A Texas inmate, Michael Rodriguez, has asked to die.

"I am a college graduate and have no delusions what will occur as an end result of these proceedings," death-row inmate Michael Rodriguez wrote in the first of a series of notes.

Rodriguez, one of the notorious Texas Seven, who escaped from state prison in 2000 and killed a police officer while on the lam, has dropped his appeals and wants to die.

He can't.

A federal judge signed off on Rodriguez's request Sept. 27, two days after the U.S. Supreme Court decided to review the constitutionality of lethal injection in a Kentucky case. But a state judge won't set an execution date for Rodriguez until after the high court rules on the Kentucky case.

(Graczyk (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004020760_texasdie18.html))

He probably will be executed at some point; the only real questions are when and how. Rodriguez, originally sentenced to life in prison for taking out a contract on his wife, received a death sentence in 2002 for his role in the murder of police officer Aubrey Hawkins. Although his lawyer is urging him to continue the fight, Rodriguez apparently wishes to get it over with.

Do not be conned, though. Rodriguez's ultimate motive involves justice only peripherally. For the convicted cop-killer, there is something far more important at stake in his execution: his immortal soul. According to the AP's Michael Graczyk, "Rodriguez told a psychologist who interviewed him before a competency hearing that he 'had to accept his death sentence and submit to it as payment in order to be forgiven and obtain salvation.'"

Greed is a powerful motivation. The eternal soul the most valuable of currencies. Does God know what is in a man's heart? Does God care?
____________________

Graczyk, Michael. "Texas inmate seeks death; court says no". SeattleTimes.com. November 18, 2007. See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004020760_texasdie18.html

Why doesn't he save everyone their time and just commit suicide if he

wants to die?

Then he wouldn't go to Heaven.

Suicide is a sin.

Suicide is a sin.

So is homicide, and I don't see where in the Bible it says that if a killer is killed then he is purged of his sin.

Because he's already asked for forgiveness for the sin of murder and per his beliefs, he's been granted it.
He can't ask for forgiveness and get into heaven if he kills himself.

So is homicide, and I don't see where in the Bible it says that if a killer is killed then he is purged of his sin.

In Christ, so the saying goes, all our sins are forgiven. Except, of course, for one. If you speak ill of the Holy Spirit, you're done for.

Murder? Hey, that's all good with God. As long as you repent and believe that Jesus will save you.

Or so I understand it from the Christians and their book.

Although, there is also an argument that in forfeiting the remainder of his appeal process, he would be committing a form of suicide by rejecting the opportunities for life that God has put before him.

The whole thing is a mess, which is why so many redemptionists just believe whatever the hell makes them feel better.

I don't see what it all matters. I doubt if the cops family cares as long as he's dead.
Did Tim McVeigh also ask to be put to death because prison was just too horrible. I don't think the OK bombing victim's families cared.

And seriously, most of us know he's not going to be seeing Jesus

Because he's already asked for forgiveness for the sin of murder and per his beliefs, he's been granted it.
He can't ask for forgiveness and get into heaven if he kills himself.

No I understand that, I'm wondering why he's "asking to die", if he's already been forgiven, he doesn't need to be killed, so why stop appealing?

Because death row sucks. Same reason Tim McVeigh wanted to die.

Because death row sucks.

So, what, .....you'd like to make prisons like a four-star hotel instead?

Baron Max

So, what, .....you'd like to make prisons like a four-star hotel instead?

Baron Max

???? no. I rather he stayed in a sucky place as long as possible and suffer. But of course I hate paying for it. He wants to die, he's supposed to die, kill him already.
:shrug:
I was just saying that's why he wants to get it over with you grumpy butt crab ass.

But of course I hate paying for it. He wants to die, he's supposed to die, kill him already.

I've heard many people argue that it costs more to imprison someone for life than it does to have them executed, I'm guessing because they include court/lawyer costs for the many appeals most cases have etc. Anyone have more info on this?

???? no. I rather he stayed in a sucky place as long as possible and suffer. But of course I hate paying for it.

Do you know how many starving, hungry kids could be fed on the money it takes to keep prisoners in jail? It's well over $50,000 per year per prisoner. How many meals for little kids would that buy?

I agree ....let the bastard die. In fact, give me a gun and I'll do it myself!

Baron Max, the grumpy butt crab ass! :D

"Death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment."

http://www.comptroller.state.tn.us/orea/reports/deathpenalty.pdf

Do you know how many starving, hungry kids could be fed on the money it takes to keep prisoners in jail?

Baron Max, the grumpy butt crab ass! :D


Hey Grumpy, there is thread for you about starving children :D

Hey Grumpy, there is thread for you about starving children :D

Where? I love starving children. :D

Baron Max

Baron Max (feed the Children) :D

I can't find any goddamned thread about feeding the freakin' children!! Where is it?

Baron Max

A Texas inmate, Michael Rodriguez, has asked to die.



He probably will be executed at some point; the only real questions are when and how. Rodriguez, originally sentenced to life in prison for taking out a contract on his wife, received a death sentence in 2002 for his role in the murder of police officer Aubrey Hawkins. Although his lawyer is urging him to continue the fight, Rodriguez apparently wishes to get it over with.

Do not be conned, though. Rodriguez's ultimate motive involves justice only peripherally. For the convicted cop-killer, there is something far more important at stake in his execution: his immortal soul. According to the AP's Michael Graczyk, "Rodriguez told a psychologist who interviewed him before a competency hearing that he 'had to accept his death sentence and submit to it as payment in order to be forgiven and obtain salvation.'"

Greed is a powerful motivation. The eternal soul the most valuable of currencies. Does God know what is in a man's heart? Does God care?
____________________

Graczyk, Michael. "Texas inmate seeks death; court says no". SeattleTimes.com. November 18, 2007. See http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004020760_texasdie18.html


"Rodriguez told a psychologist who interviewed him before a competency hearing that he 'had to accept his death sentence and submit to it as payment in order to be forgiven and obtain salvation.'"

If this is his belief then he is misguided.

He cannot make a payment for Salvation. If He believes he is going to buy his way into Eternity with God by accepting execution then he is seriously Wrong

Jesus made the Payment for His salvation and it is a Gift from God to all whom believe. Seeking to make a payment for this gift is an insult to God.

Romans 4
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

The grace of God is the gift of God and if people seek to work for it then they seek to obtain it as a payment from God for there works. Salvation cannot be paid for by our Works.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

"Rodriguez told a psychologist who interviewed him before a competency hearing that he 'had to accept his death sentence and submit to it as payment in order to be forgiven and obtain salvation.'"

If this is his belief then he is misguided.

He cannot make a payment for Salvation. If He believes he is going to buy his way into Eternity with God by accepting execution then he is seriously Wrong

Jesus made the Payment for His salvation and it is a Gift from God to all whom believe. Seeking to make a payment for this gift is an insult to God.

Romans 4
1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?[a] 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

The grace of God is the gift of God and if people seek to work for it then they seek to obtain it as a payment from God for there works. Salvation cannot be paid for by our Works.


Adstar, that only works if you ignore every other passage in the Bible that teaches differently than this. That is the only way! And that is exactly what you are doing.

Romans 2:6-8 (Paul in the New Testament)
6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.

Where? I love starving children. :D

Baron Max

??? you love children who are starving, or you love actually starving those children?
;)

I think at some level even the murderers get in. It's akin to God's final message to creation (http://flag.blackened.net/dinsdale/dna/book4.html). God knows that He is responsible for all that comes by His creation, and takes pity, which is about the only way to explain the convenience of the deathbed confession.

But I find it disgusting that, even at this stage, as far as Rodriguez is concerned, this seems to be all about him.

But I find it disgusting that, even at this stage, as far as Rodriguez is concerned, this seems to be all about him.

What an interesting, if self-righteous comment! Of course it's all about HIM ...he's about to be executed, he's requested to be executed, he wants to be executed, he's begging to be executed, ......who the fuck else is it going to be about??!!

Tiassa, you're disgusted much too easily. Is that because of your naturally self-righteousness or what?

Baron Max

What an interesting, if self-righteous comment! Of course it's all about HIM ...he's about to be executed, he's requested to be executed, he wants to be executed, he's begging to be executed, ......who the fuck else is it going to be about??!!

Max, you've taken so many swings of late that by random probability, you should have gotten at least something right. And yet, still, relevance eludes you. At some point, it really does seem deliberate.

However, in order to fill in what you so deftly managed to miss:

Read the damn topic title. Of course it's about him. But he's not rushing to the executioner in order to bring about justice, but because he thinks it will buy him salvation.

It would be nice to say that, in forfeiting his appeals, he was doing the decent thing. But he's not. He's not aiming toward justice, but his own salvation.

Of course, overlooking that point as you did helped you build a nifty, convenient platform from which you could more easily confuse yourself.

...But he's not rushing to the executioner in order to bring about justice, but because he thinks it will buy him salvation....

I'm sorry Tiassa, but I'm not understanding what the problem is. As long as he dies, its all good right?

It would be nice to say that, in forfeiting his appeals, he was doing the decent thing. But he's not. He's not aiming toward justice, but his own salvation.

And that makes a difference to anything ...........how?

What's your point here, Tiassa? If Joe Average thinks he's doing it for "justice", but Tiassa doesn't, what's the big fuckin' deal to it all? Who the fuck cares what it's for or who decides what it's for?

Like most such threads, Tiassa, you're just going 'round n' 'round and saying very little. Well, except for insulting me and other posters ...you seem to enjoy doing that a lot.

Baron Max

I'm sorry Tiassa, but I'm not understanding what the problem is. As long as he dies, its all good right?

Well, that's one way of looking at it. I am, for the record, putting aside my general objection to capital punishment.

I think you're aware that I am a critic of Christianity at the very least. I am not as critical as my atheist neighbors of the idea of religion, but redemptive monotheism (e.g., Christianity, among others) is, in my opinion, more of a cancer on the human endeavor than anything else.

And, while there are many details that may or may not make for fascinating explorations about that idea, the more important thing to remember would be that this is the reason I care about this topic at all.

I was baptized as an infant. I barely have memories of that ritual. Perhaps it meant more to my grandmother, but I'm still not sure why we bothered. I grew up a "holiday Christian", under a bizarre legal requirement that demanded I receive a Christian education of some form. By the time I chose (asked, even) to attend a Jesuit high school, this strange culture called "Christianity" seemed pretty much the standard.

And from those years of forced exposure, there are certain lessons that are indelible marks of Christian faith. The core of how I judge Christian socio-theological assertions in the contemporary, for instance—two stories from Matthew (chapters 5 and 25) are the primary guides, while the passages from Matthew and Luke included in the "Greedy mother (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=73465)" topic set the dimensions of obligation—are directly descended from this education.

Let me first explain how important this was to people: What would you do if your child's teacher knocked over furniture, hurled books at, and cussed out the class? Seriously. If there was some spittle-spraying, purple-faced old man literally overturning furniture while shouting condemnation and, yes, winging books at the students, what would you say? What if, when all was said and done, the unanimous statements of the class also happened to agree with those of the teacher: that the teacher was upset because the students wouldn't cover their ears in class and shout at one another? (We all just sort of looked around at each other for a couple of seconds, and then, snap! he was off.) So ... how many teachers do you let threaten and demean your kids while throwing books at them and upsetting the furniture? When all was said and done, we all had to go before the preacher, one by one, and apologize to him for being disobedient. That is how important this Christian education was. It was, in fact, in the wake of that incident that it was finally explained to me that I had no choice, that I was legally obliged to this process. But yes, that's how important it was. We all had to apologize for making a man of God so angry that he would cuss and spit and knock over tables and chairs and throw Bibles at us.

True story.

And at the heart of that education is a simple child's saying that they'd drilled into us during the summer at "Vacation Bible School". It was the heart of our confirmation education, to become "adults" in the Lutheran church. And during my years in Jesuit school, the saying formed a central part of the teaching we received. I have found this idea among the Quakers. And yes, even among a Southern Baptist youth group when my high school girlfriend dragged me to a Carmen concert, could this simple maxim be found. The only difference, as I understand it, is how we define what it means.

And this is it:

God first, others second, self third.

Really. That's it. The uncounted hours, the "history" and theology, the lessons in faith and trust. It all comes down to a sentence fragment, a three-step instruction on how to make one's way through the world.

When nonbelievers note that Christianity "preaches selflessness", it is this idea they are referring to.

And it is conspicuously missing throughout much of Christianity today. (It is also present through much of Christianity, and the difference is a matter of trust, but this is a separate discussion for now.)

As nature abhors a vacuum (or so God wills, so to speak) that void must necessarily be filled in with something. And that something is a selfish attitude that through history has spawned many terrible crimes against humanity and God alike. It is what turns Christ's modified Golden Rule into a nightmare that justified crusades, inquisitions, parts of the American slave trade, and without which Manifest Destiny would have been considerably harder an argument.

When an evangelist tempts the infidel, "Don't you want to go to Heaven?" it is an appeal to greed. As I understand it from the Bible and the preachers, God knows damn well what is in a person's heart, so I assert that God sees this greed.

I don't actually begrudge the murderer a place in God's kingdom. Stalin, Hitler, Torquemada: theoretically they all have a place in God's so-called Plan. God, to put it as simply as possible, is not extraneous. God simply doesn't do things "for the hell of it". (Or so the preachers demand, and it seems fair enough; I say that Nature is not extraneous, and in the end the only thing separating God and Nature is that the former has an attitude problem while the latter has no attitude whatsoever.)

But here is the problem: As long as we poor mortals are trapped within our earthly coils, stranded in this sad existence until God's mercy changes that fact, we have to put up with Christians. Life goes on.

I remember once listening to a Seventh Day Adventist criticizing the U.S. government in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. The SDAs had many relief supplies just waiting for a disaster to serve, and this sounds wonderful, except that the reason, apparently, is their duty to God. And it is this conscious acknowledgment that bothers me. Christians will tell us who we can sleep with, what music we can listen to, and in some cases what freakin' underwear we're allowed to wear. And all in order to impress God. They'll burn books, sabotage condoms (yes, really, truly, it has happened), and some will even go so far as to set off bombs or shoot doctors (and, to be politically correct in order to not offend those so empowered by God as to be dysfunctionally oversensitive, that is thankfully few in American society). All of this is because people think they are impressing God. If I save a life, it should be because a life needed saving, and I was there to do it. If I give a dollar to a homeless man, it should be because a homeless man asked and I had a dollar to give. The idea that I should do these things for God? That goodness is merely a way to pander for God's favor?

In these most basic forms, the "greedy" mother and now this man in a Texas prison are symbolic of where Christianity ran afoul in the world. They are refined depictions of a dangerous caricature of faith. And yes, it sickens me.

Because this corruption is not borne of some inherent evil about humanity. It is learned behavior, taught by Christians in pursuit not of God's kingdom, but for God's blessing. In the end, it is tragic, these lonely souls weeping for their Father: "Do you see? Do you see me, Father? Am I good enough for you now? Are you looking? Hello? Please? I'm right here!"

But they revel in the tragedy and the misery it brings. Look at what this man's decision says. You might say it's all good, but the man is simply spitting on the dead. He needs to die, he thinks, so that he can get into heaven, so that he can be rewarded.

Go ahead and piss on his grave for all I care. But for now, just look at what he's saying. This is what Christian faith does to people. The only relationship between his motive and justice is that he needs to exploit the idea of justice in order to earn his heavenly reward.

You don't have to believe he's actually going to heaven. All I'm asking is that people stop and think about how perverse the logic is. For this is what the faith does to people.

If history is any indicator, the triumph of orthodoxy over gnosticism suggests that, in the end, this greedy corruption of the faith will win out over a deeper, more complex expression of faith. It is easier to decide what God wants than it is to seek meaning. And it is far more attractive to petty souls to wield power in the name of God than it is to trust in the Lord.

There is a lot more to this than whether and when they actually put this man down.

Ahh, I get it now, Tiassa!!

You're wanting to bring down the "Wrath of Tiassa" on people who don't see things your way. Yep, now I see it ....now I see the Tiassa for what he really is ....self-righteous.

Baron Max

Ahh, I get it now, Tiassa!!

You're wanting to bring down the "Wrath of Tiassa" on people who don't see things your way. Yep, now I see it ....now I see the Tiassa for what he really is ....self-righteous.

Baron Max

You did notice that the man guilty of the murder of a police officer. You could at least give Tiassa a nod for that.

I don't really see why this conversation has shifted from the murder to Tiassa, what does he have to do with it? Tiassa made a point, either argue the point or agree, don't argue Tiassa's motives...

I don't really see why this conversation has shifted from the murder to Tiassa, what does he have to do with it? Tiassa made a point, either argue the point or agree, don't argue Tiassa's motives...

Obviously you don't even know what the thread is about. It has nothing to do with the man murdering a police officer, it's about the convicted killer's wish to be executed. Read the thread, you'll see.

Baron Max

You did notice that the man guilty of the murder of a police officer. You could at least give Tiassa a nod for that.

No, can't do that either. Tiassa hates cops, so I'm guessing that he's glad that the man killed that cop.

But this thread is about the convicted killer asking to be executed. Tiassa, in his high-n-mighty, self-righteous way, is arguing that the killer's request is wrong!

Baron Max

Obviously you don't even know what the thread is about. It has nothing to do with the man murdering a police officer, it's about the convicted killer's wish to be executed. Read the thread, you'll see.

No, can't do that either. Tiassa hates cops, so I'm guessing that he's glad that the man killed that cop.

But this thread is about the convicted killer asking to be executed. Tiassa, in his high-n-mighty, self-righteous way, is arguing that the killer's request is wrong!


My point is that this thread shouldn't be about Tiassa, it doesn't matter what he think about the subject, you shouldn't be bringing what you think are his views into this. Argue the points not the person.

My point is that this thread shouldn't be about Tiassa, it doesn't matter what he think about the subject, you shouldn't be bringing what you think are his views into this. Argue the points not the person.

Read the thread ...it is about the subject, but it's also about Tiassa's insistence that he's right, and everyone else is wrong or stupid or ignorant or blinded by religious faith or ...anything else that Tiassa doesn't like.

Read the thread, you'll see.

Baron Max

...All I'm asking is that people stop and think about how perverse the logic is. For this is what the faith does to people...


Tiassa,

I for one, think your last post was very insightful, honest, and sometimes even bordering on brilliant.

Of course, I am not really allowed to have an opinion of my own without being damed to hell, and I do not want to be damned to hell, so forget what I just said.

But on the other hand, avoiding hell, by forfeiting my own opinion, would be very selfish of me and I do not want to be selfish because if I am selfish then I will be damned to hell anyway. So maybe if I really put some effort into going to hell as an unselfish act then I will really instead be rewarded with heaven. Perhaps that might work... Hmmm... Just maybe... Unless, of course, God sees through my plan and knows that I am actually being selfish in wanting to go to hell so that I will actually go to heaven, if that makes any sense whatsoever... Probably not... But on the other hand, if I...

Anyway, just trying to make you smile! :)


Thank you for your comments!

Tiassa,
Of course, I am not really allowed to have an opinion of my own without being damed to hell, and I do not want to be damned to hell, so forget what I just said.

But on the other hand, avoiding hell, by forfeiting my own opinion, would be very selfish of me and I do not want to be selfish because if I am selfish then I will be damned to hell anyway. So maybe if I really put some effort into going to hell as an unselfish act then I will really instead be rewarded with heaven. Perhaps that might work... Hmmm... Just maybe... Unless, of course, God sees through my plan and knows that I am actually being selfish in wanting to go to hell so that I will actually go to heaven, if that makes any sense whatsoever... Probably not... But on the other hand, if I...!

Well, it should be perfectly obvious what to do in that dilemma .....do and say absolutely nothing ever again as long as you live. If you do that, then you and the All-Mighty, All-Knowing, Self-Righteous Tiassa will have no problems with anything you say or do. ...you'll be safe from Tiassa's condemnation. :D

Baron Max

Well, it should be perfectly obvious what to do in that dilemma .....do and say absolutely nothing ever again as long as you live. If you do that, then you and the All-Mighty, All-Knowing, Self-Righteous Tiassa will have no problems with anything you say or do. ...you'll be safe from Tiassa's condemnation. :D

Baron Max

I must have missed something somewhere. Where did you ever get the idea that just because Tiassa has an opinion that he therefore thinks of himself as either All-Mighty, All-Knowing, or Self-Righteous?

You seem to have an opinion as well. How is it that you do not have these same attributes? Hopefully you will not be able to find a way to throw a book or two at me through your computer monitor. :bugeye:

I must have missed something somewhere. Where did you ever get the idea that just because Tiassa has an opinion that he therefore thinks of himself as either All-Mighty, All-Knowing, or Self-Righteous?

Go read some of his posts ....not just in this thread, but in all of his threads. If you don't see it in all of those, then I don't know what to tell you.

As to me? ....same thing, ....go read my posts. If you don't see it, then I don't know what to tell you.

Baron Max

Well, that's one way of looking at it. I am, for the record, putting aside my general objection to capital punishment.

I think you're aware that I am a critic of Christianity at the very least. I am not as critical as my atheist neighbors of the idea of religion, but redemptive monotheism (e.g., Christianity, among others) is, in my opinion, more of a cancer on the human endeavor than anything else.

And, while there are many details that may or may not make for fascinating explorations about that idea, the more important thing to remember would be that this is the reason I care about this topic at all.

I was baptized as an infant. I barely have memories of that ritual. Perhaps it meant more to my grandmother, but I'm still not sure why we bothered. I grew up a "holiday Christian", under a bizarre legal requirement that demanded I receive a Christian education of some form. By the time I chose (asked, even) to attend a Jesuit high school, this strange culture called "Christianity" seemed pretty much the standard.

And from those years of forced exposure, there are certain lessons that are indelible marks of Christian faith. The core of how I judge Christian socio-theological assertions in the contemporary, for instance—two stories from Matthew (chapters 5 and 25) are the primary guides, while the passages from Matthew and Luke included in the "Greedy mother (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=73465)" topic set the dimensions of obligation—are directly descended from this education.

Let me first explain how important this was to people: What would you do if your child's teacher knocked over furniture, hurled books at, and cussed out the class? Seriously. If there was some spittle-spraying, purple-faced old man literally overturning furniture while shouting condemnation and, yes, winging books at the students, what would you say? What if, when all was said and done, the unanimous statements of the class also happened to agree with those of the teacher: that the teacher was upset because the students wouldn't cover their ears in class and shout at one another? (We all just sort of looked around at each other for a couple of seconds, and then, snap! he was off.) So ... how many teachers do you let threaten and demean your kids while throwing books at them and upsetting the furniture? When all was said and done, we all had to go before the preacher, one by one, and apologize to him for being disobedient. That is how important this Christian education was. It was, in fact, in the wake of that incident that it was finally explained to me that I had no choice, that I was legally obliged to this process. But yes, that's how important it was. We all had to apologize for making a man of God so angry that he would cuss and spit and knock over tables and chairs and throw Bibles at us.

True story.

And at the heart of that education is a simple child's saying that they'd drilled into us during the summer at "Vacation Bible School". It was the heart of our confirmation education, to become "adults" in the Lutheran church. And during my years in Jesuit school, the saying formed a central part of the teaching we received. I have found this idea among the Quakers. And yes, even among a Southern Baptist youth group when my high school girlfriend dragged me to a Carmen concert, could this simple maxim be found. The only difference, as I understand it, is how we define what it means.

And this is it:

God first, others second, self third.

Really. That's it. The uncounted hours, the "history" and theology, the lessons in faith and trust. It all comes down to a sentence fragment, a three-step instruction on how to make one's way through the world.

When nonbelievers note that Christianity "preaches selflessness", it is this idea they are referring to.

And it is conspicuously missing throughout much of Christianity today. (It is also present through much of Christianity, and the difference is a matter of trust, but this is a separate discussion for now.)

As nature abhors a vacuum (or so God wills, so to speak) that void must necessarily be filled in with something. And that something is a selfish attitude that through history has spawned many terrible crimes against humanity and God alike. It is what turns Christ's modified Golden Rule into a nightmare that justified crusades, inquisitions, parts of the American slave trade, and without which Manifest Destiny would have been considerably harder an argument.

When an evangelist tempts the infidel, "Don't you want to go to Heaven?" it is an appeal to greed. As I understand it from the Bible and the preachers, God knows damn well what is in a person's heart, so I assert that God sees this greed.

I don't actually begrudge the murderer a place in God's kingdom. Stalin, Hitler, Torquemada: theoretically they all have a place in God's so-called Plan. God, to put it as simply as possible, is not extraneous. God simply doesn't do things "for the hell of it". (Or so the preachers demand, and it seems fair enough; I say that Nature is not extraneous, and in the end the only thing separating God and Nature is that the former has an attitude problem while the latter has no attitude whatsoever.)

But here is the problem: As long as we poor mortals are trapped within our earthly coils, stranded in this sad existence until God's mercy changes that fact, we have to put up with Christians. Life goes on.

I remember once listening to a Seventh Day Adventist criticizing the U.S. government in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. The SDAs had many relief supplies just waiting for a disaster to serve, and this sounds wonderful, except that the reason, apparently, is their duty to God. And it is this conscious acknowledgment that bothers me. Christians will tell us who we can sleep with, what music we can listen to, and in some cases what freakin' underwear we're allowed to wear. And all in order to impress God. They'll burn books, sabotage condoms (yes, really, truly, it has happened), and some will even go so far as to set off bombs or shoot doctors (and, to be politically correct in order to not offend those so empowered by God as to be dysfunctionally oversensitive, that is thankfully few in American society). All of this is because people think they are impressing God. If I save a life, it should be because a life needed saving, and I was there to do it. If I give a dollar to a homeless man, it should be because a homeless man asked and I had a dollar to give. The idea that I should do these things for God? That goodness is merely a way to pander for God's favor?

In these most basic forms, the "greedy" mother and now this man in a Texas prison are symbolic of where Christianity ran afoul in the world. They are refined depictions of a dangerous caricature of faith. And yes, it sickens me.

Because this corruption is not borne of some inherent evil about humanity. It is learned behavior, taught by Christians in pursuit not of God's kingdom, but for God's blessing. In the end, it is tragic, these lonely souls weeping for their Father: "Do you see? Do you see me, Father? Am I good enough for you now? Are you looking? Hello? Please? I'm right here!"

But they revel in the tragedy and the misery it brings. Look at what this man's decision says. You might say it's all good, but the man is simply spitting on the dead. He needs to die, he thinks, so that he can get into heaven, so that he can be rewarded.

Go ahead and piss on his grave for all I care. But for now, just look at what he's saying. This is what Christian faith does to people. The only relationship between his motive and justice is that he needs to exploit the idea of justice in order to earn his heavenly reward.

You don't have to believe he's actually going to heaven. All I'm asking is that people stop and think about how perverse the logic is. For this is what the faith does to people.

If history is any indicator, the triumph of orthodoxy over gnosticism suggests that, in the end, this greedy corruption of the faith will win out over a deeper, more complex expression of faith. It is easier to decide what God wants than it is to seek meaning. And it is far more attractive to petty souls to wield power in the name of God than it is to trust in the Lord.

There is a lot more to this than whether and when they actually put this man down.

You are the most self rightious person i have ever listened too. Max's observation was right. What a twisted rant, Let scriptures answer the main point of your argument:

2 Corinthians 9
7 So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver.

What hate filled people like you don't want to believe is that there are people out there who are joyful followers of the Messiah Jesus and they get a kick out of helping others.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Let scriptures answer the main point of your argument:

Let me know when you find some relevant scripture.

Let me know when you find some relevant scripture.

He did, ...and he posted it, ...and you didn't even read it. So, I'll post it below for you to read:

2 Corinthians 9
7 So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver.

He also said: What hate filled people like you don't want to believe is that there are people out there who are joyful followers of the Messiah Jesus and they get a kick out of helping others.

Why didn't you respond to that, Tiassa?

See? Tiassa, you're just being overly self-righteous ...which is something that you "claim" that you dislike in others, especially in religious people. Seems to me, Tiassa, that you're just filled up with hate.

Get help, Tiassa.

Baron Max

He did, ...and he posted it, ...and you didn't even read it. So, I'll post it below for you to read

Explain to me how that passage is relevant.

He also said: What hate filled people like you don't want to believe is that there are people out there who are joyful followers of the Messiah Jesus and they get a kick out of helping others.

Why didn't you respond to that, Tiassa?

Because there's no need to, Max. If he doesn't want to read my post before complaining and posting irrelevant Bible passages, why should I bother responding to it?

You can bring a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

For others who are not blinded by hate.

Christianity is not Christians. Christianity is the Word revealed in the Bible.

Not the sometimes weird and wonderful variance in the many who claim to follow it.

Tissa has attacked The Love of the Truth because she judges those who have embraced the Love of the truth to be doing so out of greed. But the love of the truth is independent of reasoning that different people have for embracing it. God knows the motivations of people and He will judge.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

That's awesome, Adstar. So the love of truth is the pursuit of one's redemption above all else? Absolutely smashing, dude.

No the Love of the Truth is Gods mercy on the hopeless sinner who is repentant of the sins they do. The Love of the truth is that The Word of God became flesh and dwelt amounts us and willingly suffered the price of Sin, death, to take that penalty away from those who embrace the Love of the Truth.

I hope you overcome your hate and desire for vengeance, maybe then you will be able to look beyond the human beings around you and see God.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Feel better for that Adstar?

Feel better for that Adstar?

I'm sure he feels just as good with his preaching as you do your own preaching, Tiassa. :D

Baron Max

I'm sure he feels just as good with his preaching as you do your own preaching, Tiassa.

And you with your Zen vacuity, Max. I'm just waiting for him to get relevant.

Tiassa, you seem to have found the worst in a few Christians and have exploded it to be all Christians. A central tenant of Christianity is that there is nothing one can do that is good enough to satisfy God. Christians do "good works" because they feel good doing it and they want to live their lives as Christ-like as they can.

No one can buy their way into Heaven; this murderer cannot sell his life to God for forgiveness. This is the whole point behind salvation by grace and faith. This is what makes Christianity so very different from most religions like Islam.

-- Clay

This is what makes Christianity so very different from most religions like Islam.

Please elaborate this...

Please elaborate this...

A detailed explanation would merit a separate thread – I really don’t want to hijack this one. Religions are generally divided into those where salvation comes from faith, and those where salvation comes from deeds.

In short, Christians are saved through their relationship with God; grace is a gift from God. Christians good deeds reflect that they are motivated by the Holy Spirit which dwells within them.

Muslims on the other hand, have no saving grace; they live in fear of eternal punishment. Muslims are rewarded or punished only after a judgment based on weighing their actions. If they are sufficiently obedient to Allah, they can go to paradise, a rather erotic place that appeals mostly to young men. One must be obedient to Sharia Law, a complex set of rules. So complex in fact that Islamic clerics are called “jurists”.

There is actually, one and only one way for a Muslim to be guaranteed of going to paradise. That is to die in Jihad.

Tiassa, you seem to have found the worst in a few Christians and have exploded it to be all Christians

No, not all. In fact, if you actually read my posts in this topic, you'll discover that your statement is exactly wrong:

When nonbelievers note that Christianity "preaches selflessness", it is this idea they are referring to.

And it is conspicuously missing throughout much of Christianity today. (It is also present through much of Christianity, and the difference is a matter of trust, but this is a separate discussion for now.)

As nature abhors a vacuum (or so God wills, so to speak) that void must necessarily be filled in with something. And that something is a selfish attitude that through history has spawned many terrible crimes against humanity and God alike. It is what turns Christ's modified Golden Rule into a nightmare that justified crusades, inquisitions, parts of the American slave trade, and without which Manifest Destiny would have been considerably harder an argument.

(#1638111/27 (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1638111&postcount=27))

In order for your point to be accurate, you would have to ignore the parenthetic note. Additionally, you would have to twist history and apply the sins of the crusades, inquisitions, American slave trade, and Manifest Destiny onto all Christians.

I don't go that far. Why do you?

A central tenant of Christianity is that there is nothing one can do that is good enough to satisfy God.

Shall we split hairs? Or shall I simply note that I know what you mean?

Christians do "good works" because they feel good doing it and they want to live their lives as Christ-like as they can.

I think you made the point better in made the point better in your response to JLocke (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1644755&postcount=51).

No one can buy their way into Heaven; this murderer cannot sell his life to God for forgiveness. This is the whole point behind salvation by grace and faith.

I think we can agree on this. Part of me does wonder where Rodriguez got such a notion into his head. (Most likely, it wasn't from a Muslim.)

Feel better for that Adstar?

Yes indeed. It always feels Good to express the Love of God, The evil reaction to it by others does sadden me but the joy of the truth is greater than the sadness of the rejection.

All Praise The Ancient Of Days

There is actually, one and only one way for a Muslim to be guaranteed of going to paradise. That is to die in Jihad.
*************
M*W: Please give examples of what kinds of things are considered to be "Jihad."

Yes indeed.

Cool. Always happy to gratify. Let me know when you feel like being relevant.

*************
M*W: Please give examples of what kinds of things are considered to be "Jihad."

The objective of the Islamic “Jihād” is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule world wide. Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. This is done through Jihad. Jihad of Islam is not merely a “struggle”; it is a “struggle for the Cause of Allah”.

--ABUL A’LA MAUDUDI, International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations, 1934.

"And fight them until there is no persecution and religion is professed for Allah." (2: 193).)

"If you do not do (that you are enjoined) there will be mischief in the earth and tremendous disorder". ( 8: 73)

"He is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, he may make it dominant over all religions, even if the polytheists resent it". ( 9: 33)

-- Qu’ran

All of the Islamic violence we see today, whether it be terrorism or genocide (as in Sudan) are examples of Jihad.

No, not all. In fact, if you actually read my posts in this topic, you'll discover that your statement is exactly wrong:



Before I reply let me see if I understand your position. Are you saying that Christians are motivated by greed (to avoid Hell) and are therefore responsible for much of the violence on the world?

Sorry but your posts are so emotionally laden that it is difficult for me to be sure I know what you're trying to say.

Are you saying that Christians are motivated by greed (to avoid Hell) and are therefore responsible for much of the violence on the world?

That's one way of looking at it. Sure.

Sorry but your posts are so emotionally laden that it is difficult for me to be sure I know what you're trying to say.

Which is why it's best to simply accuse? Do I have that right?

I shall endeavor in the future to be mechanical and robotic enough to make things easier on you.

Tiassa, your education it seems has lead you to condemn all of Christianity, but I see it as not being well founded in Christian beliefs. I don’t know where on Earth a Christian education is required by law. Certainly not in the US where atheists are doing their best to eliminate any references to God or any moral absolute from the education of our youth.

Certainly power corrupts, even the power of an old man over children. It corrupted the Catholic Church, which lead to the Protestant Reformation (Protestant meaning to protest). But even acknowledging that corruption exists, virtually no evil and murder in this world is due to Christians.

The great mass murders in history are usually atheists. Hitler’s Nazi’s despised Christians: the Nazi’s became Gods. Stalin, Lenin, both atheists responsible for the murders of tens of millions. Mao was a communist not a Christian, allowed more tens of millions to die. Cambodia – not Christian, 3 million deaths. The various genocidal regimes in Africa – not Christian. Sudan where some 200,000 people have died in the last 5 years – Muslim. Nowhere will one find such evil at the hands of Christians.

Even the Crusades were defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression, an effort to defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands. Muslims were gunning for Christians to wipe them out. The Christians of 11th century Europe were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims were and still are. Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed's death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt-once the most heavily Christian areas in the world-quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul.

From the perspective of medieval Christians, Muslims were the enemies of Christ and His Church. It was the Crusaders' task to defeat and defend against them.

By the 1500’s the Protestant Reformation, which rejected the papacy and the doctrine of indulgence, made Crusades unthinkable for many Europeans, thus leaving the fighting to the Catholics. The Protestant Reformation enabled the Renaissance which led to great economic growth and new science and engineering – by Christians: the Muslim lands had no such Renaissance, leaving ultimate defeat of Islam due to economic power not military power.

Today power still corrupts. And perhaps there are some who call themselves Christians who do good works to try to buy themselves into Heaven. Nevertheless much of the good in this world comes from Judaeo-Christian values and devoutly religions people. Much of science and technology, from Kepler, Newton to Einstein, came from devoutly religious people. Christians are not killing people because their God tells them to.

The great mass murders in history are usually atheists. Hitler’s Nazi’s despised Christians: the Nazi’s became Gods. Stalin, Lenin, both atheists responsible for the murders of tens of millions. Mao was a communist not a Christian, allowed more tens of millions to die. Cambodia – not Christian, 3 million deaths. The various genocidal regimes in Africa – not Christian. Sudan where some 200,000 people have died in the last 5 years – Muslim. Nowhere will one find such evil at the hands of Christians.

How strange. Help me out here, this tired, bitter argument has anything to do with what? Given its insistence that a dynamic history operating in at least four dimensions be static and two-dimensional, it's not particularly effective.

Furthermore, your endorsement of atrocities committed in the name of Christ doesn't help your argument much. Of course, I'm not sure what that argument even is at this point, so it doesn't much matter.

Christians are not killing people because their God tells them to.

You're right. It's marginally more complicated than that.

• NNDB: Joseph Kony - http://www.nndb.com/people/398/000022332/
• BBC News: Joseph Kony - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4320858.stm
• Petratis: "Joseph Kony's Spirit War" - http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_petraitis/spirit_war.shtml

History is not as simplistic as you would treat it, Revolvr.