How does one identify charlantry?

[tipofthespear]

The anti-christian crowd is desperately scrambling to find ways to throw christians in prison, and clean them off the streets and out of the way.

You have the nutjobs presenting us with daily garbage threads about "Christianity as a mental disorder" and "Taking children to church is child abuse" etc.

This is just more of the same.

Prisons? No! Not at all ! We just need more mental health facilities for treatment. It a matter of this county's survival that we have a critical thinking populace so we can compete in Math and Science .

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7jETVUulGwc#]Last 5 Minutes of Bill Maher's Religulous - YouTube[/ame]!

So you believe that Christianity is a mental disorder? How exactly do you define a "critical thinking populace?"

 

[The Irish Ram]

Just because there are spiritual teachers or preacher that ask for money, they cannot be gauged by that practice.
Money is necessary to pay the electric in the sanctuary. Money is necessary for a preacher to pay his costs when he is televised. The question must then be, is he a good steward of the money he receives?
and,
That you want to lock up people for their opinions tells me there should be a room with your name on it

 

[The Irish Ram]

With the constitution on the wall.

 

[tipofthespear]

Just because there are spiritual teachers or preacher that ask for money, they cannot be gauged by that practice.
Money is necessary to pay the electric in the sanctuary. Money is necessary for a preacher to pay his costs when he is televised. The question must then be, is he a good steward of the money he receives?
and,
That you want to lock up people for their opinions tells me there should be a room with your name on it

Exactly, we are charged by God to be good stewards of all of His creations.......money is not the root of all evil, however the "love" of money is, in that people place "money" above God........simple truth is money is nothing more than an asset to be used in the work of His Kingdom........even Jesus had a treasurer.........

 

[numan]

Prisons? No! Not at all ! We just need more mental health facilities for treatment. It a matter of this county's survival that we have a critical thinking populace so we can compete in Math and Science .

If that is what you want, then forget about building more loony bins (after all, the USA is already one, vast, spacious loony bin) -- just smash all the TV sets and imprison everyone who works in Hollywood.

Cutting out the vocal cords of all the politicians wouldn't be a bad idea, either.
.

 

[koshergrl]

Well there's a wonderful image.

 

[tipofthespear]

Prisons? No! Not at all ! We just need more mental health facilities for treatment. It a matter of this county's survival that we have a critical thinking populace so we can compete in Math and Science .

If that is what you want, then forget about building more loony bins (after all, the USA is already one, vast, spacious loony bin) -- just smash all the TV sets and imprison everyone who works in Hollywood.

Cutting out the vocal cords of all the politicians wouldn't be a bad idea, either.
.

You left out the producers of Video Games...........just saying........talking about a vegetative state of being.........(but then, I suppose many of them reside/produce their product in Hollywood, so, never mind.............)

 

[amrchaos]

Well, since this is the "religion" Forum, you could consider what the Word of God says........Jesus said we would know a "tree by it's fruits." Meaning we will know men (what they are) by their works. The Apostle Paul said (paraphrased) anyone who preaches other than Christ born, crucified and resurrected is a false teacher........that goes to your question concerning "spiritual" things.

Those who promote themselves are usually self-serving, and, in my opinion, false teachers.......

OK--Hold onto your hat here for this is just a question and not an accusation.

How do we know that Jesus and his disciples are not charlatans?

I am asking this only because it is the essential question of the thread.

Because you deeply believe in the validity of their teachings does not mean they are who they claim to be.

To also add to the problem here, Men may perform public works that are good, but privately are committing great evils. Note, we normally only see their public works. It is by good fortune if we see the evil works they wish to keep hidden. So I don't think the works we see give us the complete picture of the man behind them.

Let me be sure I understand you.......you are saying that the whole point of the thread is to show that God, Jesus...........were charlatans and not real? Now, you certainly have the "God given right" to NOT believe in God or His Son Jesus Christ, but I would wonder how anyone ever assumes that............?

NO--That is not the point of the thread!

 

[tipofthespear]

OK--Hold onto your hat here for this is just a question and not an accusation.

How do we know that Jesus and his disciples are not charlatans?

I am asking this only because it is the essential question of the thread.

Because you deeply believe in the validity of their teachings does not mean they are who they claim to be.

To also add to the problem here, Men may perform public works that are good, but privately are committing great evils. Note, we normally only see their public works. It is by good fortune if we see the evil works they wish to keep hidden. So I don't think the works we see give us the complete picture of the man behind them.

OK--Hold onto your hat here for this is just a question and not an accusation.

How do we know that Jesus and his disciples are not charlatans?

I am asking this only because it is the essential question of the thread.

Because you deeply believe in the validity of their teachings does not mean they are who they claim to be.


Let me be sure I understand you.......you are saying that the whole point of the thread is to show that God, Jesus...........were charlatans and not real? Now, you certainly have the "God given right" to NOT believe in God or His Son Jesus Christ, but I would wonder how anyone ever assumes that............?

NO--That is not the point of the thread!

Well, GOOD! For the previous comment certainly suggested such........and I QUOTE:

OK--Hold onto your hat here for this is just a question and not an accusation.

How do we know that Jesus and his disciples are not charlatans?

I am asking this only because it is the essential question of the thread.


END QUOTE.........

See, when I read a comment that says "I am asking this only because IT IS THE ESEENTIAL QUESTION OF THIS THREAD............." I kinda get the impression that questioning the reality of "who" Jesus is was the intent of the thread.....so, my bad I suppose...........

 

[numan]

If that is what you want, then forget about building more loony bins (after all, the USA is already one, vast, spacious loony bin) -- just smash all the TV sets and imprison everyone who works in Hollywood.

Cutting out the vocal cords of all the politicians wouldn't be a bad idea, either.

You left out the producers of Video Games...........just saying........talking about a vegetative state of being.....

You are quite right -- they should suffer condign punishment, too.

It's much worse than being responsible for turning our children into vegetables -- they are conditioning children to be numb to violence and cruelty.

Probably they design these games to manufacture zombie robots for the insane American War Machine and its future rampages of savagery.
.

 

[numan]

OK--Hold onto your hat here for this is just a question and not an accusation.

How do we know that Jesus and his disciples are not charlatans?

If one is going to be scientific, I think one should not even assume that Jesus existed.

There is no independent attestation to anything in the Gospels --- with the exception that Pontius Pilate was a prefect [not a procurator!] in Judea in the first century A.D. There is not a single mention of Jesus in any non-biblical writing of the first century A.D. [I discount the two fragments in Josephus. Only the longer fragment is significant, and it is all too obviously an interpolation by a later Christian scribe]

First century Judea was lousy with religious fanatics, rabbis and "Christs" ( that is, supposed "Anointed Ones" or "Messiahs" ). The Gospels could easily be ( and probably are ) a mish-mash of "wise saws and ancient instances" and confused recollections about any number of the religious lunatics who were wandering through Judea during that century. It would not surprise me that one of these "Christs" was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and that he had a brother named James; but neither would it surprise me that the whole story was woven out of pure fantasy and bits and pieces of various incidents which occurred during that century.

Even in our own time of incessant transfer of information, think of all the apocryphal stories woven about people -- as an example, Elvis Presley !!

I am quite sure far more people saw Elvis appear to them after his death than ever claimed to see Jesus after his "resurrection." · · ·
.

 

[numan]

'
The first significant mention of Christians comes from the second century. Tacitus, in his Annals, describes the Great Fire of Rome during Nero's reign, and he states:

Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia, quin iussum incendium crederetur. ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. Igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt.
---- Annales XV 44

[ But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. ]

The Latin says that certain people confessed to "attacks," or to "seizing of plunder." Then, apparently because all or most of the people first arrested were Christians, the rest of the cult of atheists (as the Romans thought of them) were rounded up because "they hated mankind" and were prone to terrorism.
.

 

[numan]

'
I do not know why so many people assume that the Christians were not, in fact, responsible for the Great Fire of Rome. They were hysterical religious fanatics; they considered Rome to be Great Babylon, a sewer of sin; they thought the world was going to end at any moment, ushering in a golden age of the reign of the saints ( that is, of their own humble selves ). What could be more natural than to attempt to hurry along the advent of so much glory and happiness?

The ramshackle area of Rome where the fire started was inhabited by many Jews (and so, presumably, by many Christians). The Roman authorities at the time were convinced that the Christians had a hand in starting or spreading the fire.

Tacitus also writes:

...nec quisquam defendere audebat, crebris multorum minis restinguere prohibentium, et quia alii palam facies iaciebant atque esse sibi auctorem vociferabantur, sive ut raptus licentius exercerent seu iussu.
---- Annales XV 38

And no one dared to stop the mischief, because of incessant menaces from a number of persons who forbade the extinguishing of the flames, because again others openly hurled brands, and kept shouting that there was one who gave them authority, either seeking to plunder more freely, or obeying orders.

Even if the Christians did not start the fire, it seems quite within the bounds of probability that they did everything they could in order to keep the fire burning and to spread the flames.
.

 

[amrchaos]

OK

I think people are going off on a wild tangent here. This thread is not about any particular religion. It is not about Christianity, Islam, Judaism or even Scientology for that matter

The question is how do you recognize if some one is a charlatan. Essentially, how do you know if the people you trust are not or what is a giveaway for some one you suspect.

 

[koshergrl]

A charlatan uses people's vulnerabilities against them in order to take advantage of them.

 

[numan]

A charlatan uses people's vulnerabilities against them in order to take advantage of them.

Yeah, just like most of the people who run religions.
.

 

[koshergrl]

I see I've stumbled into the third grade thread.

 

[koshergrl]

Incidentally, I'm not entirely convinced that "charlantry" is a word.

There's "charlatanism" and "charlatan" but charlantry is one of those made-up words that illiterates used so much that it sort of became a word on it's own, but not like a REAL word.

 

[koshergrl]

Kind of like "ain't" and "irregardless" and most uses of "per se".

 

[numan]

I see I've stumbled into the third grade....

What did you expect? You insist on posting in this message board -- and it is an American board.

Incidentally, I'm not entirely convinced that "charlantry" is a word.

There's "charlatanism" and "charlatan" but charlantry is one of those made-up words that illiterates used....

Of course there is no such word -- the illiterate who posted it was obviously attempting the word "charlatanry", which you will find in a decent dictionary. If you look at my postings, you will see that I spelled it correctly, though I did not draw attention to it. There are so many errors and idiocies in these threads, I have to restrain my desire to correct people's spelling and grammar.

"Charlatanism" is far more common and euphonious, and should be preferred.
.