It could be used as a comparison.
Maybe some of them don't understand that none of us are any better than anyone else. We should treat everyone with respect because we do not have the right to judge another for their words, thoughts or deeds. We all have the freedom of choice to do as we please and act as we wish. We are in no position to judge anyone, because we are imperfect ourselves. Everything that we don't understand colors our judgment of others and changes how we act towards them. Preconceptions about other people is what keeps us from true understanding.
I think when someone doesn't comprehend this they do suffer from a superiority complex, even though it is non-existent.
2006-10-07 19:59:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by buttercup 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
In 2 Kings 7 there is a story of lepers outside a starving beseiged city who discover the beseiging army has left; at first they eat all the food they find themselves, then they realise there are hundreds of starving people in the city that need food so they see they cannot keep the good news to themselves.
In just the same way Christians are like those lepers. They may look repulsive to you but they have important Good News. There is nothing in me that deserves to know the grace of God in Christ. But God wants you to know that the danger of Hell is real, and although you may not think you need Him, Jesus is your only path of escape.
2006-10-07 19:52:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by andy c 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah, Christians do that. They seek collective power and excuse their rudeness, disrespect, and lack of good manners with the pretext that they're saving souls from hell and therefore they should be allowed to barge into your home and suggest that you're hereditarily evil, or at least morally deficient in some way.
I like Rudyard Kipling's pro-White racial poetry. His poem "The Stranger" has been set to music by Prussian Blue. Click the link to download the song.
http://www.jabpage.org/images/stranger.mp3
(4.3 meg)
2006-10-07 19:46:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by David S 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, Suresh -- Gandhi and Nehru did not think the British were that bad. It is also an irony that Nehru and Jinnah, both architects of the terrible division of the sub-continent and both completely Westernized and servile to the Western culture would have loved to hand over their countries to the British if they could. But, they had to role play as "Freedom givers", when in fact the British ruled India for less than one hundred years directly (1857 to 1948).
If these gentlemen (N & J) could help it, they would have willingly gotten out of their Indian skins and become fully British. But, as that was not possible, they chose to serve their masters instead and divide the Subcontinent permanently. They divided India into three parts, and divided Muslims into three parts. Everyone lost and only has bitter memories for what they did to us, but we blame each other without seeing the true picture on any side.
Only the foreigners gained, while the Indian children to this day celebrate "FREEDOM" permanently from the rule of the British when their rule was through proxy (as it is today) and their ruling of India is permanently etched in our psyche. It was too tiny a phase in the history of India in depth or scope to permanently celebrate our freedom from them foreign visitors who robbed us of our wealth and left us permanently and debilitatingly divided.
It is as if India did not have a history before. India has been ruled by many and they are all dead, as are those British who ruled India. India can survive thank you very much, without celebrating freedom from a foreign nation that ruled for less than 100 years. But, we have to remember how good the Christians were... who pillaged India, and left us only in the hands of their stooges. At least the past Muslim rulers, in spite of their many flaws at least settled here and lived here and made it their home here, andt their genarations fate is permanently linked with those of the Indians who have always lived in the land.
People are fairly blind. They do not see how others were similarly divided on whatever available grounds existed. If none existed, then communism was created, the fight between rich and poor. Thus Korea was divided into North and South, vietnam too, China was divided, so was many of the fast eastern countries, middle-east, Africa and any area that was touched by the do gooders.
Irony however is, Christianity felt the same onslaught first at the hands of the "freedom givers" who wish to enslave us all, before Christianity was allowed (after fully in their control) to pry other nations, religions and people apart. I hear John Paul the Second and his current assistant are now agents for change too. The Protestants were already on their side all along.
Divide and rule until you are subdued is the general rule. Most people are too selfish or self centered to look beyond their immediate selfishness, so there is no cure in the works in any case. India will do the same and has done it, if its interests were looked at from the British prism.
Irony is by the time Nehru in his last days figured out the whole set-up, when China attacked India, it was too late. But for figuring out the whole thing and not playing along, he, Indira Gandhi and her two sons paid a terrible price. Bhutto on the other side faced the same problem, so did several of the Prime Ministers and rulers of Pakistan.
Now we have another apeaser in General Musharraf who has learnt from Ayoub Khan's lessons who wrote "Friends, Not Masters" and paid a price to be shown who is the boss.
It is all ironic that even today most people are so focussed on the benefits they can gain as a nation, religion or race that no one sees humanity as theirs!!
Iraq is being raped and pillaged, but India makes deals with the rapist. Chechniya is being destroyed, and everyone just watches on and makes deals with Russia (including Iran). Every nation is on their own in supporting the abuse of others, so everyone should pay a price perhaps.
Until humanity rises as one, things will not and can not change. And, that is not about to happen in any case.
Don't you think?
2006-10-07 20:11:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by NQV 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
<> Christianity is in each and every united states in the international; not regularly in basic terms a white guy's faith! you're the guy who labels it as such, no longer Christians typically. <> The time period "Christian" stems from "Christus" it quite is Greek for the Hebrew time period 'Messiah'. The Israelites of Palestine were middle jap, extra olive-skinned than African black. <> no longer each and every thing. a lot of it takes position in Asia. <> that's no longer your faith. that's the international's faith. <> Catholic Christianity is what it meant to be practiced. selfish a lot? Christianity isn't only for one race yet all races.
2016-12-04 09:43:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Affirmative Action is closer than Christianity.
2006-10-07 20:10:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋