What Does a Christian Look Like?(No Wrong Answers)

08/08/2006 09:07:54 PM · #51

Originally posted by posthumous:

re the $64,000 question: what IS the belief in basic human rights if not a religious belief?

That would suggest that rights are somehow inherent, rather than constructed and imposed by man.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

08/08/2006 09:28:27 PM · #52

Originally posted by legalbeagle:

Originally posted by posthumous:
re the $64,000 question: what IS the belief in basic human rights if not a religious belief?

That would suggest that rights are somehow inherent, rather than constructed and imposed by man.

What would suggest that? The question itself? A belief in basic human rights? I think if one is willing to violate a religion only when it interferes with people's "basic human rights," then one is suggesting that rights are indeed "somehow inherent." And if that is the case, this belief suggests some sort of religion (or at least theology) on the part of the believer.

DefyTime

Canon EOS-7D

08/09/2006 02:19:34 AM · #53

Originally posted by routerguy666:

If I understand, you are asking what a Christian should act like or how a person that claims to be Christian would or should be perceived by others.

So I will answer this, and the cynicism that drips from my answer is that born of life in a Christian home as son of a Christian minister, surrounded for the entirety of my childhood by Christians.

A Christian is someone who leads their life in such a way that it follows the tenents of proper living as laid down in the Bible. How those tenents of good living are interpreted, how they are applied in real life, and what motivations exist for following them vary based on situation. As in all other religions, Christians pick and choose what portions of their religion to observe based on the inconvience it introduces into their life. If it were any other way, everyone claiming to be a Christian would sell all their worldly possessions and use the money and the rest of their life on the planet in the sole pursuit of helping the less fortunate.

So, a Christian is the same as a follower of any other religion. A life spent in the pursuit of balancing faith and hypocrisy in an attempt to find spiritual solace in a physical existence.

Even though this is a very blunt way of saying itâ�¦it is very trueâ�¦and donâ��t know if I have ever heard it said this way before. I am a Christianâ�¦and half of me would love to do just that and sell every possession I own and travel the worldâ�¦helping people, thatâ��s BIG for me. I donâ��t go around trying to see how many points I can score for myself in Heaven by how many souls I can save hereâ�¦and that is impossible for me to do anyways. All I can do is do good things for and around people and they will eventually wonder why I am like I amâ�¦after you have a trusting relationship with someone is the time that they will truly open their heart and allow certain things in and let their heart go unguarded for a second so that God might prick it. I do not think I save anyone no matter how much time I spend with them reading the scriptures and just talking about our viewsâ�¦what I do know is that it plants a seedâ�¦or waters a seed that was planted by someone else. I may never see anyone I talk to ever come to Christ in my lifeâ�¦but they may all find Him in their own time and that is for them and God to know.

The other half wants to be more â��realisticâ�� and stay where I amâ�¦keep workingâ�¦save moneyâ�¦and make a life for myself. I said realistic like that because this half of me is the worldly side and wants to think that if I sold everything and went to work for the Lord then I would die of starvationâ�¦or that I wouldnâ��t be able to support a family. But in reality I do believe God provides for those who follow himâ�¦but it will be hardâ�¦and those hardships are brought on to discourage us from continuing to follow the straight and narrow path.

Ultimately I believe I am not being the best Christian I could beâ�¦and probably will think that for the rest of my life no matter what I doâ�¦because you can never be at a level that you can sit back and say I am done while you are alive. I am trying to strive more to the first half of myself that wants to do all things for Himâ�¦but I am human and the other side will win its fair share of battles till the day I die. That is human nature and no one can say different.

I donâ��t know if that remotely answers your questionâ�¦but that was just some things that kinda rolled out of my brain as I was typing. If anyone has a questionâ�¦or if I might have been unclear in anything I have said please contact me.

Clint

777STAN

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

08/09/2006 03:01:04 AM · #54

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

All who have posted so far have proven to me that my basic premise about Faith holds up no matter how many people offer insight and no matter how many views of the subject come to light.

PREMISE:
1. Some belief about Some Person(s) or Some Value that can be used as a Guiding Principle for living Life seems to be innate in Human Beings.
2. This belief or non-belief or uncertain belief is usually considered valuable to the heart that holds to this belief.
3. The degree to which this belief is valuable is in direct correlation to the amount of emotion that accompanies the belief. (Examples are wars, racism, loss of business and loss of friendship.)
4. The rational discussion of this belief is not possible without a great amount of self-discipline.
5. Any significant change in this belief is not possible through the logical or rational arguments of any other human being.
6. Change in this belief (if that becomes personally necessary or wanted) occurs at the core of the person holding to this belief.
7. This happens when the Super Ego is either forced by Life to make a Values Reassessment or chooses to reassess of its own accord resulting in New Information that needs to be incorporated in some way.
8. (With apologies to atheists/agnostics for lack of inclusion, Point #8 speaks to the nearly universal belief in Diety.) Reassessment at the core of one's being can also be an act of Divine Intervention.

Thank you, also, for posting great wisdom & great humor! This has proven to me another of my premises...that...Most photographers are quite intelligent making them good company for those of us who like to think! IMHO...The Truly Wise are also Truly Funny! (How else can one keep a Thinking Brain from over-heating?)

Please enjoy the Wisdom of one of my mentors. "Stan, Learn to Laugh at yourself! The rest of us already do!" :)

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

08/09/2006 03:27:02 AM · #55

Unfortunately, when I think of what a Christian looks like, I see a "Fire and Brimstone" preacher telling me to come to Jesus or burn in eternal hell.

Or a sharp dressed man on TV telling me about Jesus' love while trying to pick my pocket so he can buy a new Rolls..

Or a protester at a military funeral, with a sign professing that "God Hates Fags"...

Or a sniper aiming at a Doctor...

Now, before you break out the torches and pitchforks, realize that I know that this perception is wrong and that these kinds of people are in the extreme, but that's the connotation that the term "Christian" has for me.

08/09/2006 05:08:28 AM · #56

Originally posted by 777STAN:

[i]1. Some belief about Some Person(s) or Some Value that can be used as a Guiding Principle for living Life seems to be innate in Human Beings.

I am not so sure about this one, and it strikes directly at number 8. It seems bit facile. People have a value system and you are suggesting that, what I would consider societal constructs ("Some Value"), provide some kind of "guiding principle". It could very equally be that people are social animals and in order for society to work there must be a degree of conformity. People are not "guided", but have a degree of conformity imposed upon them by society. The principles evolved within society are chaotic, without control, but societies only flourish where there is an effective social order. Therefore, principles that exist do so because they promote social order, not the other way round (as you appear to be suggesting).

Originally posted by posthumous:

Originally posted by legalbeagle:
That would suggest that rights are somehow inherent, rather than constructed and imposed by man.

What would suggest that? The question itself? A belief in basic human rights? I think if one is willing to violate a religion only when it interferes with people's "basic human rights," then one is suggesting that rights are indeed "somehow inherent." And if that is the case, this belief suggests some sort of religion (or at least theology) on the part of the believer.

As I have said above, I don't think that the rights are inherent, or exist independently of a culture and environment. It takes no requirement of belief in modern Western society to consider murder a breach of another's right to life, because the culture we have developed would be less effective if it were tolerated: the principle develops out of need and custom, not out of a belief system. Looking back through history, there are thousands of cultures that have not respected what we consider to be important rights, including the right to life. Even that most important modern "right" is not inherent in any way, except perhaps as a prerequisite to the development, and within the confines of, modern Western culture.

The identification of rights that set out a framework for the enhancement of our modern society is not a religious exercise, but largely a philosophical and sociological exercise.

Message edited by author 2006-08-09 05:10:11.

08/09/2006 10:14:18 AM · #57

When you talk about values occurring because of a sociological need, you speak only to origins. The fact of belief remains, regardless of how it originated. You personally might not feel that basic human rights are inherent, but many people do, including people who do not consider themselves religious. Other people might come from a culture where community is considered more important than the individual, and thus do not feel that human rights are inalienable. I propose that that, too, is a "religious" feeling, even though that, too, has its own sociological benefits (The notion of individual rights is actually something of a blow to society and social structures, and it was recognized and reviled as such for quite a while).

Religion traditionally accomplished some important functions (such as providing values, a world view and a reason to get up in the morning), functions that people who claim to be non-religious still require. In this way, entities like Science and Sports find themselves fulfilling religious roles. Even more complex, they fulfill such roles for self-defined religious people as well! I find this process fascinating. Can we end the religious impulse in humankind simply by replacing it with things we insist are not religious?

08/09/2006 11:03:00 AM · #58

Originally posted by posthumous:

If people believe that human rights exist inherently, then yes, that is an article of belief. I don't think that anyone could point to a single human right that has existed and been recognised for all time (or, at least, the limited amount of time that humans have existed), so I think that it would be a rather odd belief outside of a formal religious context.

Originally posted by posthumous:

Religion traditionally accomplished some important functions (such as providing values, a world view and a reason to get up in the morning), functions that people who claim to be non-religious still require.

Before religion existed in its modern form, surely people had views and got up in the morning? I think that the natural urges to eat and procreate fulfil these functions pretty well. In fact, some religions (broadly) based themselves around these biological urges (eg Bacchanalians).

08/09/2006 11:29:16 AM · #59

Originally posted by legalbeagle:

my original point is that many people do have this odd belief. I agree with you except for "formal." I think religion had a "formal" period beginning sometime around the stone age and ending sometime around now. :)

Originally posted by legalbeagle:

Before religion existed in its modern form, surely people had views and got up in the morning?

Assuming evolution (do I dare?), let's look at animals that don't have religion (as far as we can tell). They have their reasons for getting up in the morning. They may or may not have a worldview.

As we evolved into who we are, we had to evolve our reasons as well. We had to come up with reasons for, if not getting up in the morning, then more complex things, more societal things. As we became more self-conscious, we realized more how much the struggle to survive really is a struggle. Why struggle? Religion provided some answers. Self-consciousness also asked for a worldview as we became world-conscious. Religion provided answers for that as well, answers beyond a random chaos that kills you whenever it feels like it (though even my attempted formulation of a non-religious worldview has religious undertones!).

p.s. it's a pleasure discussing this with you. I always enjoy the way you slice and dice conservative arguments in political rant threads.

Tamron AF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Aspherical for Nikon

08/09/2006 12:04:34 PM · #60

Originally posted by posthumous:

I would have thought that "formal" was pretty important. If there were just a vague sense of deism, then that hardly generates principles or any degree of social uniformity out of which principles might spring. From organised religion spring untold numbers of principles (though they are not consistent between religions, again suggesting that the rights are not inherent to humanity). IMO, a lot of the principles reflect the society in which the religion was initiated or codify it, rather than shape it. Of course a religion may shape neighbouring societies with a different culture if and when it is introduced.

Originally posted by posthumous:

Assuming evolution (do I dare?),

That is very brave of you - the first step on the ladder ... ;-)

Originally posted by posthumous:

As we evolved into who we are, we had to evolve our reasons as well. We had to come up with reasons for, if not getting up in the morning, then more complex things, more societal things. As we became more self-conscious, we realized more how much the struggle to survive really is a struggle. Why struggle? Religion provided some answers. Self-consciousness also asked for a worldview as we became world-conscious. Religion provided answers for that as well, answers beyond a random chaos that kills you whenever it feels like it (though even my attempted formulation of a non-religious worldview has religious undertones!).

I agree with you in part.

I think that a lot of things have a stronger biological imperative than we like to think. Our evolutionary ancestors survived through social cooperation, and this is part bred into us. Many biological imperatives exist. There is, overlaying them, a rational consciousness and self awareness that appears to exist in relatively few animals.

As man developed a greater comprehension of his surroundings, stories had to be found to explain that which could not be understood. Some of those stories became increasingly complex and developed into what we now refer to as religion (the combination of legends, myths, mysticism and organised religion can be observed in an interesting fashion in Greek and early Roman civilisations).

As man developed a sense of self awareness and his own mortality, those stories/religions had to cater for, and found sympathy in, the psychological needs of man. Religion provides answers, it codifies parts of the social contract, but it is also attractive to leaders and wannabe leaders because it represents a method of social control (or revolt).

Interestingly, the development of consciousness is theorised to be linked to social effectiveness: the more people whose mind you can comprehend, the more socially effective you are, and the more genetically reproductive. This may have been the evolutionary pressure that resulted in the development of our brains.

Originally posted by posthumous:

p.s. it's a pleasure discussing this with you. I always enjoy the way you slice and dice conservative arguments in political rant threads.

I regularly get sliced and diced myself, but likewise, I enjoy a civilised conversation and debate. I like DPC for throwing together so many disparate viewpoints.

vtruan

Nikon D5100

08/09/2006 02:36:12 PM · #61

Since I'm a visual Guy, and the question is what do we look like. Here are two Christians, my wife and me, I'm not the deer :) This is an example of my family, many more in my portfolio. I'm sure there are others on the site.

777STAN

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

08/09/2006 10:18:15 PM · #62

Originally posted by vtruan:

Thanks, Van! Pleasure to know you! Great thrill to meet other Christians who also have a sense of humor!
The real reason I started this thread was to try to find verbal descriptions of the infamous "unwritten rules" that govern Christian conduct & speech in daily life the world over in a manner that suggests devotion on the level of Holy Writ.
It is my supposition that these very "unwritten rules" are so laden with provential social mores that if two Christians from countries on opposite sides of the globe stood side-by-side, we would easily observe a strikingly different external aspect, even though their internal love for Jesus would be very much the same.

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

08/10/2006 05:58:47 AM · #63

Originally posted by 777STAN:

The real reason I started this thread was to try to find verbal descriptions of the infamous "unwritten rules" that govern Christian conduct & speech in daily life the world over in a manner that suggests devotion on the level of Holy Writ.
It is my supposition that these very "unwritten rules" are so laden with provential social mores that if two Christians from countries on opposite sides of the globe stood side-by-side, we would easily observe a strikingly different external aspect, even though their internal love for Jesus would be very much the same.

Are you thinking across sects? The expression of Christianity is quite different between, say, Coptic, Orthodox, Catholic and C of E. The rules of interpretation are very different, even if based on substantially the same book. An interesting visual comparison might be conducted from the architecture of each, and how the different interpretation of Christianity has affected the way in which churches are built and decorated (an obvious example being the degree to which perceived idolatry is prohibited).

If you expanded your avenues of enquiry further, you might look at how expressions of Christianity have changed over time. For example, 8th C Christianity was expressed in a similar fashion to modern Islam in the method of prayer and certain social aspects.

However, I am not sure that these are just provincial social mores: the differences, at least in part, represent substantially divergent belief systems, even if they have a common core.

777STAN

Pentax K10D

08/10/2006 01:34:54 PM · #64

Here let me run at it from another direction. (I will use examples this time because the English language can so impotent to translate the "pictures" in the heart.)
As a boy in a Southern Baptist Church I knew that every Sunday morning I would go to church dressed in a nice white shirt, a tie, a dark suit coat, and dark pants. Sunday evening service was usually more casual...losing the coat & tie. Wednesday evening prayer service was the most casual in that I might be allowed to wear a t-shirt & blue jeans.
As an adult in my thirties I attended some "Seeker-Sensitive" non-denominational churches that had one service on Sunday morning and your choice of "Care Groups" during the week. Dress code was quite liberal to attract a wider range of seekers. Three-piece suits with a tie were still welcome, but people, like me, who showed up in a t-shirt & blue jeans were always welcome, too...Really!
However, in my mid-forties I have been attending a similarly "Seeker-Friendly", non-denominational church that leans more heavily into the Full Gospel end of the Protestant spectrum. Though I have never been "thrown out" for wearing a t-shirt & blue jeans, non-verbal indications have always made me feel most accepted when I wear a button-up shirt, nice slacks, and a bolo (i.e."cowboy tie".)

There are many other aspects of Christian life expressions that I would like to discuss, like why that when I was growing up with a Baptist preacher for a dad I was encouraged (along with any willing heart who would listen to him) to serve in any area of church ministry that I felt excited about trying my hand at doing, but in the "Seeker-Friendly" churches my enthusiam has been severely quashed because the leaders were not equally convinced as I am that the LORD has prepared me to serve in the areas to which I am offering to serve. From what I can gather non-verbally (i.e. "unwritten rules") I appear to be D.Q.ed from service because I'm breaking one of these "unwritten rules" and my own non-verbal presentation as well as my speech qualities/patterns are not polished enough for an increasingly "Hollywood-trained", "consumer-oriented" Christian.
The leaders of these "S.-F."churches appear to believe that they need the "stage presence" of Former-President Ronald Reagan & the "campaigning-in-the-oval-office" ability of Former-President Bill Clinton, and that anyone who serves in the church must have the same. This, of course, leaves me out because even though I am a prolific writer, I tend to present my ideas in person with all the animation & facial expression of a long-winded, verbose, monotone college professor teaching a two-hour night class.
(I think I have very good ideas, but if I put my audience to sleep... who even cares?)

This post has probably given the reader great insight to some of my bad experiences. I hope that they also give me credibility when I say that I understand why at least some people arrive at being an agnostic or an atheist.
Those were two of my options as well. In recent years those options have looked increasingly appealing, except for one thing...my Dad.

Dad served the LORD to the best of his abilities, but his presence & his delivery weren't much better than mine, but he never gave up. He was committed to Jesus! When some individual, set of man-made rules or church/denominational council came into conflict with Jesus, he always chose Jesus! No matter what people did to him as he loved & served Jesus...he never once wavered from his determination to love & serve Jesus!
So, if his unwavering commitment to Jesus, the One he believed to be his Messiah, made him crazy simply because he couldn't prove his HOPE, then hand me an application...I want to be crazy!!!!!!!

By the way, he seemed to live by the driving principle that no one was going to stand between him & Jesus, preventing him from getting to Jesus. That's because he believed that if anyone stood between him and Jesus, that person was closer to Jesus than he was,...and he wasn't going to have any part of that...no matter what anybody did to or said about him. Dittos for me!
Since my LOVE & my RESPECT for Dad always outweighed any disagreements I ever had with him, I can honestly say that I agree with him completely here!
Let me close with the last real example of belief in his life that clearly demonstrates his consistent commitment to Jesus: The last time he could move about on his own power, Dad chose to visit a man who was evaluating the claims Jesus made about who God is & how God wants to relate to a human but who did not yet have enough reasons to believe. Dad was all about giving people reasons to believe in Jesus! He never wavered!!!!
(Even though many have already stated that they do not believe it appropriate to proselytize, please "cut me a little slack" for the purposes of this story about one man who was consistent in the exercise of his faith...that alone is a rare quality these days. I hope you will agree.)
To put it in the vernacular of my childhood, Dad spent his last evening on Earth (at least the last one of his "chosen" activities) trying to "bring another man to Jesus."
From what I have heard he wasn't successful that night in convincing the man to change his beliefs, but he was successful in serving the LORD & being true to his beliefs. That makes me proud of him!!!!
And (at least in my mind) I believe the LORD was proud of him, too, because very next morning the LORD began the process of calling my Dad to Himself. I believe that Jesus sent my Dad a limo in the form of an ambulance in the wee hours of the morning during that night. (Dad had COPD & couldn't breathe. He was on life-support the last two weeks of his life.)
Dad was finally freed from the shackles of this life on Good Friday, March 29, 2002, and even that was a high compliment (at least in my mind) that the LORD gave to my Dad that even the way he died was connected to the message he had lived.
So, if I seem childish to you in regard to my beliefs, I can accept that. However, as you can tell, my Dad meant a lot to me. I expect to see him again! I, also, expect to meet Jesus face-to-face for the first time in the flesh!
I can't make you believe it! (I do not want to MAKE anyone believe anything!) But I don't want anybody to ever doubt that I BELIEVE JESUS!!!!!!! :)

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

08/10/2006 01:57:04 PM · #65

Originally posted by 777STAN:

However, in my mid-forties I have been attending a similarly "Seeker-Friendly", non-denominational church that leans more heavily into the Full Gospel end of the Protestant spectrum. Though I have never been "thrown out" for wearing a t-shirt & blue jeans, non-verbal indications have always made me feel most accepted when I wear a button-up shirt, nice slacks, and a bolo (i.e."cowboy tie".)

...

From what I can gather non-verbally (i.e. "unwritten rules") I appear to be D.Q.ed from service because I'm breaking one of these "unwritten rules" and my own non-verbal presentation as well as my speech qualities/patterns are not polished enough for an increasingly "Hollywood-trained", "consumer-oriented" Christian.[/i]

This sounds like a depressingly human relationship issue rather than a religious one. Maybe time to look for a new church to join?

Originally posted by 777STAN:

But I don't want anybody to ever doubt that I BELIEVE JESUS!!!!!!! :)

I don't think many people are doubting that here!

Riponlady

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

08/10/2006 03:25:24 PM · #66

Originally posted by 777STAN:

This type of hypocritical human behaviour is exactly what makes me unwilling to go to religious places. How can your style of dress and speech pattern affect your spiritual beliefs and method of worship? I sometimes attend a spiritualist church where you are not judged by fellow worshippers but welcomed whatever religion, colour, beliefs, dress sense and accent!
P

digitalknight

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

08/12/2006 12:57:14 AM · #67

Originally posted by deapee:

Geez, don't these people know that the internet is no place to discuss Christianity? The internet is mainly for porn, fighting, making fun of people, and chatting with babes (who just might happen to be other guys).

In this context - this may be the funniest post I've read on DPC! Tears in my eyes.

I think DPC should have a "add this photographer to your funniest photographers" link.

digitalknight

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

08/12/2006 01:05:53 AM · #68

More on topic:

I agree with reading the Bible to find out for yourself. I firmly believe that if you ask God, he will tell you he's there, so prayer is a part of that reading too.

But...

I've had those same kind of experiences in lots of locations/times.

Reading "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenence" I had a moment where a truth just opened up in my mind - and I had that "feeling" that God was teaching me something.

There are times on my bike (motor) that I look forward and behind and I can see that I'm the only person on the road for 40 miles - I can relax on the driving and just contemplate - driving through God's amazing creations - and all is right with life, just for a moment I feel God is expressing his love to me personally.

There are times a small child will say something or do something that is so pure - I get that "feeling" - God is teaching me through this child.

I think truth can be found in lots of places, I think God/Christ whoever you want to call it, can teach you with that innate sense and longing for truth - the longing to find God - if you follow those "feelings" you'll find Him, and you'll be more like Him in the process.

All that and I didn't even say what one looks like - :-p

NoellaSue

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

08/15/2006 03:51:10 PM · #69

What does a Christian look like? If I wanted to actually take a photo of a Christian, I'd do a group shot. I would include in the middle - Jesus. Then I'd put in Peter (who betrayed him) and the Apostle Paul (whose life was turned absolutely upside down by him). They'd be the central figures.

Then I'd surround them with people like Martin Luther, and a few others from his era. They'd be common-looking men and women, but if one could look into their hearts, they'd see love, joy, peace, longsuffering (or patience), gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance (or moderation).

Then I'd include some people from the last century (because I know more about them) and that would be people like Mother Teresa, Princess Diana, Elvis, Billy Graham, Jim Bakker, a few of our more current presidents (even the ones who "sinned").

I'd include some of my neighbors and former co-workers (though I wouldn't include a certain former boss who claimed to be Christian, but who fired me two hours after I turned in a Workman's Comp claim though I'd worked for him for 11 years - Now God himself might include him, but that man wouldn't get to be in my photo).

Mostly, though, my picture would include just everyday people living everyday lives the best they can, wishing they could be more like Jesus.

(Lest anyone stumble at some of the names I've listed - I thought about each name. Some of them have not done so well in their public lives, but it is my belief that each of them have sought forgiveness and received it.

On the day of judgment, I'd really hate to have God's job.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

08/16/2006 05:10:43 AM · #70

Originally posted by NoellaSue:

Princess Diana

This was an odd inclusion - I am not sure that Princess Diana was particularly religious (she was certainly not famous for it), but rather she was famous for having been portrayed as a character of compassion.

In fact, on Googling the question, she is more often regarded as a counterpoint to Christianity (and a possible threat to it).

NoellaSue

Canon EOS-20D

08/16/2006 09:45:37 AM · #71

Perhaps it was her great compassion for people that I responded to. I do not know much about her life other than what I read in the news. She seemed love her children dearly, seemed very sad, and yet had great compassion for others.

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro for Canon

08/16/2006 09:54:37 AM · #72

I have no qualms with including Princess Diana, but Jesus is inappropriate. He was Jewish, not Christian.

Jutilda

Canon EOS-7D

08/16/2006 06:55:12 PM · #73

I find it so interesting that within the say past 10 years, being a Christian has become who you are, not what you do. I grew up with all sorts of Protestants, Jews, Catholics, etc but that was a part of you that didn't express you as a person, but the action you took regarding your ethnicity or faith. Now people home school, "because they are Christian," or vote for a certain candidate "because they are Christian."

I think if you look at the "rules" of most religions, they all basically say the same thing but its all of the dogma and doctrines that divide us. Living kindly toward yourself, others and the world around you, and you fit right into any organized theism with or without an established name. But the "my god is better than your god," or "I'm better because I beliee this or that" that really gets me and turns me against those who say and act in such a manner.

Love the Ghandi quotes.

NoellaSue

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

08/17/2006 12:02:29 PM · #74

Originally posted by posthumous:

I have no qualms with including Princess Diana, but Jesus is inappropriate. He was Jewish, not Christian.

"Christian" comes from the fact that Jesus was the Jew who was the Messiah, and was given the mantle, "Christ," the anointed-one. How could you not include him?