# A great example....



## WaltL1 (Mar 1, 2020)

I have frequently made apparent my disapproval of "organized religion". Or at least what I view as "organized religion".
I think this a great example of what I'm talking about -


> https://www.nbcnews.com/news/religi...r-old-boy-first-communion-because-he-n1144341


It seems to me that if God is what you all claim he is.... there sure seems to be a whole lot of man made nonsense between this child and that God.
While this happens to be the Catholic denomination, all the denominations have their own "rules/beliefs/processes" so if folks choose to comment, please lets forego the "those wacky Catholics" comments and focus on my point.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I have frequently made apparent my disapproval of "organized religion". Or at least what I view as "organized religion".
> I think this a great example of what I'm talking about -
> 
> It seems to me that if God is what you all claim he is.... there sure seems to be a whole lot of man made nonsense between this child and that God.
> While this happens to be the Catholic denomination, all the denominations have their own "rules/beliefs/processes" so if folks choose to comment, please lets forego the "those wacky Catholics" comments and focus on my point.




I agree, there is something wrong with organized religion in general as far as rules and “rulers”. 

One of my fondest memories was visiting a church with a friend and there was a boy about 18 to 20 years old with Down syndrome playing his guitar along with the choir. He couldn’t play worth a lick, but to him he was making a joyful noise.


----------



## j_seph (Mar 2, 2020)

That is sad to say the least, there is a reason when I make a statement that just because someone says they are a Christian does not mean that they are. Too many churches have made God who they want God to be. I know a family who have an autistic son, their son has been saved. He speaks very little if any but has other ways to communicate, as well he confessed salvation himself and it did not take man to tell him he was saved or to convince him.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> I agree, there is something wrong with organized religion in general as far as rules and “rulers”.
> 
> One of my fondest memories was visiting a church with a friend and there was a boy about 18 to 20 years old with Down syndrome playing his guitar along with the choir. He couldn’t play worth a lick, but to him he was making a joyful noise.


Just doesn't seem like it should be that complicated.
To complicate every dang thing is a human trait.. I just don't see why a g(God) would need to.


> He couldn’t play worth a lick, but to him he was making a joyful noise​.


Yes. Uncomplicated. The only thing that matters is the feeling it gives him.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Just doesn't seem like it should be that complicated.
> To complicate every dang thing is a human trait.. I just don't see why a g(God) would need to.
> 
> Yes. Uncomplicated. The only thing that matters is the feeling it gives him.


Yep, I have no use for any organized religion. I think your religion should between you and who/what you worship.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Just doesn't seem like it should be that complicated.
> To complicate every dang thing is a human trait.. I just don't see why a g(God) would need to.
> 
> Yes. Uncomplicated. The only thing that matters is the feeling it gives him.


I’m not convinced that God needs it. I am convinced that those “rulers” are convinced that God requires it. 

You have to have standards and in return, that brings some form of organization. But the common sense gets thrown out because they don’t know how to separate the idea of the lack of understanding with the ability to learn more, and the challenge of a lower comprehension level for whatever reason. 

I will take 100 Autistic people that are giving 100% of their understanding into the communion over 1 well educated person doing it to be part of the crowd.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

j_seph said:


> That is sad to say the least, there is a reason when I make a statement that just because someone says they are a Christian does not mean that they are. Too many churches have made God who they want God to be. I know a family who have an autistic son, their son has been saved. He speaks very little if any but has other ways to communicate, as well he confessed salvation himself and it did not take man to tell him he was saved or to convince him.


I agree 100% with you that its sad.
But on the flip side, the church is just trying to follow what they believe to be the God given "rules".
If they DONT do that then they will be accused of -


> Too many churches have made God who they want God to be.


Again, man making it complicated.


----------



## j_seph (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I agree 100% with you that its sad.
> But on the flip side, the church is just trying to follow what they believe to be the God given "rules".
> If they DONT do that then they will be accused of -
> 
> Again, man making it complicated.





> Jimmy LaCugna said in a Facebook post that he and his wife were informed Tuesday by the Rev. John Bambrick at Saint Aloysius Church that their son Anthony won't be able to participate in the religious ceremony because *he feels the boy* is "unable to determine right from wrong due to his disability."





> LaCugna said they were told that Anthony, who is nonverbal, is not at the "benchmark required to make his communion."



Seems to me that Rev. John denied this because HE feels the way he does. Again man is making up the rule, not sure where in Gods word it states that the boy cannot participate. Even seems to me that there is some judging going on. What right does John have at all to state what the boy is able or unable to determine? I mean if you offend God should you not go to him to make amends for what you did wrong? Yet in this religion you go to a man and tell them what you did wrong so they can go to God for you if I am not mistaken. They are men just like everyone else so they have no right to do that either cause they screw up just like the rest.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism. 

There is nothing wrong with organized religion as far as Christians having a church, there is however something wrong when certain church members start imposing their rules and not God’s rules as shown in your example. 

And just for the record, everybody has rules/beliefs or guidelines they live their life by, not just organized religion.


----------



## hummerpoo (Mar 2, 2020)

j_seph said:


> That is sad to say the least, there is a reason when I make a statement that just because someone says they are a Christian does not mean that they are. Too many churches have made God who they want God to be. I know a family who have an autistic son, their son has been saved. He speaks very little if any but has other ways to communicate, as well he confessed salvation himself and it did not take man to tell him he was saved or to convince him.


A primary indication​ of Autism , and perhaps the most consistent across the degrees of effect, being a decrease in social interaction and communication, it must be really difficult to define the point at which the diagnosis is positive.  I know I certainly have plenty of room for improvement in both areas; and I'm pretty sure I've not known anyone who didn't.  It's not difficult to make a case that Autism might facilitate an improved ability for supernatural communication by eliminating the confusion of natural interpersonal interaction and communication.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Seems to me that Rev. John denied this because HE feels the way he does. Again man is making up the rule, not sure where in Gods word it states that the boy cannot participate. Even seems to me that there is some judging going on. What right does John have at all to state what the boy is able or unable to determine? I mean if you offend God should you not go to him to make amends for what you did wrong? Yet in this religion you go to a man and tell them what you did wrong so they can go to God for you if I am not mistaken. They are men just like everyone else so they have no right to do that either cause they screw up just like the rest.





> What right does John have at all


The right that his denomination gives him as according to their rules.


> Yet in this religion you go to a man and tell them what you did wrong so they can go to God for you if I am not mistaken


Name the denominations/religions that dont have "middle men/man".
And you are kind of making my point for me -
All this man made "stuff" between God and the people.
That man made "stuff" is..... organized religion (in my view). Which is comprised of all the different opinions of men.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with organized religion as far as Christians having a church, there is however something wrong when certain church members start imposing their rules and not God’s rules as shown in your example.
> 
> And just for the record, everybody has rules/beliefs or guidelines they live their life by, not just organized religion.


Spending six years working for a major Protestant denomination thoroughly educated and convinced me of the rampant corruption, greed, power lust, and backstabbing cutthroat politics that are present whenever a religion gets too organized. It was/is basically a multi billion dollar corporation that runs on profits but doesn't pay taxes.
I think a small, self-contained  community church is about as organized as religion needs to get.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with organized religion as far as Christians having a church, there is however something wrong when certain church members start imposing their rules and not God’s rules as shown in your example.
> 
> And just for the record, everybody has rules/beliefs or guidelines they live their life by, not just organized religion.





> I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism.


"Against" wasnt the angle I was coming from though.
Those rules, which I contend are man made, have effects/results. In this case, the effects/results of those man made rules are creating a wall between this kid and God regardless of whats in this kid's heart/faith/love for God etc.


> there is however something wrong when certain church members start imposing their rules and not God’s rules


They believe the rules they are following are God's rules.
You might not agree. They might not agree with you. Another denomination might not agree with you or them. Another denomination......
All that disagreement is a result of "organized religion".


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

hummerpoo said:


> A primary
> indication
> of Autism , and perhaps the most consistent across the degrees of effect, being a decrease in social interaction and communication, it must be really difficult to define the point at which the diagnosis is positive.  I know I certainly have plenty of room for improvement in both areas; and I'm pretty sure I've not known anyone who didn't.  It's not difficult to make a case that Autism might facilitate an improved ability for supernatural communication by eliminating the confusion of natural interpersonal interaction and communication.


Yes ^


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

NCHillbilly said:


> Spending six years working for a major Protestant denomination thoroughly educated and convinced me of the rampant corruption, greed, power lust, and backstabbing cutthroat politics that are present whenever a religion gets too organized. It was/is basically a multi billion dollar corporation that runs on profits but doesn't pay taxes.
> I think a small, self-contained  community church is about as organized as religion needs to get.





> educated and convinced me of the rampant corruption, greed, power lust, and backstabbing cutthroat politics that are present whenever a religion gets too organized.


I think this ^ was a major ingredient in the creation of "organized religion" from Day 1.
Certainly not the entire recipe but a major ingredient.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism.



I am DYING for you to connect the dots.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I think taking this example and using it “against” organized religion would be akin to someone using a thief “against” atheism/secularism.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with organized religion as far as Christians having a church, there is however something wrong when certain church members start imposing their rules and not God’s rules as shown in your example.
> 
> And just for the record, everybody has rules/beliefs or guidelines they live their life by, not just organized religion.


Wanted to also comment -
1st - Hope you and the family are doing well, glad you popped in here 
Have you got a bird zip-tied up on the roost waiting for opening day?
Now -


> There is nothing wrong with organized religion as far as Christians having a church,


I totally agree with that ^. That type of "organization" is not what I'm talking about.
And being "organized" certainly has its benefits - like you mentioned a church to gather at to worship, where you can pool your money and support each other etc etc...... And church bake sales. Im a fan of church bake sales.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

NCHillbilly said:


> Spending six years working for a major Protestant denomination thoroughly educated and convinced me of the rampant corruption, greed, power lust, and backstabbing cutthroat politics that are present whenever a religion gets too organized. It was/is basically a multi billion dollar corporation that runs on profits but doesn't pay taxes.
> I think a small, self-contained  community church is about as organized as religion needs to get.


I agree it does exist in the church, and some churches need to do much better in regards to those things you mentioned, but greed, rampant corruption and the like exist everywhere humans exist, that’s why we all need Jesus in our lives. I will say that a lot of the folks doing those things need to start practicing what they preach, that is to say, that if they’re preaching out of the Bible.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> "Against" wasnt the angle I was coming from though.
> Those rules, which I contend are man made, have effects/results. In this case, the effects/results of those man made rules are creating a wall between this kid and God regardless of whats in this kid's heart/faith/love for God etc.
> 
> They believe the rules they are following are God's rules.
> ...


They may not agree in this particular instance, but they would be wrong. There is a right and a wrong. I’ve been wrong before, but there isn’t a man alive that could sit down and read the Bible and come to the conclusion that anybody should stop that child from taking communion is the correct biblical position. 

As far as denominations disagreeing on issues, that’s all well and good. It’s simply going to happen. So long as the disagreements are in love and not of anger or bitterness, I think it’s fine. 

E Pluribus Unum. “Out of many, one”

As long as a Christian church teaches that Jesus Christ died and rose again for our sins, and that we need to repent and ask forgiveness for our sins, everything else is second to that.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I am DYING for you to connect the dots.


A person saying that organized religion is bad because of certain people is bad logic, just like saying that all atheists have no morals is bad logic.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> A person saying that organized religion is bad because of certain people is bad logic, just like saying that all atheists have no morals is bad logic.


There are many examples throughout THOUSANDS of years of atrocities and bad acts being done due to the practices of Organized Religion. The people involved were/are an accepted member of an Organized Religious sect and in a position of power within that Organization where they are able to makes decisions which involve and effect other members and non members of that Organization.
You are taking an example of a specific instance where Organized Religion is responsible for the case at hand and then trying to paint another example with a wide brush in order to make it fit.
There are thieves in religion as well as non religion. That cancels each other out.
In this case you have an autistic boy being denied by the "rules" of a man who is a representative of a specific denomination of an organized religion. Not due to a set of individual beliefs or non beliefs tied to no organization.

If you could have somehow used a similar situation where an autistic person was denied something by an ORGANIZED atheist group, then you would have connected some dots.


----------



## j_seph (Mar 2, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> The right that his denomination gives him as according to their rules.
> 
> Name the denominations/religions that dont have "middle men/man".
> And you are kind of making my point for me -
> ...


Our baptist church does not have a middle man. Unless maybe you would call the pastor and preachers that preach a middle man. However the bible tells of preachers and men who carry Gods word. Now as far as a middle man we answer to, only one I would call that would be the one that sits at the right hand of the father.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> There are many examples throughout THOUSANDS of years of atrocities and bad acts being done due to the practices of Organized Religion. The people involved were/are an accepted member of an Organized Religious sect and in a position of power within that Organization where they are able to makes decisions which involve and effect other members and non members of that Organization.
> You are taking an example of a specific instance where Organized Religion is responsible for the case at hand and then trying to paint another example with a wide brush in order to make it fit.
> There are thieves in religion as well as non religion. That cancels each other out.
> In this case you have an autistic boy being denied by the "rules" of a man who is a representative of a specific denomination of an organized religion. Not due to a set of individual beliefs or non beliefs tied to no organization.
> ...


You don’t cancel each other out because both make bad choices, you still have two bad choices. You just got bad apples in every basket, it’s called life. There’s some not so great atheists / agnostics / non believers out there doing all kinds of things in the name of hate - do they represent all of y’all? Does it make the whole  group bad?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> You don’t cancel each other out because both make bad choices, you still have two bad choices. You just got bad apples in every basket, it’s called life. There’s some not so great atheists / agnostics / non believers out there doing all kinds of things in the name of hate - do they represent all of y’all? Does it make the whole  group bad?


Point out to me the part where I missed you giving examples of those Atheists, Agnostics and non believers being part of an ORGANIZED institution.
String and you are totally bypassing the ORGANIZED part of religion in favor of making extremely broad comparisons between things that are not comparable.

The specific topic at hand is Organized . It is a  specific religion, a specific denomination,  a specific church, a specific clergy which are all linked in an Organized fashion. THAT is what we are talking about here.
Not, guy with hair chokes baby, therefore all guys with hair are bad.
That is not what we are saying here.
History is full of examples of bad, wrong, immoral, horrible,  atrocious  etc etc things that were the result of having Organized Religion involved. The Organized part of religion, meaning the chain of command, the written rules,  the unwritten rules, the do as I say not as I do, the appointing of an individual and individuals who represent THE Organization is what we are talking about here. Those people make the rules and decisions that followers adhere to. It is Organized!!! Therefore linked. Therefore together.
If the religious want to argue that 40,000 different denominations all lead to one God then it is not a stretch to include the bad with the good. That priest, father, padre IS part of the entire Organization and also a representative. 

If I am wrong, show me what Organized club I belong to merely for my own thoughts. Surely you can see the difference I am pointing out here.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Point out to me the part where I missed you giving examples of those Atheists, Agnostics and non believers being part of an ORGANIZED institution.
> String and you are totally bypassing the ORGANIZED part of religion in favor of making extremely broad comparisons between things that are not comparable.
> 
> The specific topic at hand is Organized . It is a  specific religion, a specific denomination,  a specific church, a specific clergy which are all linked in an Organized fashion. THAT is what we are talking about here.
> ...



Organized isn’t the issue. There must be some form of organization in anything, even a hunting club. There are ways you’ll act in public if you’re representing.......even your work place.

The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.

Your disdain for religion won’t allow to you objectively look at human nature, it’s automatically a religious problem. 

For every bad apple in religion, there’s plenty of good ones that will agree that the boy should take communion if his understanding is enough to know that it’s more than drinking a drink.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

Here ya go bullet - yup, atheist don’t assemble in any type of group or organization. BTW, you should study atheism a little more, they have several categories ?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nation...heists-just-want-you-to-laugh-at-religion/amp


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Organized isn’t the issue. There must be some form of organization in anything, even a hunting club. There are ways you’ll act in public if you’re representing.......even your work place.
> 
> The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.
> 
> ...


You're enthusiasm for religion does not allow you to see that it is ALL man and zero God.
What is involved with religion that is not involved elsewhere? What force is involved that is the CEO, the Face of the company, the Leader?
If a being of ultimate truth actually has a hand in it then there would be no "wrongs" , especially within the Organization that represents that God.

You and others credit God for all that is good and in every instance then blame man for what god cannot do, does not do and will not do.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> A person saying that organized religion is bad because of certain people is bad logic, just like saying that all atheists have no morals is bad logic.


The best organized religions I have ever experienced have been little community churches back in the middle of nowhere. Actually look after their community and have no imbedded corruption.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Here ya go bullet - yup, atheist don’t assemble in any type of group or organization. BTW, you should study atheism a little more, they have several categories ?
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/nation...heists-just-want-you-to-laugh-at-religion/amp


Spot, the Organized part of any Organization is only as good as the head honcho. They are representatives of the entity.
Now, if you are comparing  and relating a group of Organized atheists that absolutely agree that they represent Man with the Organized religious who agree they represent a being above man....then I have to believe you know both are totally the result of man and represent man.
I agree with the general assessment that individuals (humans) are not a representative of the whole. Although you see leadership take the consequences for the actions of the pee-ons all the time.
But here we are talking about Human vs God. One fallible and the other supposedly infallible.
Which one would have a better grasp of what every employee or potential employee and representative can or will do and could take the appropriate actions to make sure everything is done perfectly every time?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 2, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Organized isn’t the issue. There must be some form of organization in anything, even a hunting club. There are ways you’ll act in public if you’re representing.......even your work place.
> 
> The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.
> 
> ...


Are you self employed?
If not who do you answer to for your actions,who do they answer to , who do they answer to, and on and on?


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> There are many examples throughout THOUSANDS of years of atrocities and bad acts being done due to the practices of Organized Religion. The people involved were/are an accepted member of an Organized Religious sect and in a position of power within that Organization where they are able to makes decisions which involve and effect other members and non members of that Organization.
> You are taking an example of a specific instance where Organized Religion is responsible for the case at hand and then trying to paint another example with a wide brush in order to make it fit.
> There are thieves in religion as well as non religion. That cancels each other out.
> In this case you have an autistic boy being denied by the "rules" of a man who is a representative of a specific denomination of an organized religion. Not due to a set of individual beliefs or non beliefs tied to no organization.
> ...


Apparently, I must not have explained my point very well. Never mind it.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 2, 2020)

NCHillbilly said:


> The best organized religions I have ever experienced have been little community churches back in the middle of nowhere. Actually look after their community and have no imbedded corruption.


There are some large churches doing great things that don’t have corruption too, they just don’t get the “coverage” because it doesn’t make good headlines. 

I like small churches too, they usually got the best food from all the lil ol lady’s.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Mar 2, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> There are some large churches doing great things that don’t have corruption too, they just don’t get the “coverage” because it doesn’t make good headlines.
> 
> I like small churches too, they usually got the best food from all the lil ol lady’s.


You ain't eat until you eat at a church homecoming/decoration day here.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> You're enthusiasm for religion does not allow you to see that it is ALL man and zero God.
> What is involved with religion that is not involved elsewhere? What force is involved that is the CEO, the Face of the company, the Leader?
> If a being of ultimate truth actually has a hand in it then there would be no "wrongs" , especially within the Organization that represents that God.
> 
> You and others credit God for all that is good and in every instance then blame man for what god cannot do, does not do and will not do.


Your opinion of being all man and no God isn’t relevant. The issue here is human nature, man problem, etc. Based on your understanding, guns kill people, not people.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 2, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Are you self employed?
> If not who do you answer to for your actions,who do they answer to , who do they answer to, and on and on?


I am not, but my one employer doesn’t represent every employer ?


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 3, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Point out to me the part where I missed you giving examples of those Atheists, Agnostics and non believers being part of an ORGANIZED institution.
> String and you are totally bypassing the ORGANIZED part of religion in favor of making extremely broad comparisons between things that are not comparable.
> 
> The specific topic at hand is Organized . It is a  specific religion, a specific denomination,  a specific church, a specific clergy which are all linked in an Organized fashion. THAT is what we are talking about here.
> ...





> The Organized part of religion, meaning the chain of command, the written rules, the unwritten rules, the do as I say not as I do, the appointing of an individual and individuals who represent THE Organization is what we are talking about here. Those people make the rules and decisions that followers adhere to.


Yes this is ^ who/what I'm talking about when I say "organized religion".
I'm not talking about the every day folks who "organize" together at church.
 I'm talking about the "Board of Directors".


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 3, 2020)

NCHillbilly said:


> You ain't eat until you eat at a church homecoming/decoration day here.


Ive eaten at some pretty fancy high $ resteraunts.
Not a one of them has even come close to a church lady meal served on a paper plate!


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 3, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Organized isn’t the issue. There must be some form of organization in anything, even a hunting club. There are ways you’ll act in public if you’re representing.......even your work place.
> 
> The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.
> 
> ...





> The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.


Essentially .. yes.
And in my view, organized religion (all of them not just Christianity) are a tool that man created to push their various ideology(s).
Organized religion is the "middle man" between God and the people. 
And the "middle men" have convinced the people that they have to go through them AND FOLLOW THEIR RULES/IDEOLOGIES/ etc..... to properly get to God.
When I reject "organized religion", I am rejecting the "middle man".
If there is a God, I am rejecting what the middle man is telling me what that God is/believes/wants and how and why Im supposed to worship it.
And why do I reject the middle man? Cuz just like you said -


> The problem is still “men” and their ideology and any tool available will be used, even atheism if it’ll push their ideology.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 3, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Our baptist church does not have a middle man. Unless maybe you would call the pastor and preachers that preach a middle man. However the bible tells of preachers and men who carry Gods word. Now as far as a middle man we answer to, only one I would call that would be the one that sits at the right hand of the father.





> Unless maybe you would call the pastor and preachers that preach a middle man.


Yes, I would.
And being Baptist pastors/preachers they preach Baptist ideology.
Which was determined by Baptist hyerarchy.
Who determined what Baptist beliefs are.
And what the Baptist rules for worship are.
And.......

EDIT -
By the way j_seph….
I am NOT in any way "bashing" pastors/preachers etc. So please don't jump to that conclusion.
I think its a fact that the vast majority of them are honest, God lovin'/fearin', hard working, give you the shirt off their back, just down right good men who do their job with the absolute best of intentions.
Thats an entirely different subject than where do the beliefs come from that they preach.


----------



## Israel (Mar 3, 2020)

but I think I see a flag on the play...


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 3, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Yes this is ^ who/what I'm talking about when I say "organized religion".
> I'm not talking about the every day folks who "organize" together at church.
> I'm talking about the "Board of Directors".


I see where you’re coming from now.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 3, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Your opinion of being all man and no God isn’t relevant. The issue here is human nature, man problem, etc. Based on your understanding, guns kill people, not people.


No, that is not my understanding at all.
I am fully 100% in agreement and understand that Man is 100% to blame.
It is when another source is introduced into the mix that Should have a better set of checks and balances.
You have argued in many conversations that a God is in the mix. You,and all the other religious people give credit to all the good and all the things that take place that are unexplainable to a Higher being who is Above Man in every sense and aspect. 
Because that outside source of a God is introduced it takes away the human  nature aspect of excuses.

I full well know humans are 100% responsible for their own actions both outside of and inside of religion. I am of that mindset 100% of the time.
The religious people though,  add another element beyond humans. You/they say this added element is better than humans and you all give praise and credit to this added element UNTIL an example pops up that shows this God Element either dropped the ball, Doesn't care, Chooses not to do the "right" thing or flat out does not actually exist at all. THEN you forego the God does get involved in human affairs claims and blame man as if your God can't do anything to change the outcome.

Using your "gun" example.
If a priest is going to shoot up his own congregation on Sunday morning I full well know it is not the gun making him do it.
I full well know that the decision and act is solely his choosing.
I full well know that it can be prevented if another human finds out about it.
I full well know that no God is going to step in and stop the priest.

I also full well know that if the plot is foiled by a human the religious people will say God stepped in.
If the priest carries out his bad deed then the same religious will say "well he is man and man does bad things" abandoning their God helps claims immediately.

Back to organized religion.
I know the highest management position is held my man both inside and outside of religion. 
Religious people add one more element beyond man....when convenient.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 3, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> I am not, but my one employer doesn’t represent every employer ?


Who is responsible for your actions while you represent the Company?

Basically there is a chain of command and ultimately the top man is the face of the company and you represent him.
He makes sure you do it to his satisfaction and if you dont he takes actions to correct it.
That seems to stop when a boss who possesses all knowledge of what will happen and the power to prevent it doesnt stop someone from doing things that hurt the company. That is Organized Religion.
A bunch of men who makes the sales pitch that they represent God, only those men are actually God. Don't look behind the curtain.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 3, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Yes this is ^ who/what I'm talking about when I say "organized religion".
> I'm not talking about the every day folks who "organize" together at church.
> I'm talking about the "Board of Directors".


Precisely Walt.
In every aspect of an Organization it stops at the top. Ultimately the Head Honcho, the CEO, The Boss.
In Religion there is an added CEO who is touted as being "better" than human yet he never gets the blame. His company is excused to human standards when the deeds of its managment team do not represent the organization in a good way with no mention of the CEO. But, when the Organization looks good, the CEO gets all the credit. Can't have it both ways.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 3, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Who is responsible for your actions while you represent the Company?
> 
> Basically there is a chain of command and ultimately the top man is the face of the company and you represent him.
> He makes sure you do it to his satisfaction and if you dont he takes actions to correct it.
> ...


I am responsible for me. But, I think I’m looking at this from a different perspective.

I agree with you and Walt about the “board of directors” issue. I know it’s design and purpose is to have decency and order in representing your faith, but man does go overboard. As a check in balance, we have Pastors in place and we should follow them as they follow God.

Of course I can choose to find another church if I don’t think my Pastor is following God.

One benefit of being part of an organization is ensuring you’re protected in certain circumstances. I can tell you stories of how the church building / property was saved for the congregation after Pastors took advantage of their position. There are times when a Pastor passes away and the organization will place a temporary preacher there so services continue until they find a Pastor. It has its good side, too.

I’m ok with rules that say if you represent who we are, this is how you’ll act / dress, because this is who we are and why. Our visitation team requires a long sleeve shirt and shacks for men, a skirt for ladies. You’re not required to be in the team, but if you choose to do so, this is how you’ll dress while representing us. You’re selling yourself / church to people and you want to look presentable. No one preaches you’re sinning if you don’t dress that way, it’s just a standard, no different than Walmart saying you’re wearing this uniform on the job. 

Then I have a choice to find one that has rules that I like.

The rest isn’t relevant because I was thinking on different lines. My mindset was this one incident doesn’t represent every organization.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 3, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Who is responsible for your actions while you represent the Company?
> 
> Basically there is a chain of command and ultimately the top man is the face of the company and you represent him.
> He makes sure you do it to his satisfaction and if you dont he takes actions to correct it.
> ...


It’s probably a disconnection on how we look at this, you’re familiar with the Catholic / Priest “organization”. Not throwing off on how they’re structured, just saying it’s different than the rest of what is considered “organized” religion.

I can agree with you 100% when looking at what you’re familiar with.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 3, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> I am responsible for me. But, I think I’m looking at this from a different perspective.
> 
> I agree with you and Walt about the “board of directors” issue. I know it’s design and purpose is to have decency and order in representing your faith, but man does go overboard. As a check in balance, we have Pastors in place and we should follow them as they follow God.
> 
> ...


My mindset is that if the CEO was as claimed, this could never happen in the Organization


----------



## bullethead (Mar 3, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> It’s probably a disconnection on how we look at this, you’re familiar with the Catholic / Priest “organization”. Not throwing off on how they’re structured, just saying it’s different than the rest of what is considered “organized” religion.
> 
> I can agree with you 100% when looking at what you’re familiar with.


I was baptized Catholic,  raised and confirmed Protestant. Married in a Catholic Church I am familiar with a few practices. 

Lets start at the top of the chain of command in any Christian Organized Religion.
Can we agree it is God?
Then underneath him we have Clergy be it Pastors or Priests of varying titles.
They all represent God.
Their actions reflect God.
If the claims are true about God,  those underlings couldn't do wrong in his name while representing him even if they wanted to.
We see that is definitely not the case. You agree to that.
Why doesn't the CEO have more control over the Representatives within his Organization?


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 3, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I was baptized Catholic,  raised and confirmed Protestant. Married in a Catholic Church I am familiar with a few practices.
> 
> Lets start at the top of the chain of command in any Christian Organized Religion.
> Can we agree it is God?
> ...


No I don’t agree that men are perfect and will not do wrong. I will be neutral for a moment, if the Bible story is false, at least the story claims that men will booger up and do their own thing. So within it, it tells me that they will do their own thing at times.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 4, 2020)

Israel said:


> but I think I see a flag on the play...


Well come on Israel don't be a tease... lets hear it


----------



## Israel (Mar 4, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Well come on Israel don't be a tease... lets hear it


I think after I wrote that Spotlite kinda touched on it, so I let it go.

Why is this being discussed at all? Isn't it all due to some fellows being disgruntled with the way things are being administered in a place/organization/group of which he is willfully part, no one having put a gun to his head to be a member? And then publicizing his disagreement...on Facebook?

If he has made this his structure under which he believes he is directed rightly "to God" (though I'd have to ask him why he is part and also considers his family so, or _to be so_...), then to me his complaint is not only silly, but also includes an ignorance even most of us, being not members, are even aware. There's a pretty clear clergy/laity structure with a great many restrictions and allowances of practice limited to one and not provided the other. There's the concept of original sin, autistic child or not.

My recitation in no way implies I agree with any of them...but if this fellow believes this thing called "communion" is ministered only by one in authority to "do it"...thereby making it "legitimate"... doesn't any refutation by complaint (especially quite public...to many not even involved) of _the authority_ that makes it legitimate...speak more of the complainers estate than is being addressed?

Sure I can wear a sweater vest to the club I joined that requires members to wear coat and tie to dine, demanding to be seated, complaining when I am not served because "a sweater vest is the same to me as a coat and tie"...but...I may find _whatever gain I thought I had_ in belonging to the club by _its position_...I have argued against...and is no longer mine.

Now, the matter of submission and will, and grumbling/complaining, and even to those "outside" (does he believe something "outside" the church, as he sees it) should be able to bring pressure to bear to change it? Then...by all means have what will submit to the pressures of the world's opinions if one must...but...

It's a little embarrassing...like hearing a man complain about his wife...or even ex.

Better he resolve what attracted him in the first place...and so much so he entered a covenant with her. And if she turned out to be "someone I didn't think she was..."...LOL...he might be wiser to see "yeah...that's after she had been in a great deal of touch with me..."

And, if she were a "liar from the beginning" (fool me once shame on you...) he might ask, "why didn't I see a liar for a liar?"

And..."do I now?"


----------



## bullethead (Mar 4, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Well come on Israel don't be a tease... lets hear it


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 4, 2020)

Israel said:


> I think after I wrote that Spotlite kinda touched on it, so I let it go.
> 
> Why is this being discussed at all? Isn't it all due to some fellows being disgruntled with the way things are being administered in a place/organization/group of which he is willfully part, no one having put a gun to his head to be a member? And then publicizing his disagreement...on Facebook?
> 
> ...





> Why is this being discussed at all?


​You must be new here. Welcome to the AAA Forum where we talk/debate about our views on mainly religious stuff with some huntin/fishin/guns/music thrown in. 
Pull up a chair, most all are welcome.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


>



He's having a crappy day at the office.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 4, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> there sure seems to be a whole lot of man made nonsense between this child and that God.



And you would not be wrong in the least.  I made the comment upstairs the other day, and I firmly believe it, that if Christ were to be born again today and made the same claims he made 2000 years ago that the Church today would crucify him again for blasphemy (*blasphemy* (noun) · the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things.)  

Most of our "Churched" people today are blindly loyal to doctrine, yet have no conception of, much less a relationship with the Author, nor do they desire one.  They, like the Pharisees of old, are much more satiated with the imagined power of their wielded doctrine than to hear, much less seriously contemplate, what the Author truly calls for.  They've heard whispers of that, and it ain't pleasing to their palate.

Perhaps, you will allow me to alter your quote to what I view as more accurate.
"there sure seems to be a whole lot of man made nonsense between this church and that God."


----------



## tgc (Mar 4, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> And just for the record, everybody has rules/beliefs or guidelines they live their life by, not just organized religion.


Yep, hells full of ‘em.  Like the old saying 
“**** will be full of good people “


----------



## Israel (Mar 4, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> You must be new here. Welcome to the AAA Forum where we talk/debate about our views on mainly religious stuff with some huntin/fishin/guns/music thrown in.
> Pull up a chair, most all are welcome.


But seriously...none of this is new fodder to y'all, really, is it?

I ain't trying to put no prohibition...but what I mean is the only reason anyone knows of this particular incident is someone went all (to me) sour grapes on FB...but long before anyone heard of it...y'all have made many mentions of your own experiences with different structures...most describing themselves as "the church".

Now the "story" got picked up...and folks are "aghast"...that clergy makes very personal decisions for people who, till they disagree, are quite content to accept.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 4, 2020)

Israel said:


> But seriously...none of this is new fodder to y'all, really, is it?
> 
> I ain't trying to put no prohibition...but what I mean is the only reason anyone knows of this particular incident is someone went all (to me) sour grapes on FB...but long before anyone heard of it...y'all have made many mentions of your own experiences with different structures...most describing themselves as "the church".
> 
> Now the "story" got picked up...and folks are "aghast"...that clergy makes very personal decisions for people who, till they disagree, are quite content to accept.





> But seriously...none of this is new fodder to y'all, really, is it?


Some would say the Bible is not "new fodder" either.
But you can learn something new/view something different/have new thoughts every time you open it or discuss it........


> the only reason anyone knows of this particular incident is someone went all (to me) sour grapes on FB


Valid point ^
But I think invalid to the intended overall point of the discussion.



> that clergy makes very personal decisions for people who, till they disagree, are quite content to accept.


Yes its very easy to accept doctrine and "rules" but you never really understand what it is you are accepting until it affects you personally.
Maybe its a good thing that family now has a clearer view of what they have bought into. Whether that be positive or negative.
If you strip away the titles and religion etc its basically just a person/family questioning a humans personal decision about what the rules mean.

The whole thing is kinda sad to me.
They believe in God.
They want to "do it right" according to their faith.
There is a wall of human construction being placed between a child and that God.
Sure they were accepting of the rules. What choice did they have? Walk away from from their faith/religion? Easier said than done.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 4, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> And you would not be wrong in the least.  I made the comment upstairs the other day, and I firmly believe it, that if Christ were to be born again today and made the same claims he made 2000 years ago that the Church today would crucify him again for blasphemy (*blasphemy* (noun) · the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things.)
> 
> Most of our "Churched" people today are blindly loyal to doctrine, yet have no conception of, much less a relationship with the Author, nor do they desire one.  They, like the Pharisees of old, are much more satiated with the imagined power of their wielded doctrine than to hear, much less seriously contemplate, what the Author truly calls for.  They've heard whispers of that, and it ain't pleasing to their palate.
> 
> ...





> "there sure seems to be a whole lot of man made nonsense between this church and that God."


Certainly that can be your opinion. But just a reminder -
In reality what this church is guilty of is trying to follow the rules to the letter.
Seems like a common complaint I hear these days is how churches dont follow the rules to the letter no mo.....
Its the rules that create the no win situation. The man made rules.


----------



## Israel (Mar 5, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Some would say the Bible is not "new fodder" either.
> But you can learn something new/view something different/have new thoughts every time you open it or discuss it........
> 
> Valid point ^
> ...



As long as faith and religion are equated it is not "Easier said than done". It is not merely _not easily done_, it is not...because it is impossible.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 5, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Certainly that can be your opinion. But just a reminder -
> In reality what this church is guilty of is trying to follow the rules to the letter.
> Seems like a common complaint I hear these days is how churches dont follow the rules to the letter no mo.....
> Its the rules that create the no win situation. The man made rules.


I don’t believe it’s the “rules” itself.


----------



## PopPop (Mar 5, 2020)

That feller on the TV is wanting me to cut out the middleman when I buy a mattress. I thinks that’s a good idea. I found out long ago that me and Jesus don’t need a middleman either. He died on that Cross all by his self, he did it for me. That got my attention.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 5, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> In reality what this church is guilty of is trying to follow the rules to the letter.



Which is exactly what I alluded to.  Relax Walt.  We agree up till this point.

My additional point, which is the bigger issue in my mind, is that they are left doing so (following the rules) because they have absolutely no conception of the intent (heart/ desires/ wishes) of the Rule-maker.  Truly they are more lost than the unreached or agnostic.  Not only have they confidently hitched the cart in front of the horse, they are headed in the wrong direction.  Like I said,  in the old days they were known as Pharisees.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 5, 2020)

Israel said:


> But seriously...none of this is new fodder to y'all, really, is it?
> 
> I ain't trying to put no prohibition...but what I mean is the only reason anyone knows of this particular incident is someone went all (to me) sour grapes on FB...but long before anyone heard of it...y'all have made many mentions of your own experiences with different structures...most describing themselves as "the church".
> 
> Now the "story" got picked up...and folks are "aghast"...that clergy makes very personal decisions for people who, till they disagree, are quite content to accept.




Well said.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 5, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Which is exactly what I alluded to.  Relax Walt.  We agree up till this point.
> 
> My additional point, which is the bigger issue in my mind, is that they are left doing so (following the rules) because they have absolutely no conception of the intent (heart/ desires/ wishes) of the Rule-maker.  Truly they are more lost than the unreached or agnostic.  Not only have they confidently hitched the cart in front of the horse, they are headed in the wrong direction.  Like I said,  in the old days they were known as Pharisees.





> because they have absolutely no conception of the intent (heart/ desires/ wishes) of the Rule-maker.


I know, I know.
"They" are lost; "We" are found.
"They" don't know God; "We" know God.
'They" don't know what God wishes/desires are; "We" know what God's wishes/desires are...
Rinse.
Repeat.
None of them know squat. ALL the various denominations of man's making just think they do.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 5, 2020)

PopPop said:


> That feller on the TV is wanting me to cut out the middleman when I buy a mattress. I thinks that’s a good idea. I found out long ago that me and Jesus don’t need a middleman either. He died on that Cross all by his self, he did it for me. That got my attention.


Every body knows the middle man is just taking a cut in just about any kind of transaction.
Their power is in making you think you need them.


----------



## PopPop (Mar 5, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Every body knows the middle man is just taking a cut in just about any kind of transaction.
> Their power is in making you think you need them.


They sure can time their visits to get there when the chicken is ready and the biscuits are done.


----------



## PopPop (Mar 5, 2020)

I have a Pastor, he checks in and comes when I call him.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 5, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Every body knows the middle man is just taking a cut in just about any kind of transaction.
> Their power is in making you think you need them.


Maybe our Pastors are different than Priests that you’re familiar with ? ours certainly aren’t driving Cadillac’s.......mine actually drives a school bus. 

Scripture is clear on the need for a preacher.........and the no no of calling a man father and all the confession stuff. So many of us don’t really see the struggle within the “church” (Catholic organization)


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 5, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Maybe our Pastors are different than Priests that you’re familiar with ? ours certainly aren’t driving Cadillac’s.......mine actually drives a school bus.
> 
> Scripture is clear on the need for a preacher.........and the no no of calling a man father and all the confession stuff. So many of us don’t really see the struggle within the “church” (Catholic organization)





> Maybe our Pastors are different than Priests that you’re familiar with


The priests I remember best, Father Gaye and Father Kilbride (am I the only who cant help chuckling at their names?) were kind, understanding, good men.
One of them drove an old Thunderbird that he was restoring himself. 



> and the no no of calling a man father


Its just a title like Deacon or Pastor or Professor or Dr.


> Scripture is clear on the need for a preacher.


Might make an interesting discussion/debate.​


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 5, 2020)

PopPop said:


> They sure can time their visits to get there when the chicken is ready and the biscuits are done.


Hey they aint stupid


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 6, 2020)

bullethead said:


> My mindset is that if the CEO was as claimed, this could never happen in the Organization


Its possible that there IS a g(G)od but he/she is really ticked off that man made up all this nonsense. Im betting man flipped the script. In reality, all us A/As are going to heaven for rejecting this stuff and its the organized religion folks who will be making s'mores around the fire 
I could probably start my own denomination based on that theory.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 6, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Its possible that there IS a g(G)od but he/she is really ticked off that man made up all this nonsense. Im betting man flipped the script. In reality, all us A/As are going to heaven for rejecting this stuff and its the organized religion folks who will be making s'mores around the fire
> I could probably start my own denomination based on that theory.


I’d vote for you !!!!!!
(I’m not for organized religion, but I am for decency and order)


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 6, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> I’d vote for you !!!!!!
> (I’m not for organized religion, but I am for decency and order)





> Matthew 7:13-14 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.


Translation -


> Enter through the narrow gate.


The gate is narrow because its only intended for a small percentage of the people. Small. Like the percent of A/As versus organized religion folks.


> broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.


Many. Like the number of organized religion folks. As opposed to the small number of A/As.


> and only a few find it


Yep. Only that small number of A/As who bravely rejected man's nonsense.

I would say a few more guys, some cold beer/sweet tea and a pen & paper and we are well on our way to a "denomination".


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 6, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Translation -
> 
> The gate is narrow because its only intended for a small percentage of the people. Small. Like the percent of A/As versus organized religion folks.
> 
> ...



Will fried chicken be involved ??? That usually gets some attention ??


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 6, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I know, I know.
> "They" are lost; "We" are found.
> "They" don't know God; "We" know God.
> 'They" don't know what God wishes/desires are; "We" know what God's wishes/desires are...
> ...



I guess we’ve reached endpoint of the purpose of this thread.  Somehow I had hoped you would have a moved off the soap-box.  Nope.  Oh well.  So much for my optimism.  yawn.


----------



## Israel (Mar 6, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Translation -
> 
> The gate is narrow because its only intended for a small percentage of the people. Small. Like the percent of A/As versus organized religion folks.
> 
> ...


why ruin it?


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 6, 2020)

Israel said:


> why ruin it?


Well that's a good point but we gotta pay for the beer and sweet tea and now that we have a few more guys we'll need a bigger place to meet and we'll need to hire a few people to cook I mean keep the books and........
Geez this denomination stuff is expensive.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 6, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Will fried chicken be involved ??? That usually gets some attention ??


Rule #1 -
To properly communicate with "Him" you must have greasy fingers as a direct result of eating of the holy fowl that was dipped in hot grease.
Let it be written.


----------



## Israel (Mar 8, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Well that's a good point but we gotta pay for the beer and sweet tea and now that we have a few more guys we'll need a bigger place to meet and we'll need to hire a few people to cook I mean keep the books and........
> Geez this denomination stuff is expensive.


I find you about as good at convincing you don't have any faith as I am at convincing I do.
Oh, I don't doubt your dislike of religion as it appears to you, but that of itself don't mean much, all sortsa folks can easily gather to oppose many things...or form themselves to a "better" (as it appears to them) expression of a thing (like what it means to "be a man")...the call to the outstripping of others can hold great enticements...even to the bringing together of what in other situations would have no affinity. You could call it some form of negative attraction...how that things can coalesce... in _the against._

And men do easily lie when telling the truth as they see it. Look, if need be, at me. You'll get your fill of all you don't want to look at. And that may be the best I ever serve. And the funny thing is, I know I don't have to ask anyone if that's true. The only real question is that in the stating of it as true, will I be found able to bear its truth...in  full expression. (seems there are still a few folks that can stomach me...)

Plain English? The world I was born into never wanted me here, but then it never wanted you either...which is why it places such taxing demands upon you for your continued presence. Don't have any doubt...it knows when you stop dancing to its tune.

Yep, that's pretty much why folks say stuff, even exalt certain stuff...mottos and the like...not because they believe it...but because they really don't...and wanna hide that truth. Yeah, man developed language when he discovered how hard it is to lie without it.

Like my brother said to the cop who woke him on the beach in New Hampshire and told him to move along "ain't your State motto 'Live Free or Die'? " Obviously some police feel the need to keep the populace safe from the sleeping.

https://forum.gon.com/threads/ohh-neat-our-own-forum-sort-of.572276/

So the truth that lie underneath "all that" is that some finally have "their own place".
A place to congregate. The non congregationalists...even the "anti" congregationalists all finding a place here...to get together. Have their congregation.

You weren't far off in the "flipped the script". But, the implications are tough...ain't they? If "we" are the people in the basement that are not gonna be like the "other people" (upstairs) who got it all wrong, thinking "they" were the ones...what's it gonna take to show that? That "we" are the right ones?

Go ahead, try it on, but whether you care to call me liar or not, is of no consequence. It'll break every man that does..."try it on". Try and show one's self _right. _Prove to others...just how right you are.

But your "flipped the script" thing...even if it ain't_ all _right, it sure ain't wrong. There's a fair amount of us, me surely included, who use the name of Jesus like a password, it allows us entrance among those we want to appear right with. It's kinda like "I'm OK (think of all the hustlers that use that little fish sign on their businesses), you can let me in...see, I know the password".

And when Jesus is used "for the hustle" it really could be those that refuse to use his name like that that really are the more right. They might even hate mentioning the name at all, except in derision...when they see, plainly, how the hustlers use it.

Think of how cynical a man might become if he had to listen to every time a 17 year old back seat Romeo uses the word love. He might even get a little nauseated eventually, in the hearing of it. But it ain't because he really doesn't believe in love at all, it's actually because he does believe in it, knows it ain't what that frequent use of the word means to that priapic Lothario...but just can no longer bear its dripping off the tongue of every slobbering and groping hormone driven fool.

And if sickened enough...he'd probably be forgiven for then making fun of every James Dean wannabe by feeding it back to him in spite. So you're right, to me, in some measure. I can't tell who, just because they use the name, and on that basis, really have faith. Or, if they don't...don't have any. Just like I know...I've used it to appear...right...to try and convince others "Hey this time, I really mean it!"

Just like some girl saying "but I know you told Sue-Anne you loved her, too!"

Yeah, but this time..."I really mean it!" (Can we get in the back seat now?)

So name dropping the name of Jesus Christ...well...before it can mean "I'm with you brother" or can truly mean that...might be better recognized as "hey, this name means I'm also found among those plainly displayed as desperately wicked". I may be among the recovering (or I may not be)...but make no mistake...the value of that name to its use...ain't for "good people". If anything...its intrinsic value, not attributable by any man...is precisely as given to, and for...the desperately wicked. Jesus wasn't kidding when he said "I haven't come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance"

So...who knows? Maybe you are the righteous, and I am the worse off (especially if I am found using that name to try and "hide" the fact I need a doctor...or worse even... "you need one..._more!_")

But I can't deny, I heard the call in desperation. And that should be a tip off to any who, despite what they think they hear from me...should know of me, maybe all and only what they should know...of me. Cause I never heard of any man being desperately good...or desperately righteous.

And as anybody "in recovery" knows it's always only one day at a time, and the surest way to falling or relapse is to think that 30 day...or even 30 year pin has in itself the power.

Me, I'm just beginning to trust the Lord. And you may put me to shame today if I am only found able to boast of what he did for me yesterday.

Hey, I see I lost an hour somewhere. It's later than I thought.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Mar 8, 2020)

While I agree that faith is primarily a vertical relationship between an individual and the Lord, I also realize that humans are social creatures, and we are inclined to find like-minded folks to encourage each other in just about anything we do.

Organizing for the purpose of worshipping and serving God is no worse than organizing to feed the poor, house the homeless, provide hunting opportunities, host shooting events, or encourage one another in fishing.

But there are good and bad organizations for every goal.  What makes an organization bad?  I've noticed a few commonalities:

1.  Trying to assert more power than needed to accomplish the goals.
2.  Placing a higher priority on the organization's continued existence than on its mission.
3.  Thinking it's approach is the only "right" way.
4.  Striving for a bigger piece of the pie rather than creating a bigger pie.
5.  The love of money.
6.  Redefining "good" and "bad" according to its own rules rather than an eternal standard, and judging people by those rules who have not agreed to them.
7.  Trying to exercise authority and influence outside of their given sphere or trying to define their legitimate sphere as larger than it is.

Now, it's easy to point out how organizations we don't like have the bad features listed above.  But how are we doing these same things in our own churches, families, clubs, teams, businesses, etc.?  Let's get the log out of our own eye first.


----------



## Israel (Mar 8, 2020)

That log things always trips me up.
It's kinda like no one ever has to tell me I'm cold, or hungry, uncomfortable, smart enough to be me, or that other folks are wrong...when they look wrong to me.

I just never doubt my own sensing. 

Except for that log thing. 


That just beats the heck outta me every time.


----------



## tokenliberal (Mar 11, 2020)

Religion is a connection between an invisible man and your money.These Xians are on TV 24 hrs a day telling you how you should give them your money.You would think a God would be able to generate money without having to beg for it.What happened to the all knowing,all seeing ,all powerful deity?Maybe he never was really there?


----------



## 660griz (Mar 11, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> Organizing for the purpose of worshipping and serving God is no worse than organizing to feed the poor, house the homeless, provide hunting opportunities, host shooting events, or encourage one another in fishing.


Interesting you think gathering to worship is right up there with feeding the poor, housing the homeless, etc.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 11, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> While I agree that faith is primarily a vertical relationship between an individual and the Lord, I also realize that humans are social creatures, and we are inclined to find like-minded folks to encourage each other in just about anything we do.
> 
> Organizing for the purpose of worshipping and serving God is no worse than organizing to feed the poor, house the homeless, provide hunting opportunities, host shooting events, or encourage one another in fishing.
> 
> ...





> What makes an organization bad?  I've noticed a few commonalities:





> 1.  Trying to assert more power than needed to accomplish the goals.
> 2.  Placing a higher priority on the organization's continued existence than on its mission.
> 3.  Thinking it's approach is the only "right" way.
> 4.  Striving for a bigger piece of the pie rather than creating a bigger pie.
> ...


It would be pretty simple to apply and provide examples of organized religion, as an organization, doing exactly that ^ throughout history including the present..
Could one also apply and provide positive examples? Of course.
Is like minded people "organzing" together a "bad" thing in and of itself? Of course not.



> Let's get the log out of our own eye first.


I completely agree with the premise.
However, it can also be used as a very convenient excuse.


----------



## Israel (Mar 11, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> It would be pretty simple to apply and provide examples of organized religion, as an organization, doing exactly that ^ throughout history including the present..
> Could one also apply and provide positive examples? Of course.
> Is like minded people "organzing" together a "bad" thing in and of itself? Of course not.
> 
> ...



I am not sure I understand. And I realize you are addressing LDB, not me. You surely owe me no understanding, but I ask. This is in regards to the last two sentences.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 11, 2020)

660griz said:


> Interesting you think gathering to worship is right up there with feeding the poor, housing the homeless, etc.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 11, 2020)

Israel said:


> I am not sure I understand. And I realize you are addressing LDB, not me. You surely owe me no understanding, but I ask. This is in regards to the last two sentences.





> You surely owe me no understanding


I might not owe it but I would prefer it 


> I completely agree with the premise.


I completely agree with the premise of checking ourselves before we go blaming/accusing/finding fault in others.


> However, it can also be used as a very convenient excuse.


If you don't really want to acknowledge something, or explore it fully or for a variety of reasons.... its easy to more or less dismiss it with "well Im not/no one is perfect  either...".


----------



## Israel (Mar 11, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I might not owe it but I would prefer it
> 
> I completely agree with the premise of checking ourselves before we go blaming/accusing/finding fault in others.
> 
> If you don't really want to acknowledge something, or explore it fully or for a variety of reasons.... its easy to more or less dismiss it with "well Im not/no one is perfect  either...".



OK, I think I get it. The premise of "get the log out of your own eye..." is OK, but it can be used as an excuse?

And I sure can't tell you how anyone views that particular passage except me. And for me the experience of it is better summed up by what I've already said...rather than try to say "what I think it means".

And thanks for taking the time.

And it also goes a long way relative to that "flipped the script" thing you mentioned than some other explanations.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 11, 2020)

Israel said:


> OK, I think I get it. The premise of "get the log out of your own eye..." is OK, but it can be used as an excuse?
> 
> And I sure can't tell you how anyone views that particular passage except me. And for me the experience of it is better summed up by what I've already said...rather than try to say "what I think it means".
> 
> ...





> OK, I think I get it. The premise of "get the log out of your own eye..." is OK, but it can be used as an excuse?


I would say it is of far more import than just OK.
And yes it can be used as an excuse -
The parent who doesnt really want to accept their kid's drug use - "well he's a teenager we all tried drugs when we were teenagers".


----------



## Israel (Mar 11, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I would say it is of far more import than just OK.
> And yes it can be used as an excuse -
> The parent who doesnt really want to accept their kid's drug use - "well he's a teenager we all tried drugs when we were teenagers".



Well, that's good to hear.

That you esteem it more than just OK.

(Not being facetious)


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Mar 11, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> But there are good and bad organizations for every goal.  What makes an organization bad?  I've noticed a few commonalities:
> 
> 1.  Trying to assert more power than needed to accomplish the goals.
> 2.  Placing a higher priority on the organization's continued existence than on its mission.
> ...





WaltL1 said:


> It would be pretty simple to apply and provide examples of organized religion, as an organization, doing exactly that ^ throughout history including the present..



I've found the list of things that make organizations bad much more likely to be true of public schools than of the churches I've attended.  I've also found them more likely to be true of most of the employers I've worked for.   I would bet if you considered it carefully, your experience with public schools and employers might be similar.  

So why do we tolerate these defining characteristics of bad organizations in public schools and employers?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 12, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> I've found the list of things that make organizations bad much more likely to be true of public schools than of the churches I've attended.  I've also found them more likely to be true of most of the employers I've worked for.   I would bet if you considered it carefully, your experience with public schools and employers might be similar.
> 
> So why do we tolerate these defining characteristics of bad organizations in public schools and employers?


An organization is only as good as the person or entity in charge.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 12, 2020)

And while I agree that an Organization is a reflection of its members and the actions of a few bad members do not represent the entirety, the effect of constant and  repetitive negative actions by members or employees eventually make their way to the top brass to have to answer for their employees or members. If nothing is done to rectify the problems a change in leadership is often made. Many of these instances go on for months or years and when finally addressed the entire Organization has a bad reputation for 1. It happening. 2 . It happening over and over. And 3. The Boss/CEO/Head Honcho/Owner doing nothing to acknowledge it, address it and ultimately prevent it. Now multiply that to the tune of hundreds and thousands of instances over hundreds and thousands of years absolutely does reflect the leadership on an Organization and or Company.
I full well expect it from and am no longer surprised by the action and inaction of humans, not from something that is constantly touted as being better than human and all powerful and all knowing.


----------



## WaltL1 (Mar 13, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> I've found the list of things that make organizations bad much more likely to be true of public schools than of the churches I've attended.  I've also found them more likely to be true of most of the employers I've worked for.   I would bet if you considered it carefully, your experience with public schools and employers might be similar.
> 
> So why do we tolerate these defining characteristics of bad organizations in public schools and employers?





> So why do we tolerate these defining characteristics of bad organizations in public schools and employers?


There are a whole bunch of answers to that question.
Just  few would be -
Employers -
People need jobs.
People need benefits.
The average employee doesnt have a clue what the "Board of Directors" do/decide.
People dont care.
What we might deem as bad characteristics are actually sound business decisions.
What you or I deem as bad, others deem as good.
The public wants or needs what these companies are selling.
Just a few ^
Public schools -
Many, many families cant afford an alternative.
Many, many parent(s) arent qualified to home school.
Many parents are satisfied with public schools.
Many parents are completely disconnected from their children and their education.
Many families have 2 working parents and need the public schools and the activities to "take care" of their kids while they work.
Just a few ^
You specified public schools and employers so that what I responded to.
You left out organized religion so I did not comment on that. All you have to do is review history and one can come up with a list quite easily. A number of the above attributes can be applied to organized religion also as its a "business" whether one admits/recognizes it or not.


----------

