareth.

Again, go to http://www.liberalslikechrist.org and read up a bit on Paul of Tarsus, and find out exactly what kind of a complete and total asshole Paul was!

As far as I am concerned, you cannot be a Christian, if you are not following the teachings of JESUS. The Old Testament has no relevance, whatsoever, to a Christian...Jesus came to free us from the Laws of Moses, because we proved to be incapable of living up to them...he gave us the New Testament, and He died on the cross for us...for those who believeth in Him shall not perish, but shall have eternal life.

Now, this does not give a Christian "carte-blanche" to go out and sin...in fact, in you're a real Christian you do not WANT to sin...you know, of course, that you are human, and thus have weaknesses and shortcomings, and you will screw up...and Jesus has forgiven you for this. Even the Bible says, "For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God." Heaven knows I've done my share.

Nevertheless, as Jesus spake out against the Pharisees and Sadducees of His day...he spake out against the false prophets of His day...so it is our obligation today, as real Christians...to speak out against the false prophets of today...the modern-day Pharisees and Sadducees...like Fred Phelps, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Don Wildmon, to name but a few.

These named men are perfect examples of what Jesus rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees for. They wash only the outside of their cups...all that see only with their eyes, they see the clean and shiny cup...but they do not look within to see the filth. These named men, by their actions are evil, detestable, horrible, rotten people...in fact, I believe them to be minions of Satan. How many GLBT folk, for example, do you think have been turned away from the love and mercy...the forgiveness, hope, and tolerance of God and Jesus...by the hate-filled preachings of these men? They are recruiting for Satan, because they are turning people against God! I know, I once was just such a person. I, once, was an Athiest and an Agnostic, after having been brought up Roman Catholic...and after having been beaten upside the head too many times by the Bible-thumpers quoting Leviticus and Deuteronomy...and doing so out of context, in order to justify their hatred, and their intolerance, and their horrible acts of prejudice.

However, it came to pass one day I saw the light, and I accepted Jesus as my Lord and personal Savior. But I refuse to be confused with the whackjobs who use a good faith, Christianity...to promote a political agenda that goes against everything my religion stands for. I will not stand idly by while these people promote an agenda 180 degrees removed from the teachings of Jesus...and still call themselves Christians!

I will...as Jesus did in his day...call them out for their hypocrasy. I will call them to task for their perversion of a good faith. I will call them to task for turning so many good people away from Jesus. And I will call them to task for making many others turn away from the true teachings of Jesus...and turning them into more warriors against humanity.

The perfect example of Jesus...and What Would Jesus Do can be found in the parable in which the moral of it is..."Let him here without sin cast the first stone." And not a one of them could cast that stone!

I am sick and tired of seeing these fundamentalist whackjobs throwing huge, honking fucking rocks at other people from behind the cross!! And I, for one, will no longer tolerate it...I intend to call these people out for what the are...they are followers of Satan, they are recruiters for Satan....they have irreparably harmed more people than anyone could know...and have turned many away from the love, joy, hope, peace, mercy, understanding, forgiveness, and tolerance that can be theirs.

Now, have I made it perfectly clear WHY we liberal Christians wish to distance ourselves from filth...and why I refuse to allow themselves to continue to push a political agenda, masked in my good faith...that goes completely against what my faith is supposed to stand for?

[jdj]

33. your post underscores the fact that the best racism is taught in the bible

that's where I learned to speak and think in racist terms without even knowing it. The Pharisees and the Saducees were real groups of people, just like the Philistines and the Samaritans.

That right there is the modern day mindset that can justify use of the words 'nigger' and 'faggot'or in our present case 'towel head'. That is why we can justify killing 100,000 Iraqi civilians without even thinking about it, because they are "the enemy" because some (religious) leader said so.

I'm horrified now at what I learned about racism from the bible, especially regarding the tale of the 'good' samaritan. This person was 'bad' because the leaders of the hebrews had designated a whole region of people as 'bad' and the thrust of the story is that said person of this regional designation of people can actually, believe it or not, sometimes be 'good' which makes the 'real' people, the 'good' people, 'God's people' look bad, because they should be so much 'better' than these people. (Philistine is the origin of the word Palestine, by the way).

this is why I despise this religious tripe... it aims to teach but only ends up underscoring just how horribly barbaric and xenophobic the floundering fathers of this paradigm really were, and how desperately humanity needs to finally evolve beyong this and wipe the memory of this failure of perception from our consciousness.

edit: I suspect that the term farsi for the iranian tongue came from 'pharisee' as well. These were regional conflicts amoung groups of people, but they are taught to children as terms for 'bad people'. I think this is psychologically abusive and, really, this kind of education without any further historical education should be outlawed, it's an abomination. Down with Sunday school, stop poisoning the minds of children!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. The Pharisees and Saducees were not a racial group but sects within

Judaism. In an era where religion influenced every moment of your life, their differences were as much political as religious. Being against the attitudes of these people was like being against the attitudes of rigid Republicans. Indeed, they were the ones enforcing the Jewish practice of avoiding contact with Gentiles.

And I always thought the point of the story of the Good Samaritan was NOT to be racist. :shrug: Jesus violated the rules about associating with Samaritans frequently.

By the way, the word Farsi for the Iranian language has nothing to do with Pharisee (which is the Greek pronunciation of whatever that religious sect was called in Hebrew). It's a variation of the word "Persian," because the modern Iranians are descendants of the ancient Persians.

[Pacifist Patriot]

56. Pharisees and Saducees were Jewish sects...

much like the difference between Christian denominations. They professed different interpretations of the Jewish law.

The conflict with the Philistines was ethnic/religious and predated Christ by about 1000 years. Their villification in the Hebrew Bible has definitely been unfair and resulted in the negative connotation used today.

The ancient religion of the Hebrews was extraordinarily ethno-centric and patriarchal. I have no doubt that our modern culture has some serious problems because of the undercurrent that remains becaues of how deeply embedded these old values are.

Farsi has nothing to do with the word Pharisee.

FARSI: 1878, modern Persian language, the usual Iranian word for it, from Fars, Ar. name for region of Pars (no "p" in Arabic) in Iran, where the modern language evolved from I.E.-based Persian with many Ar. elements.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

69. And I looked up "Pharisee' in my unabridged dictionary and discovered

that it comes from the Greek spelling (the New Testament was originally written in Greek) of the Aramaic (the common spoken language in Judaea in Jesus' time, a more recent variety of Hebrew) word for "separate."

[H2O Man]

65. Interesting questions.

With the exception of a few posts on here, I've seen very little of the phenomenon described in the OP. It would have been interesting to have some examples cited, for example, from the national or international scene. When I think of liberal Christians such as Rev.
Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, or the late Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., I think that they tend to disagree about the interpretation of the social gospel, but not be rude to their right-wing counterparts. I've yet to hear one of them say that people like Pat Robertson are not Christians.

I do notice that you ask about if all Christians "follow" the bible, and then some comments regarding Paul. I think that these are good questions when asked in sincerity. Surely not all Christians "follow" the bible in the same way. And considering that there is significant Christian history before the New Testament, there really shouldn't be much confusion on that particular issue.

Christianity is a term that describes those who look to the life and teachings of Jesus. While the majority of Christianity has indeed included Paul's interpretation, history again shows that many Christians do not agree with Paul's views.

The wide range of interpretations of Jesus's teachings, and the bible, is obviously a result of the wide range of people. Angry people interpret "God" in hostile terms; loving people interpret "God" in a different manner. Rigid people have a rigid view.

It's not a surprise that Rev. Sharpton would have a different interpretation of Jesus than Jerry Falwell. I think that Rev. Sharpton probably has a different interpretation of the Constitution that Falwell, and a different view of George Bush; still, of course, they are both US citizens.

If there are Christians saying other people are not Christians simply because they have different opinions, I think that would be wrong. But because someone says they are a Christian, and then commits actions that are criminal in nature, other Christians are not obligated to refrain from calling them on it. A good example would be the Catholic priests that rape children: they are Christians, but they are also criminals.

[Ron Green]

30. I suppose you take George W. Bush at his word, then, that he's a "uniter."

That's what he calls himself. I call bullshit on him, because I know he's not a uniter. Just as any thoughtful person who walks with Christ must call bullshit on the "Christians" who have hijacked the name.

[bling bling]

35. I should have read the thread first and just said "ditto" after yours.

Perfect. Short yet precisely said.

[Modem Butterfly]

43. That's a bit different than religious faith, isn't it?

Telling someone they're not real Xians because they don't meet your definition of Xianity is wrong whether you're a conservative or a liberal.

[Ron Green]

60. Nah... I tell them they're not real Christians because they don't do what

Jesus said to do. If you unquestioningly accept anyone's definition of what he is, you're not applying critical thinking to your observations, and that's dangerous for democracy.

[Modem Butterfly]

70. Again, they say the same thing about you

As far as I'm concerned, individuals really should have the right to define themselves. You never know what's in someone else's heart or what's behind their actions. And I say that as someone who has been consistantly told I'm not really an atheist, not really a person of color, and not really a liberal. Oddly enough, being told by someone who's known me for all of fifteen minutes that I'm not really an atheist didn't change me one bit.

[Ron Green]

87. Individuals have the RIGHT to define themselves, but it doesn't mean

they are right when they do it. The truth comes out in fits and starts, and takes a long time and lots of people to keep it going. Bush is NOT a uniter, no matter what he says. Falwell is NOT a Christian, even if he calls himself that. A Christian forgives himself and forgives the world.

If you're wanting to lump all who call themselves "Christians" into the same category, it's too big and vague a group to be meaningful. The meassage of Jesus is clear, and those who have hijacked the word "Christian" are just wrong.

[bling bling]

32. Fundamentalists really are fake Christians.

You say you're not a Christian so maybe you haven't studied very much of what Jesus taught.

In a nutshell, whatever you hear spewing out of the mouths of fundamentalists -- Jesus taught the opposite.

Unlike the fundamentalists running our country, Jesus did not make it his priority to feed the wealthy and starve the poor. He did not put business interests above the social welfare of people. He did not advocate war. Jesus advocated for the poor and oppressed and criticized the greedy and selfish rich people.

Really, based on what I have read about Jesus, I cannot emphasize enough how UN-CHRISTIAN I think the fundies are.

I'm just calling in what my opinion is a spade a spade. If it's true that differentiating these wacko's from good Christians is pushing Christians away, then we should try to find a better way to explain the concept. But the concept itself is valid, IMO.

[jdj]

34. Christianity is a brand and Jesus is a spokesmodel.

Bush is an MBA and it's all marketing. the best thing that liberal xtians can do for their religion is to refuse to participate in the whoring of Jesus and just zip up about it.

[bling bling]

36. Totally agree.

I have read some very good articles by some Christian leaders lambasting Bush and the administration's hijacking of Christianity for their political purposes. Unfortunately, those articles never tend to make it into mainstream venues, so most people don't see them.

[mermaid]

53. Indeed

So how about posting some links??

Personally, I have continued to direct people to the following two web sites, and will do so again, here.

http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.org
http://www.JesusNoRepublican.org

[bunkerbuster1]

41. Check out this BaptoPlex website's tagline:

"CONNECTING PEOPLE TO JESUS CHRIST AND HIS LIFESTYLE."

shit you not, it's here:

http://www.hebronchurch.org/hebroneast.htm

[mermaid]

51. No Chance!!

If we "zip up" about it, as you suggest, then we allow those who have hijacked our good faith to frame the debate!

Damned if I'm conceding that ground to the minions of Satan!

[Pacifist Patriot]

58. I agree. Sometimes silence is tantamount to acceptance.

I think it is vitally important that the differences be made highly visual.

[mermaid]

63. I Notice Your Avatar...

Are you a UU?
I am, myself, by my own definition, a Unitarian Christian.

I'm looking for others who define themselves similarly. I am a Christian, yet I practice in a Unitarian church...largely because of the disgust I feel for the way the modern Church seems to have catered to the fundies, and turned away from teaching the message of Jesus.

Anyone who wants to know the MESSAGE...the TEACHINGS of Jesus of Nazareth should read the Jefferson Bible...the one "sacred" text of the UU Church. This book, better known as "The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth" by Thomas Jefferson, a scholar fluent in six different languages...was an attempt by Jefferson, to condense the four Gospels into a single narrative, to settle the minor inconsistencies within the Gospels...and it eliminates recounting of the miracles. Instead this book focuses solely on the TEACHINGS of Jesus...on His MESSAGE! And Jefferson worked from the oldest texts he could find...thus he was working from texts that were as undistorted by time and translations, as were available to him.

Check it out!

[Pacifist Patriot]

64. Yes I am.

I have the edition with the forward by F. Forrester Church. I probably would have been comfortable in a Universalist or Unitarian church in the early 19th century but I do not identify myself as either a Unitarian Christian or a Christian UU. Jesus' teachings are not unique to his ministry but they are certainly enough for anyone to lead a compassionate and fulfilling life. I bristle at the actions of the fundamentalists who call themselves Christian. They're more like Paulists.

[mermaid]

79. Exactly. I Call Them What They Are - Paulites.

They are not Christians, they are Paulites. And I, quite frankly believe Paul was inspired not by God...but by satan...to spread a message opposite to that of Jesus, and to call THAT Christianity.

again, I refer those who want to know more about why I say this should visit http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.org and read more about Paul of Tarsus.

[Pacifist Patriot]

86. Have you read Bishop Spong's book...

Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism? He has some great chapters on Paul. He's convinced Paul was a self-loathing homosexual.

[QC]

38. Jesus himself made such distinctions...

21 Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

22 Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?"

23 And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness."

from the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 7.

[Bridget Burke]

42. So, you consider all Christians as bad as the worst....

But you're above it all.

Sorry, it's time that the majority of fine Christians called out the Dominionists & Christian Reconstructionists who are trying their best to make Christianity look bad. Even some who would be considered Conservative or Fundamentalist would be appalled by the political plotting of the Religious Right.

[Modem Butterfly]

47. I don't consider all Xians to be anything, bad or good...

They're just Xians, with many, many different interpretations of the Bible and many different ways of understanding Christ's life. To me, an Xian is a follower of Christ. How they follow him is their own business.

I'm not "above it all", but I am certainly not directly involved in this fight, since I'm not a Xian.

I suspect that Xians discomfort with each other, on the left and the right, has more to do with politics than heart-felt sentiment.

[mermaid]

54. Well Spoken

EDIT FOR CLARITY: My message below is intended as a response to Message 42, not Message 47. Not a response to Modem Butterfly...but a response to Bridget Burke. SHE is the one I am saying was well-spoken, and who has the right idea here.

Damn the way the Forum sorts the replies...I want no one to be confused into thinkking I thought Modem Butterfly was right, or well-spoken, because I heartily disagree with most everything Modem Butterfly, the OP, has said so far.
----------------------------------------------------------
We now return you to our regularly scheduled reply!....

Now if we could only get some critical mass going on...WE are the majority of Christians...the problem is, the public doesn't know this, because that vocal minority is so very loud...and their message is very seductive.

We need to, as the majority, stand up and shout these false christians down! Only if we stand together, and all do our part, can we drown out their message of hate...which is being misconcieved by many as the only message Christianity has. Only then can we fight the demagogue the fundies are pushing.

Right now, they are winning, because too many of us good Christians are LETTING them win! Join with me, and other good Christians, and let us take back our good faith from the clutches of these minions of Satan who seek to redefine our good faith to serve their political agenda...and seek to redefine our good faith to mean exactly the opposite of what Jesus taught!

[Modem Butterfly]

74. No one likes to be told they are wrong about themselves

It's arrogant, presumptious, rude and more often than not, dead wrong. If liberal Xians want to distance themselves from conservative Xians, then that's a great idea. But the attempt to negate conservative Xians by claiming they are not, in fact, Xians will just piss off and further entrench people who might otherwise by swayed to your point of view. Furthermore, it reflects badly on liberal Xians.

[mermaid]

77. I Respectfully Disagree

If someone is drowning in the River Denial, then it is incumbent upon me, as a Christian, to try to save them, and to get them back on the right path...not let them dontinue to drown, and being led further astray by the minions of Satan that preach a message completely opposite to that Jesus preached.

I will tell them that they are not following the teachings of Jesus, and that they, thus, are not Christians. I will point out where they are failing to follow the teachings of Jesus, and then invite them to read and think for themselves, and they will, hopefully, come to see that I am right, and they aren't.

[leesa]

55. You have obviously not had any dialogue with a RW Fundie

A Christian follows the teachings of Jesus Christ. These people do not. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Yes, you CAN tell who is behaving in a Christian manner.

[mermaid]

57. EXACTLY!!!

these fundies...if anything, are following Paul of Tarsus...not Jesus of Nazareth!

They are not following the teachings of Jesus, and thus, should not be allowed to define themselves as Christians, because they aren't.

They are Paulites...they are Tarsusians...call them what you will (I personally call them minions of Satan) but do not call them Christians, because they aren't.

[Modem Butterfly]

66. Not true

I live in a red state. I dialogue with fundamentalist Xians regularly. Many of their views are repellant. But I think it's inaccurate to doubt their allegiance to their religion based on that.

[sendero]

59. I don't know much about Chistianity but I do believe this...

... just saying you are a Christian does not mean you are one.

I can say I'm president of the U. S., but when I try to board Air Force One it isn't going to happen.

I believe that people who call themselves Christians and ignore most of what Jesus said and also invent things he didn't say - well, you get the picture.

[msongs]

62. almost ALL nazis are christians - interpret that...

good german lutherans and catholics, like the current popie....
christians almost all, answering god's call to gas the jews.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Modem Butterfly]

71. But that's not to say that almost all Xians are Nazis

One can adhere to an idea without having an affect on other adherants.

[LittleClarkie]

72. Strike that -- reverse it

We are often made to feel we are not real Christians in the same way the Republicans can't accept a Dem as a real veteran.

I acknowledge that they are Christians, just not that they are acting in a Christian manner. I'm sure the Pharasees were folks of faith as well. Didn't make what they were doing correct.

It's not the Christian part of their makeup that makes my teeth itch. It's that they try to shove their special brand of Christianity and the accompanying political pov down people's throats. As with folks who dissented from the President during the buildup to the Iraq war who were made to feel like less than American, people of faith who disagree with the fundamentalists are made to feel less than real Christians.

As I tried to understand faith, I ran into this alot. It messed with my head quite a bit. But I can be a bulldog at times, and I wouldn't let go. So now I realize that we all are responsible for figuring out faith for ourselves, and if I come at that task honestly, my answers are no less legitimate than theirs.

I have found it is they, not us, who try to define what a real Chrisitan is. That's why it blows my mind that the Fundamentalist and the Catholics seem to have something of an alliance going. To the average Fundy, Catholics aren't real Christians.

[Modem Butterfly]

76. It's beyond me why anyone who has been subjected to this of "thought"...

...would want to extend it to someone else. It's insulting, maddening, and inaccurate.

Why would liberal Xians, or anyone else for that matter, want to embrace such a polaring position, one that seems designed to only further entrench those subjected to re-definition?

[LittleClarkie]

81. Well, that's democracy for you

It takes all kinds, even among liberal Christians.

I would agree with you, I think.

I wonder if it's the same folk who would redefine a liberal Dem as "Repub-lite" or a "DINO" for disagreeing with them. It's rather the same mentality, isn't it. "You're not a REAL Democrat!"

[Modem Butterfly]

83. Unfortunately yes

My partner is a liberal Veteran (and a disabled one at that). He's constantly told that he's not a "real" veteran because he disagrees with W. We have a "Vets for Kerry" sticker on our car, and have been told more than once that we're liars because no "real" veteran would support Kerry. My partner actually got into it with one guy (who hadn't actually served himself), told him where he served, when he served, where he was deployed, what his MOS was, and all but offered to show him his DD214 (that's essentially your discharge papers), then told the guy that he had never voted Dem for president in his life until 2004 (which is true, he used to be a Repug, then voted Libertarian in 96 and 2000). The guy said, "Well maybe you were a vet once but you ain't a vet no more,"

What the fuck does that even mean?

:grr:

[LittleClarkie]

84. I know an old guy who was a Marine

who was told he wasn't a true American for not supporting the war. He said they had tapped his family for every damn war thus far, and now they wanted his grandson for thi one. He wanted to know when it would stop. His neighbors tried to apologize during the election. He told them to go to hell.

My brother can't get over the idea that my yellow ribbon says "Bring the troops home now." (I'm not quite in that school of thought, but that's about as close as I'm going to get to a ribbon that supports the troops without agreeing with the war). My brother says that you have to support the mission if you support the troops, and that liberals must like Saddam if they don't support the war.

I have no idea how I did it, or even if I did it (might have been the economy) but he voted Kerry. Freaked me out.

[supernova]

78. We should distance ourselves politically

if not theologically.

Look, I don't like having to share our Lord's Table with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. But God claims them even as He claims you and me. That means we are called to air our differences in good faith with each other.

Will people be able to listen and respond humanely? That's a different question.

[Modem Butterfly]

80. Well said

I think that attempting to work with them spiritually rather than antagonize them will ultimately be more rewarding.

[Don Claybrook]

95. That's a nifty theory...as it turns out, it's dead wrong

Ask a few moderate Southern Baptists (if you can find any) how it worked for them when they tried to work with the fundamentalists in a spiritual way. They got steamrolled. The fundamentalists had no interest whatsoever in finding common ground, and they drove moderates away from the church. That was 12-15 years ago. Their take-no-prisoners attitude still persists. There is no reasoning with these unreasonable people.

[Ichiro]

82. Personally . . .

Can't speak for anyone else on this, as my definition of Democrat doesn't include anything about religion at all. However, when I refer to any fundie, I mean a person who has stopped thinking, the person who listens to the voices in his/her head and then thinks they are talking to God. Okay, no denying, these people are scary.

Aside from that, I fall in behind Thomas Jefferson, "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." {Notes on Virginia}

[hfojvt]

89. it is not about partisanship, although some would like to think so

I do not say that JR Bush is not a real Christian because I disagree with his political positions. I say he is not because of his dishonesty and his greed and powerlust. If you can show me where those are Christian virtues, then I am wrong to say he is not a Christian.

Because his actions differ from his words, I have every right to call him on his words, either to disavow what he said, or to change what he does. Same with many other fundies. It is not the things they believe which I would say make them unchristian. It is the hate and greed which do so. The hate they speak and the greed they practice. They are either extolling or practicing things which are unchristian.

They usually say lefties are not christian because of our support, as they see it, of hedonism. I do not disagree with that, necessarily, but tolerance is not the same thing as hedonism, and many types of hedonism should be legal in this country even if they are not moral.

[noiretextatique]

90. you have to accept people where they are

but you don't have to acquiesce to them because of where they choose to remain in consciousness. nor does it make any sense to whitewash the harmful effects of some of their beliefs...combined with their current politcal power. if there is anything moral about denying people rights that you take for granted because of some warped sense of self-righteous bigotry...please let me know what it is. thanks.

[rman]

92. Now why would liberals distance themselves from conservatives?

(and vice versa)

I would't have a clue.

[TWiley]

104. Evidently, we would be .... ASSHOLES .... if we did. n/t

[Bouncy Ball]

99. You're kidding me, right?

No way do I want to be associated with people who think you should beat children into conformity (literally!), people who preach (and believe) that God hates homosexuals, people who think the Grand Canyon was created just a few hundred years ago and the earth is 6,000 years old, people who sniff their noses at SCIENCE, people who pick and choose from the Bible to meet their own hateful ends like they're at some kind of buffet, people who prefer the dead Jesus over the living one who spoke about ministering to the poor and the sick.

No WAY do I want to be associated in any way with people like that.

[Modem Butterfly]

100. And yet, you share a religion...

It seems to me that the better tactic would be to differentiate yourselves as Xians rather than claim the fundies aren't Xians. Rather than negating their religion, as they have attempted to do to liberals, you could differentiate yourselves in the manner of different sects of Xianity. Not only is it nobler to take the high road, but it would alienate fewer outside observers and allow you to put your best foot forward.

[Bouncy Ball]

105. Except for here on DU, I don't even discuss this topic.

So I'm a bit baffled as to how I am alientating people. I mind my own business.

BTW, I highly doubt THEY would think we share a religion. It's simplistic to say "oh you believe in Jesus and you do, so you must be the same religion."

I probably have more in common with BUDDHISTS than I do with Christians like them.

So it's not as black and white as it may seem. Also, I attend a UU church, which fundie Christians and even some non-fundie ones do NOT consider ok. UU churches accept anyone and everyone and have no creed or dogma, so to them I might as well be a satan worshipper or something.

See what I mean?

[Stuckinthebush]

101. Perhaps because the extremists are dangerous

violent, angry, and full of hate. I can understand completely how a religion based in love of one's neighbor would want to distance itself from such extremists.

[G_j]

102. no

I am not gonna tell these folks they aren't real Christians,it is not my place, but the fact is they are like a person sitting eating a huge steak discussing how happy they are to be a vegetarian.
There is almost nothing in Jesus's teachings that they embrace.
I have some fundie family so I'm fairly familiar with the subject.

[Lindacooks]

106. All you have to do is read the words attributed to Jesus

then look at the positions fundie Xians take - they're the polar opposite. It's not complicated at all.

Since Christians are supposed to follow the words of Christ, and fundie Xians DON'T follow those words, it's very obvious they are not Christian.

[Lindacooks]

107. I fail to see how the exact opposite of Christ's teachings are

considered a 'radically different interpretation'.

There are no shades of gray on this issue. Either you agree with and try to further Christ's teachings and words or you don't. The exact opposite of a position is not a different interpretation - it's the OPPOSITE.

For instance, Jesus said 'Judge not, that ye be judged. For the measure you give will be the measure you receive.' That means humans aren't qualified to judge another person's beliefs. Fundie Xtians are constantly judging others. That's the exact opposite of what Jesus said, NOT an 'interpretation'.

[Modem Butterfly]

109. That's exactly the same thing they say about you

The teachings of Christ can be spun and "interpreted" to justify a great many positions.

Exactly what do you hope to gain by telling people they aren't really Xians?

[Lindacooks]

110. First of all, I don't say people aren't Christians.

And again, the teachings of Christ cannot be 'spun' to mean the exact opposite.

He said to feed and clothe the poor. So fundies support cutting funding for programs that feed and clothe the poor. That is not SPIN, that is the POLAR OPPOSITE of what Christ said.

If anybody ever said that to me, all I'd have to do is pull out a Bible and start reading Jesus' words. You can't 'spin' a statement to mean the exact opposite. That's called lying.