Cardiff University Christian Union is holding events throughout this week.
Every day apart from Wednesday there will be a talk in Buffers by the Kitchen on the second floor of the Students’ Union at 1.15pm, covering topics such as science and religion, and whether there’s a God in Haiti given the recent earthquake.
There will also be a variety of evening events through the week at 7.30pm, including a jazz cafe in CF10 on Monday, an international night in Milgi’s on Tuesday, and a LoveFilm event in the Bioscience cafe on Friday.
All students are welcome to any of the events, religious or not, and they’re all free. For more information visit www.cardiffcu.org or phone 07532002482.
1. Adam Troth
Will the Christian Union be following its lead from when I was at Cardiff, when it lead a leaflet campaign outside the Union condemning 95% of us to burn for all eternity in Hell? I believe they also protested on the corner by the Law building, highlighting the moral corruption of women wearing miniskirts and drinking Bacardi Breezers.
2. Liam Lord
with a special lecture by Cardiff Uniersity Christian Union:
‘How to best love your neighbour whilst they burn in hell for all eternity’
Tea and Cakes provided.
3. Jonathan
I feel your pain gentlemen, however I don’t recognise your protraly of my friends in CU. Those Christian students who distrubute bottles of water and flip flops to Union club nigh goers, seem to be following the true non-judgement lead of Jesus.
4. Adam Troth
Jonathan, the events and observations I describe are actual events which I witnessed while a student at Cardiff. These were carried out under the banner of CUCU, and showed anything but the non-judgmental lead of Jesus (who I agree was a good role model).
Maybe your friends at the Christian Union are not the sort of people who would behave in the manner I described above, but some of the Christian Union activities in the recent past have been anything but welcoming or tolerant. If there is a God, you would think he would have better things to preoccupy himself with than whether or not girls are wearing skirts above the knee.
5. Liam Lord
Jonathan,
Whilst I don’t doubt that many of your friends at CU are fine people, do you really not recognise the portrayal at all? No-one?
My comment was meant to jokingly highlight the disparity between the friendly approach of the CU and the dire message inherent in the teachings. Though to be fair, whilst they’ve warned me of hell, they’ve never once offered me cakes. They must be moderates ;)
6. Jonathan
Well CUCU is large. I couldn’t possibly know all of them. Oddballs are extremists are in every large club, soc, party..etc. Is there Dire message inherent in their teaching. On the subject of hell, it as a place of fire, punishment, and Satan with horns and pointed tail has less to do with the Bible than Zoroastrism.
7. Liam Lord
Jonathan, Of course you don’t know all the members, if the group is sufficiently large. However, do you not recognise anyone in the parody above?
As for the dire message inherent in the teaching, that’s IMO undeniable. I’m interested to know what you think hell is and where you got that idea from though.
As for the bible’s description of hell let’s see- I do apologise for this, the Internet is hardly short on Bible quotes…-
Fire: Matt 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Luke 16:22-24 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Revelation 20:14-15 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
I think we’ve got punishment covered with fire, but anyway: Punishment:
Matt 11:23 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 11:24 But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
Matt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
As for Satan/The Devil:
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison
followed by…
20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
So, fire, punishment and Satan are all in the biblical description of Hell. I kept it to the New Testament teachings as well.
That’s said, the Revelations extracts are up to wide interpretation. The first lot are fairly undeniable.
Going back to the previous question, had you read these biblical descriptions of Hell before, Jonathan? If not, what do you think of them? You seem to have a very different idea of Hell to the one Jesus describes.
8. Jonathan
I’m sincerly impressed. I would say many members of the churches, couldn’t do that. The translation you use, makes a common mistakes. Everlasting “Punnishment” the greek is more like cutting-off, distruction. the text of the Rev 20:10 was glossed in the byzantine period.
Notice Death and hell are cast into the fire. Not people, the personification of death is biblical. It refers to the destruction of death, thats is the end of death. People, living forever.
The Luke passage is a parable. An example story given to pharisees, who were also infulenced by zoroastrism believd in such a hell. The saducess didn’t.
Jesus would have used the word sheol not hell. Sheol is talked about as being a place of no thought, activity, knowege etc.. indeed compare to sleep. Bare in mind not all passages were ment to be taken literally. Sorry, I have to go.
9. Liam Lord
Jonathan,
Thank you for the compliment. Could you also answer the questions put to you in my last post please.
It’s unfortunate that you have to go. I would like sources for your explanations -could you say to which passage each refers, to keep things clear? I find in discussion with religious people that there can be a lot of unhelpful vagueness in references to scripture that doesn’t match the specific claims they make.
I’m not convinced by your explanations i’m afraid. It would help if you specifically addressed the passages, but they seem very clear to me: Those who do not please God/Jesus will go to hell. In Hell there is fire and torment. The Devil is also there as punishment.
As for the Luke parable, I see nothing to suggest that this is not the real hell. As a special mention- saying not all passages are meant to be taken literally is fine, but this is often a fig leaf for ignoring what they say. If the descriptions are not literal, what are they metaphors for? Why use elaborate descriptions of fire and torture when it jars severely with the interpretation you give of ‘no thought, activity’?
I appreciate the reply, but without further explanation and specific answers, it’s not convincing.
10. Jonathan
Ok, Liam I get back to you. I’m going to an interfaith event tonight. Tomrow I’m going to a coference. Monday is the earlist I can do sorry.
11. Lianne Wilson
Adam: Jesus was a good role model? Really??
12. Adam Troth
Lianne, I said that Jesus was a “good” role model. Not exactly perfect, but compared with everyone else in the Bible, he was good. Now I expect you to intelligently cite several passages which show what a colossal prick the Messiah was…
13. Liam Lord
...which are of course always welcome and a good giggle.
Jesus is the chap who introduces Hell to everyone, after all. At least you could RIP in the Old Testament.
14. Rhys
Adam
(May i take you up on your challenge?)
Jesus was a crap role model, his main message wasn’t peace and love, but to sell all your thing and just follow him, sell everything you have, until you have just the clothes on your back and just follow him, sell everything and give to the poor. That’s something which only a mad man would say, the whole “do on to others as they would have do on to you” pre-dates Jesus time by about 1000 years. Most think that the new testament is much better than the old, mainly because all the genocide has stopped, but there is no hell in the old testament, it’s only when Jesus comes does the idea of the torture of the dead appears. Do you really want to say that’s a good role model? There is also no accurate account of Jesus life, there no other texts which reference Jesus outside the bible, which is dated 40 years after Jesus death, there where many people claiming to be the messiah around at that time, there is no reason to believe that is man existed.
15. Lianne Wilson
Adam: Well, personally I’ve always found the bit (Luke 2) where he runs off without his parent’s permission or even letting them know and sits in the temple at Jerusalem as they leave to go back home and then bitches when they ask why he’d acted that way a bit rich. That and I’ve always disapproved of the bit where he goes mental at the money changers and merchants in the temple and turns their stuff upside down and threatens them out of the temple. That is hardly polite, rational behaviour.
In a similar way to Rhys, I question some of the bits about owning possessions. For example, Matthew 25:29-30: “For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.”
There’s also the bit (Matthew 26:6-13) where the disciples ask why a woman has just wasted very expensive perfume by pouring it over his head when it could have been sold and the money used to feed the poor. Jesus says “She has done a beautiful thing to me. The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.” So he essentially allows some of the poor to continue to starve when they could have been given food and water all so that he could be pampered. And he doesn’t even seem to care.
But, perhaps my favourite Jesus-is-a-dick bit is in Matthew 10:34-39: “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law – a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”
Lastly, there’s of course the fact that he’s in league with, and technically an aspect of, God, who we all know is a big bastard in the Bible. Jesus is of course quite happy to teach the way of his father even though it is hypocritical and in many places harmful and immoral.
16. Terrtulian
Since when is reducing any human being to his or her sexual organs, been acceptable. Or is there a moral worth difference between dicks and C*s?
17. Liam Lord
No, no Jontulian!
Remember, in this thread you’re Jonathan, it’s the ‘Mind your own…’ thread where you’re Tertulian. Don’t get your sock puppets mixed up, or you’ll look like a total bell end! After all, you don’t want to ruin the high opinion you’ve cultivated here by posting well considered, consistent and pleasantly phrased coherent arguments and answering thoughtfully questions put to you. Oh… nevermind.
/trollface
18. Adam Troth
On the face of the evidence presented, it looks like I will have to swot up on my Bible a lot more! You guys have certainly put forward a very convincing case for Jesus being somewhat dubious at best, and a Grade A Cunt at worst.
19. Lianne Wilson
Terrtonathan: Eh? What on Earth has that comment got to do with anything? I’m going to assuuuuume, simply because my comment had the word dick in, that you’re talking to me. Though to be honest I’m still confused as to what the hell you mean.
Dick is also an insult and a description of someone who acts in a way one disapproves of, usually describing someone arrogant, cruel or who screws people over, among other things. It’s not just a body part.
And no, I’ll happily call Jesus a cunt too.
In any case, you don’t seem to have actually attempted to make any defence of your supposed saviour at all, besides that baffling post. As a Christian, can’t you easily tell me why I’m wrong in my post above?
I should hope so or you may as well hang up the Bible now and get in the sin boat with the rest of us science-worshippers. It’ll be fun, we’re off to roast a baby and give Richard Dawkins a shoulder massage!
20. Liam Lord
Lianne: I think that’s what Jonterrliathan meant. Don’t expect a coherent comment from a cretin who can’t even remember which sock puppet goes with which thread.
I even suspect that Jack Dance was him. He turned up, made an incorrect, mispelled comment then was never seen again. Is it paranoia? I’m seeing Jonathan’s sock puppets everywhere- I think he even appeared on my cheese toastie!
21. Lianne Wilson
Liam: Well, I did think Jack Dance had a rather ‘Bill Door’ sort of quality to it…
22. Tertulitan
My post should be clear to most. Anyway, I will spell it out and check for typos which might be much for you.
Calling anyone a dick- Lianne did earlier calling Jesus a dick, OR prick Liam, when did that become acceptable. If so is ok to call someone a WOMAN Cunt?
23. Jonathan
“Dick is also an insult and a description of someone who acts in a way one disapproves of, usually describing someone arrogant, cruel or who screws people over, among other things” oh not sexist at all then, I’m reassured that’s how you view men, not! (that was Irony with a contradiction showing the real meaning left to the end)
24. Tertulian
Matthew 7:6, also why most of the Christians here, ignore your posts.
25. Liam Lord
Oddly no matter how small your barrel gets, shooting fish is still fun…
What a fun choice of biblical passage. You’re too smart for us, that’s it right? What an odd choice given the preceding verse:
Matt 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
You’ve not managed to answer the questions put to you earlier either, have voiced idiotic opinions in every thread you’ve written in and continue to play your cuntish sock puppet game, ineptly I might add. You have no basis for questioning our intelligence.
As for why most Christians haven’t answered, I thought it’s likely due to less than 10% reading their bibles at all and fewer having put actual thought into it, as opposed to just turning up for an xmas service once a year.
Lianne, Rhys and I have all put a clear case together. You’ve simply said “you’re to stupid to understand”.
I’d repeat my alliterative invective at you, but what’s the point? You’ll find it up there in previous posts, alongside the arguments you’ve failed to rebutt and the questions you’ve failed to answer.
26. Lianne Wilson
Terrnathan: Haven’t I already answered that? “And no, I’ll happily call Jesus a cunt too.” See? There it is in black and white. I am perfectly fine calling people cunts and in fact had a bit at one friend the other day for using the ridiculous ‘see you next Tuesday’ instead of just coming out and saying it. Personally, I think it’s a great word.
Er, no, it’s not sexist. I see the word cunt to mean exactly the same thing, though if anything it’s stronger. Quote “reassured that’s how you view men”? Oh dear, oh dear, Jonulian, are you trying to paint me as a misandrist? Hahaha, that’s funny. Anyone I know, including Adam will be able to tell you that that’s not true. I can’t stand feminism and I personally like men much better than women. I just get on better with them. Further, you don’t remember me on the non-misandrist side in the debate about The Lash posters? Tut tut. Nice try, but perhaps you shouldn’t resort to wild lunges that turn out to be baseless.
I mean, really. If you’re going to use stupid logic like that above then I may as well call you a misogynist for calling me a dog and a pig (Matthew 7:6). Luckily, I’m not that idiotic.
Now that I mention Matthew 7:6, well done. It almost looks like you can call on that to defend you. But wait! What’s that? It turns out the Bible is pretty keen on you explaining your faith to others, no matter how dog-like: “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15).
Would you like to hear some more reasons from the supposed mouth of your own lord as to why you should be defending Jesus’s name? How about “Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go home to thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on thee.” (Mark 5:19)?
What about “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matthew 28:19-20)? Or even “O sing unto the LORD a new song: sing unto the LORD, all the earth. Sing unto the LORD, bless his name; shew forth his salvation from day to day. Declare his glory among the heathen, his wonders among all people.” (Pslam 96:1-3)?
Or, perhaps the most tempting: “Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” (James 5:20).
Oh look, seems I can do this “quote the Bible” game too and it seems I’m better at it.
27. Rachelle
Considering this is quite an unremarkable article and just a kind of notice to interested parties…I can’t help wondering of GR have put this so far up the home page just because they know they can get easily riled people to have a massive comment war boosting hits&comment stats!
Not that I’d blame them, it’s a sensible thing to do!
28. Dictionary.com
Dick (dĭk) n. Vulgar A person, especially a man, regarded as mean or contemptible.
Cunt (kŭnt) n. Vulgar Slang a. (Offensive) Used as a disparaging term for a woman. b. Used as a disparaging term for a person one dislikes or finds extremely disagreeable.
So using the word dick to describe a man is a perfectly acceptable use for the word, whereas cunt can sometimes refer only to woman.
I’d agree with Lianne’s comment in post 26 that cunt is a stronger insult than dick, if nothing else the sound of the word itself lends itself to stronger emphasis
29. Lianne Wilson
I just went with dick because I felt like it. I didn’t quite feel grrr enough for anything stronger. The gender of it didn’t even occur to me, but then I’ll quite happily refer to women as ‘dicks’, men as ‘cunts’, both as ‘guys’ and myself as ‘the King of [Insert Something I am Awesome at Here]’.
Either way, thanks to whoever is behind the ‘dictionary.com’ comment. :)
30. Liam Lord
Agreed Lianne, sometimes you want go with dick, sometimes you want to go with cunt. We can all relate to that.
Although not necessary (we are the ones answering all the questions here), I suppose it’s not harmful to state that we can use a word with one accepted meaning without endorsing another. Were we to call Jonerrtull a bastard, we wouldn’t be required to despise those born out of wedlock. Lianne, you can write convenient in Japanese without being sexist, ne?
31. Emma Jones
Rachelle: No strategy involved in posting this notice so far up the home page – I work backwards through the newspaper posting articles on the website and it just so happens that this notice was quite near the front. Great debate though!
32. Ed
Why on earth has an advert for a series of – it would seem good natured – events spark such a large amount of debate on the nature of religion? You guys need a hobby.
33. Haha
“Agreed Lianne, sometimes you want go with dick, sometimes you want to go with cunt. We can all relate to that” that’s more about your personel life, than I wish to know.
34. Tertullian
To answer Ed’s question 3 inferority complexes and the lack of sufficently fulfilling employement in the two alumni cases. (Liam and Adam, aren’t students here anymore)
35. Lianne Wilson
Liam: Hai, sou desu ne!
Ed: Why not? It’s harmless, brain-stimulating and quite fun. Although if you pay attention you’ll note it was something Adam said related to the article, not the article itself. That I have no real problem with.
Tertullian: Stop trying to psychoanalyse me, sweetcakes, it’s not working.
36. Liam Lord
Lianne: So desu. Sore wa chotto ecchi desu ga… mada kokkei dakara kakitta! ;)
Ed: You’re right, a couple of jokes questioning the ‘good nature’ of the events snowballed. It would have been shortrer but getting answers out of our resident Chisto-troll Jonathan/Tertullian/Terrtulian takes longer than empyting the aegean stables teaspoonfull by teaspoonful – and leaves a similar taste in the mouth.