Tallesty1:
I'm here

MizMyColi:

“People often envision Jesus as someone tiptoeing around in a flowing robe, speaking softly, and carrying a baby lamb in his arms. But the real Jesus of history was a lightning rod. He got angry. He was the greatest debunker of religious hierarchies and traditions, and the greatest desacralizer of holy places, times, people, rituals, priests and things, that this world has ever seen. The religious establishment hurriedly condemned him to death for blasphemy, while the secular powers executed him for sedition.


“Nice” is overrated. “Nice” is being “amiably pleasant, pleasing, and agreeable.” Not exactly the word I would use for Jesus when he was turning over tables in the temple. Jesus did not do this nicely. Jesus was a person of deep love and compassion, but the word “nice” doesn’t fit him. “Defiant” and “subversive” fit much better.

You’re too nice.


Religion taught you that you should be nice, considerate, polite, amiable, and selfless. An antonym for “nice” is “improper.” “Improper” is defined as: “not being in accord with acceptable behavior and procedures; not in keeping with conventional mores.” Yep, that was Jesus!

The road to Truth has improper written all over it. People traveling this road are a threat to all the nice people. Don’t expect them to be nice anymore, at least to you. Your world works because it hinges on you being nice. There will not be a crowd cheering you on. Knowing Truth is not a popularity contest, and the road to your freedom and end of suffering will be lined with people expressing disapproval.


Every step on the path of Truth is an act of non-conformity.

There will be resistance. There will be a lot of chances to turn back. Keep going! Be fearless!”

---

Questions and Answers
Q: What about 1st Corinthians 13, Jesus was definitely subversive (disruptive, troublemaking, inflammatory, insurgent, insurrectionary, insurrectionist, rabble rousing) but maybe his subversiveness came from the fact that he could passionately disagree with love and respect for the one he disagreed with. Anger and rage don’t correspond with love.

Jim: I’d say ransacking the temple, and referring to the religious leaders as a “brood of vipers” isn’t too nice. One of the nice-sounding but false premises associated with religion/Christianity is that anger is bad.

Q: I don’t believe anger is bad because some religion told me. I think one can be angry at a situation without being angry at the person involved. Plus neither of us believe everything presented in the bible is accurate, so why choose to believe the story of the cleansing of the temple is accurate? Why not let love dictate truth?

Jim: Yes, sounds like we both can agree on the supremacy of love.


- Jim Palmer, Notes from (Over) the Edge

Let’s Discuss.

YungwizzzyChina:


Happy birthday to me!!!

xamster:
it's obvious u're an atheist hun. actually the messiah can never be overated with the word "nice" cuz his deeds were of the creator which was established on his love and teachings to humanity. he never lived an undeem life while on earth. but my ascertion on his action in the temple cud be illuminated in an instance whereby one walks into his father's office only to see his father's employee making out in there(quite a gross & gorry scen
e uh)
......& besides he never converged his anger on any soul



all in one jesus christ is nice & the GREATEST ever until the end of time.

Misogynist2014:
Nice one . Atheists don't hate Jesus today as much as Judaism(Jews) .

MizMyColi:

“People often envision Jesus as someone tiptoeing around in a flowing robe, speaking softly, and carrying a baby lamb in his arms. But the real Jesus of history was a lightning rod. He got angry. He was the greatest debunker of religious hierarchies and traditions, and the greatest desacralizer of holy places, times, people, rituals, priests and things, that this world has ever seen. The religious establishment hurriedly condemned him to death for blasphemy, while the secular powers executed him for sedition.


“Nice” is overrated. “Nice” is being “amiably pleasant, pleasing, and agreeable.” Not exactly the word I would use for Jesus when he was turning over tables in the temple. Jesus did not do this nicely. Jesus was a person of deep love and compassion, but the word “nice” doesn’t fit him. “Defiant” and “subversive” fit much better.

You’re too nice.


Religion taught you that you should be nice, considerate, polite, amiable, and selfless. An antonym for “nice” is “improper.” “Improper” is defined as: “not being in accord with acceptable behavior and procedures; not in keeping with conventional mores.” Yep, that was Jesus!

The road to Truth has improper written all over it. People traveling this road are a threat to all the nice people. Don’t expect them to be nice anymore, at least to you. Your world works because it hinges on you being nice. There will not be a crowd cheering you on. Knowing Truth is not a popularity contest, and the road to your freedom and end of suffering will be lined with people expressing disapproval.


Every step on the path of Truth is an act of non-conformity.

There will be resistance. There will be a lot of chances to turn back. Keep going! Be fearless!”

---

Questions and Answers
Q: What about 1st Corinthians 13, Jesus was definitely subversive (disruptive, troublemaking, inflammatory, insurgent, insurrectionary, insurrectionist, rabble rousing) but maybe his subversiveness came from the fact that he could passionately disagree with love and respect for the one he disagreed with. Anger and rage don’t correspond with love.

Jim: I’d say ransacking the temple, and referring to the religious leaders as a “brood of vipers” isn’t too nice. One of the nice-sounding but false premises associated with religion/Christianity is that anger is bad.

Q: I don’t believe anger is bad because some religion told me. I think one can be angry at a situation without being angry at the person involved. Plus neither of us believe everything presented in the bible is accurate, so why choose to believe the story of the cleansing of the temple is accurate? Why not let love dictate truth?

Jim: Yes, sounds like we both can agree on the supremacy of love.


- Jim Palmer, Notes from (Over) the Edge

Let’s Discuss.

Silkmoth33:



D Jews aren't all Judaists today either.


We even have some on nl!

Where all my igbotic niggas at? Crazy set of ppl.

Misogynist2014:
Come off it! I'm talking of real jews and not the 'matchmade' ones.

ihedinobi2:
He said, "I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it."

Jesus was not a rabble rouser. He was CALLED a rabble rouser. He was considered disruptive but what He was actually was corrective.

He called the religious elite of His Day hypocrites. He did not merely rebel against what existed, He judged it. And when He found it wanting He denounced it.

For instance, it was wrong to be very careful about the tithes and at the same time be so merciless as to sue a widow for a bad debt to the point that she loses her very home. He insisted that the Law had never been about that.

If Jesus did anything at all, it was prove that those who were supposed to be guardians of God's Law and examples of His Righteousness were wicked, black-hearted people who needed to repent.

Jesus was no mere rebel. And He was truly good.

Nice is an attitude that you can hold toward things. Jesus, being good, could not have been nice toward wickedness. But He could be nice to even ignorantly wicked people. That was why He had friends even among the establishments that He denounced.

MizMyColi:
Biko, don't just view, drop a thought.

Misogynist2014:
What has the Son of Man done to you? Your account is silly and blasphemous-It holds no water. I think no one is forcing you into Christianity . Let us wait till the day of judgement and let your soul be calm.

...............but pause a bit and ask yourself, What if I'm wrong?

Misogynist2014:
Your writeup seems persuasive but lacks the critical touch you make it sound. The wise ones read but since your write up does not work side-by-side with wisdom, they do what's best i.e. they've left you to Jesus' coming, with whom you can argue your case.

Silkmoth33:


There are no real jews! There clan has been disintegrated-scrambled all over the face of d earth. The natives of modern day Israel that congregate at Jewish sanctuaries are mostly fresh converts from other religions.


Even drake is Jewish! atheists shouldn't declare untold hatred for the religionists but d religion. Else we risk the advent of another holocaust or mass genocide of innocent ppl.


I hate Jews though.

Silkmoth33:



Yeah! Ehm! Right! Just to be clear ehm! on whose side r u?

Silkmoth33:



Scour d earth for the minotaur labyrinths

xamster:
it's obvious u're an atheist hun. actually the messiah can never be overated with the word "nice" cuz his deeds were of the creator which was established on his love and teachings to humanity. he never lived an undeem life while on earth. but my ascertion on his action in the temple cud be illuminated in an instance whereby one walks into his father's office only to see his father's employee making out in there(quite a gross & gorry scen
e uh)
......& besides he never converged his anger on any soul



all in one jesus christ is nice & the GREATEST ever until the end of time.

Sweerie, if labelling me an atheist helps us relate better, please go on.

But for what it's worth, I believe in Jesus, I believe God, I believe that he's not just a concept/figment of our imagination.

Now @Topic.

I am not saying he lived a wrong life, afterall he even said that "the prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me".......

All I'm trying to say here is that a person can be nice and be subversive and still be filled with compassion.

You get?

I think Jesus was a Chlor-Phleg like me.


Want me to explain more?

ihedinobi2:
He said, "I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it."

Jesus was not a rabble rouser. He was CALLED a rabble rouser. He was considered disruptive but what He was actually was corrective.

He called the religious elite of His Day hypocrites. He did not merely rebel against what existed, He judged it. And when He found it wanting He denounced it.

For instance, it was wrong to be very careful about the tithes and at the same time be so merciless as to sue a widow for a bad debt to the point that she loses her very home. He insisted that the Law had never been about that.

If Jesus did anything at all, it was prove that those who were supposed to be guardians of God's Law and examples of His Righteousness were wicked, black-hearted people who needed to repent.

Jesus was no mere rebel. And He was truly good.

Nice is an attitude that you can hold toward things. Jesus, being good, could not have been nice toward wickedness. But He could be nice to even ignorantly wicked people. That was why He had friends even among the establishments that He denounced.

MizMyColi:


Good.
I almost agree with you 100%.
That's progress.


I'd actually posted the thread as a reference and a reminder.
Also to correct myself on certain notions.

A person can be subversive, a rebel, a heretic in some circles and still be filled with Love and Compassion.
And still have a good heart and the best of intentions.

That anger is not bad, if it seeks to genuinely right wrongs......if it comes from a heart flowing with love and compassion at the same time.

ihedinobi2:




I actually laughed a happy laugh just now. Yes indeed, it's progress.

Basically, you are saying that you think that Love can get angry? And perhaps be, well, disruptive or corrective? That Love can be less than agreeable in certain circumstances?

Yep

MizMyColi:


Yep

MizMyColi:

“People often envision Jesus as someone tiptoeing around in a flowing robe, speaking softly, and carrying a baby lamb in his arms. But the real Jesus of history was a lightning rod. He got angry. He was the greatest debunker of religious hierarchies and traditions, and the greatest desacralizer of holy places, times, people, rituals, priests and things, that this world has ever seen. The religious establishment hurriedly condemned him to death for blasphemy, while the secular powers executed him for sedition.


“Nice” is overrated. “Nice” is being “amiably pleasant, pleasing, and agreeable.” Not exactly the word I would use for Jesus when he was turning over tables in the temple. Jesus did not do this nicely. Jesus was a person of deep love and compassion, but the word “nice” doesn’t fit him. “Defiant” and “subversive” fit much better.

You’re too nice.


Religion taught you that you should be nice, considerate, polite, amiable, and selfless. An antonym for “nice” is “improper.” “Improper” is defined as: “not being in accord with acceptable behavior and procedures; not in keeping with conventional mores.” Yep, that was Jesus!

The road to Truth has improper written all over it. People traveling this road are a threat to all the nice people. Don’t expect them to be nice anymore, at least to you. Your world works because it hinges on you being nice. There will not be a crowd cheering you on. Knowing Truth is not a popularity contest, and the road to your freedom and end of suffering will be lined with people expressing disapproval.


Every step on the path of Truth is an act of non-conformity.

There will be resistance. There will be a lot of chances to turn back. Keep going! Be fearless!”

---

Questions and Answers
Q: What about 1st Corinthians 13, Jesus was definitely subversive (disruptive, troublemaking, inflammatory, insurgent, insurrectionary, insurrectionist, rabble rousing) but maybe his subversiveness came from the fact that he could passionately disagree with love and respect for the one he disagreed with. Anger and rage don’t correspond with love.

Jim: I’d say ransacking the temple, and referring to the religious leaders as a “brood of vipers” isn’t too nice. One of the nice-sounding but false premises associated with religion/Christianity is that anger is bad.

Q: I don’t believe anger is bad because some religion told me. I think one can be angry at a situation without being angry at the person involved. Plus neither of us believe everything presented in the bible is accurate, so why choose to believe the story of the cleansing of the temple is accurate? Why not let love dictate truth?

Jim: Yes, sounds like we both can agree on the supremacy of love.


- Jim Palmer, Notes from (Over) the Edge

Let’s Discuss.

musKeeto:
Finally, I think she gets it.