Here is the quote from Isaiah at the beginning of that movie. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53;&version=31; This passage does not refer to me. This is Paul's legacy, his idea of God's plan for salvation. Paul, heavily invested in the sacrificial ideology of the Hebrew priest class of Pharisee, could not bring it upon himself to "sell" off his entire investment in the world's way of thinking. Rather, his idea of salvation was to integrate the idea of mutilation in exchange for salvation, as per an obscure reference in Isaiah and sacrificial priestcraft. In modern circles, this idea is taught as a "divine exchange". And it still depends on sophistry to sell this idea. It will be sold with emotion and assertion and perhaps a little logic. But it can never meet the standards of reason. Mel essentially assaults the audience. That is, whenever the crucifixion is interpreted this way, it is assault. No one is arrested because the public has been brainwashed into accepting assault from their idea of God. Here is a picture of God subjecting his Son to assault and battery, and further threatening anyone who does not appreciate such mutilation. Mel, nor any of Paul's ideological children, really have any idea what it is about such a mutilation that saves them. They are not sure if it is: A. The amount of pain and suffering? B. The number of wounds? C. The amount of blood oozing out of the body? D. The death of the body itself? E. The rising of the body from a tomb? F. Attack on innocence? G. The value of innocent blood? H. Belief in any or all of the above? Exactly which of these "pays" for sins? They do not know. Most however will emphasize A as their best guestimation, among some combination of the above. And by doing so, they utterly subvert the very teaching of the cross that could save them if they headed it's message. The fact is, many witnesses present were astonished that I did not suffer as would be expected under such circumstances. And this was to prove this maxim I often taught those who would listen: The innocent mind cannot suffer. And because the body is a manifestation of the mind, it also did not suffer pain. This truth is unacceptable to those who have invested heavily in guilt, as did Paul. The "guilty" are grasping irrationally for the idea that the amount of pain they imagine I suffered, is what "pays" for their salvation. Their first mistake is to assume they are guilty. Their next mistake is to judge that salvation is something that must be paid for. Upon that false premise, they then misjudge what must be the method of payment. This same group then proceeds to retain guilt as insurance in case all other payment methods do not work. They consider it humility to keep in mind that they are, or were guilty of something. So guilt, plus ready admission of guilt is finally what must appease an angry God. This is not surprising, because since before the world even came to clutter up the mind of the Son of God, salvation was believed to be achieved by way of attack. So it is a very ancient mental aberration following upon a sense of guilt for abandoning and betraying our Father...which never really happened except in our imagination. So my crucifixion is interpreted as a necessary attack, Father upon Son, for salvation. And as violence begets violence, this interpretation sets the world up for more conflict. Little children are beaten, and their parental attackers use such logic to justify their attack. And this is just one isolated example of many, some of which lead to the justification for war. So long as this interpretation rules minds, they will not experience salvation. Salvation is for a mixed up mind...for a confused mind in conflict with itself, not at peace. Paul's plan of salvation will not work. Only God's plan for salvation will work. Paul's plan confuses the mind, and rules it by fear. God's plan enlightens the mind, and brings it peace. Jesus
Since non-religious/atheists come in at about 0.6-1.2 billion, then they aren't the elite few whom you refer to either. This is the most flawed logic I've ever seen.
Islam is the FASTEST GROWING major religion, especially in Europe, where Christianity has been in serious decline since WW2. But overall, Christianity is still tops in terms of membership numbers.
How do they ( Muslims ) do that? I mean, here in the US, there's all sorts of Christian groups going door to door, accosting you on the sidewalks, or just sending out post cards in the mail in an attempt to get you to join. But I ain't never been approached by a Muslim trying to convert me. Maybe I just don't look desirable to em?
Quote from chuck.ells: "I mean, here in the US, there's all sorts of Christian groups going door to door, accosting you on the sidewalks, or just sending out post cards in the mail in an attempt to get you to join." I have had no one knock on my door in years, and I have seen perhaps 2 "christian groups or individuals" doing evangelism and very few cards in the mail. Where do you live? "But I ain't never been approached by a Muslim trying to convert me." No, they just like to blow people up. They take you (an infidel) with them, they are guaranteed a place in paradise
Most Muslims do not believe that. Only the fundamentalists do. What attracts people to Islam is its focus on discipline, clean living, and its commitment to the poor.
All fundamentalists are dangerous including christian fundamentalists and political fundamentalists too.