I heard a radio ad late last night which basically said "everyone but us is going to hell". I really don't understand how 10,000+ people are suckered into joinging this gay-bashing, evolution-hating, ideology driven institution, but I certainly feel sorry for them.

also, they cause too many traffic hangups on Rt 7

You feel sorry for them..and they beleive all non-believers are going to hell. Maybe it's time for everyone to worry about themselves.

"Not a sermon, just a thought."


Ummm, actually, it IS a sermon.

BibleChurch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I heard a radio ad late last night which basically
> said "everyone but us is going to hell". I really
> don't understand how 10,000+ people are suckered
> into joinging this gay-bashing, evolution-hating,
> ideology driven institution, but I certainly feel
> sorry for them.
>
> also, they cause too many traffic hangups on Rt 7

My wife tried going there a couple of times. She says it is like going to a shopping mall. She really didn't care for it.

Just like going to almost all the churches in Tennessee.

I went there one Sunday with my wife and daughter.

Our first stop was at Wesley Methodist which is within walking distance of my house.

Sunday School or whatever they call it starts at 9:15am and then at 10am is the service. We show up at 9:16am and try the front door - locked. We go around the building, trying five other doors, all of which are locked. Has anyone else ever gone to a church that was locked during regular worship hours?

We see people in the far distance through one of the doors, but too far for us to pound on the door and shout. Then again, why should a supposedly open church community require effort like that to join?

My wife insists we go to McLean, so I look up a service time. First mistake was going when it was too close to our daughter's naptime. I go in and I'm wondering where the actual service is. We found it after a couple minutes of looking.

We try and bring her into the service (second mistake) when she starts acting up. So I take her outside and walk around then look for the nursery. I'm told by the nursery volunteer, sorry you can't drop her off -- something about service times (it was about 1/2 way through the service, but there seemed to be plenty of volunteers and the such in the toddler room.)

Granted there might've been a real liability or logistical reason but frankly at the time I did not feel like hearing it as I was on my last nerve. I also understand they might not want to be used as a free daycare across multiple services, but why not worry about that when/if it actually happened?

So I just take my daughter and walk off.

Having no interest in caring for a tired toddler for the next 30 minutes, I tell my wife it's time to go. (She's blind, so taking care of our daughter on the road unfortunately tends to fall onto my lap.)

Is there a way to get to know someone outside of your small group if you attend a place like McLean Bible? Over three years of going to a church in Arlington, we ended up knowing, reasonably well, a few dozen families. I'm not sure how you can make that sort of connection in a megachurch, and it just seems you'd end up hanging out with your own age/family range.

Hi,
I grew up in Wesley (my parents still go there), and I think that their current pastor and the congregation would be mortified to know that you tried to get in, but found the doors locked. The congregation is small, most everything is done by volunteers, and many are retirees. I know this is no excuse, but maybe the person unlocking the doors just hadn't gotten to those yet? Also, if you came during the summer, the worhsip hours are later then.

FYI, there is another couple that attends the church with young children and the husband is blind. They are active in the community, and I see the husband at the VW pool all the time.

We attend McLean Bible for the Deaf interpreter services, so our son stays with us, but I know that other parents of disabled children have found the Access ministry to be a great help. He's my youngest, and I've never put a non-disabled child in their normal childcare. I can't speak to why they wouldn't accept your daughter mid-service -- and I agree that seemed really strange.

There are a lot of churches in Vienna, ranging in size and belief set -- from ultra conservative to ultra liberal (one even has a lesbian pastor) -- so I think that if you keep visiting churches you are bound to find one that fits your family.

formerhick76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Is there a way to get to know someone outside of
> your small group if you attend a place like McLean
> Bible? Over three years of going to a church in
> Arlington, we ended up knowing, reasonably well, a
> few dozen families. I'm not sure how you can make
> that sort of connection in a megachurch, and it
> just seems you'd end up hanging out with your own
> age/family range.

My wife goes to a semi-megachurch (not McLean). The way you get to know people is by joining the various church groups (Bible Study, Women's Issues, Royal Rangers, etc). The smaller group settings allow you to get to know people.

Mrs. K:
Thanks for your reply -- maybe the doors @ Wesley were just stuck or something -- I don't know. The child care thing @ McLean Bible was a bit off, although there may have been a good reason. I'll admit I didn't care to hear the volunteer's explanation as by then I was on my last nerve.

We have found a welcoming church family at Holy Comforter. Members and staff have been accommodating and friendly, and we like the formality (but non-stiffness) of the services.

WashingToneLocian:
I figure the small groups were how you got to know people. I guess multiple small groups get you to know more people.

After our daughter decided 7pm was the best time to go to sleep (and said night-night routine needs to start around 5 or 5:30pm and includes dinner, bath, and a pre-sleep bottle), small groups became a thing of the past for my wife and me. So we like being able to see the same faces week in, week out.

Formerhick76, glad you found a church home that you enjoy.

Pax,
Mrs. K

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

BewareOfFalseProphets Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/


Thanks. I plan to use this often.

Try Fairfax Community church on Braddock Rd, much smaller, non-denominational, contemporary, very family oriented...Plenty of parking : ) Their web site is fairfax.cc Hope you try it and like it.

Were all going to the same place...
MBC is for wacky, extremist idiots.

Lucifer, I wondered when you would come calling...

If you are calling folks who attend MBC names, then we must be doing something right.

Mrs. K

Mrs. K Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lucifer, I wondered when you would come
> calling...

As Satan's attorney, I want to make it clear that the previous poster was not Mr. Lucifer. He is currently on vacation in Barbados and does not have internet access (I know because he calls me like 10 times a day to look stuff up for him on Wikipedia...slightly annoying).

Mr. Lucifer has expressed his option of McLean Bible Church before, and in general he feels it is awesome. They allow their women to speak in church and even allow them to enter without their heads covered as Paul directs.

Numbers 31.

Yes, but do any of you give proper credit to the power of TIMECUBE?

The clown that runs that church lives in a $2,000,000 home and takes a salary of over $800,000 per year. He also takes two months vacation every year.

Only an idiot would donate hard earned money to McLean Bible Church, the scam of the century.

Whoever posted above, you have very inaccurate information. Neither figure is close to being correct, especially his salary.

re: scam church Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whoever posted above, you have very inaccurate
> information. Neither figure is close to being
> correct, especially his salary.


Where can we get better information? We'd be interested in the correct numbers.

Don't non-profits have to file docs with the IRS similar to those filed by corporations? Or are they exempt since they are a church?

formerhick76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't non-profits have to file docs with the IRS
> similar to those filed by corporations? Or are
> they exempt since they are a church?

I don't believe churches have to do this....hence the reason it's become a sanctuary for scoundrels.

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Matthew 19:23-24

"He" lives in a huge house in Mantua on Colesbury Drive. It very well may be worth 2M...

| CONTACT US | HELP



homepage - tax administration - real estate
Main Property Search



Address Map Number



Profile

Sales

Values

Residential

Commercial

Map

Structure Size



....... MAP #: 0591 17 0007

SOLOMON LON N 8931 COLESBURY PL


Values
Current Land $317,000
Current Building $837,460
Current Assessed Total $1,154,460
Tax Exempt NO
Note


Values History
Tax Year Land Building Assessed Total Tax Exempt
2008 $317,000 $837,460 $1,154,460 NO
2007 $230,000 $1,047,270 $1,277,270 NO
2006 $230,000 $931,590 $1,161,590 NO
2005 $185,000 $930,640 $1,115,640 NO
2004 $156,000 $597,520 $753,520 NO
2003 $98,000 $597,520 $695,520 NO
2002 $88,500 $573,900 $662,400 NO
2001 $88,500 $463,500 $552,000 NO
2000 $88,500 $324,800 $413,300 NO







CURRENT RECORD


Return to Search Results





Neighborhood Sales







Printable Summary












Site Design Copyright 1999-2006 Akanda Group LLC. All rights reserved.

| CONTACT US | HELP



homepage - tax administration - real estate
Main Property Search



Address Map Number



Profile

Sales

Values

Residential

Commercial

Map

Structure Size



....... MAP #: 0591 17 0007

SOLOMON LON N 8931 COLESBURY PL


Sales History
Date Amount Seller Buyer
08/18/1999 $475,000 SOLOMON LON N


Sales
Date 08/18/1999
Amount $475,000
Seller
Buyer SOLOMON LON N
Notes Non-representative price based on comps
Deed Book and Page 11052-0001








CURRENT RECORD


Return to Search Results





Neighborhood Sales







Printable Summary












Site Design Copyright 1999-2006 Akanda Group LLC. All rights reserved.

The "Non-representative price based on comps" makes me wonder if Rezko was involved???

That usually means that the sale was for below market value. They can not tell you the reason, because they generally do not know.

As of 1999, the land and house were assessed at 400K+, but if you look through all of the information on the tax website, you will see that additions were built in 2000 and 2005. Thus, the original purchase in 1999 was not way out of line, but it looks like a lot of money has been put into the house since then, as it is now assessed at about 1.5 mil.

No, this pastor isn't poor. But so what? He's not claiming poverty.

A lot of homes were underpriced in Mantua during the 1990's, due to the Texaco oil/gasoline spill. After the spill was cleaned up, people came back and so did the prices. And FYI, his house value went up like every else's over the last 10 years.

Some of the work done on their house was to allow them to care for their daughter, Jill, who is severly handicapped. Jill has to be cared for medically 24/hr day, 365 days a year. Ramps and hospital-type upgrades take up a lot of space and cost a lot of money.

If any of you actually has FACTS about the MBC pastor doing anything illegal or illicit, then post them.

I have gone to McLain over 20 years and I still can't find out what the pastor makes. It has always puzzled me why they don't reveal just how much the staff does make. We, the members are paying those salaries. What is there to hide?

Is this the place? Looks like the kind of house Jesus would have had.
Attachments:

I don't know -- is this his house?

Again, do you have proof that he's done anything illegal?

Mrs. K Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know -- is this his house?
>
> Again, do you have proof that he's done anything
> illegal?

Why the focus on illegality? Did someone claim that he was doing something illegal?

I'm much more interested in ethical dilemmas. Like a man that preaches the word of Christ, yet doesn't live the word.

By all outward appearances, he seems to be a rich man. And who was it who said:

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."?

Mr. H Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have gone to McLain over 20 years and I still
> can't find out what the pastor makes. It has
> always puzzled me why they don't reveal just how
> much the staff does make. We, the members are
> paying those salaries. What is there to hide?


What is there to hide?!?! WTF do you think there is to hide?

They don't want you suckers to know about the yachts and jets!

If you throw your hard earned money into Solomon's (or any of those blow-dried preachers') basket, you're worse than a moron.

Not a sermon, just a thought.


As for myself, I offer God my entire paycheck....I throw it up in the air, and if it comes back and hits the ground....I pick it up, God didn't want it...

u guys r too much in peoples lives get a life!

wow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> u guys r too much in peoples lives get a life!

omg like no wai!

This is a really stupid thread.

But, I forgive you.

RELIGION MAKES NO SENCE! PEOPLE ARE JUST STUCK BELIEVING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY. WHICH ALOT OF IT IS MADE UP. SOME INFORMATION IS CORRECT BUT MOST IS WHAT SOMEBODY SAID YOU HAVE TO DO TO GET TO HEAVEN. ALLLLL RELIGION IS THE SAME CONCEPT.

JUST STICK TO GOD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RELIGION MAKES NO SENCE!

Dammit son, you're not doing us atheists any favors.

LYc3M Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> formerhick76 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Don't non-profits have to file docs with the
> IRS
> > similar to those filed by corporations? Or are
> > they exempt since they are a church?
>
> I don't believe churches have to do this....hence
> the reason it's become a sanctuary for
> scoundrels.
>
Kinda like Scientologists?

Glad you guys like my house. Stop by anytime, just make sure to take off your shoes before you step on my imported Italian marble and lift the lid before you pee on my gold L embossed toilet seats. Respect to my annual sabaticcal it's only three months ! I need the time for my handicapped daughter the on I built the 3,000 square foot addition for. I hope you guys don't find out about my chartered jet flights, but then again SO WHAT !

The dopes that set in the pews at my church (family business) are so well trained that they will just keep dropping the cash in to support my $800,000 a year income. I love MCLEAN BIBLE CHURCH, it's been good to me, LOL.

Sincerely, LON Suckerthem

P.S I hope the board doesn't cut my $150,000 a month expense account, jet fuel is expensive and I'm too important to stand in line for a commercial flight.
Attachments:

Opsy you were not supposed to see my little boat. I bought it to spend time with my handicap daughter,
Attachments:

Lon Suckerman??? LOL

Actually, his daughter has profound disabilities, to include recurring, multiple seizures, requiring supports for mobility and assisted living. My hunch is that the criticisms are coming from people who otherwise profess their "tolerance."

One of my best friends is a quadrapalegic--what's funny is Mr. Solomon's home has twice the square footage as my buddy's, which is also a single family home...and that's not counting the additional 1724 sf of accessory structures attached to Lon's house. Trying to justify it with his handicapped daughter is pathetic.

It's pathetic that people contribute to that "church" and I use that term loosely. Any church/religious institution that can afford to advertise on the radio on as frequent a basis as MBC does should lose its tax exempt status immediately. That church should also have to pay for the needed transportation improvements in the area to make up for all the traffic it needlessly causes the neighbors.

It is no suprise that Mr. Solomon's salary isn't public, LOL.

I hate to break it to you, but Mr. Solomon works for me. All of these rich ministers do.

The Greeks made a philosophy out of Christianity, I forget what the Romans did but Americans made a mega business out of it. I Corinthians gives us a glimse of what the original church was and still should be. Clergymen who are essesencial to the contemporary forms of American Christianty, are as a group stystically problematic. The original concept of leadership has been suplied from the prescent concept to the Bible. I attend a small interactive Christian group.

Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, his daughter has profound disabilities,
> to include recurring, multiple seizures, requiring
> supports for mobility and assisted living. My
> hunch is that the criticisms are coming from
> people who otherwise profess their "tolerance."


Sounds like she needs and excorcism...

OOPS. Wrong church.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2008 03:17PM by ITRADE.

1. Lon Solomon is big on Jews for Jesus.

2. He owns in manuta and at the beach (hence the 2m is correct)

3. House on Madrillon estates in Vienna is in his name or sons, but son just moved back.

4. it is sermon and they do hate.

Odd little thing: I have a nephew...big christian..big on going to church, but he is the first to lie, be deceitful and talk negatively about those who cannot stand up for themselves.

It's those that can stand on principles and not try to change everyone else that stand in harmony.

Technically Rod, the Hebrews made Christianity out of the Greek's religion (which the Roman's were practicing).

Actually though, it can be traced back to the mystery cults of Ancient Egypt.

In any event, the church is just another business. It's angle is to get believers to think it's *not* a business.

Even though I believed for 20+ years, looking back, I'm AMAZED that so many people believe the Christian message.

Skeptics point to a long line of dualisms that are in the Bible and exist in pagan culture. Christians consider some of them counterfeits. To the Christian there's a religion I think it's called miterism seems counter fit Christianity. Christianity is a faith based religion. Still the spread of Christianity can correctly be based on the actual resurrection of Jesus and 500 people seeing him after the resurrection and they telling others. This is something that mere story telling cannot recreate. Some Christians are converted by miraculous acts. For example the Apostle Paul was struck blind and heard Jesus voice. This is what it might take for some people. Christians believe everyone will be converted because the Bible says every knee will bow [to Jesus].

312AD: Roman emperor Constantine converts to Christianity
313AD: Constantine ends the persecution of the Christians (edict of Milan)
313AD: Constantine recognizes the Christian church

There's a lot to read here, but you can find this information at your liesure online. The point of it all is that all the stuff in the Bible is arbirtrary, and there are things that you don't see in the bible that are not there for the same arbitrary reasons. Zoroastrianism, Mithrian and Pagan believes were rolled into the Roman Emprire's new relgion. It has nothing to do with anything that might have happened to a newborn in a manger with 3 wise men who grew up to walk on water and turned water into wine and caused one loave of bread to feed thousands. This was all about the Roman Empire co-opting a growing cult or religion to maintain control. They changed everything in the new testament that threatened Roman rule, and added things to give legitimacy towards Roman rule.


The First Council of Nicaea was held in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day İznik in Turkey) and convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 325 AD. It is believed to have been the First Ecumenical council of the Christian Church by the Assyrian Church of the East, the Oriental Orthodox, the Eastern Orthodox, the Roman Catholics, the Old Catholics, and a number of other Western Christian groups. Most significantly, it resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called
the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops' (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom. From Koine Greek oikoumenikos, "ecumenical" literally means worldwide but generally is assumed to be limited to the Roman Empire, as in Augustus' claim to be ruler of the oikoumene/world; the earliest extant uses of the term for a council are Eusebius' Life of Constantine 3.6[1] around 338 "σύνοδον οἰκουμενικὴν συνεκρότει" (he convoked an Ecumenical council), Athanasius' Ad Afros Epistola Synodica in 369[2], and the Letter in 382 to Pope Damasus I and the Latin bishops from the First Council of Constantinople[3].

The purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements arising from within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father or merely of similar substance. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arian controversy comes, took the second. The council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250–318 attendees, all but two voted against Arius[1]).

Another result of the council was an agreement on when to celebrate the Resurrection, the most important feast of the ecclesiastical calendar. The council decided in favour of celebrating the resurrection on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Hebrew Calendar (see also Quartodecimanism and Easter controversy). It authorized the Bishop of Alexandria (presumably using the Alexandrian calendar) to announce annually the exact date to his fellow bishops.

The Council of Nicaea was historically significant because it was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.[2] "It was the first occasion for the development of technical Christology."[2] A precedent was set for subsequent general councils to adopt creeds and canons.



Pagan religion could not all be suppressed. Many gods were admitted to the church as saints - Dionysus as St. Denis of Paris; Diana Illythia as St. Illis of Dole. The statues of Jupiter and Apollo became statues of St. Peter and St. Paul.

The Romans celebrated the Winter Solstice on December 25th as a renewing of the sun every year. In many European countries, this is called Yuletide, meaning wheel time, the cycles of time. The Church tried to put an end to this festival but failed. So, in 354 CE Pope Liberius repackaged this Pagan festival as Christmas celebrating the birth of Jesus despite the fact there is no recorded date for the event. Another Pagan festival of the Romans was Lupercalia. Romans believed believed that the goddess Juno Februata inflicted her love fever on the young and unwary in the ides of of February. This festival was converted to St. Valentine's Day.

* - "The father of ecclesiastical history," as Eusebius of Caesarea is called, wrote his famous Ecclesiastical History some years before the death of Constantine; and it does not contain this very important miracle.

Part - IV
Gospels and the other books of the New Testament are considered to be canonical or divinely inspired i.e. the New Testament was the "word of God" and that it was not written by mere mortals. Unfortunately, there were many books in circulation and God did not specify exactly which among them had his official stamp of approval. So, that task was usurped by mere mortals - the Church fathers. These men were considered some books to be divinely inspired or "orthodox." Others were considered to be heretic. Among themselves, humans have different opinions. So, at various times in history, some books went from being orthodox to being heretic and back again and so forth. The four gospels that we now have are the ones that survived the shootout. The rest were suppressed and destroyed and almost lost for ever. Incidentally, the gospel authors (who were later made St. Mark, St. John, St. Matthew and St. Luke) had written other books, which are now considered to be heretic!

One of the first list of canonical books was drawn by Marcion. His list only had one gospel (of Luke's). Iraneous, the Bishop of Hippo, considered Marcion as heretic and made a new list of 22 books, which for the first time had four gospels. All these books except the Shepherd of Hermas have made it to today's New Testament. Later, Origen created a new list which put some books under dispute. Apostolic authorship was the reason why some books became canonical while others were not. The Church wanted to identify some apostles closely with the books so as to be their authors. The final list of 27 books of the New Testament was made by Athansius, the Bishop of Alexandria, in 367 CE. The rest were considered heretic. However, not all Churches accepted this list. This is why some very old branches of Christianity have different sets of books in their New Testament.

In 1958, Morton Smith, a theology student at Columbia University, discovered a letter which include a reference to "a secret gospel of Mark" when he was working at the Mar Saba Monastery near Jerusalem. It is a letter written by Clement of Alexandria (2nd century CE) concerning a dispute with the Carpocratians, an heterodox Christian sect. While Secret Mark may be false, the letter* is an indication of the numeous gospels that were in existence and the plurality in the treatment they accorded to Jesus Christ. It also reveals the way "official" gospel writers worked to embellish and spruce up the tale of Christ to create a more acceptable image for the new cult.

Bob quotes: The Romans celebrated the Winter Solstice on December 25th as a renewing of the sun every year. In many European countries, this is called Yuletide, meaning wheel time, the cycles of time. The Church tried to put an end to this festival but failed. So, in 354 CE Pope Liberius repackaged this Pagan festival as Christmas celebrating the birth of Jesus despite the fact there is no recorded date for the event. Another Pagan festival of the Romans was Lupercalia. Romans believed believed that the goddess Juno Februata inflicted her love fever on the young and unwary in the ides of of February. This festival was converted to St. Valentine's Day.

Me: There is no reason for Christians to celebrate Christmas, Easter. Christ and Paul and the early Christians and everyone in the bible all celebrated the Biblical holiday's mentioned in Leviticus 23.

Everyone in the Bible kept the seventh day Sabbath, from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. This is what observant Jews have done through out history. This is not what we see in the mega-church.

where THE PREACHER COMES FROM: NOT THE BIBLE!!!

We have in history, the medicine man, the shaman, the rhapsodised, the miracle worker, the witch doctor, the soothsayer and the priest who in a sense have all been with us since the fall of man. One of the first great ones was Nimrod.

The seeds of the contemporary Pasteur canny be detected in the New Testament era, Diotrephes is spoken of in 3 John 9-10 as one as one who loved to have preeminence in the church and illigitimately tool controll of it's affairs. In addition, some scholars have suggested that the doctrine of the nicolaitans that Jesus condemned is a reference of the early clergy.

Alongside humanities fallen quest for a human spiritual mediator is the obsession with the hierarchical form of leadership.

We had the Sophists which were traveling fee accepting Greek philosophers. They were a important part of Greek culture. They brought a lot of thier paganism into Christianity as they converted and continued to practice thier craft. They are the origin of the great super preachers. Much of this is the new book, "Pagan Christianity," by Frank Viola

Rod Wrote: "Skeptics point to a long line of dualisms that are in the Bible and exist in pagan culture. Christians consider some of them counterfeits. To the Christian there's a religion I think it's called miterism seems counter fit Christianity. Christianity is a faith based religion. Still the spread of Christianity can correctly be based on the actual resurrection of Jesus and 500 people seeing him after the resurrection and they telling others. This is something that mere story telling cannot recreate. Some Christians are converted by miraculous acts. For example the Apostle Paul was struck blind and heard Jesus voice. This is what it might take for some people. Christians believe everyone will be converted because the Bible says every knee will bow [to Jesus]."

There are similarities between Christianity and mithrialism, that is for sure. Christianity has many influences and I would say that it's rather obvious that it's been helenized. Take 'Hell' for instance, which wasn't in the old testament. In the old testament, when you died you went to Sheol, which was an actual place. Hell and the duality of 'good' and 'evil' came from persian influence - ie, zoroastrianism. If you look in the book of Job, Satan was just another angel of God. He wasn't *opposed* to God as he is in the new testament.

As to the 'spread' of Christianity, I disagree. I do not think it can be traced back to an actual resurrection. The earliest source is Paul and he makes no real mention of the life of Jesus - in fact, his experiences were something like two decades AFTER the resurrection was supposed to have taken place.

We have no *real* contemporary sources for Jesus, we have after the fact, third hand accounts. As for the 500 people - I believe you are referring to the miracle that Paul mentions - but I don't think anyone should take that without a huge spoonful of salt. After all, who were these people? Is it possible that Paul was just engaging in hyperbole?

In any event, I think I might be taking your post to be actually supporting the contentions that are written. I'm not sure if you mean it in that vein (ie, you support what you are writing) or if you mean it in the sense of 'this is what Christians believe'.

Dear Rod...the following statement just isnt true.

Still the spread of Christianity can correctly be based on the actual resurrection of Jesus and 500 people seeing him after the resurrection and they telling others. This is something that mere story telling cannot recreate.

Many religions have experienced similar growth based on an "event" purported to be true. Probably the most recent is Joseph Smith's revelations that are the basis for today's Morman Church. In fact their growth actually surpassed early Christian growth. It wasnt until Constantine made christianity "the" religion of rome did christianity really take off.

So unless you accept Joseph Smith's revelations as true...your statement is not true. Christianity's growth was not phenominal...it doesnt necessarily have to based on a true event.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2008 06:26PM by Vince(1).

Wow, between this discussion and the "best burger in nova," it has been quite a morning on FU

Vince, you are reading my quote of Rod. I wasn't subscribing to what you are saying I was subscribing to. Reread it.

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince, you are reading my quote of Rod. I wasn't
> subscribing to what you are saying I was
> subscribing to. Reread it.


Noted and revised...ty.

Hey Vince, have you ever gotten in the middle of an argument with a Mormon and a Christian?

I find it quite bizarre. The Christian will typically attempt to take the rational high ground and say that the historical claims that the Mormon makes are ungrounded and that they are subscribing to scientifically inaccurate views.



Yet ask them about Genesis....

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Vince, have you ever gotten in the middle of
> an argument with a Mormon and a Christian?
>
> I find it quite bizarre. The Christian will
> typically attempt to take the rational high ground
> and say that the historical claims that the Mormon
> makes are ungrounded and that they are subscribing
> to scientifically inaccurate views.
>
>
>
> Yet ask them about Genesis....

I like the people who claim that God put fossils on the earth to test their faith.

When I was 5 years old, my mommy told me that if I wished hard enough, Santa would bring me the toys I wanted. I had a hard time believing her at 5, how do these grown people believe that God will save them if they just believe in him hard enough????

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
the Mormon makes are ungrounded and that they are subscribing to scientifically inaccurate views.


Q: Why should you always ask TWO Mormons to go fishing with you?

A: Cuz if you ask just one, he'll drink all your beer.

Didn't read all the shit....BUT, _any_ church that has the radio asdvertising budget that McLean Baptist apparently has is obviously a sham.

Translation: Anybody that throws coin in Lon's basket is a MORON.

tubby Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't read all the shit....BUT, _any_ church that
> has the radio asdvertising budget that McLean
> Baptist apparently has is obviously a sham.
>
> Translation: Anybody that throws coin in Lon's
> basket is a MORON.


Not a sermon, just a thought.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tubby Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Didn't read all the shit....BUT, _any_ church
> that
> > has the radio asdvertising budget that McLean
> > Baptist apparently has is obviously a sham.
> >
> > Translation: Anybody that throws coin in Lon's
> > basket is a MORON.
>
>
> Not a sermon, just a thought.


Yup, Ole' Lon used to be a recreational Pharmacist (Cocaine) so preaching isn't really a stretch, (religion is an opiate for the masses). Organized religion is just an extension of government, disagree if you want but its clearly evident if you compare church/mosques/temple doctrine to the the law of the day. Here's a good religion to practice without wasting your Sunday mornings. Do the right thing when no one else is looking and try to be a decent human being.

preachon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Here's a good religion to
> practice without wasting your Sunday mornings. Do
> the right thing when no one else is looking and
> try to be a decent human being.


But how do I benefit? My neighbors won't be impressed. It won't further my career. I can't look down on others.

Oh, shit, since I'm not a moron, I get it. It's called intellectually honest spirituality -- doing good because it is right.

Come on. Many of us understand this, but too many people are looking to prove themselves, or gain some advantage out of their false piousness. This is too hard for simple people to comprehend. If I buy two sandwiches at lunch and give the second one to a homeless guy, who's going to pat me on the back and tell me what a great guy I am? Why should I do that? If I buy a bottle of cold water and give it to a homeless guy in Lafayette park, and nobdy sees me do it, how will it benefit my career? I'm out $1.25 and I don't get any credit for it.

its hard to believe in god when you live in a world of shit

I am in a world of shit

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Pangloss Wrote:
> the Mormon makes are ungrounded and that they are
> subscribing to scientifically inaccurate views.
>
>
> Q: Why should you always ask TWO Mormons to go
> fishing with you?
>
> A: Cuz if you ask just one, he'll drink all your
> beer.

I'm thinking that has some relevance to my father's experience in going to Saudi Arabia for contracts.

If it's just one mormon, he's going to say "hey, hey buddy. I'm just wondering, what are you going to do with all that beer", while if there's two of those religious nutcases, neither is willing to risk being ratted out by the other, so they let you keep your beer.

My father was brought into flophouses in Saudi Arabia where they have rented apartments with no furniture, but stocked with every imaginable form of alcohol.

My father still knew about the execution for drinking or bringing bibles sort of shit and said, nah dude, have fun. We can do this in the four seasons in Georgetown, but right now, I have a family and two kids and I'm not gonna risk any of that shit. I'll drop an Amex Gold card at the Westfields Marriot, or anywhere you want to go, and we can pay your tab, anywhere in America. Come see us.

Were all going to the same place...
MBC is for wacky, extremist idiots.


"for god so loved the world that he gave his only begoten son that whoever shall believe in him shall NOT perish, but have ever lasting life" john 3:16

"no one gets to the father except throguh me" john 14:6

> (religion is an opiate for the masses). Organized
> religion is just an extension of government,
> disagree if you want but its clearly evident if
> you compare church/mosques/temple doctrine to the
> the law of the day. Here's a good religion to
> practice without wasting your Sunday mornings. Do
> the right thing when no one else is looking and
> try to be a decent human being.

I like it AND it's in the 'sermon' on the mount. Math 5-6

whoa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am in a world of shit

Take heart, there's help in God!

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince, you are reading my quote of Rod. I wasn't
> subscribing to what you are saying I was
> subscribing to. Reread it.


It's hard to follow this

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Pangloss Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Vince, you are reading my quote of Rod. I
> wasn't
> > subscribing to what you are saying I was
> > subscribing to. Reread it.
>
>
> It's hard to follow this


BOils down to this...the first christians never saw christ rise from the dead..and there was no unusual conversion rate to christianity after the reported rising.

After calculating that I wasted 6500 hours in church the first 25 years of my life, I vowed to spend 6500 hours doing volunteer work that would actually make a difference in the world.

Well there's quite a document that says Jesus did. How could such a document maintain credibility if no one witnessed? If someone just wrote it and no one witnessed it would not have credibility and no initial following. In the first century. The NT didn't just come in after that it. It had a big following up to and after the first century.

Rod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well there's quite a document that says Jesus did.
> How could such a document maintain credibility if
> no one witnessed? If someone just wrote it and no
> one witnessed it would not have credibility and no
> initial following. In the first century. The NT
> didn't just come in after that it. It had a big
> following up to and after the first century.

It happens all the time...someone makes up..or hallucinates a godly vision..and it takes off as a new religion. Joseph Smith said he saw angels and god in upstate NY and started the Mormon church. Do you believe any of that really happened? They have their book of mormon...it's a formula...see god..write a book...start a religion...oh yeah! and pass the plate and donate generously.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2008 09:06AM by Vince(1).

Rod Wrote: "Well there's quite a document that says Jesus did. How could such a document maintain credibility if no one witnessed? If someone just wrote it and no one witnessed it would not have credibility and no initial following. In the first century. The NT didn't just come in after that it. It had a big following up to and after the first century."


My Response: What you take to be self evident is actually very contentious. You say there is a document that says what Jesus did. You are referring to the New Testament, correct? If so, there are a few problems with that document:

1. The Gospels are all drawn from Mark. In otherwords, the other gospels add to Mark, manipulate it, and so on to form their own version of events. This conclusion is not contraversial in the scholarly community. Mark is dated several decades AFTER the events are supposed to have happened. If this doesn't bother you, think of how fast it takes for a rumor/urban legend/etc to spread.

2. Mark is not written as history. This is also fairly uncontraversial. Mark is teaching a message, it is not teaching history and as a matter of fact, the original Mark ends with the women going to the tomb (IIRC). The attestations of Jesus appearing were added to Mark. There are too many details in Mark (and the other gospels) that give it away that this is not history. There are discussions that the disciples could not have heard: Such as Jesus being on the cross - remember they weren't around, so how did they hear what he said? Also, how did they know that Pilot found no fault with him? How did anyone know about the temptation of Christ? How did anyone write down the events in Gesthemane (sp?), when the disciples were asleep?

3. The original documents do not have *names* on them. They were anonymous. It was only around 200 AD that the traditional names were added to them.

4. The whole dieing and resurrecting theme was *common* during the days of Jesus. In fact, the whole end of the world, there is a messiah was common. Check out Josephus - Jesus wasn't the only 'Jesus'.

5. Check out the early Christian's apologetics against the pagans. As an example, check out Justin's apologetics. He does not argue that Christianity was unique, that their beliefs were unique, instead he argues that Christian beliefs are on par with Roman beliefs. He specifically mentions virgin births of Jesus and I think Perseus - trying to suggest that the Christians weren't very different.

6. Why are there no contemporary sources for Jesus? There were at least 40 historians in and around Jerusalem at the time of Jesus and not one of them mentions him. Instead the earliest mention is decades after his death.

Which is ABSURD if you believe the new testament. Seriously, are we to believe that Saints jumped out of their graves (as in the gospel of Matthew) and NO ONE bothered to write anything?

7. Why does the earliest Christian source we have (Paul) not mention his earthly life at all? The gospels, the supposed 'witnesses' do not show up until something like forty years later. Paul never mentions any earthly life at all of Jesus. This is odd, if Jesus was a real person, don't you think?

Okay, and now for the hero savior of vietnam, taken from here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/whynotchristian.html

Hero Savior of Vietnam
Suppose I told you there was a soldier in the Vietnam War named "Hero Savior" who miraculously calmed storms, healed wounds, conjured food and water out of thin air, and then was blown up by artillery, but appeared again whole and alive three days later, giving instructions to his buddies before flying up into outer space right before their very eyes. Would you believe me? Certainly not. You would ask me to prove it.

So I would give you all the evidence I have. But all I have are some vague war letters by a guy who never really met Hero Savior in person, and a handful of stories written over thirty years later by some guys named Bill, Bob, Carl, and Joe. I don't know for sure who these guys are. I don't even know their last names. There are only unconfirmed rumors that they were or knew some of the war buddies of Hero Savior. They might have written earlier than we think, or later, but no one really knows. No one can find any earlier documentation to confirm their stories, either, or their service during the war, or even find these guys to interview them. So we don't know if they really are who others claim, and we're not even sure these are the guys who actually wrote the stories. You see, the undated pamphlets circulating under their names don't say "by Bill" or "by Bob," but "as told by Bill" and "as told by Bob." Besides all that, we also can't find any record of a Hero Savior serving in the war. He might have been a native guide whose name never made it into official records, but still, none of the historians of the war ever mention him, or his amazing deeds, or even the reports of them that surely would have spread far and wide.

Besides the dubious evidence of these late, uncorroborated, unsourced, and suspicious stories, the best thing I can give you is that war correspondence I mentioned, some letters by an army sergeant actually from the war, who claims he was a skeptic who changed his mind. But he never met or saw Hero in life, and never mentions any of the miracles that Bob, Bill, Carl, and Joe talk about. In fact, the only thing this sergeant ever mentions is "seeing" Hero after his death, though not "in flesh and blood," but in a "revelation." That's it.

This sergeant also claims the spirit of Hero Savior now enables him and some others to "speak in tongues" and "prophecy" and heal some illnesses, but none of this has been confirmed or observed by anyone else on record, and none of it sounds any different than what thousands of other cults and gurus have claimed. So, too, for some unconfirmed reports that some of these believers, even this army sergeant, endured persecution or even died for believing they "saw Hero in a revelation"--a fact no more incredible than the Buddhists who set themselves on fire to protest the Vietnam War, certain they would be reincarnated, or the hundreds of people who voluntarily killed themselves at Jonestown, certain their leader was sent by God.

Okay. I've given you all that evidence. Would you believe me then? Certainly not. No one trusts documents that come decades after the fact by unknown authors, and hardly anyone believes the hundreds of gurus today who claim to see and speak to the spirits of the dead, heal, and predict the future. Every reasonable person expects and requires extensive corroboration by contemporary documents and confirmed eyewitness accounts. Everyone would expect here at least as much evidence as I'd need to prove I owned a nuclear missile, yet the standard required is actually that of proving I own an interstellar spacecraft--for these are clearly very extraordinary claims, and as we saw above, such claims require extraordinary evidence, as much as would be needed, for example, to convince the United Nations that I had an interstellar spacecraft on my lawn. Yet what we have for this Hero Savior doesn't even count as ordinary evidence, much less the extraordinary evidence we really need.

To complete the analogy, many other things would rightly bother us. Little is remarkable about the stories told of Hero Savior, for similar stories apparently have been told of numerous Vietnamese sorcerers and heroes throughout history--and no one believes them, so why should we make an exception for Hero? The documents we have from Bob, Bill, Carl, and Joe have also been tampered with--we've found some cases of forgery and editing in each of their stories by parties unknown, and we aren't sure we've caught it all. Apparently, their stories were used by several different cults to support their causes, and these cults all squabble over the exact details of the right cause, and so tell different stories or interpret the stories differently to serve their own particular agenda. And the earliest version, the one told by Bob, which both Bill and Joe clearly copied, added to, and edited (which Carl might have done, too, perhaps by borrowing loosely from Joe), appears to have been almost entirely constructed out of passages from an ancient Vietnamese poem, arranged and altered to tell a story full of symbolic and moral meaning. These and many other problems plague the evidence, leaving it even more suspect than normal.

This Hero Savior analogy entirely parallels the situation for Jesus.[7] Every reason we would have not to believe these Hero Savior stories applies to the stories of Jesus with all the same force. So if you agree there would be no good reason to believe these Hero Savior stories, you must also agree there is insufficient reason to believe the Jesus Christ stories. Hence I am not a Christian because the evidence is not good enough. For it is no better than the evidence proposed for Hero Savior, and that falls far short of the burden that would have to be met to confirm the very extraordinary claims surrounding him.

Professor Pangloss - not sure if I follow everything that you are relating, but I do think the study of the historical (as opposed to the theological) Jesus is both healthy and fascinating. The historical Jesus was not generally studied with a critical eye for centuries for fear of offending the religious powers that be. The last thirty years has reflected an emerging and vibrant pattern of critical (not religious) historical study. And I think that all major religions would benefit from critical historical treatment - a difficult concept for many ascribe to some variants of faith, whether it be those at the McLean Bible church, Mormons, or any number of Muslim adherents. But in the end we benefit from separating history from theology, just as we do separating science and the inductive method from religion. By the way, I am by no means even a rank amateur on this subject, but have respect for a few divinity professors from my alma mater that are just making tremendous headway in this area.

In any event, on the topic of McLean Bible Church. I listen to Solomon's sermons occasionally and find them to be formulaic, simplistic, and overly conclusory in nature. I also find them at times to be intolerant, and am amused and at times a bit disgusted at his open criticism of other elements of faith, including Mormons (giving rise to the notion that the Mormon church is stealing his paying customers to his chagrin). And I am fascinated at how many people apparently digest his message without much heartburn. His sermons are not without some merit - his constant reminders that it is fairly easy in this life to go off the rails without some sort of moral construct (he wouldn't call it that, it is my term) are good reminders for us all. But it all comes at a price (including my unyielding desire to question and think), and it just isn't my cup of tea.

I hesitate to be more critical of this church (and many others like it) because they do in fact do good things for the community, and it does provide meaning to some people's lives. And I think criticism of entities such as this church would be far more persuasive if they were balanced and fair - not sure I quite get there on this score but again I do think there is a need to be fair with religious organizations because there is frankly a lot of good work they do that is wrongly overlooked or trivialized.

Professor Pangloss, meet Spunky.

Hey, it's a good gig. If the congregation wants to pay the guy six figures and perhaps his million-dollar home in Mantua, that's their choice. The sermons must be pretty enthralling. Jesus would likely commend the pastor's entrepreneurial spirit.

Jimmy - you are indeed correct. It is a very good gig.

The cynical could state that is is really another sales career.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I hesitate to be more critical of this church (and
> many others like it) because they do in fact do
> good things for the community, and it does provide
> meaning to some people's lives. And I think
> criticism of entities such as this church would be
> far more persuasive if they were balanced and fair
> - not sure I quite get there on this score but
> again I do think there is a need to be fair with
> religious organizations because there is frankly a
> lot of good work they do that is wrongly
> overlooked or trivialized.

I think you're right, Quantum, but there is so much more that congregations could do (but only together, not alone) if it weren't for our pride-driven obsession to evangelize people strictly into our own groups/denominations. The fear of accepting historical and theological differences of opinion have tragically undone what Christianity could be right now.

I am always leery of a positive message with strings attached, and sometimes wonder if it would have been better not getting that message to begin with.

Alright, all you church people. I have a question that Christians should be able to answer:

What are the 10 commandments?

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Alright, all you church people. I have a question
> that Christians should be able to answer:
>
> What are the 10 commandments?


ain't thems those first 10 lines of the constitution?

Actually there are two sets of 'ten' commandments...

As for the question of the historical Jesus - obviously I don't see it as a given. I'd flavor myself more of an agnostic on the question. I don't know whether a man named Jesus actually did exist, but I see no reason to accept his existence anymore then I would Hercules, Perseus, etc.

Professor Pangloss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually there are two sets of 'ten'
> commandments...

Which should be familiar to any Christian that's read Exodus. Moses smashed the first set about not killing, stealing, fucking your neighbor's wife, etc. They were re-written by God, and were drastically different from the first set; God actually made his covenant with Israel based on the second set.

If Vince actually knew anything about religion, he might be able to discuss it in a clear, rational manner. I guess research and critical thinking are a lot harder than just writing "Khristians are dumb, there is no god, lol."

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Pangloss Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Actually there are two sets of 'ten'
> > commandments...
>
> Which should be familiar to any Christian that's
> read Exodus. Moses smashed the first set about
> not killing, stealing, fucking your neighbor's
> wife, etc. They were re-written by God, and were
> drastically different from the first set; God
> actually made his covenant with Israel based on
> the second set.
>
> If Vince actually knew anything about religion, he
> might be able to discuss it in a clear, rational
> manner. I guess research and critical thinking
> are a lot harder than just writing "Khristians are
> dumb, there is no god, lol."


I don't know of any sane society ever existing where murder, stealing and fucking your neighbors wife is the norm. I don't think diffrent ten commandments would be sustained by scriptural examination.

I know plenty about religion..and I use that knowledge as a basis for saying Khristians are dumb....and mean spirited.

Pangloss - I think the almost unanimous view of historians is that Jesus did exist. The details of course are subject to interpretation and argument.

Prophets and those claiming to messiahs were not unusual in Roman Judea. It is fair to state that from a historical perspective Jesus was among them.
And separating history from theology of course is challenging; nevertheless it is a worthy endeavor for those interested in that kind of scholarship.

Berdhuis - I am not a Christian myself, but I am not ready to lay the generally negative views on Christians all on Christians themselves, although like anyone else, they need to help themselves and do better. There are significant portions of our culture, and particularly our media and in academia, that demonize Christians unfairly and often inaccurately. And they do so out of a sense of intellectual and cultural snobbery and a concept of political economy that finds private virtue threatening. This is not to say that churches and Christians are above legitimate criticism - indeed the McLean Bible Church's huge edifice and seeming large expenditures on salaries for its leaders are legitimate grounds for criticism -- as well are its expressions of intolerance that issue from time to time -- all fair game to me. But so much of criticism is myopic - it ignores the good works churches often do, and the vast number of people within those organizations that do the right thing for very little (or no) recompense. I see that as a non-Christian and am appropriately respectful (or better put, try to be). Churches are in particular threatening to the left, secular culture that dominates our media and discourse, because private acts of virtue and charity detract from the assumption that all good and hope springs eternal from the edifice of a strong monolithic state. And rather than debate that assumption, it is much easier (and intellectually lazy, by the way) to simply conclusorily deride people of faith, and to do so emotionally without resort to facts and rigor.

And let's get this from the abstract to the concrete. A local church recently held a winter coat drive in the neighborhood. And frankly, it wasn't my rear end that was out the door on a cold Saturday morning collecting the coats so unfortunate people won't freeze. And it wasn't some Government agency either. So again, while dedicated to the notion of fair criticism, fair criticism means giving due regard for kind and caring people such as this.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pangloss - I think the almost unanimous view of
> historians is that Jesus did exist. The details
> of course are subject to interpretation and
> argument.
>


Most historians do believe that there is a historical person at the core of the Jesus myth, this is true. I don't see any reason to hold to this, so I differ from them.

> Prophets and those claiming to messiahs were not
> unusual in Roman Judea. It is fair to state that
> from a historical perspective Jesus was among
> them.
> And separating history from theology of course is
> challenging; nevertheless it is a worthy endeavor
> for those interested in that kind of scholarship.


True.


> Berdhuis - I am not a Christian myself, but I am
> not ready to lay the generally negative views on
> Christians all on Christians themselves, although
> like anyone else, they need to help themselves and
> do better. There are significant portions of our
> culture, and particularly our media and in
> academia, that demonize Christians unfairly and
> often inaccurately. And they do so out of a
> sense of intellectual and cultural snobbery and a
> concept of political economy that finds private
> virtue threatening. This is not to say that
> churches and Christians are above legitimate
> criticism - indeed the McLean Bible Church's huge
> edifice and seeming large expenditures on salaries
> for its leaders are legitimate grounds for
> criticism -- as well are its expressions of
> intolerance that issue from time to time -- all
> fair game to me. But so much of criticism is
> myopic - it ignores the good works churches often
> do, and the vast number of people within those
> organizations that do the right thing for very
> little (or no) recompense. I see that as a
> non-Christian and am appropriately respectful (or
> better put, try to be). Churches are in particular
> threatening to the left, secular culture that
> dominates our media and discourse, because private
> acts of virtue and charity detract from the
> assumption that all good and hope springs eternal
> from the edifice of a strong monolithic state.
> And rather than debate that assumption, it is much
> easier (and intellectually lazy, by the way) to
> simply conclusorily deride people of faith, and to
> do so emotionally without resort to facts and
> rigor.
>
> And let's get this from the abstract to the
> concrete. A local church recently held a winter
> coat drive in the neighborhood. And frankly, it
> wasn't my rear end that was out the door on a cold
> Saturday morning collecting the coats so
> unfortunate people won't freeze. And it wasn't
> some Government agency either. So again, while
> dedicated to the notion of fair criticism, fair
> criticism means giving due regard for kind and
> caring people such as this.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

Quantum,

Again, in general, I agree with you. However, there are some tawdry examples of Christianity gone awry, despite whatever incidental charity may have been borne from them, that make me wonder if we would have been better off if that particular ministry never saw the light of day: Jim and Tammy Faye Baker's PTL Club comes immediately to mind. There are others.

By the way, Quantum, do you ascribe the left to a coalition of institutions, or issues? You've railed against it in this forum, and I just want to make sure I understand you precisely.

The world would be a better place if all religions were eliminated. Not that a single problem would be solved if we did...people would still make up reasons to hate other people...but at least the debate would be elevated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2008 09:51PM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The world would be a better place if all religions
> were eliminated. Not that a single problem would
> be solved if we did...peole would still make up
> reasons to hate other people...but at least the
> debate would be elevated.


I agree Vince. It seems to me that God had in mind more of a barbeque and after dinner get discussion based on the story of God meeting with Abraham. There was no formal prayers, theologies, dogma, order of the service, sermons, pews, pulpits.

I heard through the grapevine Lon Solomon sells absolution vouchers much in the same way the early Catholic church used to. If you pay a certain amount to MBC you in turn receive a grant of absolution for any one of your sins...even the touching of little children.....Hmmm that's funny....I wondered why I saw so many priests attending service at a bible church....





can anyone confirm or deny this???

That's not Lon's house- and yes, they put in extra $$ on the house to care for their daughter Jill, so get a life, stop spreading false rumors, and leave them alone. If their house value went up in the past 10 years, so be it. Who cares anyways? The offering isn't paying for his house or some crazy salary.

Anybody that throws their hard earned dollars into Lon's basket is an idiot.

Not a sermon, just a fact.

Father Guido Sarduchi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I heard through the grapevine Lon Solomon sells
> absolution vouchers much in the same way the early
> Catholic church used to. If you pay a certain
> amount to MBC you in turn receive a grant of
> absolution for any one of your sins...even the
> touching of little children.....Hmmm that's
> funny....I wondered why I saw so many priests
> attending service at a bible church....
>
>
>
>
>
> can anyone confirm or deny this???


Well, if that were true, then in that case, at least, I'd have to say "more power to him!" because anyone stupid enough to believe that they can "buy forgiveness" ain't that bright in the first place and has no business having money.

I never even understood the concept of "confession" the way many people believe it works, that by telling a priest all the bad things you did and then saying a few hail marys and a few our fathers, everything is right in the world and God won't hold a grudge. I especially can't comprehend how stupid you'd need to be to think that slipping the priest a little cash is going to work any better. Can stupid people buy their way into heaven????

Father Guido Sarduchi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I heard through the grapevine Lon Solomon sells
> absolution vouchers much in the same way the early
> Catholic church used to. If you pay a certain
> amount to MBC you in turn receive a grant of
> absolution for any one of your sins...even the
> touching of little children.....Hmmm that's
> funny....I wondered why I saw so many priests
> attending service at a bible church....

Say what you will about the WalMart aura of that traffic monstrosity, the incessant commercialism and self promotion by Solomon- NO ONE is selling absolution.

You are a hater who is trying to drop an untrue turd and stir things up. Get real and get a life.


>
>
> can anyone confirm or deny this???