I don't believe you're in danger of "causing me to stumble". However, you have in the past denied the historical Jesus - how do you reconcile this while at the same time calling yourself Christian? Who is it, then, that you are placing your faith in? You have also, if memory serves, called yourself an "atheist Christian". That seems to be an oxymoron of the highest class. Can you be a little more explicit about what you actually do believe? I would love to call you a "brother", but too many things don't jive just yet. That doesn't stop us from having good conversation, but I'd like you to clear up this enigma so that we can converse meaningfully...

I'd have to agree but there's still many important things to pick up from religions like Christianity, and Buddhism, i.e. the idea of oneness,love and compassion. I myself identify as a Christian but have more, in my opinion progressive views.. Such as, I don't believe that if you didn't accept Jesus you will go to hell. I believe it's more about of an appreciation for what he did for us..I think there is a hell, but it's not for all eternity, I don't think God would be as so cruel. It's just a temporary punishment for people who do terrible things out of hate. Then I think those people will get reincarnated, as well as anyone else who's souls are just not ready to ascend yet..

Anyone can write in stone but not everyone voodoo, who do,,, remind me of the babe?

I think community is great but religion®™\&© isn't it...

And; the mumbo-jumbo, fairy-tail bits just sell and\or can be fun or\and placebos...

while true =! true

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ml#post5565939

end

I understand your views but, like sundialsvcs, I don't understand how you can identify as a Christian. You seem to be mixing and matching beliefs from different religions, and adding beliefs of your own making (like a non-eternal hell). There is a wide latitude of beliefs that fall under the "Christian" banner, but they all have a core subset in common - and neither you nor sundialsvcs seem to come close to meeting the "requirements" for using the "name"...

So I think what you're saying Jim is we should still be hanging people on crosses t, right?

Why do you barrage me with snide remarks? What you say here has nothing to do with the conversation. You are just trying to "pick a fight", and, sorry, but I won't comply. You have well over 200 posts like this, as replies to mine, so everyone already knows your opinion quite well. Why continue to badger me? How about something constructive for a change?

That 1st quote was for Bluesclues227's statements but as you "believe"(--for whatever agendas*) in them too took offence? The 2nd I still want answers...

If you're proven wrong like to believe in mythology as true, only a few choices: get mad, *, ignore (bliss let kill) or accept?

You seem to think my opinions aren't more law than yours?

You've been saying the same thing, over and over again, for many, MANY weeks now. Curiously, your posts almost always occur within MINUTES after mine, no matter who I'm talking to. There's no need to call EVERYTHING I say "fairy tales" or "mythology" - especially the number of times you've already done. How about trying something new?

We are, I've stayed (albeit metaphorically--)"on track..."(--Maybe you read stuff in as we all do, if you red Catcher in the Rye would you want to kill John Lennon then blame it on the book?)

...just I still follow facts and reality almost like other evolving theologists here but you seem to not evolve?

How is this "on track"? What does it have to do with the current conversation(s) or the title of this thread?

Why would I want to "evolve"? The word has no meaning in this context. Change (if that's what you mean) for the sake of change also has no meaning. Are you saying you want me to change my beliefs? Why?

Oh and: