If Jesus loved people, why did he call them dogs and pigs?

Jesus certainly knew how to curse.

No point running away from the facts.

Truth may be bitter, but it is the truth.

--

quote:

If Jesus loved people, why did he call them dogs and pigs?

Jesus certainly knew how to curse.

No point running away from the facts.

Truth may be bitter, but it is the truth.

Perhaps it was a slow day at the carpentry business?

can you give us some scripture as to where Jesus says dogs and pigs and i will answer you. It was probably in one of his parables.

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
If Jesus loved people, why did he call them dogs and pigs?

Jesus certainly knew how to curse.

No point running away from the facts.

Truth may be bitter, but it is the truth.

--

Dont be silly - remember Jesus (Isa) is believed to be a prophet by Muslims!
Maybe you should stick to common sense...guess people can't take their own advice(sp)!

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
If Jesus loved people, why did he call them dogs and pigs?

Jesus certainly knew how to curse.

No point running away from the facts.

Truth may be bitter, but it is the truth.

--

I see that the point I made to which you've responded here has been removed, Omrow - as indeed has at least one other post that I made on another thread on this site earlier today. Strange, that! Seems that one point of view does get more exposure than others?

Looks like your Islamic tradition contains things about Jesus that none of the rest of us have heard of ....

Muslims, as you all well know, actually love Jesus. They claim that Jesus will return to sort out the mess in our world. To muslims this means Americans and their allies.

Although I have read nowhere in the Qoran that Jesus will take over the White House.

But it is not a bad idea.

I hope he does.

The place is in desperate need of good cleaning.

---

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
Muslims, as you all well know, actually love Jesus.
---

Mmm - but it seems it's a rather different Jesus from the one I recognize ...

We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

Only Christ himself upon his return
will tell us which of was right and which of us was wrong.

He is the best judge. Perfect, in fact.
---

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

Only Christ himself upon his return
will tell us which of was right and which of us was wrong.

He is the best judge. Perfect, in fact.
---

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings and all that, but (even if there was enough credible evidence to suggest that this Jesus character was real) he isn't coming back. If he was he'd have been back about 1950years ago (or 1900 at a push). Or does the koran give a different date for his return to the bible?

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

I'm an atheist and I don't recognise Jesus.

Unless... he's not the bloke who works down the market is he? Long haired fella, wears sandals, short temper, keeps kicking the tables over and shouting. Funnily enough, he did mention that he was jesus but I just discounted him as a nutter!

Christians and Muslims both love Jesus in their own way.

One says he was God in human form.

The other claims he was an Envoy of God - A Messenger.

Well, we will just have to wait till the day he comes and settles it.

---

You might have a long wait. When Paul predicted he'd be back he certainly wasn't expecting him to wait 2000+ years. Won't it be just typical though if you wait all that time then 2 messiahs turn up at once.

quote:

Originally posted by Asarualim:
You might have a long wait. When Paul predicted he'd be back he certainly wasn't expecting him to wait 2000+ years. Won't it be just typical though if you wait all that time then 2 messiahs turn up at once.

Yeah, but the predictions made in the Revelation couldn't have come true until- well, around about now, actually.

So, anytime soon, basically.

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
Tony Blair thought that Qoran is probably the most tolerance-preaching religious book in the world.

It is known for its advance laws on co-existence and love between difference cultures, races, religions and so on. One only has to read it with an opened and unprejudiced mind.

Interesting that, the same man converted to Catholicism. This is the problem with people like Blair who have been giving Islam back handed compliments to bring others on board. And yet these uneducated remarks have become the Holy Grail for those who would not rest unless they have taken over the world.

quote:

Originally posted by Asarualim:

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

I'm an atheist and I don't recognise Jesus.

Unless... he's not the bloke who works down the market is he? Long haired fella, wears sandals, short temper, keeps kicking the tables over and shouting. Funnily enough, he did mention that he was jesus but I just discounted him as a nutter!

Naaah:
Next time He comes, there will be no mistaking it.
Bands of Angels, trumpets, all that mallarkey.
Every eye shall behold Him.
Every knee shall bow.
What an epic spectacle this is going to be!

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
Christians and Muslims both love Jesus in their own way.

One says he was God in human form.

The other claims he was an Envoy of God - A Messenger.

Well, we will just have to wait till the day he comes and settles it.

---

Yeah, but if you believe that He was "just" a messenger of God, then you have to question what the message was?
I believe that the message, for Christians at least, was "I AM God: Trust in Me, and be saved. There is no other way"

Or, what do you believe that His message was?

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

Only Christ himself upon his return
will tell us which of was right and which of us was wrong.

He is the best judge. Perfect, in fact.
---

Well, we can agree, at least, on that ...!

quote:

Originally posted by TheCarpenter:

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings and all that, but (even if there was enough credible evidence to suggest that this Jesus character was real) he isn't coming back. If he was he'd have been back about 1950years ago (or 1900 at a push). Or does the koran give a different date for his return to the bible?

1. You must be almost alone if you think that the hostorical Jesus didn't exist. Contemporary pagan writers in the Roman Empire even mention him, and his followers, in passing.

2. You are unfortunately not alone in the peculiarly daft assumption that the Bible is some mystic tome in which a privileged bunch of the spiritually enlightened can discern a date for the second coming of Jesus. This odd conviction seems to be held by an increasing number of eccentric Christians, especially in the USA, who are good at publicizing themselves, so I suppose it's not surprising that people who don't accept Christianity get the idea that this is actually something that is believed by the all the other christians as well.

But then Muslims don't have a monopoly on barmy fundamentalist extremism - we Christians unfortunately have them as well. At least, on the whole - there are a few exceptions, in the USA, as you might expect - the Christian ones don't resort to the murder of people who disagree with them.

Most of this vacuous stuff comes from people rooting into the last book of the New Testament, the Revelation to St John, which actually, in the opinion of most Christians, doesn't cryptically hide clues as to the date of the second coming at all. When the Church in the third and fourth centuries AD was trying to work out which of its written traditions it was going to recognize as containing the authentic Christian message, some contemporary Christian leaders were against including the Book of Revelation because they argued that it encouraged exactly this sort of wild and silly speculation. It looks like they had a point.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Woolf:

quote:

Originally posted by Asarualim:
You might have a long wait. When Paul predicted he'd be back he certainly wasn't expecting him to wait 2000+ years. Won't it be just typical though if you wait all that time then 2 messiahs turn up at once.

Yeah, but the predictions made in the Revelation couldn't have come true until- well, around about now, actually.

So, anytime soon, basically.

You're not waiting for the UN to be disbanded by any chance are you? I knew some JoHos a while back and they were heralding the collapse of the UN as the final sign that Jeebus was coming back to town. Still, you know the JoHos and their predictions, they're always getting it wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Asarualim:
You might have a long wait. When Paul predicted he'd be back he certainly wasn't expecting him to wait 2000+ years.

You're actually spot on there, Asarulalim. Nice to find myself in agreement with an atheist for once!

quote:

Originally posted by Mr Woolf:

quote:

Originally posted by Asarualim:

quote:

Originally posted by Omrow:
We all recognise a different Jesus.

Even Atheists recognise a different Jesus to one known by christians and muslims.

I'm an atheist and I don't recognise Jesus.

Unless... he's not the bloke who works down the market is he? Long haired fella, wears sandals, short temper, keeps kicking the tables over and shouting. Funnily enough, he did mention that he was jesus but I just discounted him as a nutter!

Naaah:
Next time He comes, there will be no mistaking it.
Bands of Angels, trumpets, all that mallarkey.
Every eye shall behold Him.
Every knee shall bow.
What an epic spectacle this is going to be!

He'll probably get slapped with an ASBO if he goes around making all that noise with them trumpets.

quote:

Originally posted by John BE:
1. You must be almost alone if you think that the hostorical Jesus didn't exist. Contemporary pagan writers in the Roman Empire even mention him, and his followers, in passing.

That's not actually true. I think you'll find that the one and only reference to Jesus outside of the bible is by a roman historian and that is judged to be a falsification by a Catholic priest a long time after the event.

quote:

2. You are unfortunately not alone in the peculiarly daft assumption that the Bible is some mystic tome in which a privileged bunch of the spiritually enlightened can discern a date for the second coming of Jesus. This odd conviction seems to be held by an increasing number of eccentric Christians, especially in the USA, who are good at publicizing themselves, so I suppose it's not surprising that people who don't accept Christianity get the idea that this is actually something that is believed by the all the other christians as well.

Is it not central to christianity that Jesus will return? Were Paul's predictions completely wrong, and if so, is it worth paying any attention to anythinjg else Paul wrote if he got something as major as that wrong?

quote:

But then Muslims don't have a monopoly on barmy fundamentalist extremism - we Christians unfortunately have them as well. At least, on the whole - there are a few exceptions, in the USA, as you might expect - the Christian ones don't resort to the murder of people who disagree with them.

I do see a fundamental difference here between christianity and islam. With christianity it almost seem like a virtue to be persecuted so you can turn the other cheek, forgive, etc. whereas islam deals with such slights in a more reactionary way as forgiveness isn't as central a tenet as it is in christianity.

quote:

Most of this vacuous stuff comes from people rooting into the last book of the New Testament, the Revelation to St John, which actually, in the opinion of most Christians, doesn't cryptically hide clues as to the date of the second coming at all. When the Church in the third and fourth centuries AD was trying to work out which of its written traditions it was going to recognize as containing the authentic Christian message, some contemporary Christian leaders were against including the Book of Revelation because they argued that it encouraged exactly this sort of wild and silly speculation. It looks like they had a point.

Perhaps they should have gone further, because they left some pretty wacky stuff in. It's all a bit suspect anyway, selecting only those writings which are "on message" and burying the contradictory stuff. If there was contradictory stuff then surely that means that what they did select doesn't really stand up to scrutiny and can't be classed as authentic or believable.

Religion was an early form of laws, ie to control society. Whilst I do not dispute that the people central to various religions existed, I can not believe that they could walk on water, perform miracles etc. Please ask yourself this question, if your female partner told you that she was pregnant, and you had not had sexual relations with her, would you believe her story that the child was the son of God? Ofcourse not, so why is this story any more believable today? All religious books were put together by an elite bunch of people, who edited and embellished according to the message they wanted their people/community to recieve. I would like though someone in the muslim community to explain to me how a muslim women is ever to obtain a succesful rape prosecution in a muslim country, if the rape has to be witnessed by numerous males? In other countries the watching males would be prosecuted and quite rightly so, for aiding and abetting a rape. I also have a problem with Muslim/Hundu communities in our country who would rather disown their offspring, and in some cases kill them, for not marrying their chosen suitor, or marrying outside the faith.

Hi,Asarualim ..

1. We can go into this in detail if you want, though it will take time and space! But there is more than one contemporary allusion to Christ and Christians - though I suppose the one about the riot in Rome ab instigatione Chresto is always going to be a bit ambiguous - and the scholarly attempt in the 19th century to argue that Christ did not exist is generally accounted a failure. I've never heard of a demonstration that any particular text is a forgery. If you say that it's "by a Catholic priest", I guess the suggestion is that it's relatively recent, as "Catholic priests", at least in the way in which the phrase is generally used in these days, is a term that would be pretty meaningless in the first thousand years of Christianity? Jewish controversialists in the first couple of hundred years of the Church argued that the resurrection was a spoof, though they never produced evidence of a grave or bones, but none of their writings that have survived ever suggested that his actual existence was a fable.

2. It is central to Christianity that Jesus will return. It's also manifestly true that Paul expected that to happen imminently - in his earliest letter he has a lot to say about it, in quite elaborate terms, and his argument that it's better to stay single is based, not on some addiction to celibacy, but on the contention that, if Christ is returning soon, it's best to keep your life uncomplicated, and to focus on the imminent End. As Paul was a convert in the first generation of the Church, it's reasonable to suppose that this aniticipation of an imminent second coming was a part of the expectation of the Christians that he first met.

And, of course, it didn't happen. Paul doesn't allude to it directly in any of his later letters, but they make an obvious shift towards looking at the problems which faced the Church from day to day, rather than focusing on sober - or breathless! - anticipation of the End. That expectation was therefore wrong, and you make a valid point. However it didn't put the first Christains off, and it's not put others off since. Trouble is, Christianity has something in common with the lager advertised on the box about 15 or 20 years ago, when the bloke's mates ask him what's so good abvout it, and he just takes a sip and says: "Oooh, you gotta try it" ... But to others, that might add up to no more than a sense that some folk will swallow anything!

3. Yes, forgiveness is at the heart of Christianity, and I don't think there is that same centrality in Islam. We ain't always good at it, but it's the gold standard of the Gospel, nonetheless. We forgive because we're forgiven. Voltaire, I think, who was an agnostic, said, tongue-in-cheek: "Dieu pardonnera - c'est son metier" - "God will forgive - it's his job"! Substitute "nature" for "job", and there's something in it, though it still coarsens what Christians believe is the reality. Resentment begets resentment, and hate begets hate. These things are alien to the heart of God, and Christians believe he's remaking us in his likeness. So we try to make themn alien to us as well, and turn the other c