Inline.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-virus@lucifer.com
> [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
> Of Snow Leopard
> Sent: Saturday, May 08, 1999 6:57 PM
> To: virus@lucifer.com
> Subject: Re: virus: Faith and Works
>
>
> >Dear Snow Leopard,
> >
> >Glad to have you (plural) back! I am always interested in talking
> >with a sincere Christian. I just finished reading "The Screwtape
> >Letters" by C.S. Lewis, and I certainly found them to be very
> >enlightening. It's pretty obvious that the book is written to be
> >pro-Christian, and doesn't seriously represent the position of the
> >Devil well, but I found it a fascinating looking glass into Christian
> >idealism. I recommend it.
>
> I (Joy) have already read it, and Nathan plans on reading it
> as soon as
> exams are over. Rose read it many years ago... we're familiar.
>
> Have you read any of C.S. Lewis' other works? If so, you
> must be aware that
> accuracy is not his objective. He's mocking "the devil" and
> he's teaching.
> He's teaching, and that's the point.
Well, anyone who is teaching if they make any claims to be an ethical
teacher will attempt to be accurate and objective. What CS Lewis was
attempting to do was to proselytize in the guise of fiction. The result was
poor proselytizing and turgid prose. If you are up to it, try "Why I am not
a Christian" by Bertram Russell. At least that makes sense.
>
> <<>I really don't want to fight an individual. It feels like
> crud. On
> >this list, I can take a good stab at you NOTHING-worshippers, with
> >full knowledge that there are enough atheists to respond
> with a decent
> >answer>>
>
> >Nobody here fights against individuals. We fight against the memes
> >(or Virus's of the Mind) that some individuals have. We are not
> >"throwing stones" and making ad-hominum arguments but rather
> critising
> >ideas, and seeking the truth.
>
> I disagree. I'm defending Christianity.
I've already told you that your assumptions as to our "worship" are invalid and indicate a complete lack of understanding of what motivates us, so I won't bother to discuss that further.
My opinion to date is that the defender (Borg though you may be) is far more worthy than the cause. But here you make a whole lot of assumptions again. The first is that Christianity is worth defending, something which is in doubt. Secondly that those here wish to attack it, which is not the case. Only when Christians choose to make their usual unreferenced, unjustified assertions here do any of us bother with it. The fact is that the insane beliefs of a warlike desert tribe 2,000 and more years ago, and light years from modern man as far as ethics are concerned, has nothing to do with or relevant to modern man. Especially not when "interpreted", by people with their own agendas, to such an extent that the original message is lost (and probably a good thing too). Don't bother defending it. It is indefensible. And if you don't try to "defend it", nobody would bother to attack it. Note that, as on innumerable previous occasions, you the Christian, are the one adopting "warlike" terminology.
> Yes, that's
> Christianity with a "C"
> the xtians thing really bothers me. I see it on the same
> level as a racial
> slur.
No. Christianity is just another dirty old religion, based on some very primitive ideas and the interpretation of a Jewish Zealot who wanted to return to strict Mosaic law, by a Greek and his successors with private agendas and dirty philosophy. It is not a person, it is not a race. It is not even a person's name. So why it gets capitalized I don't know. And "xian" uses the symbol (Chi) selected and used by the early Christians to represent themselves. You still see echoes of it in the Fish symbol and the use of "Xmas" instead of Christmas. Another appropriated festival. So please don't get annoyed by it, it only encourages its use by people who are annoyed by your attempted missionary ejaculations on this list.
> You send messages "disproving" bits of it. If I don't
> respond, that
> will stand as truth in the minds of your readers.
No. You issued a challenge. I responded. As yet, you have failed to address them. Until you do, please adopt a slightly less strident tone of voice. Or feel free to leave. Nobody forced you to be here, and your company, when you are not whinging is not offensive. So feel to stay or to leave as you will. But unless you come up with responses to the questions asked on your instigation, don't make a noise about it. You are free to take the rest of your life to analyse the questions, but hopefully you will decide long before you answer them, that you are wasting your time trying to deal with a badly written, immoral and frequently obscene hodgepodge of writings and go on to do something useful with your lives. I promise you, I will not be offended, upset or even surprised if you never reply. I certainly am not holding my breath.
> In essanse, I'm in
> competiton with you.
Reeealy? Do you think you could? I fear me, we not only have thinking minds, but our "chariots have wheels of iron" and thus, your volcanic gods are powerless against us.
> You'd probably see it as yourself producing
> interferons... whatever.
Whatever.
>
> >ERiC
> >
> >[1] I'm using the NIV. Hope you don't mind.
> >
> >[2] Indeed, I've never even understood worship, either in practice or
> >theory. Just why should any god even care what we grasshoppers think
> >of it? Does it bring the Almighty pleasure to see us grovel and
> >declare ourselves unworthy? But this is just my age old question --
> >what is the meaning of God's life?
>
> It doesn't make sense. Neither does a child playing with a gigapet.
> Neither does a parent caing after a child is grown. Don't
> ask me! I'm only
> worthy through Christ.
>
Gigapets are extremely responsive little slaves. The ultimate toy is a
thinking person. I don't think you really want to go down this path. The
only crime that an ethical modern human can detect in "Eden" is that of the
"god" who planted the tree of knowledge there... and then cursed a race of
experimental animals for eating it, when according to the reports, they were
morally incapable of deciding right and wrong.
That anyone can find something positive to say about a religion that at
least condones, if not encourages human sacrifice, and slavery is beyond me.
That anyone can imagine there is something good in a god that allegedly
machinated the slaughter of "its own child" in order to make itself feel
better about actions allegedly performed by people long dead goes down the
path of insanity.
Collective or not, I would say that you are vastly superior to the god, the virtues of which you have chosen to extol.
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
All the best, TheHermit