PDA

View Full Version : Why is it OK to criticize religion (i.e. Christianity)?


Pages : [1] 2

mr116
07-04-2003, 02:06 AM
Before any of this begins, I'd like to try and keep things rational in this post, if you would please...

With that said:

As I browsed the boards this evening, I find a very interesting double standard: Non-Christians harass Christians about not being accepting, but then they try their very hardest to debunk Christianity.
Why is this the case? We (yes, we) as Christians believe in the Bible as the absolute law... why do you not accept this?
In a below post regarding homosexuality, people are being torn up for disagreeing and using the Bible as cause for the disagreement. Homosexuals aren't riddiculed for being what they are... but Christians are.

You beg us, please be accepting of others thoughts and ideas... I beg you, please respect our beliefs, and don't assume that we are close-minded biggots simply because of our beliefs, it is simply that some of us do not compromise values that we hold important to us.
[Let me elaborate on the last sentance: I don't say that you don't, I'm not implying anything, just stating one of the bases of Christian beliefs]

Thank you
Mr116

TheJackal
07-04-2003, 02:32 AM
I dont bash Christianity since on paper i AM Christian. But I dont fallow any of it.

Christianity is fine if its peacefull. However the problem some of us have with this religious is that its too dominative in North America. The Pope doesnt allow people to use anti-contreceptive pills, why not? Christianity has abused power for a long time. Notablity in Québec during colonisation of North America. The French Canadians (like me) were often opressed. Told what do to. Who to see. etc. telling people to get more children or be shuned by the community and forced out of the church.

The main idea is a great idea. just like budism and every other religion. Love. Peace. Acceptance.

However when it gets to the core its just as corrupted as modern corporations and politics. They force a lot of opinions on people. When the Supreme court in the States overrulled the anti-gay sex in Texas and a few other states, Priests and religious fallowers prayed and protested at the courts. Why? Because they feel they must inforce the code of the Bible on others that are not part of the religion.

Then a vast majority have the nerve to say at other religious what they are doing is wrong. Attacking jews, muslims, etc for thier difference in opinions. Attacking the Jehovah's' Witnesses because they are too "hard core fanatics". Saying the the fact that muslims fallow their religion to the core of acting out jihad when the Catholic church had crusades that murdered thousands.

speaking of which. in the bible it says no sin can be pardoned. Then why did the pope, which is supposed to represent God, send murderers, thieves and rapists to the Crusades with promisses that if they are victors, all sins will be forgiven and a spot in heaven will be kept for them?

Its not that we are attacking DIRECTLY Chatholics all the time. It might seem that way to you because this is the strongest religion in the States, especially in the Southern States.

SkinWalker
07-04-2003, 02:46 AM
I can only speak for myself, but since I've been accused in the past of "bashing" christianity, I can tell you that I generally have sincere respect for other cultures and religions (christian or otherwise). In fact, I find many of them extremely fascinating.

Here, in this forum, however, christianity often gets thrown out like a wild card in a poker game. What I mean is, whenever a serious topic comes up about "homosexuality," "the death penalty," "genetics," or philosphy in general, someone always seems to subvert or hijack the discussion to relate it to a narrow measure of christian values.

Christianity is by no means the only faith in the world and is only viewed as valid by christians.

One can only be willing to humor this phenomena for so long before it becomes readily apparent that the only way to continue the discussion is to oppose this viewpoint along with others.

Also, this is a branch of the LucasForums where serious discussion is encouraged, and, thus, draws the more intellectual and philosophical of LF along with the theological.

In many of the circles I move in during my day-to-day life, there are friends and associates who are religious (most christian, some muslim and hindi). However, there are also many circles I associate with that the members are typically more intellectual and less religious. Most scientists and budding scientist friends of mine are agnostic, as am I.

Again, speaking for myself, I usually don't initiate any controversy with regard to religion (unless it's April first), but I am more than willing to respond to a post that cites a religious point where I disagree. This is because, from my perspective, there is a certain measure of hypocrisy associated with christianity. It seems a bit pompus to go about life attempting to change others to fit your belief system while proclaiming their own invalid. I'm not trying to suggest that you, personally do this, but this is the business of most religions, not just christianity.

Now I realize that most christians who read this post will immediately think to say, "but agnostic, scientist types also try to impose their beliefs upon others." I cannot deny that I wish everyone would believe in the value of critical thinking and skeptical reasoning with regard to life, education, and things spiritual. But there is a difference in that the agnostic approach is always open to improvement on the way we view life and its history. There are no certainties, no evidence is 100% convincing, and everyone is welcome to a hypothesis as long as they're willing to have it ruthlessly scrutinized.

By engaging in conversation with one such person, you unwittingly agree to this. Don't take it personal. Your ideas might be ruthlessly examined ('attacked' if you will), but if anyone attacks you directly, let me or C'jais know. It's likely that we'll catch it, though.

So.... did that answer your question? At least partially?

One last thing... there is a thread that was moved here from the Swamp in which you will note some very personal attacks. One person was banned, another warned (both should have been banned or neither, but that was taken care of elswhere). Their comments still stand, however, as an example of what not to do. Those comments are also very telling of both of their characters.

mr116
07-04-2003, 03:18 AM
Ok, if the topics I address below seem vague, I'm sorry, but I don't like to quote people, that tends to open up meticulous nitpickings of grammar usage and the like, and can sometimes fully destroy a point.

I'm afraid I have to disagree to an extent about the core of Christianity being compassion and acceptance. Don't get me wrong, both very important things, but the focus behind Christianity is to love and worship the Creator our God, and be redeemed from our sins through Jesus Christ. **Sorry, I understand many are rolling eyes right now, but as that is the main focus, I feel that it should be elaborated upon**

Skinwalker, I agree with you fully about wishing everyone would take an open-minded stance on things. I personally feel that if you should have to follow it blindly, then that truly is whistling in the dark. However, by scientific means (and other, less concrete means) I have personally concluded that there is an Intelligent Creator, and so on from there.

I wish people could and would evaluate their faith, if they claim to be Christians, because if there really is a God, then there should be enough evidence to prove that to yourself.

I understand that people, when they think of Christians, think of worldly establishments that try to interpret the Bible and make masses follow their interpretations, i.e. the Catholic Church. While that might be the largest sect of Christianity, it is not the definitive, which is why I believe many terrible things were done in the name of the church and of God, such as the Crusades. That was a blatent misuse of power, but I can't understand why that is chosen to depict Christianity in general, of its shortcomings.

Skinwalker, I also agree about the arrogance of some, but I truly have to stress, the points hammered are often represented by people who don't truly represent Christ, just as you don't judge a race by one person, or even a group of people.

I understand the 'wildcard' remark, but it stands that people who have Christian beliefs let it influence all their lives, that's part of it. Again, I concede that the Bible is only valid by Christians, but that's where it is justified from for us. I also agree that it is a pity that members of other religions, such as Hindi or Muslim, don't get the chance for whatever reason to express their beliefs here, I believe that would give more perspective, and also take pressure off Christianity being the only non-fully tangible source.
Again, I have to reiterate that even in an intelligent debate, theology will have to play in somewhere, so long as there is someone who can put it out there, and can support it.

About the technicalities of my term 'bashing', I simply meant the unwillingness to accept it under any circumstance, regarding it as complete nonsense, merely because it is theology, and the many repeated attempts to show the flaws therein.

RoguePhotonic
07-04-2003, 03:32 AM
Well the big difference is you choose to believe in a religon...gays do not choose to be gay...they just are....

SkinWalker
07-04-2003, 03:58 AM
Your post was well said.

Originally posted by mr116
About the technicalities of my term 'bashing', I simply meant the unwillingness to accept it under any circumstance, regarding it as complete nonsense, merely because it is theology, and the many repeated attempts to show the flaws therein.

Actually, I prefer a different reason as to the unwillingness to accept mainstream religion: the inability to test it.

I've been involved, lately, in educating myself about some of the more interesting research of late regarding the brain. There is much going on that is finding reasons for various syndromes such as senseasthesia (my spelling on this term is likely incorrect), mental illnesses, and various conditions brought on by injury or stroke.

In doing the research, the researchers could easily have chalked up some of the whys to God. In their perspectives, however, god is an untestable hypothesis, so they throw it out and look at other hypotheses. And its in this that they find answers that allow for further discovery.

I don't discount the influence of god, I just don't apply a very high probability to it as it goes against common sense. That sense, of course, isn't common among believers.

My interest in the brain and consciousness, by the way, is part of a paper I'm attempting to write on Why People Belive. Not just in religion, but UFOs, parapsychology, divination, astrology, and a host of other unsubstantiated ideas. From my perspective, I see little difference when comparing theology to astrology. Both, for instance, depend upon unverifiable documents that guide the practitioner. I see the differences, but the similarities that I see are significant.

The Count
07-04-2003, 08:15 AM
I refuse to follow an organisation that is incompassionate and inflexible and as contradictory as Christianty, they have so many double standards its laughable.

Jah Warrior
07-04-2003, 09:56 AM
Yup, if we are talking about double standards then why is it ok for the church to dictate to us what is right and wrong and yet it un acceptable to point out that the church is wrong?

Freedom of speech as long as you agree eh?

withe each passing day the existence of god becomes less and less likely as far as i'm concerned, and as such i would say the loch ness monster is probably more of a reality than god.

I've never see one iota of scientific proof that god is real. Basically god and gods were invented to explain things that could not be explained through reasoning and/or science. We now know how the universe started thanks to science and god is not even mentioned. Q.E.D.

The other problem is that religion is used as an excuse to treat people badly under the pretence of carrying out god's word.

obi
07-04-2003, 10:36 AM
I applaud you, mr116. I too have wondered this for some time, but it occured to me that even in the Bible it states that we will be ridiculed beyond belief for being a christian. I mean, look what they did to Jesus. :\

Jah Warrior
07-04-2003, 10:46 AM
well remember this when i mock christianity:-

Turn the other cheek ;) LOL

The Count
07-04-2003, 11:55 AM
Christianity: Human Life is sacred.

Christianity: Pregnant women can't have abortions it is immoral even if it is to save their own life.

Christianity: Love Thy Neighbour

Christianity: Kill All Gays because they are Gay.


I could go on but I won't.

Homuncul
07-04-2003, 12:04 PM
I wonder then after all what faith is? I mean it's not that I can't understand that personal fate is unquestionable but how does it work physically? What happens in human brain that makes it stick with one idea and protect it no matter how good it is refuted? And then what happens to the uncertainty that every human know to be the bigger part of his life (not even bigger but whole)?

TheJackal
07-04-2003, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by mr116
O...I don't like to quote people, that tends to open up meticulous nitpickings of grammar usage ...

i have a feeling you are talking about me. if you aren't then... woohoo for me... but if you are. dammit who cares if i have bad grammar. english isnt my first language! And if you ask me its pretty damn good considering that fact!

now back to the christian bashing debate:

I have to agree with SkinWalker on the forum issue. There is a lot of references and wild cards thrown around by catholics, especially in that homosexuality thread.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 12:30 PM
Christianity to me is merely a crutch for the weak, a tool for the manipulative and an excuse for the vile. I cannot love God nor can I hate him, for he is like us without guilt. I can only hope to convince him of the error of his way, and failing that quest for his utter destruction.

His followers are ignorant, naïve sheep and by far the most of these are hypocritical, arrogant buffoons like those representing themselves in this thread.

Eternity in any state can only bring insanity.

I cannot bring myself to discuss this rationally for my loathing is too great.

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 12:36 PM
Christianity: Kill All Gays because they are Gay.

IT NEVER SAYS TO KILL GAYS!!!!! Name one place in the Bible that it says to kill gay people? In fact Jesus hung around the most sinful people in there time(prostitutes,tax collectors, gays).

In fact in the Bible Jesus saves a women from being stoned by men because she slepped with another man other than her husband. You cant say that he hates other non0christians.

Homuncul
07-04-2003, 12:41 PM
I cannot love God nor can I hate him, for he is like us without guilt. I can only hope to convince him of the error of his way, and failing that quest for his utter destruction

I think neither you nor christians really understand his way. I guess everyone can only possess personal god and not ultimate. And his way therefore is only seen through the angle of our subjectiveness. God's not Bible, nor science, it's much more complicated than that. If I could I would invent a new word for it. If I could I would understand him.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by Homuncul
I think neither you nor christians really understand his way. I guess everyone can only possess personal god and not ultimate. And his way therefore is only seen through the angle of our subjectiveness. God's not Bible, nor science, it's much more complicated than that. If I could I would invent a new word for it. If I could I would understand him.

I can offer this word: Faith.

obi
07-04-2003, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus

His followers are ignorant, naïve sheep and by far the most of these are hypocritical, arrogant buffoons like those representing themselves in this thread.


Well excuse me for breathing, mr. perfect. How dare you. How dare you come here and tell me christians are ignorant and naive. Do you have any idea how smart I am? I'm sure you don't, do don't you dare mock me for being a christian.

This is exactly why I am leaving the senate chambers. You call us christians hypocrits, yet everyone here believes in stating opinions and not bashing someone for having an opinion, yet in almost every instance, christians get bashed by these SAME people simply because they are christian. You sir, tell me who is the hypocrit.

Homuncul
07-04-2003, 12:55 PM
Not faith. I would believe god is a fish can if I was appropriately explained why and how it is so. And faith is a stagnation, it's limited, it has nothing to do with perceiving anything (whether god or anything).

El Sitherino
07-04-2003, 12:56 PM
i don't particularly bash christianity unless it's proven that a certain denomination is ignorant like the denomination known as southern baptist. they used the bible to prove slaves were the wish of god. these are the christians i detest. now if the person is nice and accepting of times i will enjoy their company such as obi-wan13 he's a very kind man. we may have different views on things but he accepts that and doesn't rub the "your going to hell" thing.

i think that if there was a god he'd be a cactus. wanna know why? cuz cactus' don't give a s**t. they just accept what's going on and just go with the flow. they got no wonder, no biggie.

Lord Siraious
07-04-2003, 01:01 PM
Question: TheJackal when you say catholics are you referring to the whole of christianty or just the Catholics?

Where do i begin. Well yes it does seem that Christians are getting a fair bit of stick. From some of the arguements i've finally had the chance to read in the anti-homosexual thread it is well deserved critism in places!

I think the main proble however is that some Christians (This applies to ALL other organised religions as well) are not prepared to sit and think through why they follow their repective bibles. Some are blindly following with out questioning! This IS ALWAYS DANGEROUS!!!! Why because it allows the blind followers to be mislead by the preachers and religious leaders instead of thinking for themselves and self-intrepreing the bible and doing as they believe is correct.

I bet now you would like to know my faith. Well I do not follow the organised religions any more I turn my back on them years ago. Why because everyone of them without exception (as far as i know) are corupted one way or another. I do believe in a surpreme power, God as you will. But the way I see it as it is easier to thing of the surpreme power as a "force" but i call it the universe, that binds everything together and is beyond such a thing as good or evil. I do follow a majority of Christian values and morals as well. Anyway I digess to much.

So basically all those Christians out there that believe they are being unfairly attacked your not its just that people are "asking" why do you believe that. My advice is to answer their question. :)


Yes I have edited it Note to posters i may be a good idea to not post arguement when sleepy!!!!!!!

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
i don't particularly bash christianity unless it's proven that a certain denomination is ignorant like the denomination known as southern baptist. they used the bible to prove slaves were the wish of god. these are the christians i detest. now if the person is nice and accepting of times i will enjoy their company such as obi-wan13 he's a very kind man. we may have different views on things but he accepts that and doesn't rub the "your going to hell" thing.


I would never rub the your going to hell thing into someone that is just as much a sin as anything else. And Insane you know that are views are extremely different in most cases but you are one of the nicest guys here, you dont bash anything to do with christianity the moment you see it.

Ray Jones
07-04-2003, 01:03 PM
1st) christians BURNED people for certain reasons. ONE is that they SAID the EARTH is a SPHERE.
2nd) they refused to accept this up to the 20th century.

3rd) CHRISTIANS KILL AND HAVE KILLED TO SPREAD THEIR BELIEFS!

nothing furthermore needed to say to that except perhabs:

If you are carrying a cross and step to a foe with it and hit him with it, then you are not longer carrying a cross. YOU CARRY A WEAPON.

Homuncul
07-04-2003, 01:04 PM
This is exactly why I am leaving the senate chambers. You call us christians hypocrits, yet everyone here believes in stating opinions and not bashing someone for having an opinion, yet in almost every instance, christians get bashed by these SAME people simply because they are christian. You sir, tell me who is the hypocrit.

Please don't just leave SC. I'm sure Jub's got pretty an argument why he thinks so. Not bashing. You're just defending yourself for not having anything valid to justify christians. For that many like to generelize people as hypocrit christians. I don't do so. But since this thread is for seriouss discussions it would, I would very much like to see how Jub's been refuted as I have keeping it as an oath to do so sometime

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Lord Siraious
[COLOR=limegreen]Question: TheJackal when you say catholics are you referring to the whole of christianty or just the Catholics?

Where do i begin. Well yes it does seem that Christians are getting a fair bit of stick. Deal with it. From some of the arguements i've finally had the chance to read in the anti-homosexual thread it is well deserved critism in places!
COLOR]

How dare you tell me to deal with it. You are making it sound that we are below you and are naive ignorant welps. I do not have to deal with it from you.
In your view homosexuals get bashed they should deal with it. Blacks get bashed they should deal with it. You are a true hypocrite.



1st) christians BURNED people for certain reasons. ONE is that they SAID the EARTH is a SPHERE.
2nd) they refused to accept this up to the 20th century.

3rd) CHRISTIANS KILL AND HAVE KILLED TO SPREAD THEIR BELIEFS!


America is a christian dominated country and we allow people of other religions to live here and practice there beliefs.

But In Muslim countries, christians are persecuted and killed for spreading there beliefs so dont say that we are closeminded religion.

The Count
07-04-2003, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
Christianity to me is merely a crutch for the weak, a tool for the manipulative and an excuse for the vile. I cannot love God nor can I hate him, for he is like us without guilt. I can only hope to convince him of the error of his way, and failing that quest for his utter destruction.

His followers are ignorant, naïve sheep and by far the most of these are hypocritical, arrogant buffoons like those representing themselves in this thread.

Eternity in any state can only bring insanity.

I cannot bring myself to discuss this rationally for my loathing is too great.

My aren't we arrogant we see ourselves as able to tell God what is right and wrong.

The Count
07-04-2003, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by obi-wan13
Well excuse me for breathing, mr. perfect. How dare you. How dare you come here and tell me christians are ignorant and naive. Do you have any idea how smart I am? I'm sure you don't, do don't you dare mock me for being a christian.

This is exactly why I am leaving the senate chambers. You call us christians hypocrits, yet everyone here believes in stating opinions and not bashing someone for having an opinion, yet in almost every instance, christians get bashed by these SAME people simply because they are christian. You sir, tell me who is the hypocrit.


If you are going to announce how intelligent you are then please learn how to spell hypocrite, and fiancee.

* attacking someone's spelling/typing amounts to nothing more than an ad hominim attack, which is against the rules. not to mention that this type of post is off-topic an pointless to the discussion. --- Skin

* Well if he is going to boast about how intelligent he is, he might aswell spell correctly, I mean were Charles Darwin's books full of spelling mistakes? I personally think when he says look how clever I am, that he should be able to spell simple words, so this was undermining his argument which has to do with the thread of how clever he is --- Murphy

Lord Siraious
07-04-2003, 01:16 PM
ooops sorry Thracken that did sound like that my apoligees that wasnt my intention give me a few minute to reword (its late here and I've had a busy day I'm just typing and editing without proof reading. It was original to a particular persons response but then I re=ad the person's response and it was not need anyway It will be re check and edit in a few mins

The Count
07-04-2003, 01:17 PM
I don't know if God exists or not however religion particularly Christianity is despicable, their incompassionate inflexibility is despicable.

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by Lord Siraious
ooops sorry Thracken that did sound like that my apoligees that wasnt my intention give me a few minute to reword (its late here and I've had a busy day I'm just typing and editing without proof reading. It was original to a particular persons response but then I re=ad the person's response and it was not need anyway It will be re check and edit in a few mins

Its ok I know who and what you are talking about.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by obi-wan13
Well excuse me for breathing, mr. perfect. How dare you. How dare you come here and tell me christians are ignorant and naive. Do you have any idea how smart I am? I'm sure you don't, do don't you dare mock me for being a christian.

This is exactly why I am leaving the senate chambers. You call us christians hypocrits, yet everyone here believes in stating opinions and not bashing someone for having an opinion, yet in almost every instance, christians get bashed by these SAME people simply because they are christian. You sir, tell me who is the hypocrit.

How dare I? I dare.

I suppose I'm to be intimidated and humbled by your delusional 'righteous wrath', yes? I don't know how smart you are, but I have a pretty good idea of how smart you aren't.

I'm not bashing you for your oppinions, I'm bashing you for your naïve weakness. My only hypocrisy is existing.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by Homuncul
Not faith. I would believe god is a fish can if I was appropriately explained why and how it is so. And faith is a stagnation, it's limited, it has nothing to do with perceiving anything (whether god or anything).

Then we have yet again misunderstood eachother. Thought you had faith in science.

Originally posted by Homuncul
....I would very much like to see how Jub's been refuted as I have keeping it as an oath to do so sometime

And you have yet to succeed.

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
How dare I? I dare.

I suppose I'm to be intimidated and humbled by your delusional 'righteous wrath', yes? I don't know how smart you are, but I have a pretty good idea of how smart you aren't.

I'm not bashing you for your oppinions, I'm bashing you for your naﶥ weakness. My only hypocrisy is existing.

MAN! Righ now I am too angry to type a decent responce without getting banned:mad:

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by Darth Murphy
My aren't we arrogant we see ourselves as able to tell God what is right and wrong.

We were created in his image, yes? We did eat of the Tree of Knowledge, yes? Conclusively, God's capability of reasoning should not exceed ours.

The Count
07-04-2003, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
MAN! Righ now I am too angry to type a decent responce without getting banned:mad:


Even if you did it would be full of holes and contradictions so be glad you didn't.

The Count
07-04-2003, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
We were created in his image, yes? We did eat of the Tree of Knowledge, yes? Conclusively, God's capability of reasoning should not exceed ours.


Thats up to debate whether we are in his image, and that tree of knowledge is aload of crap, my theory as God is only escathologically verifiable so we don't know squat about God, and I don't think the divine would give a toss what you think. (I mean did you create the universe?)

Breton
07-04-2003, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
IT NEVER SAYS TO KILL GAYS!!!!! Name one place in the Bible that it says to kill gay people? In fact Jesus hung around the most sinful people in there time(prostitutes,tax collectors, gays).


Leviticus 20:13

Romans 1:31-32

Happy now? That's one more than you asked for.


Anyways. The problem with christians in debates isn't that they are christians, no one bothers very much about what they believe in. The problem is that they tend to view the Bible as the complete truth and use that in discussions, where their only real argument is "because the bible says so", wich, I'm afraid, is not a good argument in a serious debate

The Count
07-04-2003, 02:28 PM
Thank you Brenton I was going to point that out but was too lazy.

Luc Solar
07-04-2003, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
IT NEVER SAYS TO KILL GAYS!!!!! Name one place in the Bible that it says to kill gay people? In fact Jesus hung around the most sinful people in there time(prostitutes,tax collectors, gays).

In fact in the Bible Jesus saves a women from being stoned by men because she slepped with another man other than her husband. You cant say that he hates other non0christians.

Well, umm...lemme think.. oh yes:


Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Dunno about you, but to me that pretty much sounds like "kill all gays". :(

The problem with christians is that they can not take any criticism.
They can't discuss the subject but yet have a need to talk about it.

Everyone is supposed to listen to their stories about Jesus doing this and Jesus doing that, and everyone *must* believe this even though they can offer no proof whatsoever, even though there are 144.588 different religions out there who all represent "the truth".

The second a question is presented highlighting the oddities of christianity, christians feel insulted. Whenever someone criticizes their system of belief, they feel insulted. The arguments don't matter, 'cause a true believer won't listen to them. They're like stubborn children who plug their ears with their fingers and go "lalalalalala I won't listen to you LALALALALALALA!"

Then, once the arguments have been presented, a true believer disregards it all and starts from the beginning by saying "Jesus died for our sins and you are going to hell because the bible sais so".

And that's what makes debating with religious people (christian or whatever) hell. That's what insults me. Not only do they insult my intelligence by telling stuff I *know* is wrong and can *prove* is wrong, but they're also so thick headed that nothing you say make any difference. There is no way in hell anyone can get through to these people! :mad: (BTW - not talking about anyone here, no-one on Lucasforums is the kind of religious type I can't stand)

We have thousands of religions and gods in the world. Billions of religious people who all KNOW that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Does anyone else see a problem with this?

My advice: if you can't handle the debate, stay out of the debate.

I enjoy these debates quite a lot. I do believe that there's a possibility that god exists in one form or another. Does that make it impossible for me to see the absurdities of the bible? Of course not. I won't block stuff out just because it's a matter of "religion" or concerning a book called "the bible".

Everyone knows, that if you're right, you're right. The more people test the truth, the more certain it is that they'll see the truth too`and convert. Where's the harm?

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by Darth Murphy
Thats up to debate whether we are in his image, and that tree of knowledge is aload of crap, my theory as God is only escathologically verifiable so we don't know squat about God, and I don't think the divine would give a toss what you think. (I mean did you create the universe?)

Wow, this is filled with things to pick apart.

Foremost, I was abusing their case for argument, not arguing my case.

That we are created in his image and ate of the Tree of Knowledge is clearly stated; it's actually one of the centerpoints in Christianity, original sin.

If we know squat about God, then the Word of the bible is not to be trusted, yes?

I had to create the Universe for the divine to giving a toss about my thoughts? So, does or doesn't God judge on us our thoughts as well as our actions? Is speaking with God futile?

I'm sure the Christians will have a field day about this, thanks Murphy :)

The Count
07-04-2003, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
Wow, this is filled with things to pick apart.

Foremost, I was abusing their case for argument, not arguing my case.

That we are created in his image and ate of the Tree of Knowledge is clearly stated; it's actually one of the centerpoints in Christianity, original sin.

If we know squat about God, then the Word of the bible is not to be trusted, yes?

I had to create the Universe for the divine to giving a toss about my thoughts? So, does or doesn't God judge on us our thoughts as well as our actions? Is speaking with God futile?

I'm sure the Christians will have a field day about this, thanks Murphy :)

Yeah but I don't believe in Christianity as do many others so your tree of knowledge crap is up to debate. I personally believe in the theory of evolution and what Iranaeus stated we were born imperfect. (The irony he's a Christian I am aware of)

Yes the Bible isn't to be trusted because we don't know sqat about God, the Bible should be known as the book of contradictions not the book of Revelations.

No, but I doubt God would let you influence him because you're well insiginificant in comparrison to God, I have never heard of anything so ludicrous I'll influence God of the error of God's ways.

Speaking with God (if you believe you're doing that) isn't futile but you believing you can reason with him and influence him is.

I doubt the Christians will have a field day with this because what I havce stated basically means that God can exist without religion, if anything they'll have a wet weekend with it.

obi
07-04-2003, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus


I'm bashing you for your naïve weakness.
Which proves you are bashing. Don't. It's against the rules. I have NEVER told you that you are stupid, I have NEVER announced you will burn in hell, I have NEVER insulted your mother. I have done NOTHING to you. I believe in the Bible. That gives you the right to call me naive and weak? I believe the answer I am looking for is "no."

Now, if I see you calling anyone else weak or naive on these boards I'll ban you quicker then you can say "sorry." I do NOT Put up with ANY name calling on these boards for ANY reason. Got it, top cop?

SkinWalker
07-04-2003, 03:05 PM
The title of this thread was Why is it OK to bash Christianity?

The originator of the thread stated "I'd like to try and keep things rational in this post, if you would please..."

Moreover, the Senate Chambers is a place for serious discussion and reasoned debate.

Please note some of the following quotes of some randomly selected posts within this thread:


"His followers are ignorant, naïve sheep and by far the most of these are hypocritical, arrogant buffoons like those representing themselves in this thread."

"I cannot bring myself to discuss this rationally for my loathing is too great."

"don't you dare mock me for being a christian."

"If you are carrying a cross and step to a foe with it and hit him with it, then you are not longer carrying a cross. YOU CARRY A WEAPON."

"In your view homosexuals get bashed they should deal with it. Blacks get bashed they should deal with it. You are a true hypocrite."

" religion particularly Christianity is despicable, their incompassionate inflexibility is despicable."

"I suppose I'm to be intimidated and humbled by your delusional 'righteous wrath', yes? I don't know how smart you are, but I have a pretty good idea of how smart you aren't."

"MAN! Righ now I am too angry to type a decent responce without getting banned"



There is little rationale coming through in these words.

If even some of these comments are serious....

Regardless, these are evidence of a lack of "reasoned debate."

Those of you that know me, know that I have been critical of christianity in the past, and will likely be so in the future. But there's a difference between "critical" and offensive.

Several comments made broad generalizations about christianity such as citing the number of people who were killed or died for the faith. This is instantly an invalid argument, since homicide, murder, suicide, war, genocide, etc. has occured independently from christianity and extensively throughout history. It could more easily be argued that this is a human construct and not a christian one.

I use that as but one example of both how to present a reasoned argument and how there is an irrational bias being presented in this thread.

Now to the good part: Clean it up or don't post here. Disregard that and I'll lock the thread.

It bothers me to see a conversation get to the point where people state that they're leaving the forum. It is a sign of others stirring sh*t up just to create a pointless argument.

Many of the arguments that came across offensively didn't have to be so. Support your argument with a bit of observation... don't just state "religion[,] particularly Christianity[,] is despicable, [it's] incompassionate inflexibility is despicable."

Give us an idea why you think so. Then give the other side of the argument an opportunity to respond appropriately.

The Count
07-04-2003, 03:07 PM
What makes you think a mere Super Moderator will stop Jubatus? I mean he thinks he can influence God.

obi
07-04-2003, 03:10 PM
SkinWalker, I think I am in love with you. =)

El Sitherino
07-04-2003, 03:14 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jubatus


I'm bashing you for your naïve weakness.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by obi-wan13
Which proves you are bashing. Don't. It's against the rules. I have NEVER told you that you are stupid, I have NEVER announced you will burn in hell, I have NEVER insulted your mother. I have done NOTHING to you. I believe in the Bible. That gives you the right to call me naive and weak? I believe the answer I am looking for is "no."

Now, if I see you calling anyone else weak or naive on these boards I'll ban you quicker then you can say "sorry." I do NOT Put up with ANY name calling on these boards for ANY reason. Got it, top cop? http://www.boomspeed.com/insanesith/owned.gif

anyways. don't bash individuals jubatus.

C'jais
07-04-2003, 04:06 PM
Just getting home from work and seeing this thread in a raging inferno is sad, to say the least.

I'll second Skin's warning and state that if I see anymore thoughtless, sweeping "carpetbombing" generalizations, I too, will lock the thread.

Now, there's a difference between bashing the Christian, and bashing Christianity. There are countless "remixes" of Christianity and some of those organizations have indeed done foul deeds. The question is whether we should proclaim Catholocism guilty for all the murders - or the Popes who commanded them to be done in Catholocism's name. If we say that Catholocism (or any other Christian sect) is a military organization with its priests the commanding officers, the common people regular soldiers, and the Pope being the 5 starred general, who is to blame? Surely all the "privates" are just following orders from higher up and "going by the book" (excuse the pun) - but still, there are times when it comes to disobey direct orders because it's trying to screw up the inner moral compass.

When the book's commands are conflicting, one should look at the higher message.

1) The Bible tells us to love each other unconditionally.
2) The Bible tells us to kill gay people.

What now? Think for yourself - which of these is more important to you? And no, I'm not gonna believe for a second that someone in here will state that the latter is. The book is full of these contradictions, and each and all must struggle to decode the bigger message. Mix and match to find the right combination that's in harmony with our heart.

I'll tell you what I believe. I believe that part of the Bible was written by loving, kind people who wanted to send a message to unite everyone on earth. You could say they were inspired from above, but the fundamental idea is that they were compassionate individuals who wanted to make a change for the better. But that's not the whole Bible. Parts of the Bible were written by f*cktards who wanted to justify their actions by claiming divine inspiration - these were not caring people, but selfish *******s who wrote what they wrote because they wanted to exploit people's goodwill and gullibility. It is important to see the whole picture, to know what was written - it is important to filter out all the harmful parts of the Bible.

Take a step back and look at the Bible again. Do you honestly think someone was inspired when he wrote all the sh*t about homosexuals? Do you honestly think that is God's message?

Why would a common man write stuff like that? Maybe he had a need to ridicule gays or hold them in contempt. Maybe he wanted to alienate those that were different from him, and in the minority? Whatever the reasons, it just doesn't jive well with what Jesus tells us to do, does it? Make of it what you will, but I know a bigot when I see one. Unnatural? Why? Would God care if his people loved their own sex - as long as they loved each other?

It's the same when people get all riled up over whether creationism or evolution is to be believed, or whether it is okay to have sex before marriage. All these people are missing the greater message, the bigger picture of the bible - love your fellow Man like you would be loved yourself. Christians killing abortion doctors are completely and utterly misguided - they have so lost connection to the centrol, most important message of Christianity that they've taken to abusing the Bible. They're in the dark, hitting everyone with a Bible whose flashlight doesn't give off the same colour as their own.

While those people have lost touch with the meaning of cooperation, I know we haven't. Now chill, and love each other.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by Darth Murphy
Yeah but I don't believe in Christianity as do many others so your tree of knowledge crap is up to debate. I personally believe in the theory of evolution and what Iranaeus stated we were born imperfect. (The irony he's a Christian I am aware of)

Yes the Bible isn't to be trusted because we don't know sqat about God, the Bible should be known as the book of contradictions not the book of Revelations.

No, but I doubt God would let you influence him because you're well insiginificant in comparrison to God, I have never heard of anything so ludicrous I'll influence God of the error of God's ways.

Speaking with God (if you believe you're doing that) isn't futile but you believing you can reason with him and influence him is.

I doubt the Christians will have a field day with this because what I havce stated basically means that God can exist without religion, if anything they'll have a wet weekend with it.

You speak as if I believe in God and Christianity; I don't. And I do as you believe that reasoning with God (if he existed) is pretty futile hence the second part of my original sentence thereof.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by obi-wan13
Which proves you are bashing. Don't. It's against the rules. I have NEVER told you that you are stupid, I have NEVER announced you will burn in hell, I have NEVER insulted your mother. I have done NOTHING to you. I believe in the Bible. That gives you the right to call me naive and weak? I believe the answer I am looking for is "no."

Your beliefs and statements of oppinion offend me, yet I do not threaten you with banishment.

Originally posted by obi-wan13
...I do NOT Put up with ANY name calling on these boards for ANY reason. Got it, top cop?

I hope you can see what I want to point out here. Look closely.

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 05:14 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
http://www.boomspeed.com/insanesith/owned.gif

anyways. don't bash individuals jubatus.

How presumptuous.

Thrackan Solo
07-04-2003, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
Your beliefs and statements of oppinion offend me, yet I do not threaten you with banishment.



I hope you can see what I want to point out here. Look closely.

Yeah but you called him names ITS AGAINST THE RULES!!!:mad:

Jubatus
07-04-2003, 08:46 PM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
Yeah but you called him names ITS AGAINST THE RULES!!!:mad:

The rules are flawed.

EDIT: Actually I need to rephrase that. My flaw in my statement of oppinion on Christianity was referring said oppinion to participants of the thread. I let my emotions towards socalled Christians lead me astray, not from my oppinion of course, but in the writing of them.

C'jais
07-04-2003, 09:43 PM
Stop it, you two.

Any bickering from here on will be deleted at first sight.


Before writing anything, take a deep breath and think of the kittens.

:)

Luc Solar
07-05-2003, 03:56 AM
Mmmmm...kittens...

I'm hungry. Must go eat. Mmmm... :)

Ray Jones
07-05-2003, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo

America is a christian dominated country and we allow people of other religions to live here and practice there beliefs.

But In Muslim countries, christians are persecuted and killed for spreading there beliefs so dont say that we are closeminded religion. [/B]

the thread is about christians .. otherwise i would have mentioned these muslimic-folks too.

The most problem with the most religions is .. they dont let their people have an own mind and opinion. nearly everything is given.

the role of the woman in most religions is .. let's just far behind time. So does the role of the man too.

Knowledge and science.. these are things which hardly fits to 'religious concerns'

so i dont have to speak about a special religion .. i just have to count on things like we have the year 2003 guys.. there are things going on in this world.. and the only thing you mind to do is to disturb our parlament with shouting "read the bible", "being gay is sin" (the major of berlin is gay.) "be shameful"



:confused: Err? Hello?

SkinWalker
07-05-2003, 12:22 PM
Okay... per C'Jais' warning, all of the meaningless, off-topic bickering that masquaraded as posts to this thread have been vanquished.

The topic is, "Why is it okay to bash Christians?"

A very touchy subject to discuss without loosing some semblance of reason and seriousness, so from this post on, try to validate your thoughts and feelings rather than simply tossing them in.

Cite some reference that someone of the opposing viewpoint can rebute or attempt to respond to.

ShockV1.89
07-05-2003, 02:44 PM
Sadly, I dont think people are mature enough to discuss this like gentlemen(women). Too many people try to take the moral highground and look down their noses at those who dont agree.

I think there are a few reasons why more people bash christianity here.

I think the big thing is that Christians (more specifically, the Catholic church) have a flat out horrible track record. More awful things have been done in the name of god than you can shake a stick at.

This is really the case with most major religions. But Christianity is the major religion of most highly established countrys, of which most of the members here are part of. It tends to get shoved in a lot of peoples faces, and they begin questioning it. They look at it's history, and off it goes....

A lot of christians here get "bashing" confused with "discussing and questioning." I've seen countless people, both on and off the boards, ask for various changes in things because it "offends" them, often on religious basis. I sometimes wonder how seeing something you dont agree with is offensive, but thats a different thread.

But when someone questions your religion, I dont think they're bashing it. Just questioning it.

obi
07-05-2003, 02:51 PM
I agree Shock, on most cases, it is just simply quesitoning it. But it is not quesitoning it when We get called naive and weak. =)

ShockV1.89
07-05-2003, 02:58 PM
No, not at all. That is bashing, and uncalled for.

<JOTD>Jedi Hunter
07-06-2003, 01:22 PM
There are valid reasons why many now oppose christianity. To state one faction. The satanic Church. Many christians will have you believe we worship Satan, when if you do your studies (as opposed to just listening to a preacher) you will find that we do not. My point being, many people see the contridictions in christianity. We have entered a digital age, which has brought us so much closer together. And because of that, many people are deciding for themselves what to believe. The difference between satanists and christians are as so. Christians purely state that you should deny any earthly pleasures. Yet while doing that, you deny what makes you human. That is what many of us see as flawed with christianity. Which is why many people have left the faith. Not to mention the christians stand on gender and Homosexuality. One last thing, I believe it has become "cool" to bash chrisitans these days. Almost a trend. And that's truely sad. With so many people attacking them, it must be hard for them to worship their god in peace. As a person with completely opposite beliefs than christians, I can state so many flaws in their books and beliefs. But, in doing that, I would be widening the gap between satanists and christians further. I can personally say that I have met very few actual satanists that go out of their way to oppose chrisitans. In closing, this fad of christian bashing will pass in time.

daring dueler
07-06-2003, 01:41 PM
im catholic, a christion denomination, and we are not taught that other religions are the wrong ones, we are taught to beleive that we all warship the same god, with different ways. im not a strict catholic, havent gone to church in a long time, but i go to a catholic school. as for not hving simple pleasures that is not true, i can do whatever, and rthey dont say if you do this you wil go to hell!!!! booga booga, thata mainly the born agains who arnt alloud to drink and stuff, not all christians.

ZBomber
07-06-2003, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by daring dueler
im catholic, a christion denomination, and we are not taught that other religions are the wrong ones, we are taught to beleive that we all warship the same god, with different ways. im not a strict catholic, havent gone to church in a long time, but i go to a catholic school. as for not hving simple pleasures that is not true, i can do whatever, and rthey dont say if you do this you wil go to hell!!!! booga booga, thata mainly the born agains who arnt alloud to drink and stuff, not all christians.

Agrred

Answering to the topic. It's not OK. I don't think it's ok to bash any religion, no matter what it is.

Jubatus
07-06-2003, 07:44 PM
Why is it OK to bash Christianity?

Because it offers a definite truth about existence that constitutes a barrier in front of intellectual insight and enlightenment. That is my basic beef with Christianity.

As for the vast millions of hypocrites calling themselves Christians, that's quite a different matter....

Wisdom really ought to be a highly contagious disease.

The Count
07-06-2003, 08:02 PM
It is ok to bash Christianity because it has no compassion to pregnant women, and homosexuals among other people.

ShockV1.89
07-06-2003, 09:43 PM
As for the vast millions of hypocrites calling themselves Christians, that's quite a different matter....

*sigh* Some people just dont know when to keep their mouths shut.... :disaprove

El Sitherino
07-06-2003, 09:53 PM
ok i may not be a mod but this is getting out of hand. no more bickering. this is a debate forum, so debate. don't argue.

Jubatus
07-06-2003, 10:52 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
As for the vast millions of hypocrites calling themselves Christians, that's quite a different matter....

You must understand that it is my oppinion that hypocritical Christians are a serious crime to mankind, the crime being in essence that of serving as a barrier in front of intellectual progress, and I wrote it as such. In this post, from where the quote is taken, I did not use unnecessary namecalling. Hypocrisy is the word that covers my view on many selfnamed Christians; your antagony against it resembles the antagonism many have against the word ignorance. And that was not written as some hidden insult (even more not so in that I do not regard ignorance as an insult, merely a description of an observation), just an observation sprang to mind.

So please, cease the unnecessary spamming as it is against the rules of the Senate. An honest and sincere request. Allow the debate to continue beyond this hurdle.

ShockV1.89
07-06-2003, 11:23 PM
[edited my own post for the greater good of the debate...]

Jah Warrior
07-07-2003, 12:22 AM
well dudes,

I have this to say:-

Christian bashing as such is wrong, its is wrong to bash anyone for holding a certain point of view even if they are wrong, however it would appear that it is viewed by some that it is wrong to question the word of the lord.

Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it not right that we question that which is given as being unshakably true? We would still be living on a flat earth if so. If something is truly righteous then surely it can withstand scrutiny at every level and indeed scrutiny should re-enforce it's righteousness and hence be encouraged?

To state that the lord's word is correct without questioning is foolhardy in my view. The problem is that the written word of the bible has time and time again been proven wrong, contradictory and in turn entirely hypocritical.

I've at first hand witnessed this hypocrisy and have seen proof with my own eyes that rock to the very core of the bible, yet to question the very word of god is wrong? Perhaps it is if you are a christian whose faith is based on following the word of god without questioning it. For the rest of us questioning god is and always will be fair game for as long as the christian faith imposes cultural and moral obligations that may or may not be righteous or indeed just.

ET Warrior
07-08-2003, 09:10 PM
The title of this thread spoke to me when I read it, because in the past I have thought of posting this same thread, but I chose not to because I knew the kinds of things that would be said.....much of it has already been said I see.

I do not understand why discrimination against religous people is considered okay in a society where discrimination is so forcefully looked down upon. I understand that being religious is a choice, I can choose to be Christian, whereas a given race is not a choice, and homosexuality is not a choice. But it is STILL discrimination against a certain group of peoples who have not necissarily done anything wrong.

Accusing christians of being evil based on acts carried out by christians in the name of God is akin to ME deciding that ALL Middle Easterners are Vile and Evil because Osama Bin Laden had airplanes flown into our World Trade Towers.

Also, attacking a person for making this choice strikes me as arrogance. You have to assume that you must of course be smarter than all of them, because they chose this and you did not. But in the case of religion, there is no way on knowing. All current evidence we have, of course, is that there very well could be no God. We have no proof of God. But we have no proof of NO God either. Therefore, your opinion is JUST as valid as ours. But that makes our opinoin just as valid as yours.

So perhaps it would be in the best interests of everyone here if all such hositilities were ended, all the Christians here can forgive everyone who has personally insulted us, all those who insulted us can appologize, and everyone else can just sit around and watch to see what kind of reaction my suggestion will cause :p;)

C'jais
07-08-2003, 11:11 PM
First of all ET (or do you prefer the shortened Muad? ;)), you have to realize that a f*ckwit is still a f*ckwit, religious backing or not. To put it bluntly.

I don't care if someone believes that there's a God that cares deeply about homosexuality being regarded as "unnatural", unfit, weird or plain wrong - they're not one bit better than those who think racial differences are bad and the aryan race superior, but they still respect each and every black person for the one he is.

He's not. There's always this underlying prejudice, even if the person loudly proclaims that "he hates the colour, but loves the person". Same thing with homosexuals. It just doesn't work, and I don't care if said person is religious or not - he's being respectless to that person's nature, something he's just not in control of. Again, same thing if someone respected you "as a person", but neatly looked down on your love for your dog or girlfriend.

Same thing with the inexcusable "creation" mumbo jumbo - I don't care if you have a 2000 year old fairy tale that says otherwise - you better start dishing up some real facts and tested theories or I'm not gonna take you seriously at all.

And all this goes double for when someone tries hard to implement his jingoist, racist viewpoints in the law. Again, religious backing or not. That the church has such unwavering, blind support from many people allows it to do many of these things, and that's not even digging into how the organizations bully its members mentally into submission.

Sorry, looks like I flied off the handle there again - it's mostly a problem of empathy. Empathy is the ability to see another's viewpoint, as if you were in his shoes. Something which religious people are notoriously incompetent at. The problem is that Christians have a hard time understanding that their neighbors might not want to become Christians themselves and don't care about their rantings. They can't comprehend that other people might not be very interested in seeing impartial laws changed to suit their bias.

Then, we have the die-hard atheist, who have a tendency to look down on Christians for following an organization with a core of "logic" different from their own. They can't imagine believing in a god, and sometimes have this nasty habit of yelling God's apparent inexistence in their face, when they're unaware that these people *need* their beliefs, just as these atheist unwittingly need the belief that they somehow matter as well. I am of the *belief* that we all have beliefs that makes us important to ourselves - for Christians, this has been expanded to include God, but it' still the fundamentally same. Some atheists think their faith in themself and themself alone makes them morally superior to Christians, and for this they should be spanked. I find the Christian ideals of sacrifice for Christ and realizing of one's own imperfection fascinating, yet their idea of salvation through Christ alone is less sympathetic to me (though I can understand it well enough).

Empathy, my friends.

Yes, I'm aware of my own prejudice, sweeping generalizations and somewhat superior attitude - but I have this here online personality test that says I'm bad at practicing what I preach ;)

ET Warrior
07-09-2003, 04:49 AM
Originally posted by C'jais
First of all ET (or do you prefer the shortened Muad? ;)),

You will refer to me as The Kwisatz Haderach, b**** ;) J/K

You can call me ET or Muad if you want. I probably won't keep this name for TOO long, but who knows. I kind of like it..hmmm.

*edit-almost forgot the whole point of my post*

I understand that being an idiot is not justified if you are a christian as well, I'm just saying I dont like the way that it is acceptable to discriminate against christians as a group, or even to judge us as a group.

<JOTD>Jedi Hunter
07-09-2003, 05:06 AM
True, afterall, christians are each different. With individual views on even their own religion.

*edit* I am personally not a christian, but that is indeed a worth while comment to make. Too many people bunch christians together, and that's as bad as saying all germans are nazi's, or that all african americans are thugs.

Redwing
07-09-2003, 08:16 AM
Not even all Christians believe that homosexuality is a sin, myself included. The reason most do is because a few (and I do mean a few...in fact only one comes to mind at the moment) verses forbid it, and there is much argument on whether those verses were translated properly in the original English version (which most other countries have used as a basis rather than the original Greek and Hebrew). A simple online search will show you what I'm talking about. I must decline to post a better explanation myself at the moment, because I'm far too tired. (not to mention that it's getting a bit off topic :D)

Note: This doesn't apply to Catholicism, because if you're a 'true' Catholic, you must believe homosexuality is a sin, because the Pope said so. :dozey:

I believe it is fine to bash anything, but not anyone...and it's better to be careful what you say, if you want to be kind.

ZBomber
07-10-2003, 01:43 AM
Note: This doesn't apply to Catholicism, because if you're a 'true' Catholic, you must believe homosexuality is a sin, because the Pope said so.

I'm Catholic, and I don't believe that. I believe that its not a sin if you decide to have a different life style, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else.

Jubatus
07-11-2003, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
We have no proof of God. But we have no proof of NO God either. Therefore, your opinion is JUST as valid as ours.

I have to address this argument now, it's been used too many times to be merely amusing anymore. Asking people that they have to disprove something that hasn't been proved, nor even observed, is absurd, and to use the argument that there is no proof of the nonexistence of something not proved, nor even observed, is equally absurd.

We cannot disprove God because by design he cannot be disproved, and by that same design he can only be proved if he wishes it so. But to accept the inability to disprove something not proved as proof of its validity is futile folly. All you can have for God is faith.

The Universe resides inside a purple peanut governed by the sevenlegged ant, Woonawoona Wantagi....I can't prove it, but prove me wrong. That oppinion is just as valid as that of God.

EDIT: Corrections.

ET Warrior
07-11-2003, 10:37 PM
And it just may well be, we'll never know. But will I call you naive and stupid for believing in the purple peanut? No. I will allow you to believe it because it is what you wish to do, and I will be a nice guy and just let you have your beliefs so long as you aren't actually harming anyone.





And for the record, I know you were being sarcastic.

Jubatus
07-11-2003, 11:19 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
...and just let you have your beliefs so long as you aren't actually harming anyone.

But that's exactly the point I'm trying to get across here; these beliefs are harmful, because they keep mankind delusionally persistent about the justification of its continued existence. These beliefs are obstructions against any further evolving of insight. They say "So it is, let us question nothing beyond their boundaries." What they represent, the submission to ignorance through subconscious fear, is the uttermost crime against mankind.

ET Warrior
07-12-2003, 05:10 AM
mankind delusionally persistent about the justification of its continued existence.

So you are saying that mankind does NOT deserve to exist?

Jubatus
07-12-2003, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
So you are saying that mankind does NOT deserve to exist?

Deserving does not apply here.

ET Warrior
07-12-2003, 11:50 PM
Perhaps you could actually explain what you mean by that, or at least explain the quote of yours I have in my post above.

Jubatus
07-13-2003, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
Perhaps you could actually explain what you mean by that, or at least explain the quote of yours I have in my post above.

Suffice to say that the notion of mankind deserving its existence is either indicating that we must answer to some higher authority or purely subjective to oppinion.

As for your quotation of me in your former post, I will ask you to justify pain. I'm not talking about everyday disappointments like 'Dang, I didn't get that job I wanted' or 'Aww, my dog died'; I'm talking about the many millions through history that have experienced despair, hunger, disease, torture of body and mind, persecution, terror and profound loss.

What I was saying with that quote is that Christianity, though merely a symptom of the disease that is determined ignorance through fear, is persistently keeping us delusional in the vain hope that we all might once and forever thenceforth be happy, i.e. Utopia.

Add to this that happiness is the wrong thing to pursue. One should seek contentment, the balance point. Two ways to accomplish that; be one with everything or don't be at all - either works for me.

ET Warrior
07-13-2003, 03:46 PM
So the fact that people believe there is a chance for them, after they are dead, to live a life of complete bliss is a disease of humanity?


I dont understand exactly how this affects humanity as a whole. It seems like it would help a lot, because this prevents people from completely despairing and killing themselves. Even if it's all wrong and their is no God, believing in a God is what keeps some people alive.

Jubatus
07-13-2003, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
So the fact that people believe there is a chance for them, after they are dead, to live a life of complete bliss is a disease of humanity?

I wasn't referring to Utopia being some paradise after death; I am talking about life, both that of the the past and of the here and now.

Originally posted by ET Warrior
I dont understand exactly how this affects humanity as a whole. It seems like it would help a lot, because this prevents people from completely despairing and killing themselves. Even if it's all wrong and their is no God, believing in a God is what keeps some people alive.

You're right, you don't exactly understand. You hold the same dogmatic belief like that of the majority of the world: That life, or rather conscious existence, is unquestionably precious. As you say, "believing in God is what keeps some people alive", and I will add, "despite the pain"...That is exactly the crime of Christianity.

El Sitherino
07-13-2003, 06:22 PM
i personally find it humorous that people think that when they die they continue to live in another plane of existence, instead of rotting in the ground. but still even if there was a life after death i think that would be terribly boring after a while.

Jubatus
07-13-2003, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
i personally find it humorous that people think that when they die they continue to live in another plane of existence, instead of rotting in the ground. but still even if there was a life after death i think that would be terribly boring after a while.

I agree with everything but the boring part; I'm convinced eternity in any 'place', Heaven or Hell or what have you, can only lead to pure and total insanity.

El Sitherino
07-14-2003, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by Jubatus
I agree with everything but the boring part; I'm convinced eternity in any 'place', Heaven or Hell or what have you, can only lead to pure and total insanity. hell i'm bored just being in this plane of existence practically all the time:(
hence my name and location :p

SkinWalker
07-14-2003, 03:18 AM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
So the fact that people believe there is a chance for them, after they are dead, to live a life of complete bliss is a disease of humanity?

This, in my opinion, is why the world is so fouled up. Of the 6 billion people that are alive, nearly every one of them has some hope that they will live past their deaths. Most of them get this nonsense from religion (christianity, budism, hinduism, islam, ).

If people had it in their heads that they [i]might get 70+ years if they are lucky and healthy, they might just live their lives more carefully, healthfully, and compassionately. Because, in their minds they know, "this is all I get."

The only way to live past your death is to leave a legacy. If your memory and deeds are honored through time, then you live on. Thomas Jefferson is still living. So is Charles Darwin, Einstein, Ptolomy, Da Vinci, Aristotle, Gengis Khan, Alexander the Great, and even Hitler.

The legacy of the latter three is quite telling of their deeds.... though I've no doubt that Hitler wanted to be remembered a little better, he earned what he got.


Originally posted by ET Warrior
I dont understand exactly how this affects humanity as a whole. It seems like it would help a lot, because this prevents people from completely despairing and killing themselves.

If anything, it seems to encourage despair and suicide among other societal taboos. By it, I'm referring to religion.

Originally posted by ET Warrior
Even if it's all wrong and their is no God, believing in a God is what keeps some people alive.

But it's what kills many and encourages many more to not bother with this life, because, as long as they get forgiveness before their time is up, they can go on to "eternal life."

Homuncul
07-14-2003, 05:31 AM
It bothers me why people are so close minded and not creative in their approach to existencial matters. Why they can't think of it another way either than feeling. Why they can't understand (and probably don't want to) how can it be a different form of existence with different properties, how something can exist not breathing, not feeling, not understanding. They think: "That's f**king boring", but they don't understand that they judge that from an angle of their own existence. Not that we can do otherwise, just we need to be open minded to be able comprehend such matters. How can a man exist in latters? It's very simple. No dispair here, no emotion at all, no thought, it's just different from how we do it. Is it boring? One could never tell, this category is only for humans.

shukrallah
07-20-2003, 04:12 PM
well.... look at it like this, Hell-burn forever thinking about your sins, heaven-live in peace forever knowing your sins are forgiven... slight difference dont you think.


Christianity for the weak? We have strong virtues, loyalty, trust, LOVE! So were weak... but were willing to die for God?


Another thing.... CATHOLICS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS. How many times do i got to say this, they are considered christians. There bible is different to ours!!!!!!!! Which yes, allows them to burn people to death, kill people, and yes they contradict themselves constantly. Yes, they disobey there bible, with forgivness of sins, the god your supposed to worship, mary, how to get to heaven, and many more things. Yeah, they tell you whats right and wrong, but dont dare tell the church whats wrong, i know all of this! Dont get them confused with christians who are trying to follow the way God commanded them. Yeah it s a denomination (there shouldnt even be denominations!!!!) but catholics arent christians, they are catholic... believe me, ive done research on this. Hey, disagree with this, post and prove to me why your a true christian?



They think: "That's f**king boring", but they don't understand that they judge that from an angle of their own existence.

Mostly everything is perspective, thats why the bible is misinterperated, there is only one 'true' interpertation (prolly misspelled) (like with the kill all gays.... which ill explain in a min) Many people interperate the bible in many different ways, but that doesnt mean that there way of interperating its right. I mean, theres only one interperatation of it, but you could think it means this... when it means that.

About the gays, leviticus is in the old testament, it was a rule for the irealites. Its not applyed any more. God saw there needed to be a new system, so he made it, with Jesus. In Romans, the death Paul is talking about is Hell. Hell is the 2nd death. But that doesnt mean just cause your gay youll go to hell, theres always the other path, turn to christ.

Someone said about born again christians not being able to drink and stuff..... bull. EVEN CHRIST DRANK WINE!!!!!!!!!! remember the wedding? THis was a catholic who said this, the way he spoke about born agains was like they were different.


I have to address this argument now, it's been used too many times to be merely amusing anymore. Asking people that they have to disprove something that hasn't been proved, nor even observed, is absurd, and to use the argument that there is no proof of the nonexistence of something not proved, nor even observed, is equally absurd.

give me a break! You cant observe the big bang! Crap, you cant even prove half of science all the way, so that means theres a chance. Untill you prove %100 that there was a big bang, or whatever other theary there is... theres always room for something else. yeah i know you wrote other stuff, but since you cant prove your science, that means that there could be something else, and probably is.

Note: This doesn't apply to Catholicism, because if you're a 'true' Catholic, you must believe homosexuality is a sin, because the Pope said so.


Hey... the pope thinks hes God.... popes have said it in the past... yeah, popes have said that they are god.

I've at first hand witnessed this hypocrisy and have seen proof with my own eyes that rock to the very core of the bible, yet to question the very word of god is wrong?

like what? I just want to know... ;) im being open minded :)

Jubatus
07-20-2003, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
well.... look at it like this, Hell-burn forever thinking about your sins, heaven-live in peace forever knowing your sins are forgiven... slight difference dont you think.

The point is, eternity in either Hell or Heaven, representing respectively torment and happiness, cannot be healthy for the mind in my oppinion.

If you are doomed to consciousness for eternity I see only two ways; either perfect balance through enlightenment or total insanity. We're talking eternity here, not 100 years or 1 million years or 1 centillion eons (which is quite alot; 225*10^606 years). Impossible to fathom, yet I can imagine the result easily enough.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Christianity for the weak? We have strong virtues, loyalty, trust, LOVE! So were weak... but were willing to die for God?

Your strong virtues are misguided, and even were they not you'd not need Christianity to embrace them. You're willing to die for God?...A hollow boast at best.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
give me a break! You cant observe the big bang! Crap, you cant even prove half of science all the way, so that means theres a chance. Untill you prove %100 that there was a big bang, or whatever other theary there is... theres always room for something else. yeah i know you wrote other stuff, but since you cant prove your science, that means that there could be something else, and probably is.

Never said I was a devout follower of science, that's your wrongful assumption. But in the defence of science, they unlike Christianity can and do provide an immense load of proof for their case.

And there will always be room for something else than what science can explore and explain, but that does not validate your arguments for God one single iota more than my theory of the sevenlegged ant, Woonawoona Wantagi governing the purple peanut inside which our universe resides.

shukrallah
07-20-2003, 10:57 PM
Your strong virtues are misguided, and even were they not you'd not need Christianity to embrace them. You're willing to die for God?...A hollow boast at best.


How is it a hollow boast.... millions of people have died 4 him! And Christ died for me! Look at Paul-he got his head cut off, Peter-hung on a cross upside down, Stephen-stoned to death... and many more.

Look this whole christian bashing stuff has been happening for 2000 yrs. What do u hope this thread will solve? One day i think it was maybe 1000 (dont know exact number) christians traveling to one of the countries in Europe (dont know exact country). Well any ways.. to make a long story short, they were in Rome.. i think... and the king (or govener... someone important) didnt like christians, juas cuase they were christians. Some building burned down somewhere, and the kind (or whoever) blamed noneother than the christians, who were just passing by. Guess what happend.... all em died. They stopped in a church to rest i think.. well they burned the church down. Many of the christians were hung on crosses, or tied to a stake and burned (they did that for fuel... or something). 1000 deaths... or more..... and right in the middle, paul and peter. And why did those 1000 + people die? To satisfy one man's hatred. The point of this is that christians will always be 'bashed' just cause they are christians.


Look... call christians dumb or whatever... i got another story far ya. One day there was a man named Stephen. He was a man of God. Jewish people were against him, cuase he spoke the word of God, and did many miricles with God's power. Well, they argued with him, and i guess you could say he won cause the spirit was speaking through him. So they got mad, they left, and started telling people that he said stuff against Moses, and God. That was against the law so he got taken to court, they put him on trial. Then Stephen gave this huge speech to them, about Moses. So then they got really mad cause of the speech. So they gave there coasts to a young man, named Saul. Saul, was a leading member of the pharacies. He watched them stone Stephen, and even said it was a good thing that they killed him. Well, he was really smart, and knew a lot about the law, and was really moving up. I guess he was good looking, and got a paid a whole lot. Anyways, he started telling the christians in Jerusalem, saying that he would kill them. So he went to the high preist and he asked them to send a letter to Damascus, and if he found any followers of christ, men or women, he was ganna arrest them and take them to jerusalem. i think he was planning to kill them :/ not sure. But anyways, he was heading to Damascus, and then a bright light shone from heaven, and Saul fell down, and a voice said to him 'Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting me?' Saul said 'Who are you, Lord?' The voice said, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. Get up now, and go into that city. Someone there will tell you what you must do.' Everyone with Saul heard the voice. Anyways, theres more to this story, but, you might already know it. You might already know this guy, he later became know as Paul. So whats the point? The point is, is that just cause your a christian, that doesnt mean your ignorant, or whatever. Sorry that was so long, but at least its interesting.

Jubatus
07-21-2003, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
How is it a hollow boast.... millions of people have died 4 him! And Christ died for me! Look at Paul-he got his head cut off, Peter-hung on a cross upside down, Stephen-stoned to death... and many more.

Was talking about you personally.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
What do u hope this thread will solve?

Nothing, of this I'm perfectly aware.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
The point of this is that christians will always be 'bashed' just cause they are christians.

Indeed, fortunately alot of people stand up to your crime, and hopefully more and more will do so for the right reason.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Look... call christians dumb or whatever... i got another story far ya. One day there was a man named Stephen. He was a man.........The point is, is that just cause your a christian, that doesnt mean your ignorant, or whatever. Sorry that was so long, but at least its interesting.

I don't believe in that story, so it holds no weight with me. I stand by my oppinion that Christians are deliberately ignorant and intellectually stagnant out of fear.

shukrallah
07-21-2003, 11:20 AM
Nothing, of this I'm perfectly aware.

i wasnt talking to you, i was talking to the guy who made the thread, even though you are correct.

Indeed, fortunately alot of people stand up to your crime, and hopefully more and more will do so for the right reason.

crime? being a christain is a crime?


I don't believe in that story, so it holds no weight with me. I stand by my oppinion that Christians are deliberately ignorant and intellectually stagnant out of fear.


I dont see where the fear comes in. So we are ignorant cause we dont believe what you believe? Or... we dont stick with the 'crowd' like scientists say something, but we stick with what we already believe, so we are ignorant. Scientists cant prove anything 100% so it doesnt mean we are wrong.

Ray Jones
07-21-2003, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
And why did those 1000 + people die? To satisfy one man's hatred. The point of this is that christians will always be 'bashed' just cause they are christians.



how many people died 'by the cross'??

isnt it otherwise around fact that many people DIED because the DONT were christians?? hmmm. YAP.

so believe if you want. but you will always be bashed for THIS fact. CHRISTIANS ARE A CRUEL HORRIBLE SOCIETY .. no matter how many GOD CHRISTIANS (persons) there are..

In my view it's the christianity's fault that we live 'behind time' medeaval age cost us hundreds of years of technological forthcome. bah.

SO. it isnt WHAT christians believe.. it's WHAT they've done.. (and doing) .. founded on their faith..

Jubatus
07-21-2003, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
crime? being a christain is a crime?

Already told you this and the reason why - don't you read what I write?

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I dont see where the fear comes in. So we are ignorant cause we dont believe what you believe? Or... we dont stick with the 'crowd' like scientists say something, but we stick with what we already believe, so we are ignorant. Scientists cant prove anything 100% so it doesnt mean we are wrong.

Already told you I'm no devout follower of science - don't you read what I write?

Your fear is that of mankind being in existence merely by chance. Your fear is that there is no purpose to our existence than what we make for ourselves. Your fear is of seizing to exist.

"but we stick with what we already believe, so we are ignorant." Exactly; you don't evolve from this point - intellectual stagnation.

Science can't prove anything 100%, eh? It means neither that Christianity is right nor wrong. It's like saying "Science can't prove 100% there are no giant blue pingvins in Sahara, so there must be some!" With how big a percentage can you proof the truth of Christianity?

Ray Jones
07-21-2003, 01:06 PM
..

plus (sorry to 'interrupt') .. i can see what science is 'leading' us to .. i mean there are definite results .. and the more results the more abilities and so on we have ..

let see.. what do we have from cristianity .. NOT EVEN PEACE .. ..

and dont say science BUILD WEAPONS .. THAT is not right. Because the ABILITY is not the same as the USAGE..
(WO)MAN build weapons .. and use them .. not science or knowledge or some.

and christians CONSTANTLY tried to suppress KNOWLEDGE ..

..

Dagobahn Eagle
07-22-2003, 01:16 AM
I just thought I'd drop in and answer the original question of the topic:

Why is it OK to bash Christianity? Because you're practically asking for us to do it.

The USA is soaked trough with ignorant christian fundamentalists seeking to impose christian way of life upon those who do not fit their biblical ideals, completely violating the US policies that prohibits citizens from imposing their religious views upon others.

When religious schools and parents literally teach children to hate minority groups and people with different religions and sexual preferences, and the same institutions refuse to let christians learn about other religions and about the evil deeds of christianity, thus promoting that hate and facist attitudes (I once met a student in my 9th grade class who didn't know about the Crusades).

I do not "bash christianity". I, like many others, bash fanaticism, such as "holy homophobia" or "holy racism". And please not that I ban every form of fanaticism, be it Buddhist, socialist, norse unificationist, animal-lovers... or christians.

If you conventional, clear-minded christians could steer the fanatical christians away from the path of ignorance and intolerance, you'd receive less of the unfair anger from people who went their feeling at all christians instead of just the fanatics.

I know I sound harsh, but my harshness is directed at the fanatics, not at you as a regular, nice christian. Oh, and if you are a fanatic, you can't take offense as you've probably said much, much meaner things yourself.

-Dagobahn Eagle

shukrallah
07-22-2003, 05:27 PM
If you conventional, clear-minded christians could steer the fanatical christians away from the path of ignorance and intolerance, you'd receive less of the unfair anger from people who went their feeling at all christians instead of just the fanatics.

youve given me something to think about here. But heres the thing, the christians who do commit these crimes, arent following the bible. The crusades were catholic right? im sure they were... and if they were christians, then they were disobeying God. Yeah i know what your talking about with these crimes, people killing... blowing up buildings and say they are doing it for God. I got an ex for you:

Tommorrow, i go to the store. I shoot everyone in there. When im asked why, im doing it the name of Jubatus, RayJones, or Dagobahn Eagle. Heres the question, did any of you have anything to do with this? Im talking from the point that God is real ok. So i go out shoot 30 people or something, and say im doing for God, or God told me to do that, or im doing it in the name of God, well whos to say God had a thing to do with it? Just because you call yourself a christian, doesnt mean your really a christian, or it doesnt mean when you do something wrong that its God's fault.

Hope that shows my point.

let see.. what do we have from cristianity .. NOT EVEN PEACE .. ..

Read your bible, does it say anything about christians bringing peace? Dude the bible is the best moral code there is.

Already told you this and the reason why - don't you read what I write?

Im guessing your talking about what i wrote above.


"but we stick with what we already believe, so we are ignorant." Exactly; you don't evolve from this point - intellectual stagnation.

ok, you see a murder, you see the murderer, and the victom. He goes to court the jury say hes inoccent, he goes free. Do you change your mind, even though you saw it? A little bit different to christianity, but same point.

and dont say science BUILD WEAPONS .. THAT is not right. Because the ABILITY is not the same as the USAGE..

You dont need science to make a weapon, you can kill with your hands... and in many other ways. And that has nothing to do with this topic ;)

how many people died 'by the cross'??

isnt it otherwise around fact that many people DIED because the DONT were christians?? hmmm. YAP.

plenty of people died by the cross... I dont really get what you said... but...... im pretty sure you missed the point of the story.




so believe if you want. but you will always be bashed for THIS fact. CHRISTIANS ARE A CRUEL HORRIBLE SOCIETY .. no matter how many GOD CHRISTIANS (persons) there are..

In my view it's the christianity's fault that we live 'behind time' medeaval age cost us hundreds of years of technological forthcome. bah.

SO. it isnt WHAT christians believe.. it's WHAT they've done.. (and doing) .. founded on their faith..

Catholic Church.

But your right... actions are important. Ok, check your bibles, read the new testament, it says how a christian is supposed to act. If a christian is committing these crimes, then they arent obeying the christian rules. Is God to blame for this? No. Its the person's choice.

With crime as the reason you do like christians, you might as well just start hating the whole human race, cause there are laws (just like the bible is the law to christians) and people constantly break them. Everyone has broken the law, whether its stealing bubble gum from a candy store, or killing someone, youve still broken the law.

Look... that 50 asian dudes bombed a building yesterday... oh no.... i hate asian people now, and they deserve whatever they get. I dont care if the rest of the asian population is perfect, some arent, and that gives me perfect reason to not like them, they are a cruel heartless society. Give me a break. No offense to any asian people here, im just trying to get my point accross. No, i dont believe that, and it sounded stupid didnt it? Now then replace the word asian with christian and im sure youll get my point ;)


and christians CONSTANTLY tried to suppress KNOWLEDGE ..

Whats wrong with knowledge... not a thing. Im a christian and im saying that. Yeah medical science has saved millions of lives, and added years to our lives. With out a simple vaccination, or even caugh medicine, millions could be dead right now. Thats perfectly fine, but its things like cloning, and abortion that gets many angry. People constantly cover there backs with abortion by saying its a choice. Your killing unborn and saying its your choice. Hell yeah its your choice, i mean you decide to kill someone or not. My point is, science is all right, untill you take it too fare. Anyways, i havnt heard about christians trying to suppress knowledge. The bible doesnt tell me dont use your computer, or dont go to school.... you might get smarter :rolleyes: Crap.... even catholics (you consider them christians, even though they break just about every commandment and rule/condition God has set up for people) The pope accepts the big bang theory so ive heard, and since he does every catholic will because he thinks hes God...

Already told you I'm no devout follower of science - don't you read what I write?

I read your stuff, i was using science as an example.


-lukeskywalker1

Jubatus
07-25-2003, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Im guessing your talking about what i wrote above.

Since it was my answer to your question, that I quoted, then yes. Seems to me you didn't even bother to find out what I was referring to, and if that is the case; that you don't bother reading your opponent's (as in we are in opposition) postings, then how do you feel justified in responding?

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
ok, you see a murder, you see the murderer, and the victom. He goes to court the jury say hes inoccent, he goes free. Do you change your mind, even though you saw it? A little bit different to christianity, but same point.

First of all the murderer is innocent, in the understanding of not guilty, in my eyes as I do no believe in guilt, but that's besides the argument. I'm not sure what you're trying to get across here, but am I to understand you've witnessed God?

shukrallah
07-25-2003, 12:33 AM
of course i read what you say :D i quote it dont i?

No i have witnessed (im guessing you mean seen God) God. Its an example.

you know that the guy killed someone, but they said he was innocent (but he wasnt) does that mean he didnt kill anyone? no. You saw him do it. You said christians were ignorant cause they dont change there mind when other say its not true... or prove it wrong. But the guy killed someone, you know he did, and yet the court says they have enough proof to let the guy go.... you dont change your mind just because the court said he was innocent do you? Hope that clears it up.

Jubatus
07-25-2003, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
you know that the guy killed someone, but they said he was innocent (but he wasnt) does that mean he didnt kill anyone? no. You saw him do it. You said christians were ignorant cause they dont change there mind when other say its not true... or prove it wrong. But the guy killed someone, you know he did, and yet the court says they have enough proof to let the guy go.... you dont change your mind just because the court said he was innocent do you? Hope that clears it up.

But you base my unwillingness to change my mind implicitly on my witnessing the murder, i.e. I have proof (if only for myself). So it is nothing like Christianity for which you have no proof. Your comparison is flawed.

I havn't said Christians are ignorant because they don't change their mind when others say it's not true; I say Christians are deliberalety keeping themselves ignorant, sometimes through denial and/or distortion of facts and speculations against their religion.

Thrackan Solo
07-25-2003, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
i personally find it humorous that people think that when they die they continue to live in another plane of existence, instead of rotting in the ground. but still even if there was a life after death i think that would be terribly boring after a while.

Its called faith and the hope for something more. You have no proof thay there isn't life after death. So why do you find it humorous? I find it sad that people dont believe in any "life after death". And if there is life after death then I'm sure it wouldnt be boring.

BawBag™
07-25-2003, 01:45 PM
But if theres life after death, is there life after that life???!!!
Bah, all too spiritual and philosophical for me.
;)

shukrallah
07-25-2003, 02:49 PM
No, if you check youir bible, it says your in heaven for eternity.

I dont c how anyone would go insane, i mean, your not going to be alone, and its not like you stand around and do nothing all day.

Jubatus
07-25-2003, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I dont c how anyone would go insane, i mean, your not going to be alone, and its not like you stand around and do nothing all day.

Am I to assume then that you've never experienced anything at such length or for so many times that it's become tedious for you? I'll take a chance and say that you have, so imagine how many experiences will have become tedious to you after 1,000 years....After 1,000,000 years....After 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years.

Granted, there are many experiences to be had, but they will be exhausted at one point and relived so many times that they will become frustratingly unbearable in your evergrowing ability to predict them further and further ahead, leading to a state of comatose or raving madness or incoherent babble of the mind.

One shouldn't just adhere to the dogmatic statement of eternal bliss without thinking it through.

Additionally, one should consider the perfectly rational and logic reason to why we are not immortal by nature instead of making up some utopian afterlife out of fear of death. Accept your mortality, ladies and gentlemen....Your children are your legacy; concentrate on them instead of your selfpity. Exploration to enlightenment is the way ahead, not refuging to ignorance.

Thrackan Solo
07-25-2003, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by Jubatus
Am I to assume then that you've never experienced anything at such length or for so many times that it's become tedious for you? I'll take a chance and say that you have, so imagine how many experiences will have become tedious to you after 1,000 years....After 1,000,000 years....After 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years.

Granted, there are many experiences to be had, but they will be exhausted at one point and relived so many times that they will become frustratingly unbearable in your evergrowing ability to predict them further and further ahead, leading to a state of comatose or raving madness or incoherent babble of the mind.

One shouldn't just adhere to the dogmatic statement of eternal bliss without thinking it through.

Additionally, one should consider the perfectly rational and logic reason to why we are not immortal by nature instead of making up some utopian afterlife out of fear of death. Accept your mortality, ladies and gentlemen....Your children are your legacy; concentrate on them instead of your selfpity. Exploration to enlightenment is the way ahead, not refuging to ignorance.

In heaven your not going to count years, your going to be overfilled with joy and a permanent "high" that it wont matter.

But...if you go to hell then it WILL seem like eternity.

Kurgan
07-25-2003, 09:52 PM
I think the general misguided attitude is part of the problem with the whole "Political Correctness" movement that seems to have had such a big splash in America in the last few years or so...

Basically the assumption is made that whatever the "majority" is seen to accept is free for slander, bad jokes, etc.

It's assumed that making fun of minority groups is bad and wrong, and to "make up for it" they turn their attention towards "majority" type stuff.

Now don't get me wrong, being non-judgemental about many cultural or ethnic stuff is probably a good idea in polite society, but I frankly think its a double-standard.

For example, the majority in the US right now is at least nominally Christian, but that may not always be so. Likewise, "white" is considered the largest racial group in the US, but that is rapidly diminishing in favor of "hispanic." Some stats say that by 2050, hispanics will be the largest racial group in the US. Does that mean that hispanic jokes will suddenly become acceptable? Somehow I doubt it.

Another pet peeve is mine is when people call women a "minority." Yet I keep hearing over and over again that women outnumber men by 1% (not sure if that's just in the US or everywhere). Just being part of a group doesn't pre-destine you to anything that I can see. If you want to take pride in your origins, that's fine, but I don't expect a person to treat me any differently because of where my ancestors were born or what color my skin is.

Let's think about an example of "cultural diversity" and see what the problems might be....

BET.

There is a channel on cable called "Black Entertainment Television." Okay, no problem right? It's just a channel with programming Black people might like. Seems harmless right?

But wait.. is that saying that being black means you are only entertained by certain things (different things than white, or yellow, etc?)? Frankly I've heard plenty of black people complain about the bad programming on BET. And what would people say if there was a channel called "WET" ("White Entertainment Television)?

That is why I think we should not pre-judge a person based soley on their group affiliation, but instead on their words and actions. Give them the benefit of the doubt.

I would want them to treat me the same way, so why would I attack them for no reason?


I have been called many nasty names by people online, who never met me, and don't know who I am or what I believe. There is a lot (sadly) of small minded, bigotted, stupid, or just flat out mean people on the internet, or folks who simply "don't care" and hide behind the anonyimity the medium grants them. I don't mind a little good natured humor or teasing now and then, but a lot of it is just uncalled for.

As to the religious issue, I don't judge anyone professing Christianity out of hand, because, as a student of religion, I know that even though Christianity is the world's largest religion, there are (nearly) an equal number of Muslims and Atheists/Agnostics in the world. I also know that there are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity, covering a spectrum of beliefs.

Christians come from all social classes, sexual orientations, races, nationalities, ages, genders, etc. So how can a person judge them based solely on a religious category? Answer: you can't.

Non-Christians as well, can't be easily categorized, since most religions have their various sects, off-shoots, denominations, philosophies, etc. (people have forgotten that a lot with regard to Islam after 9/11 for example). Atheist and Agnostics run a vast spectrum of beliefs and attitudes as well.

Some of the debates and challenges on here sound threatening at first, but they are good because they can help smooth over misunderstandings and allow people to confront the fact that we are not a bunch of living stereotypes and automatons.

Sadly, there will always people people out there, that instead of listening to what people have to say and honestly thinking about it, would rather just spout off and ignore, while waiting for their turn to slam strawmen to make themselves look good. ; p

I think that civil discussion IS possible, and most of the time on these forums I think people do try. You just have to keep an eye out for the folks who don't follow the rules of politeness.

Jubatus
07-26-2003, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
In heaven your not going to count years, your going to be overfilled with joy and a permanent "high" that it wont matter.

So your mind will remain stagnant in how it perceives things for all eternity, and this will be done by God "drugging" you. Sounds like God's the biggest pusher of them all.

Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
But...if you go to hell then it WILL seem like eternity.

No doubt, and you will go utterly insane just like in Heaven. Unless of course Satan too keeps your mind stagnant.

Homuncul
07-28-2003, 06:02 AM
I guess this whole debate is pointless. I see everything here repeats itself as in philosophy thread. It's like neither christians nor agnostics nor realists can convince each other of anything. As Jub would love to say: everything that is left here is to satisfy your own ego by not letting go. And as I notice most of the chat here is not about "ok to bash christianity" but an old world view debate.

This thread should have been a total psychology thread from the beginning and the matters that should have been followed were to be: why we try to satisfy our egoes by bashing christians and not why bashing christianity is justifyed or not justifyed.

El Sitherino
07-28-2003, 06:29 AM
Originally posted by Thrackan Solo
In heaven your not going to count years, your going to be overfilled with joy and a permanent "high" that it wont matter.

But...if you go to hell then it WILL seem like eternity. well if i have weed that'd be no problem. i'd do eternity if i had weed.

oh and muslims outnumber christians. it's just not in any of your W.A.S.P media.

Captain Wilson
07-28-2003, 10:36 PM
i am a christian, yet i have no faith. But i have alot of respect for those who do. Why is it ok to bash christainty? it is as ok to 'bash' someone for there religion as it is to 'bash' some one for there colour or there nationality. It is unexcetable. To use your faith in an arguement isnt right either. You shouldnt force your opinion or your religion on some one, or try and make them see your way. I also feel that just beacause you feel differently to someones religes(sp) belifes or teachings you can insult there faith or there God. It would be like, for a extreme example, a white man, bob, killing a black man,Bob2, for the reason that Bob2 is black and Bob feels blacks are wrong ((Names were never mystrong point, also i hope this post does not offend anyone, its just an example;))). Its pointless and stupid. I just hope everyone thinks about this and trys and stop the bashing of christianity
:)

shukrallah
07-30-2003, 03:49 PM
but i would go insane i mean we'd eventually run out of things to do there.

I doubt it. Remember, being perfect means having no needs. I mena, theres nothing wrong with you. Maybe you cant get bored.

I know catholics who would argue that catholism is the christian faith and that all other denominations are false.

I don't see a difference in your claim or theirs.... the root word of "christian" is "christ." Both cults, yours and catholicism, acknowledge christ as a messiah/savior. Both cults center around the teachings of this alleged messiah.

Say what you will.... but I say you are religiocentric.

Christian, means christ like.. or being like christ. How are they being like christ? Anyways, the rules for christianity have been set, no doubts there. No one can say they havnt, i mean... over half the New Testament is teaching how to run a church, how to be a christian. Do catholics follow any of that?


acknowledge christ as a messiah/savior.

As for that, i explained it. You can call anything christ, does it mean it is christ?

I can cal my PC skinwalker, does it mean that your my pc now? of course not.



So the idea of Satan being a horned and tailed red fellow sitting on a throne overseeing Hell is just pure nonsense, yes?

yeah im pretty sure it is. I mean, considering youve only read one book of the bible, you obviously cant base your entire opinion of the bible on one vision, can you?

I cant see him being the way people describe him, because afterall, he was the highest ranking angel. I doubt God would make an angel look bad. Unless his apperance changed. Of course, i dont know what satan looks like.



and would therefor not be grateful to God, who is not balanced.

How is God imbalanced.. you mean no sin or something?

On the same note, why is it with Christianity, like with practically all major religions, so, that all the big miracles and divine events happened many hundreds of years ago and none happen today?

Heh, that question gets asked a lot. Maybe, since most of the world has lost its faith. Sure there are platny of christians out there, but how many are really truly trying to follow Christ's commands?


Then what of all the images of the revelations presented to John? The Son of Man in all his fiery Sunlike grandeur, multiple-headed beasts, God surrounded by strange beastmen creatures, scorpion monsters? Must have just been some funky shroom trip if such concepts are pure nonsense, no?

I didnt say that was fake, but remember it was a vision, it means something. Anyways, the bible doesnt say satan is red and has horns.. and all this other stuff. He could... but i guess it really doesnt matter. I know this much, he doesnt sit around ruling Hell though. Even the bible says he will be tourtured, just like everyone else there.

Anyways, its supposed to be a vision of the future, so all of that stuff would be things john has never seen. Imagine, bringing ssomeone who died maybe 300 years ago to our time. I think he would be amazed. Just seeing things flying around would amaze him. Maybe John couldnt describe what he saw.

Jubatus
07-30-2003, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
yeah im pretty sure it is. I mean, considering youve only read one book of the bible, you obviously cant base your entire opinion of the bible on one vision, can you?

I cant see him being the way people describe him, because afterall, he was the highest ranking angel. I doubt God would make an angel look bad. Unless his apperance changed. Of course, i dont know what satan looks like.

Never said I believed he looked like that; I was using your argument against you with the revelations of John...Though for some reason you decided to split it up in 2 parts even though they were connected.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
How is God imbalanced.. you mean no sin or something?

He created the world and life.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Heh, that question gets asked a lot. Maybe, since most of the world has lost its faith. Sure there are platny of christians out there, but how many are really truly trying to follow Christ's commands?

Or perhaps people aren't as gullible in today's world? And you're absolutely right about a vast majority of socalled Christians being hypocrites, and many of them are so selfdeluded they don't even know they're hypocrites.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I didnt say that was fake, but remember it was a vision, it means something. Anyways, the bible doesnt say satan is red and has horns.. and all this other stuff. He could... but i guess it really doesnt matter. I know this much, he doesnt sit around ruling Hell though. Even the bible says he will be tourtured, just like everyone else there.

And he can't be tortured and be free enough to rule at the same time? He did a pretty good job at having time to tempt Jesus in the dessert.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Anyways, its supposed to be a vision of the future, so all of that stuff would be things john has never seen. Imagine, bringing ssomeone who died maybe 300 years ago to our time. I think he would be amazed. Just seeing things flying around would amaze him. Maybe John couldnt describe what he saw.

There's nothing to say Armageddon hasn't already happened if you read Revelations close enough. As for John and what he could or could not understand of what he saw, it was merely a counterargument for that irrelevant argument about the perception of Satan you seemed to suddenly grabbed out of thin air.

-----

Now, this argument about the truth of Christianity has relevance to the original topic of this thread, but it's not the topic, as pointed out in a few posts above this. I've indulged you enough in your weakbased arguments, and will therefor simply refer you to my oppinions stated in my original answer to this topic and let you know that you can't argue anything to change them.

As admitted in an earlier post of mine, Christianity is merely a symptom of a disease, so it is indeed not Christianity in itself I bash, but the mentality behind it.

SkinWalker
07-30-2003, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Christian, means christ like.. or being like christ. How are they being like christ? Anyways, the rules for christianity have been set, no doubts there. No one can say they havnt, i mean... over half the New Testament is teaching how to run a church, how to be a christian. Do catholics follow any of that?

I think it's all superstitious poppycock, but here's what catholics have to say about the subject:

Catholicism is the oldest Christian religion in the world. With over one billion people, the Catholic religion remains a strong force despite opposition. Catholicism is over 2,000 years old. Through the years, the religion must be more than a human organization, but a holy one.

Catholicism is the only Christian religion that started during Christ's time. All other Christian religions stemmed from it. The name "the catholic church" first started in the year 107 when Ignatius of Antioch used the title to describe Jesus' church. The term was old even then so it was probably known in the apostle's time. Catholicism has four main qualities. They are one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.

One - Jesus designed only one church with one set of doctrines. These doctrines are often examined, but their true meaning always stays in tact. Jesus has one body so He only has one Church.

Holy - Jesus has made the church holy. No, not all the members act holy, but the church itself remains holy.

Catholic - The word Catholic means universal. Jesus told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of everyone. The Catholic religion is found all over the world.

Apostolic - Catholicism is apostolic because Jesus appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church. Successors were the future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops. Since the first century, there has been an unbroken chain of bishops that pass down the traditions and Scriptures.

You want a so-called christian group to be afraid of, try the cult that calls itself The Potter's House (http://www.rickross.com/reference/door/door6.html?FACTNet)

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
As for that, i explained it. You can call anything christ, does it mean it is christ?

I can cal my PC skinwalker, does it mean that your my pc now? of course not.

Why doesn't that apply to your own cult? What gives your own cult validity while excluding older cults like catholocism?

shukrallah
07-31-2003, 12:46 AM
I think it's all superstitious poppycock, but here's what catholics have to say about the subject:


What?? I said the apostles, christ, and other godly men wrote down how the church should be ran. Yeah, catholics are probably in the bible, just not called that. Paul, and possibly a few others wrote a few times that false prophets had entered the churches. So if you have a person teaching false things, some people will believe it, and others will stick with the original, thats how i think different denominations were formed. Another thing, how can the catholic church be over 2000 years old, when Christ was born 2006 years ago? The bible doesnt teach any of what they practice, its there own rules. I could care less what they call it.

Alright, lets look at it from a christian point of view here, the world sees catholics as the main group of christianity, even if it isnt christianity. On judgement day, do you think God will care what its called?

You want a so-called christian group to be afraid of, try the cult that calls itself The Potter's House


Afraid? Where do you get that idea, if i were afraid, do you think i would post this stuff? Ive broken Roman Catholic law, the penalty is death.


Why doesn't that apply to your own cult? What gives your own cult validity while excluding older cults like catholocism?

A cult, is a group that diseaves people, how is my 'cult' decieving anyone. Dude, you dont even know a thing about me, or my so called cult. Do you even know if i go to church?

Ok i do, i was there an hour ago, but still...

Alright... 1 we actually follow God's law, in other words, the bible. 2 we dont set up our own laws. 3 we dont kill you if you disagree with us. 4 we dont try to set up a big show to impress the followers, EX: catholic costumes. 5 We dont make up a whole load of crap. 6 The man in charge of our church doesnt declare that he is God.

Catholicism is the oldest Christian religion in the world. With over one billion people, the Catholic religion remains a strong force despite opposition. Catholicism is over 2,000 years old. Through the years, the religion must be more than a human organization, but a holy one.

Catholicism is the only Christian religion that started during Christ's time. All other Christian religions stemmed from it. The name "the catholic church" first started in the year 107 when Ignatius of Antioch used the title to describe Jesus' church. The term was old even then so it was probably known in the apostle's time. Catholicism has four main qualities. They are one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.

One - Jesus designed only one church with one set of doctrines. These doctrines are often examined, but their true meaning always stays in tact. Jesus has one body so He only has one Church.

Holy - Jesus has made the church holy. No, not all the members act holy, but the church itself remains holy.

Catholic - The word Catholic means universal. Jesus told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of everyone. The Catholic religion is found all over the world.

Apostolic - Catholicism is apostolic because Jesus appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church. Successors were the future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops. Since the first century, there has been an unbroken chain of bishops that pass down the traditions and Scriptures.


Look, this is an example of the crap im talking about, that doesnt counter, or prove me wrong in 1 way. If anything it proves me even more right. Over 2000 years... man... Under Roman Catholic law, they have the right, to kill Christ, Paul, Peter, and everyone of the Apostles, and billions of people throughout history.

I think... that may just prove my point. If you want to know why, its because Christ said, you WILL go to heaven, as long as you do what your supposed to, EX: accepting him, repenting..... the list goes on....

Roman Catholic law says, if you have assurance that you will go to heaven just like christ said you do, then you should die.

What kind of church would make a law that says there founder should die????

And you still call it christianity.

Just doesnt seem very christ like to me.

SkinWalker
08-02-2003, 04:13 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
A cult, is a group that diseaves deceives people...

Cults like to trick their followers to believe that everthing else is a cult... usually with outright fabricated definitions. Beware the Kool-Aid.

Cult: Definition:
_
1. (n) _an interest followed with exaggerated zeal; "he always follows the latest fads"; "it was all the rage that season"
2. (n) _a system of religious beliefs and rituals
3. (n) _adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices

Found at HyperDictionary (http://www.hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=cult), but check Webster's College Dictionary and you'll find a very similar definition.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Alright... 1 we actually follow God's law, in other words, the bible.

A 2000+ year old document that has no verifiable sources.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
2 we dont set up our own laws.

Perhaps... but your cult definately sets up its own rules about other cults.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
3 we dont kill you if you disagree with us.

Perhaps not yet. Perhaps not ever. Time will tell.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
4 we dont try to set up a big show to impress the followers, EX: catholic costumes.

Good. I'm against those cults that take their show on the road... witnessing to needy peasants by offering food/shelter/clothing in exchange for devotion to the cult in question. They call it "missionary" work... I call it exploitation and extortion.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
5 We dont make up a whole load of crap.

See... I thought your cult subscribed to "creation," "Noah's Flood," "imaculate conception," etc. I'm glad to hear that crap isn't a part of your indoctrination.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
6 The man in charge of our church doesnt declare that he is God.

But I bet he/she has had god speak to him/her. Or vice versa.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
And you still call it christianity...
Just doesnt seem very christ like to me.

It's not up to you to decide. Catholics choose to define their religion in the same manner that you choose to define yours. From my outside perspective, it is ironic that one cult points the finger at another to denounce it's validity! Ha!

I disagree with both denominations of christianity and reluctantly offer my opinions here in the form of the fairly insensitive words above. I'm not usually this vocal of my intolerance to religion/cult activity and have very good relationships with many friends and family of many religions. In fact, I find their religions largely fascinating. I so aggressively point out the fallicies of your argument because I despise bigotry and ethnocentrism even more. Your view of other religions is bigoted and ethnocentric. It, no doubt, isn't your fault but rather that of whomever forced you to be indoctrinated in the cult itself.

And, just to be sure, I don't "call it christianity," the majority of the rest of the world does. Despite the prejudices and misconceptions you obviously have about Catholism (as well as the apparent hatred), it is regarded as the christian faith by most of the world. It's poppycock too, but its christian poppycock.

El Sitherino
08-02-2003, 12:11 PM
there have been some baptists and protestants here that have killed people because the people they killed didn't believe what they believed. and those militias in montana are baptist and protestant. just so you guys know.:)

shukrallah
08-02-2003, 01:25 PM
You assume too much skinwalker. No one in my church even talks about this, its based from well known facts, and my own observations.

I do not hate catholics, people have mentioned crimes committed by christianity, in just about every thread about religion. Im saying, it was catholics, ive proven, they cant be christians, there bibles, and mine say you have to accept christ to be a christian. If you havnt, you arent a christian. It has to be of your own choice. No one has forced me to do anything (if they did, why am i talking to you about it?)

Cults like to trick their followers to believe that everthing else is a cult... usually with outright fabricated definitions. Beware the Kool-Aid.

Kool-Aid?

Umm, anyways, no one in my church has told me anything about this.

1. (n) _an interest followed with exaggerated zeal; "he always follows the latest fads"; "it was all the rage that season"
2. (n) _a system of religious beliefs and rituals
3. (n) _adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices

And thats christianity? I believe christ said that your supposed to pray different things, not keep the same prayer. Same beliefs, but we dont do the same thing.

Youve assumed a lot, when you dont know a thing about me or my church.

Perhaps... but your cult definately sets up its own rules about other cults.

What rules, i stated what they do, compared it with what Christ and his followers said, and you can see a huge difference. I looked this up in books, and put 2 and 2 together and found out there own rules contradict there entire system.

Its a fact, they say you dont have assurence of Heaven, its a fact Christ said you do. Its a fact, there law says you are damned as a heretic if you say that.

See... I thought your cult subscribed to "creation," "Noah's Flood," "imaculate conception," etc. I'm glad to hear that crap isn't a part of your indoctrination.

lol, you know Noah's Flood is said to have affected that carbon dating method you guys have. Of course i believe in that (remember, if its in the bible, i believe it)

what is imaculate conception????

Good. I'm against those cults that take their show on the road... witnessing to needy peasants by offering food/shelter/clothing in exchange for devotion to the cult in question. They call it "missionary" work... I call it exploitation and extortion.

Ah, well we do both, sort of... with out the exchange part. We pray, thank God for the food (or whatever)

Anyways, i thought missionarys came to the people, to TEACH them, i havnt heard of anything of what your talking about.


Ill get back to you later....

SkinWalker
08-05-2003, 05:20 AM
Man, I wanted to let this thread die... but Pat Robinson gets under my skin and (walks?) is a good reason to bash christianity. With leaders like Pat, christianity doesn't need any enemies.

Pat Robinson recently launched a "call for prayer" as a result of some recent Supreme Court decisions. He wants certain justices to resign and he wants god to convince them with your help! LOL. Pat said: "Would you join with me and many others in crying out to our Lord to change the Court?" He continued with a few fallicies:

Robertson said: "In 1962, they ruled prayer out of the public schools."

Not so. Students remain free to pray in schools. What was ruled out was government-mandated, teacher-led prayer.

Robertson said: "In 1963, they ruled the Bible out of public schools."

Not so. The Bible is studied as literature in many schools. What was ruled out was government-mandated Bible preaching.

Robertson said: That it is now "illegal for little elementary school children to give thanks over their milk and cookies at snack time."

Not so. Little school children may still pray over lunch. What was recognized as illegal was state-mandated, teacher-led prayers.

Robertson said: "Now, the Supreme Court has declared a constitutional right to consensual sodomy and, by the language in its decision, has opened the door to homosexual marriages, bigamy, legalized prostitution, and even incest."

Not so. No door has been opened to bigamy, legalized prostitution, or incest. Quite the opposite--the Supreme Court confirmed the constitutional right to privacy behind closed doors.

Robertson said: "The framers of our Constitution never intended anything like this to take place in our land."

Not so. James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," had many of these ideas in mind. Other framers had other ideas, such as the continuation of slavery, the continued disenfranchisement of those without property, and the continued denial of rights to women.

Robertson said: "No culture has ever endured which has turned openly to homosexuality."

Not so. The implication that turning openly to homosexuality destroys cultures is false. No culture has ever endured, as all cultures die eventually. But there's certainly no evidence that acceptance of homosexuality ever caused the downfall of any culture.

Clearly, this deluded, self-righteous, and bigoted individual is reason to bash christianity. The pope is running a close second in his recent support of the Vatican document (12 pages long) that is entitled “Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons.” It encourages lawmakers and religious leaders alike to oppose extending marriage rights to same-sex couples.

So there you have it.... two very good reasons to bash christianity. And LukeS.... don't even bother with the anti-catholic "they're not christian" BS.... you and your particular denomination are the only ones that subscribe to that propaganda. And that's just what it is... propaganda designed to ensure the survival of the cult. The Moonies, Jehovah's Witnesses, Heaven's Gaters, Potter's House, and the Scientologists have been doing the same thing forever.

Scientologists? Did I say scientologists? No... you keep those lawyers away... I'm sorry... I ..... aaahhhhggg.

ShadowTemplar
08-05-2003, 05:25 AM
Why is it OK to bash Nazism?

Good. I'm against those cults that take their show on the road... witnessing to needy peasants by offering food/shelter/clothing in exchange for devotion to the cult in question. They call it "missionary" work... I call it exploitation and extortion.

Hear! Hear!

Joetheeskimo
08-05-2003, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
there have been some baptists and protestants here that have killed people because the people they killed didn't believe what they believed. and those militias in montana are baptist and protestant. just so you guys know.:)

If that's true, they are far from being baptsists/protestants. A true Christian never kills any one, except in self-defense. There are some who call themselves "Christians", and then torture and kill other people until the believe in Christ. WTF?! That's more like Satanity, not Christianity!

shukrallah
08-06-2003, 01:49 AM
Ive said it before, ill say it again, my denomination hasnt said anything to me about catholics. I used to think they were christians, till one day in one of these threads i met one, and he told me stuff, i realised it was less and less christian. Dude, say what you want, but even what you posted has even helped me prove they arent christians. Another thing, all the denominations you listed were not christian either. So you think ive sat here and made up a whole load of crap about catholics, lies what ever.... READ YOUR BIBLE! there cheap, maybe 5 dollars, you know the best selling book of all time! READ AND COMPARE!!!


SkinWalker, I dont think you really know or understand christianity, or what it is! Your not born into it. You dont just walk into a christian church, and then your a christian. Your parents, or your brothers or sisters can be a christian, but that doesnt mean you are. Its not what you think, far from it. To be christian you need a personall relationship with Jesus. Simply going to church on sunday doesnt mean a thing. The truth is, most denominations have the same bible. If you read in it, your not a christian untill you accept Jesus Christ as your savior, you must repent your sins.


Everything he said (i havnt even heard of the guy, i dont think) can very easily be misinterpreted. What are you mad about? It has no effect on you. Yes we are allowed to pray, read our bibles, and its against the law to stop us. He was talking about what you said. Just because the teacher prays, does the student have to say amen? You know he/she doesnt.

SkinWalker, have you met a true christian? How many true christians have bashed people? Heh, they tell it like it is. People hate that, sounds like this patterson guy talks the truth.

Dude, you dont know what denomination im in. Im in the nazarine denomination (i was born into a methodose church, judging by how the world perceives things, because my grandparents went to a methodose church) Maybe you should research the denomination (nazarine) or perhaps you already know about it. Another thing, i wasnt even in a denomination, or in a church the first 3 years i was a christian.

Dude, ask yourself, why am i even bothering to talk to you. You say i should be bashed because i believe in something. You say im in a cult for proving crimes against christianity false, and showing where the blame truly lies. You dont know me, and yet you pass judgement.

Tonight im ganna go blow up a car in the name of skinwalker (for the example, no im not ganna do that) then im ganna blow up building, kill hundreds of people in your name. Are you to blame? No. If anyone else does something in your name, are they to blame for my actions? No.

By saying you can bash someone for they believe in shows how self centered you really are, and you say i hate, and im prejeduce? Yet for some reason, God is still willing to forgive you, if youll let him. Ask any christian, when is it too late for God to accept you? Never, unless you have comitted the one unfogivable sin (wont get into that)

ShockV1.89
08-06-2003, 02:19 AM
How many true christians have bashed people? Heh, they tell it like it is. People hate that, sounds like this patterson guy talks the truth.

How many times have I heard people say, both online and off, words along the lines of "I'm not insulting you, I'm telling it how it is!"

Sorry, but if I'm a homosexual and a christian comes up to me and tells me I'm a god hating sinner who deserves to burn in hell, and then turns around and says "I'm not bashing him, I'm just telling it how it is!"... I'd be pretty pissed.

Who's to say all the christians who get insulted when people bash their religion have a right to? Perhaps Skinwalker, 'Jais, and others are simply "telling it like it is."

SkinWalker
08-06-2003, 03:12 AM
Hey... "dude," I'm just tellin' it like it is. The only real opinion that I have about the whole thing is that there probably isn't a god. I used to subscribe to all that christian hocus pocus.... then I started thinking for myself. A combination of education and experience tells me that my opinion about god is the most likely.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Another thing, all the denominations you listed were not christian either.

I never implied that they were. I only stated that they are just as valid as christianity. Actually, Budism seems more valid, though I think its a superstition as well.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
READ YOUR BIBLE! there cheap, maybe 5 dollars, you know the best selling book of all time! READ AND COMPARE!!!

Actually, I've probably logged more hours in that book than you. I only say that because I'm a bit older and read it from cover to cover in 1991. I'm not worried about the price... threw mine in the garbage years ago. I had already read it.


Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
SkinWalker, I dont think you really know or understand christianity, or what it is!

And I don't think you understand christianity. Okay.. so I've got two opinions :p .

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
To be christian you need a personall relationship with Jesus.

Then there are no christians. It is impossible to have a personal relationship with someone who no longer exists if he did at all.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Everything he said (i havnt even heard of the guy, i dont think) can very easily be misinterpreted. What are you mad about? It has no effect on you.

You're kidding, right? I'm not actually mad or even angry, though I suppose it can be difficult to discern over the internet. I am concerned, however, that such a well known leader of the so-called "religious right" can perhaps influance so many people with his biggoted views. And those comments that he made were not at all open to much interpretation. They were pretty clear.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Just because he teacher prays, does the student have to say amen?

I went to a small high school in West Texas... it was illegal to make kids pray. We said the Lord's Prayer at EVERY assembly, regardless of your denomination or religion. If you didn't, you were punished. Period. It was wrong. I haven't forgotten the look on the face of my Native friend when I asked if he believed in the lord's prayer... He was of a traditional Native family... of course he didn't. But he was forced to.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
SkinWalker, have you met a true christian? How many true christians have bashed people?

There are no true christians if they never bash people. Including you. You have bashed the catholic, original christians, denomination time and again, then deny that it is bashing. But I was once as "true" a christian as you. I grew up.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Heh, they tell it like it is. People hate that, sounds like this patterson guy talks the truth.

You're right... people do hate that. I've been telling it like it is for nearly a year now.... ;)

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Dude, you dont know what denomination im in.

It's the only correct one I'm sure.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
You say im in a cult for proving crimes against christianity false, and showing where the blame truly lies.

Actually, I say you are part of a cult based upon the definition that Webster's College Dictionary provides.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
By saying you can bash someone for they believe in shows how self centered you really are, and you say i hate, and im prejeduce?

By believing in the biggoted views that so-called christians of the world spout from their mouths... yeah, they're fair game for bashing. But as a group/cult, not individuals... I wouldn't dare insult you personally... it is your beliefs that I find disagreeable.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Yet for some reason, God is still willing to forgive you, if youll let him. Ask any christian, when is it too late for God to accept you?

What god? See... there you go. Religiocentric views... the hindu gods are just as valid as the christian gods. The greek gods are just as valid. In fact, if there can exist one God, then that proves that it is possible for an omnipotent being to exist. If that's possible, then it is possible for multiple ominipotent beings to exist. So, therefore, the polytheist view is more valid than the monotheist one of the christian religion.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Never, unless you have comitted the one unfogivable sin (wont get into that)

Oh... blasphemy of the holy spirit... Yeah... right.

ShadowTemplar
08-06-2003, 04:58 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
READ YOUR BIBLE! there cheap, maybe 5 dollars, you know the best selling book of all time!

According to the Herald Tribune, the Harry Potter Series has sold more books than the King James Bible. Read and compare.

Homuncul
08-06-2003, 05:13 AM
SkinWalker:
Oh... blasphemy of the holy spirit... Yeah... right.

Does that mean you've SINNED. Horrible. Confess now or.... You might get 2 tickets on Robbie Williiams later ;)

ShadowTemplar
08-06-2003, 05:39 AM
Originally posted by ET Warrior
We have no proof of God. But we have no proof of NO God either. Therefore, your opinion is JUST as valid as ours.

Recommended reading: Intellectual Impostures (written by a guy named Sokal).

SkinWalker
08-06-2003, 06:06 AM
Intellectual Imposters Sokal & Bricmont 2003. The attack on French postmodernism that became a bestseller. When Intellectual Impostures was published in France, it sent shock waves through the Left Bank establishment. When it was published in Britain, it provoked vicious debate. Sokal & Bricmont – examine the canon of French Postmodernists - Lacan, Kristeva, Baudrillard, Irigaray, Latour, Virilio, Deleuze & Guattari – and systematically expose their abuse of science.

------------------

It's available at Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312204078/qid=1060155336/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/002-9892590-2411225?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) and I've been keeping an eye out for this one at Half-Price Books...

ShadowTemplar
08-06-2003, 08:06 AM
Heh. Put your trust in SkinWalker to dig up the facts that you are too lazy to check... Nice work. Actually they write a lot of general things about the rules of science and logic as well... One of them being that it is a fundamental rule of logic that you cannot draw a positive conclusion from exclusively negative parameters. This means that if you use only negations as parameters, then you can draw only negations as conclusions. Which invalidates ET's argument.

Oh, and BTW, Skin, your Inbox is full.

Originally posted by Jubatus
But that's exactly the point I'm trying to get across here; these beliefs are harmful, because they keep mankind delusionally persistent about the justification of its continued existence. These beliefs are obstructions against any further evolving of insight. They say "So it is, let us question nothing beyond their boundaries." What they represent, the submission to ignorance through subconscious fear, is the uttermost crime against mankind.

This may not exactly be a casebook study of diplomacy, but nevertheless is fundametally correct. Notice by the way that this is an attack on the faith of some people, not an attack on those people.

Homuncul
08-06-2003, 08:13 AM
Can I somehow get it in e-text and actually buy it?

ShadowTemplar
08-06-2003, 08:21 AM
I dont understand exactly how this affects humanity as a whole. It seems like it would help a lot, because this prevents people from completely despairing and killing themselves.

Help? Hah! Exactly how did the confinement of Gallilei help Humanity? And the persecution of Copernicus? Selling a walking cane to a cripple is OK, but convincing perfectly healthy people to buy a cane is immoral. And forcing perfectly healthy people to use a cane is doubly so.

Even if it's all wrong and their is no God, believing in a God is what keeps some people alive.

Yeah, and what keeps alot of Muslim civs very, very dead.

heaven-live in peace forever knowing your sins are forgiven

Hah! Humans cannot be perpetually happy, because happiness is caused by accomplishment or satisfaction of desire. Any single accomplishment and satisfaction will always grow boring over time, and thus new accomplishment must be sought. And with accomplishment comes challenge. And with challenge comes failure. And with failure comes unhappiness. Q.e.d.

BTW, if humans could be perpetually happy, we would never have gotten down from the trees.

Oh, and even if God makes a miracle that makes you happy for ever, then it would not be happiness, because happiness is defined in relation to the world around us, just as we define ourselves in relation to the world around us. So if someone/something would completely change the natural laws of your world, then you would cease to exist.

So were weak... but were willing to die for God?

What's more important: Are you willing to kill for God? Are you willing to usurp power unrightfully because of divine mandate? Are you willing to abandon democracy for religious virtue? These are the important questions. Think well before you answer them. Because if any of the answers is "yes", then you are a potential traitor and terrorist.

Kurgan: You forget that criticism of Christianity is entirely justified. And you forget that being religious is something that you choose, quite unlike skin colour.

I also feel that just beacause you feel differently to someones religes(sp) belifes or teachings you can insult there faith or there God. It would be like, for a extreme example, a white man, bob, killing a black man,Bob2, for the reason that Bob2 is black and Bob feels blacks are wrong

Except that belief is an action, just like murder is an action. Whereas skin colour is an inherited trait, just like eye colour is an inherited trait.

shukrallah
08-06-2003, 03:01 PM
And I don't think you understand christianity.

I just explained what it is under that sentence ;)



Yeah, and what keeps alot of Muslim civs very, very dead.

Dude, the muslim law says they can kill christians ;)

What's more important: Are you willing to kill for God? Are you willing to usurp power unrightfully because of divine mandate? Are you willing to abandon democracy for religious virtue? These are the important questions. Think well before you answer them. Because if any of the answers is "yes", then you are a potential traitor and terrorist.

Willing to kill for God? He never commands this. He wouldnt command this. If he did it contradict the entire bible, because the God who cammands us not to sin, would tell us to sin.

Hah! Humans cannot be perpetually happy, because happiness is caused by accomplishment or satisfaction of desire. Any single accomplishment and satisfaction will always grow boring over time, and thus new accomplishment must be sought. And with accomplishment comes challenge. And with challenge comes failure. And with failure comes unhappiness. Q.e.d.

Well of course, to an imperfect being ;)

I went to a small high school in West Texas... it was illegal to make kids pray. We said the Lord's Prayer at EVERY assembly, regardless of your denomination or religion. If you didn't, you were punished. Period. It was wrong. I haven't forgotten the look on the face of my Native friend when I asked if he believed in the lord's prayer... He was of a traditional Native family... of course he didn't. But he was forced to.


Well, i cant argue with that, it is wrong (even the bible says it is, i think... id need to look some stuff up) I think it is wrong to take it completly out of our schools. Its wrong to force people to do something. But its also wrong to 'bash' people for something.



So if someone/something would completely change the natural laws of your world, then you would cease to exist.

Its not our world ;)

Actually, I've probably logged more hours in that book than you. I only say that because I'm a bit older and read it from cover to cover in 1991. I'm not worried about the price... threw mine in the garbage years ago. I had already read it.


I see. You may have... but i read mine every day, ive read cover to cover (just about, may have missed a chapter or 2)

Help? Hah! Exactly how did the confinement of Gallilei help Humanity? And the persecution of Copernicus? Selling a walking cane to a cripple is OK, but convincing perfectly healthy people to buy a cane is immoral. And forcing perfectly healthy people to use a cane is doubly so.

Dude, what are you talking about?

It's the only correct one I'm sure.

No, follow the bible, and you dont need to be in a denomination. Church isnt even required, just most every christian goes to church. If you follow your bible and obey christ you are a christian, no matter what denomination. Christians are not supposed to sin (doesnt mean they wont) there are millions of false prophets out there. How can you tell which are christian (has a relationship with christ) by there actions. If they are killing people, tourturing people, then they are obviously not following the examples and commands from the bible.

Look, some people, in this thread and the other thread that i talked about catholics, accused christians of comitting crimes. I was clearing christianitys name. Catholics, are Catholics. Christians are christians. The catholics killed people, not to mention other so called christian denominations. I dont care what they are considered, ive told you (from what the bible has tought me) how to become a christian. If they havnt, then they are not a christian. Its that simple. How did i bash them. I gave you a history lesson.




but Pat Robinson gets under my skin

I'm not actually mad or even angry, though I suppose it can be difficult to discern over the internet.

;)


catholic, original christians, denomination time and again

original, they said that they are the oldest christian denomination. They said they have been around over 2000 years (according to your post) But christ (if it wasnt for him, there would have never been christianty correct?) Christ was born around 4, or 3 BC (or BCE whatever you use) it is the year 2003, mean that he was born (ill just use 4 bc) 2007 years ago. But the catholic religion started over 2000 years ago. lets just say its 2001 years old. So Christ was 6 years old when it started? Its a well known fact that there were Baal worshipers, its a well known fact that Egypt had its Gods (osiris, isis, horus, the list goes on) its a fact that the way egypt and the catholics worship is very simular. Even the confession thing came from Babylon. It was there to control the people, and help stop blackmail (or start it?)

Now then, youve read your bible, thats what im comparing to what they do (isnt the bible the christian rules?) so if there christian, they should be following the rules, should they not? You know what it says, look at what they do, and tell me am i making all of this up? Theres no reason to bash them, my point is, dont confuse the two. Why is mine more christian? Because we follow the rules. We do what christ commands. Dont you understand what im saying??? If you dont understand by now, then you probably wont ever :|

According to the Herald Tribune, the Harry Potter Series has sold more books than the King James Bible. Read and compare.

Harry Potter?? Who cares. Umm, read what and compare what?

Hey... "dude," I'm just tellin' it like it is.[/QUOTE

read your next sentence, you say my opinion, how many times do i say my own opinion? If your tellin' it like it is, then it must be true. But you say, your opinion. Thats not 'how it is' thats 'how it is, TO YOU' ;)

[QUOTE]Oh... blasphemy of the holy spirit... Yeah... right.

:confused: Yeah right? Do you understand why its so important?

This is why i say, you dont understand christianity. Why must you people hear the gospel 2, 3, 4, 5 times.. or more before you understand. When others can hear it once and understand, and accept it?

If you comitt this sin, then its like cutting the branch of under your feet. The Holy Spirit is your connection with God. With out him, you dont have a connection with God.

Sorry, but if I'm a homosexual and a christian comes up to me and tells me I'm a god hating sinner who deserves to burn in hell, and then turns around and says "I'm not bashing him, I'm just telling it how it is!"... I'd be pretty pissed.

*SIGH* Christians are not supposed to handle things in that matter. Christians cant say YOU ARE GOING TO HELL. Ill just say if you keep doing whatever, and you dont accept christ and ask for his forgivness then you will. You cant just walk up to someone and say go to hell, because I dont know. Yes, homosexuality is wrong. I cant see how your born like that. But im not the judge, i cant just pass judgement like that.

Then there are no christians. It is impossible to have a personal relationship with someone who no longer exists if he did at all.

Have you really read your bible? Well, 1991 was a while back. Maybe im wrong, i assumed you all knew what a christian is, what it means to be christain, how to become. C'Jais did... i think.

Its not impossible, this is what seperates christianity from other religions, or completly from religions itself. Its what make christianity more than religion, its what makes it a personall relationship with Christ. Granted, there are people, who get on TV, or go wherever, they call themselves christians, and they do all kinds of things. Go out onto the street, just ask people what religion are you. I bet a lot will say christian. But they just say im a christian, because. Yeah because, nothing other than that. They acknowledge Jesus, God, Satan (and everyone else involved) but they dont really know, or understand, or have that relationship. You know about them, but does that make you a christian? no.

Check thist email i got. Its got stuff to do with this topic



Thought you might enjoy this interesting prayer given in KANSAS at the
opening session of their Senate. It seems prayer still upsets some people.
When
Minister Joe Wright was asked to open the new session of the Kansas Senate,

everyone was expecting the usual generalities, but this is what they
heard:

Heavenly Father, We come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to
seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, "Woe to those
who call evil good," but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost
our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. We confess that:
We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word and called it
Pluralism.
We have exploited the poor and called it the! Lottery.
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.
We have killed our unborn and called it choice.
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable.
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building
self-esteem.
We have abused power and called it politics.
We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition.
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it
freedom of speech.
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called
it
enlightenment.

Search us, Oh, God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and set us free. Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent to direct us to the center of your will and to openly ask these things in the name of your Son, the living Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.

The response was immediate. A number of legislators walked out during the

prayer in protest. In 6 short weeks, Central Christian Church, where
Reverend Wright is pastor, logged more than 5,000 phone calls with only 47
of those
calls responding negatively. The church is now receiving international
requests for copies of this Prayer from India, Africa, and Korea.
Commentator
Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio program "The Rest of the Story"
and
received a larger response to this program than any other he has ever
aired.
With the Lord's help, may this prayer sweep over our nation and
wholeheartedly become our desire so that we again can be called, "... one nation under God..."

If possible, please pass this prayer on to your friends. Think about this:
If you forward this prayer to everyone on your email list, in less than 30
days it would be heard by the world. God Bless gutsy Joe Wright!


Anyways, notice how he refers to Jesus, living savior.

I got another one:



In light of the many perversions and jokes we send to one another for a
laugh, this is a little different: This is not intended to be a joke, it's
not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.

Billy Graham's daughter was interviewed on the Early Show and Jane
Clayson asked her "How could God let something like this happen?"
(regarding the attacks on Sept. 11).
Anne Graham gave an extremely profound and insightful response. She said
"I believe God is deeply saddened by this, just as we are, but for years
we've been telling God to get out of our schools, to get out of our
government and to get out of our lives.
And being the gentleman He is, I believe He has calmly backed out. How
can we expect God to give us His blessing and His protection if we demand
He leave us alone?"

In light of recent events...terrorists attack, school shootings, etc. I
think it started when Madeleine Murray O'Hare (she was murdered, her body
found recently) complained she didn't want prayer in our schools, and we
said OK.

Then someone said you better not read the Bible in school .... the Bible
says thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbor as
yourself. And we said OK.
Then Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they
misbehave because their little personalities would be warped and we might
damage their self-esteem (Dr. Spock's son committed suicide). We said an
expert should know what he's talking about. And we said OK.


Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they
don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill
strangers, their classmates, and themselves.
Probably, if we think about it long and hard enough, we can figure it
out. I think it has a great deal to do with "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW."
Funny how simple it is for people to trash God and then wonder why the
world's going to hell. Funny how we believe what the newspapers say, but
question what the Bible says.

Funny how you can send 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like
wildfire but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people
think twice about sharing.


Funny how lewd, crude, vulgar and obscene articles pass freely through
cyberspace, but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and
workplace.



Are you laughing?


Funny how when you forward this message, you will not send it to many on
your address list because you're not sure what they believe, or what they
WILL think of you for sending it. Funny how we can be more worried about
what other people think of us than what God thinks of us.
Pass it on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it... no
one will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit
back and complain about what bad shape the world is in!



I got em from my pasters wife.

Before you say 'what God?' look at it through a christians perspective. I do agree with you skinwalker, to force someone to pray is wrong, or to do anything.

Joetheeskimo
08-06-2003, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Ive said it before, ill say it again, my denomination hasnt said anything to me about catholics. I used to think they were christians, till one day in one of these threads i met one, and he told me stuff, i realised it was less and less christian. Dude, say what you want, but even what you posted has even helped me prove they arent christians. Another thing, all the denominations you listed were not christian either. So you think ive sat here and made up a whole load of crap about catholics, lies what ever.... READ YOUR BIBLE! there cheap, maybe 5 dollars, you know the best selling book of all time! READ AND COMPARE!!!


I agree about that, Catholics are not Christians. Christians are supposed to be humble, Catholics have large, fancy pews and towers. And the pope is all important and fancy dressed, although the priest must be as humble as the people. Not to mention we've seen several stories in the paper of Catholic priests raping boys! :rolleyes:

El Sitherino
08-06-2003, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by joetheeskimo5
If that's true, they are far from being baptsists/protestants. A true Christian never kills any one, except in self-defense. There are some who call themselves "Christians", and then torture and kill other people until the believe in Christ. WTF?! That's more like Satanity, not Christianity! uhm.. satanists don't believe in killing people. please read up on things before you bash them. also Paul the apostle started the catholic church. :)

"To be christian you need a personall relationship with Jesus."
those killing christians have a personal relationship with god, those militias have church services everyday, the militia people have crosses and other christian artifacts all over their houses. they spend hours a day reading the entire bible, then praying to god and talking/praying to jesus, then they do "jesus" things. that whole deal. then "they kill them some ******s".(pardon my talking like them)

El Sitherino
08-06-2003, 06:03 PM
Originally posted by joetheeskimo5
I agree about that, Catholics are not Christians. Christians are supposed to be humble, Catholics have large, fancy pews and towers. And the pope is all important and fancy dressed, although the priest must be as humble as the people. Not to mention we've seen several stories in the paper of Catholic priests raping boys! :rolleyes: here in texas there have also been baptist and protestant figure heads that have raped little boys and girls, so it's not just catholic priests.

Joetheeskimo
08-06-2003, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by InsaneSith
uhm.. satanists don't believe in killing people. please read up on things before you bash them. also Paul the apostle started the catholic church. :)


Ok, I apologize for bashing catholics...in fact, there are some catholic churches that are good, i'm being a little too generel.

However, at the catholic curch i went to, the only message the pastor got throgh was "We've been vbad, let's try to be better, and worship God more than ever." That is nto true Christianity. No one on the face of the earth can do anything without God. We can't even beleive in him without his help. Most catholics I know go against this.

And, Paul did start the church, but it wasn't catholic. Back then, there as no such thing as protestants and catholics being seperate groups. There were either believers, or non-believers. The modern world has torn the church into two groups, and the catholics nowadays are usually on the wrong path.

El Sitherino
08-06-2003, 06:43 PM
catholic means universal. it was called the universal church of Jesus Christ. or the catholic church as many call it.

oh and islam prohibits murder. They only allow killing in the name of Defense of LIFE.

Noble Verse 5:32 "...if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people..." In this Noble Verse we clearly see that Allah Almighty honors all the innocent souls that He created. Killing any innocent soul is so hated by Allah Almighty that He considers it as a crime against all of Mankind.

and Islam would never condone the murder of christians. They do however condone self defense from all people, christians included. This means during the crusades, and ONLY the crusades, they were told to kill all who were christian and carried arms. this was only so their family's were not slain. Islam is about family and community not just faith. in the family of islam ALL are the children of Allah(the arab name of god, therefore the same god christians believe in.) Allah was basicly the head of the family that is Islam. do not bash what you do not even take the time to study. by study i mean engulf yourself in the works and books of islam until you have you are not permitted to bash, so says me and all that visit this forum.

I have studied christianity and all it's brotherly texts, I have also studied many other religions(sometimes makes it a little hard for me to remember what was for what, seeing as i'm only 16 and I have the association skills of a 80 year old alzheimer "victim")
therefore my statements are valid enough to be considered.

sorry i made a mistake it was the universal church of jesus christ not god pardon me.

C'jais
08-06-2003, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I just explained what it is under that sentence ;)

Yes, a personal relationship with Christ. Call it whatever you want, it doesn't make it any different from Catholocism, no matter how loud and proud you keep saying it.

Could you please elaborate on this "relationship" with someone called Jesus Christ? By relationship, I'm infering that you sit down from time to time and have a little chat with him about how your life is going. And that by this, you actually talk to this man. You're a buddy to a dead guy, who you believe still lives? Is this how it goes?

Here's an analogy fpr comparison's sake-

A man visits a professional psychiatrist. There, he tells the good doctor that he's lately been talking to an invisible, immaterial being (perceivable only to him). This being talks to him in his dreams, and guides him through his daily life. But not only this, the invisible "thing" is no less than the consciousness of the man's dead grandfather. This consciousness exist in another dimension, and has revealed that the sun orbiting the earth is in fact his cosmic willpower shining down on him, and that he created lightwaves so that everyone on earth could see his grandson. Oh, and while this man subscribes to the notion that his grand-daddy will invade the earth with his army of grotesque creatures and take him away to safety the day he dies on earth, the psychiatrist subscribes to the notion that this man is insane. Yet, the doctor was a Christian himself.

Did you spot the hypocrisy?

Let's try with something deductive-

Man is fallible, no? No matter someone's sincere intentions, sometimes they are just not well-placed, right or true in a given context. Man can fail.

Did God write the Bible? No he did not - Man did. While you may believe he inspired the authors, for all we know it was written by humans, like you.

Was Jesus a human? Yes he was - again, while you may believe whatever you want, you cannot deny that you can only really be sure of the fact that he was a human.

So, Man is fallible = the Bible could be wrong. Everything that has been said about Jesus' miraculous powers could be false.

Willing to kill for God? He never commands this. He wouldnt command this. If he did it contradict the entire bible, because the God who cammands us not to sin, would tell us to sin.

You're telling us that nowhere in the Bible does God recommend violence against "infidels"? I find that hard to believe.

Its not our world ;)

Your point being? It is still *the* world, no?

If you follow your bible and obey christ you are a christian, no matter what denomination.

So Catholics are Christians too, aye?

They said they have been around over 2000 years (according to your post) But christ (if it wasnt for him, there would have never been christianty correct?) Christ was born around 4, or 3 BC (or BCE whatever you use) it is the year 2003, mean that he was born (ill just use 4 bc) 2007 years ago. But the catholic religion started over 2000 years ago. lets just say its 2001 years old. So Christ was 6 years old when it started?

Did you ever for a moment stop to think that they were perhaps making empty boasts based on a slight exagerration?

Did you ever for a moment stop to ponder why when a so-called Christian does something terrible, he is not representative of the entire religion of Christianity - but when Catholic priests commit unspeakable acts, they suddenly representative of the entire vile cult of Catholocism?

Even the confession thing came from Babylon.

The Bible has copied many Babylonian myths. The flood story is a near exact replica of another, older, myth.

We do what christ commands.

Do you? What makes you so sure?

Yes, homosexuality is wrong.

Where in the Bible does it say that?

Does it overrule the more important belief that we as humans should love each other? Do you not think that God has unconditional love for everyone? Why does it matter a hoot if two people love each other, when even now, you are regarding us as lost? Why is more lost to love?

Before you say 'what God?' look at it through a christians perspective.


We did. We are, all the damn time.

When is it your time to look at it from ours?

shukrallah
08-07-2003, 01:40 AM
How can you look through our eyes when you dont understand what we believe?

So Catholics are Christians too, aye?


Lol, have you read everything? they dont follow the bible!

Was Jesus a human? Yes he was - again, while you may believe whatever you want, you cannot deny that you can only really be sure of the fact that he was a human.

The bible tells us, he is fully God, and fully man.


Your point being? It is still *the* world, no?

Our world is earth, is heaven on earth?

The Bible has copied many Babylonian myths. The flood story is a near exact replica of another, older, myth.

Dude, Noah's sons built the city of babylon after the flood ;)

Did God write the Bible? No he did not - Man did. While you may believe he inspired the authors, for all we know it was written by humans, like you.

Of course, look at the Apostles! They were fishermen, tax collecters, and other things! Normal men. Nothing more. Paul wrote most of the new testament in letters, did he know they would be put into a book oneday? No. The old testament was seperate books too, it was like there history books. Of course, Paul and many of the deciples were inspired by the holy spirit, how can a man write such an amazing moral code?

Could you please elaborate on this "relationship" with someone called Jesus Christ? By relationship, I'm infering that you sit down from time to time and have a little chat with him about how your life is going. And that by this, you actually talk to this man. You're a buddy to a dead guy, who you believe still lives? Is this how it goes?

Ever heard of prayer? Ever heard what happend three days after Christ was hung on the cross? Jesus is alive. Over 500 men and woman saw him, touched the holes in his fingers, the hole in his side. Of course, you can say they were halucinating, but its impossible for 2 people to have the same halucination. I think i misspelled it :|

The relationship, praying, talking, yeah, just simply talking with christ, you dont need a paster or be in a church to do it. Anytime you want. Of course youll call me insane, but its what millions believe, if i am, then millions are too. I cant see over 100 million (or more) people being insane.

This consciousness exist in another dimension, and has revealed that the sun orbiting the earth is in fact his cosmic willpower shining down on him, and that he created lightwaves so that everyone on earth could see his grandson.

Dude, the bible tells us the sun doesnt evolve around the earth ;)

anyways, ive run out of time, ill post more tommarrow because theres a lot to talk about.

ShockV1.89
08-07-2003, 02:19 AM
So basically, everything you are saying revolves around "Because the bible says so."

It seems to me that you entire religion is based upon a book which people said was inspired by God. This book has very little fact to back it up, and much of it's history cannot be verified (I didnt say all, as some of it is historically true).

Furthermore, the books were written by men, who, by their very nature, are flawed. They have their own means, their own agendas, and their own biases.

How are we to believe these men are divinely inspired? Suppose I came to you with a 100 page book that I claim God inspired me to write. Would you add this to your pages in the Bible and live by it as well?

I doubt it. But how am I any less believable than these 2000 year old men?

I'm not believable. And neither are they. but to base your entire belief system and, for some, way of life, on a book with so little backup and so much left to question, seems..... (and dont take this as insult)... foolish! At least from a neutral point of view.

So presenting a statement and then claiming that "The bible said so" is proof of that truth of the statement means absolutley nothing to me, or many people here.


On a personal rant, I'm bashing Christianity right now because of my girlfriend. She was a non-practicing Christian with an interest in the book of Revelations. So I bought her the first book of the "Left Behind" series.

Now she got all religious on me and decided "No sex before marriage, period." Nevermind that we're practically married, and the only reason I havent proposed is because I'm still in school and cant afford a ring.... But nope, "No sex before marriage."

Now I get no nookie because of a friggin formality! Argh!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[end rant]

ShockV1.89
08-07-2003, 02:25 AM
Where in the Bible does it say that?

In the book of Leviticus, it condemns homosexuality. But it also says that fresh children and the like should be killed (or something to that affect). So taking that book seriously.... eh.

SkinWalker
08-07-2003, 04:36 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1

Dude, the muslim law says they can kill christians ;)

Really? Cite a reference please. Because, just as I've read the Bible cover-to-cover, I've also read much of the Koran. I don't recall that message. Or did your little wink smiley indicate that you were making it up... hard to discern across the internet.....


Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Willing to kill for God? He never commands this. He wouldnt command this.

God orders the sons of Levi (Moses, Aaron, and the other members of their tribe that were "on the Lord's side") to kill "every man his neighbor." "And there fell of the people that day about 3000 men." Genesis 32:27-28

And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them. -- Deuteronomy 7:2

Oh... and:

Deliver up their children to the famine, and pour out their blood by the force of the sword; and let their wives be bereaved of their children, and be widows; and let their men be put to death; let their young men be slain by the sword in battle. -- Jeremiah 18:21

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I see. You may have... but i read mine every day, ive read cover to cover (just about, may have missed a chapter or 2)

Hopefully I've caught you up on the "chapter or 2" that you missed then :cool: . I actually went to an online bible and searched for keywords like smitten, smote, and sword... I remembered the books, just not the actual chapter/verse. Sammuel and Corinthians are violent books too....

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Catholics, are Catholics. Christians are christians.

And I'm saying that I see nothing different in that statement than if you said, "blacks are blacks. People are people."

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
The catholics killed people, not to mention other so called christian denominations.

The death of man at the hand of man is a matter of history. It has occured in all denominations throughout the history of the world. I would bet that there have even been deaths as direct result of the hand of the Church of the Nazarene, which incidently began around the turn of the century just down the street from me.

Speaking of your denomination.... it is direct result of a split from the Methodist faith, and the Nazarene Manual is merely a minor rewrite of the Methodist version. It appears that some turn-of-the-century Methodists were unhappy with increasingly liberal politics of the church and decided to split.

The Methodists are also a split from the Episcipal/Anglican Church... otherwise known as the Church of England. I don't suppose I need to tell you how this so-called christian bunch started... but I will remind you that it was when King Henry VIII wished to obtain a divorce from Queen Catherine of Aragon for not producing a male heir. The Pope would not grant it. The king lobbied long and hard to change the Pope's mind to no avail, and the king ran out of patience and proclaimed himself Supreme Head of the Church of England and the Church began its separate existence from Rome. Divorce became legal and "moral."

So, as you can see... you're not so far removed from Catholocism. The catholic church has long since acknowledged that many of it's previous actions were wrong (i.e. the inquisition, etc.) The catholic church has just as many failings and superstition as every other christian and non-chrisitan cult.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I dont care what they are considered, ive told you (from what the bible has tought me) how to become a christian.

If you are convinced that you interpret this out-dated work of literature correctly, and they are sure that they interpret it correctly, what gives you more validity than they?

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Because we follow the rules. We do what christ commands. Dont you understand what im saying???

Sure I do... and from the catholic perspective, they follow the rules as well. That's the major failing with the "bible" that so many christians deny: it's inconsistant and open to multiple interpretation! In short... it's about as reliable as a guide to living one's life as Shakespeare. Don't get me wrong, I think the latter is valid... just open to multiple interpretation.... to be, or not to be...

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Harry Potter?? Who cares. Umm, read what and compare what?

He was saying that Harry Potter outsold the bible (and had less time on the best seller list!) and to read the source he cited and compare to your statement.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
This is why i say, you dont understand christianity. Why must you people hear the gospel 2, 3, 4, 5 times.. or more before you understand. When others can hear it once and understand, and accept it?

We utilize critical thinking skills.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Yes, homosexuality is wrong. I cant see how your born like that.

You can't see a lot of things... each post you make shows that you are religiocentric. There exists more than one perspective in the world. Why is homosexuality wrong?

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Have you really read your bible? Well, 1991 was a while back.

Yeah.. I reallyread it. And most of the Koran, some of the Torah... and a smattering of the Bhagavad- Gita, Pistis Sophia, Book of Mormon, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, and Confucian, Buddist, Taoist, and Zen texts. While I understand that in 1991 you probably weren't far from training wheels on your bike, I was eating sand in Kuwait and passing the time by reading everything I could get my hands on.


Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
The response was immediate. A number of legislators walked out during the prayer in protest.

And well they should have... there is a separation of church and state... people should not be subjected to the cult practices of others.


Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
With the Lord's help, may this prayer sweep over our nation and
wholeheartedly become our desire so that we again can be called, "... one nation under God..."

Interesting, considering it used to be over 500 nations under Wakan-Tanka.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Funny how you can send 'jokes' through e-mail and they spread like
wildfire but when you start sending messages regarding the Lord, people
think twice about sharing.

Nobody likes spam.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
but public discussion of God is suppressed in the school and
workplace.

Not so. People are free to discuss god in either place... but it is immoral and unlawful to force someone to be indoctrinated in any religion against their will. If you preach christian nonsense in a school, you are blatantly ignoring the rights of those who prefer islamic, hindu, or pagan nonsense. In short, it's bigotry.

Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Before you say 'what God?' look at it through a christians perspective.

Oh, I do.... but I say "what god?" only to make a point that there are many religions with many views that are just as valid as christianity. Those who say christianity is the most valid are christians. Muslims say the same about islam, and so on with nearly every other religion. Buddism is, perhaps, the only religion I've encountered where the religious leaders accept the validity of other religions. Buddism is, in many ways, more christian than christianity...

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
-- Steven Weinberg

Homuncul
08-07-2003, 04:57 AM
How are we to believe these men are divinely inspired? Suppose I came to you with a 100 page book that I claim God inspired me to write. Would you add this to your pages in the Bible and live by it as well?

There is more to that. How many so called heresies containing the words of Christ had not been included in the Bible. I read some, and sometimes he says there more clearly than in Bible. I guess this is all a conspiracy, and everything in Bible is intentiously made that way so that noone could actually question anything there. It's all BLUR.

Luke, take it easy. Think of not whose turn is now to understand one another, but who can be the first. You always say of us here not understanding you and christianity. Maybe at least (if you consider us such kids) you would turn to understand our point (not the one of bashing christianity of course).

ShadowTemplar
08-07-2003, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by joetheeskimo5
And, Paul did start the church, but it wasn't catholic. Back then, there as no such thing as protestants and catholics being seperate groups. There were either believers, or non-believers. The modern world has torn the church into two groups, and the catholics nowadays are usually on the wrong path.

Meaning that there was also no US of A before the Civil War? Same diff.

He was saying that Harry Potter outsold the bible (and had less time on the best seller list!) and to read the source he cited and compare to your statement.

Actually I was repeating part of what I quoted: Skywalker said that I should read the Book (English for Bible (what a show of wit and originality on part of its authors)), and compare what he stated was the 'best selling book of all times'. So actually, Skywalker, you should have directed your question to yourself: Compare what? BTW: The post I quoted wasn't that old, are you purposefully 'forgetting' your own posts... Because you certainly seem to be repeating yourself alot.

Interesting, considering it used to be over 500 nations under Wakan-Tanka.

Smackdown!

shukrallah
08-07-2003, 06:08 PM
God orders the sons of Levi (Moses, Aaron, and the other members of their tribe that were "on the Lord's side") to kill "every man his neighbor." "And there fell of the people that day about 3000 men." Genesis 32:27-28

And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them. -- Deuteronomy 7:2

Oh... and:

Deliver up their children to the famine, and pour out their blood by the force of the sword; and let their wives be bereaved of their children, and be widows; and let their men be put to death; let their young men be slain by the sword in battle. -- Jeremiah 18:21


O_O im just looking at my bible.. and well... are u sure you have the right verses and chapters?? i mean.. number one moses, nor aron, were alive in genesis also there were no tribes, because israel not a country yet :p My bible says something completly different... maybe im looking at the wrong page :|

About the deuteronomy verse, why was that commanded? They were taking over another country.

About the Jeremiah verse, people were planning to kill him and that was his prayer....

did you read all of these passages?

Really? Cite a reference please. Because, just as I've read the Bible cover-to-cover, I've also read much of the Koran. I don't recall that message. Or did your little wink smiley indicate that you were making it up... hard to discern across the internet.....

Its a well known fact that many muslims have killed christians, just for saying Jesus died on the cross or something. Maybe its not there law, but go up to one and say something about christ, you wont be standing for long.

Allah(the arab name of god, therefore the same god christians believe in.)

actually this is allah

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/images/muslim.jpg

Through archeology allah has been proven an old idol moon god. It was worshiped by people along the nile river, and by most arab people before Islam. Muhamud knew about all this, but he just wanted to make his own religion. Thats a picture of a statue of allah, proving allah was an idol. Notice the moon on his chest.

Read up on him ;)

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm

So allah is not the same as the christian God. Allah is a stone statue.

Meaning that there was also no US of A before the Civil War? Same diff.

NO. Theres no difference. You example is flawed. The catholic church is basically the babylonian (church?)

Why is christianity more christian than catholisms? (however you spell it) Because we follow the CHRISTIAN rules. What are the christian rules? The BIBLE. They have bibles, but they dont look at them. For the last time, how can it be christian if it calls the FOUNDER of christianity (Jesus Christ) a heratic!!!!! Its like a muslim saying that muhammed is a heretic, or a buddhist saying that budda is a heratic.

There is more to that. How many so called heresies containing the words of Christ had not been included in the Bible. I read some, and sometimes he says there more clearly than in Bible. I guess this is all a conspiracy, and everything in Bible is intentiously made that way so that noone could actually question anything there. It's all BLUR.

Its not blurred :p What are you having trouble understanding? Give me an example. Is it the parables? What?

The reason you dont understand is because the bible is a spiritual matter. Only a spiritual person can understand. The bible itself tells you this.

Luke, take it easy. Think of not whose turn is now to understand one another, but who can be the first. You always say of us here not understanding you and christianity. Maybe at least (if you consider us such kids) you would turn to understand our point (not the one of bashing christianity of course).

Ah, but bashing christianity is the topic. Look what your standing for.. look whos side your on. Your defending wrong doings ;)


The post I quoted wasn't that old, are you purposefully 'forgetting' your own posts... Because you certainly seem to be repeating yourself alot.

lol. I c what you mean.

Hopefully I've caught you up on the "chapter or 2" that you missed then

Wouldnt do you too good, cause it was the population counts i skipped ;)

I would bet that there have even been deaths as direct result of the hand of the Church of the Nazarene, which incidently began around the turn of the century just down the street from me.

Heh. Are you sure it was down the street?

Speaking of your denomination.... it is direct result of a split from the Methodist faith, and the Nazarene Manual is merely a minor rewrite of the Methodist version. It appears that some turn-of-the-century Methodists were unhappy with increasingly liberal politics of the church and decided to split.

Dude, i really dont care because my bible is my manuel. I attend the church. Im a member. Strange.. i was born methodist, but never learned anything about them.

The Methodists are also a split from the Episcipal/Anglican Church... otherwise known as the Church of England. I don't suppose I need to tell you how this so-called christian bunch started... but I will remind you that it was when King Henry VIII wished to obtain a divorce from Queen Catherine of Aragon for not producing a male heir. The Pope would not grant it. The king lobbied long and hard to change the Pope's mind to no avail, and the king ran out of patience and proclaimed himself Supreme Head of the Church of England and the Church began its separate existence from Rome. Divorce became legal and "moral."


Wow, my bible tells me that the only reason for divorce is adultery. Lets just say methodists do follow the bible. Then other christian denominations wouldnt be too different, because they follow the bible also. BTW, if thats the case why dont we condone it? Of course many people in the US believe you can just divorce for any reason. They did a servey and asked a bunch of women, is it ok to divorce your husband because of his weight.. .a lot said yes.


The death of man at the hand of man is a matter of history. It has occured in all denominations throughout the history of the world.

Id have to agree. But im going with the fact that, the person can be in a denomination, but not be a christian.

Sure I do... and from the catholic perspective, they follow the rules as well. That's the major failing with the "bible" that so many christians deny: it's inconsistant and open to multiple interpretation! In short... it's about as reliable as a guide to living one's life as Shakespeare. Don't get me wrong, I think the latter is valid... just open to multiple interpretation.... to be, or not to be...

your wrong (about the christian part) it is open to multiple interpretation, depending on how God wants you to interprete it, look at revelations, who knows what half of that means? Some of it is very easy to understand, while some isnt. Because its like a code. Hidden from us, untill the actual events take place.

I just stick with, whats written is written, and thats that. If it says dont kill.. .it means dont kill and you cant change it.

Does it overrule the more important belief that we as humans should love each other? Do you not think that God has unconditional love for everyone? Why does it matter a hoot if two people love each other, when even now, you are regarding us as lost? Why is more lost to love?

It doesnt say we shouldnt love them ;) forgetting, Jesus sat at the table to eat with sinners. Why? He was there for the sinners! To help them see the error of there ways. Mathew was a tax collecter, remember, tax collecters back then would charge people more than they really owed, and kept the extra money for themselves. Dudes, Jesus told Peter he would deny him 3 times, it happend. Jesus told Judas what he had done, and will do, and was right! People deny him, betray him, and hes still there for them. Thats love ;)


It seems to me that you entire religion is based upon a book which people said was inspired by God. This book has very little fact to back it up, and much of it's history cannot be verified (I didnt say all, as some of it is historically true).

Alright... umm... ill find stuff, give me a little time ;)

first things first. The Old Testament was the Israelites history book. It had there religious laws, and everything else... even populations. Ever thought that mayb eother countries may have also written about them. I mean, its not like they didnt see them around. They have to war records, things like that.


Think about Egypt here, its a fact, preist then did plenty of... uhh... things. (going back to the Jediism thread) demonic powers would allow them to do these things. 1. they worshiped idols, in other words it was demonic. If God let Moses and Aaron use his power all of the stuff in Exodus would be possible. Who do you think built the pryamids? 2. The Pharoahs were considered god back then. If they said something, it HAD to be done. Obviously, a defeat like the one in the bible would be very embarrasing to the nation of Egypt, so all the pharoah had to say was remove it from the history.

Another thing, during wars back then, they burned everything to the ground. Nothing was left. So, lots of records, of many countries could have been destroyed very easily. The books of the old testament (in new testament times) were published (? or whatever they did) and could obviously be bought. You read in the bible about some guy sitting in a (chariot?) and reading the book of Isiah. So this proves that the Old Testament was copied. So if anything did happen, there would be another copy.

In the new testament, most of the stuff was letters. Paul wrote some in Jail. Think he knew some people would put them in a book and call it the bible? I dont. Those letters were for teaching the current churches.

Even King David has been proven

For example, until 1993 there was no proof of the existence of King David or even of Israel as a nation prior to Solomon. Then in 1993 archeologists found proof of King David's existence outside the Bible. At an ancient mound called Tel Dan, in the north of Israel, words carved into a chunk of basalt were translated as "House of David" and "King of Israel" proving that he was more than just a legend.

“Much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archeological work. For the most part, historical events described took place and the peoples cited really existed. This is not to say that names of all peoples and places mentioned can be identified today, or that every event as reported in the historical books happened exactly as stated.”

I know your going to say something about that last part :rolleyes: its one of those it cant be disproven, but it cant be proven things. At least you know, most of the people were real, and most of the events were real.

R.D. Wilson who wrote “A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament” pointed out that the names of 29 Kings from ten nations (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon and more) are mentioned not only in the Bible but are also found on monuments of their own time. Every single name is transliterated in the Old Testament exactly as it appears on the archaeological artifact – syllable for syllable, consonant for consonant. The chronological order of the kings is correct.

hmmm... interresting the chronological order itself is amazing

Mesha, king of the Moabites, those distant cousins of the Israelites who lived on the east side of the Dead Sea, is introduced in the Bible in the third chapter of 2 Kings [2 Kgs. 3] as a vassal to the King of Israel, about 849 B.C. With the death of Ahab, Mesha rebelled against this relationship. This prompted Ahab's son, Jehoram, to engage the alliance of Jehoshaphat, the King of Judah, and the King of Edom in a military campaign against Mesha. With the help of prophetic advice from Elisha, the alliance was able to gain a victory over the Moabites. Mesha retreated behind the walls of his citadel, Kir-hareseth, and it was there, upon one of these walls, that he sacrificed his first-born son as a burnt offering in order to invoke the wrath of his god, Chemosh, against Jehoram's army. The Bible tells us that the Israelites were so horrified by this act that they returned home. (See 2 Kgs. 3:27.)

Before you say anything, make you sure read this one properly

Finally let’s look at Jesus. What evidence do we have the he existed? The Roman historian Tacitus writing between 115-117 A.D. had this to say:
"They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh-not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home." From his Annals, xv. 44.
Here is a pagan historian, hostile to Christianity, who had access to records about what happened to Jesus Christ. Mention of Jesus can also be found in Jewish Rabbinical writings from what is known as the Tannaitic period, between 70-200 A.D. In Sanhedrin 43a it says:
"Jesus was hanged on Passover Eve. Forty days previously the herald had cried, 'He is being led out for stoning, because he has practiced sorcery and led Israel astray and enticed them into apostasy. Whoever has anything to say in his defence, let him come and declare it.' As nothing was brought forward in his defence, he was hanged on Passover Eve."
That there is any mention of Jesus at all is unususal. As far as the Roman world was concerned, Jesus was a nobody who live in an insignificant province, sentenced to death by a minor procurator.


i got it from right here

http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_historical_proof_bible.html


some more interesting stuff

The Book of Job is one of the oldest books ever written. In it, God tells Job of his greatness as Creator and describes an animal, called Behemoth, as follows:

Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins, And his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron. (Job 40:15–18)

Marginal notes in most Bibles speculate that Behemoth was probably an elephant or a hippopotamus, but those animals have tails like ropes. Behemoth had a “tail like a cedar.” Any animal with a tail as huge and strong as a cedar tree is probably a dinosaur. Job 40:19–24 describes this giant, difficult-to-capture animal as not alarmed by a raging river. If the writer of Job knew of a dinosaur, then the evolution position is wrong, and man saw dinosaurs.

The next chapter of Job describes another huge, fierce animal, a sea monster named Leviathan.3 It was not a whale or crocodile, because the Hebrew language had other words to describe such animals. Leviathan may be a plesiosaur (PLEE see uh sore), a large seagoing reptile that evolutionists say became extinct 60 million years before man evolved.
Consider the many dragon legends. Most ancient cultures have stories or artwork of dragons that strongly resemble dinosaurs.4 The World Book Encyclopedia states that:

The dragons of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. They are much like the great reptiles [dinosaurs] which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth. Dragons were generally evil and destructive. Every country had them in its mythology.5

The simplest and most obvious explanation for so many common descriptions of dragons from around the world is that man once knew the dinosaurs.

What caused the extinction of dinosaurs? The flood. Because dinosaur bones are found among other fossils, dinosaurs must have been living when the flood began. There are dozens of other dinosaur extinction theories, but they all have recognized problems. Most of the food chain was buried in the flood. Therefore, many large dinosaurs that survived the flood probably had difficulty feeding themselves and became extinct.


http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q3_bible_dinosaurs.html#dinosaur scripture


I even heard that they found thousands of chariots in the red sea, egyptain chariots ;)

Noah's Ark... wouldnt it have broken when the water went down completly? Or even better, maybe after the flood it got really cold because of the water, starting the ice age?

Just some stuff to think about when you say the bible isnt true

shukrallah
08-07-2003, 06:29 PM
Another thing, they list Christs entire family, from the bigginning of the world, all the way to Christ. Even King David was related to him!

another thing, when God stopped the sun, or the Earth:


Fact eight: God, in His infinite wisdom, gave man all kinds of ways to prove the Bible. Joshua’s long day, where God stopped the sun for approximately 24 hours, is proof of the Bible (Josh. 10:12-13). Many ancient cultures record in their histories a time when the world was dark for a day, stayed light for a day, when the sun set for a day or rose in the east and stayed there for about a day.

Fact nine: The Ten Commandments that were written by the Lord on stone, Aaron’s rod that budded, and a jar containing the manna (bread from heaven) were placed in the Ark were constant reminders to the Israelites that these miracles did happen anciently.

A few years back they were even looking for the Ark, but the ruler in the place they were looking wouldnt allow them to dig for it. They think they know where it is, but he wont let them find out.

The Iliad is considered the second most reliable document of antiquity. There are more copies of it in a shorter time span than any other document of antiquity except the New Testament. In the Iliad there are 15,600 lines, at roughly ten words a line. It has a corruption rate of 5 percent. That's considered unbelievably good. The epic from India, The Mahabarata, has 250,000 lines. There are 26,000 lines of discrepancy (lines in question), for a distortion or corruption rate which exceeds 10 percent.

What is the data for the New Testament? There are approximately 20,000 lines in the New Testament. Remember, there are 24,000 copies of the New Testament. Wouldn't you expect, with that many more copies than any other document of antiquity, more lines in question with one another? How many lines in question are there among the 24,000 documents of the 2nd century (New Testament)? The answer is an astounding 40! It is a distortion rate of 0.2 percent, which is 25 times purer than the next reliable book of antiquity. Moreover, in every case without exception, the differences among the manuscripts are spelling, capitalization, and in even rarer cases, punctuation. In The Iliad, you were never told, "this may not be the way The Iliad was written, but we've got copies, discrepancies and textural corruption and this is our best guess." The truth is, among the earliest copies, there are such significant differences (whole episodes) in the storylines that literally a person who writes it today must choose among the various storylines the one they are going to decide to write.

I came to this conclusion - if any book of antiquity was to be trusted, it must be the Bible. The New Testament is by several magnitudes the singular most reliable book of antiquity! It is incomprehensible that so many copies could exist and yet have so few lines of corruption. God, who authored the Scriptures, took at the very least the same care to preserve them as He did to author them.


What about the Old Testament? Until 1947 the Old Testament was considered to be no more reliable than other books of antiquity. There was no scholarly basis to believe that the documents were essentially the same as those which were originally written - until the spring of 1947, when a young shepherd boy named Mohammed was out looking for a lost goat just on the west bank of the Dead Sea about eight miles south of Jericho. He came to a crevice in the rock. Not wanting to take the effort to crawl down in it to see if his goat was there, he took a large stone and threw it into the crevice. He heard the sound of shattering pottery. He climbed down into the crevice and discovered what is considered to be the most significant and remarkable find of antiquity. Down there were a number of huge clay pots which had been sealed perfectly. They had been untouched. In those pots were thousands - 40,000 fragments of literature from antiquity. One of them, the most complete, was a manuscript of the book of Isaiah. It was on a leather scroll that was 24 feet long and 10 inches high. The materials were sold to a Jewish scholar from the Hebrew University there in Jerusalem. With great interest it was shared with the literary world. The previously oldest manuscript of the book of Isaiah which existed prior to these scrolls, which have now been called the Dead Sea Scrolls, was from 900 A.D. Paleographers have dated the Dead Sea Scrolls at between 100 B.C. and 200 B.C. The scroll for Isaiah was dated at 125 B.C.

This forms a wonderful opportunity to compare textural corruption over what amounts to 1,025 years. Scholars immediately went to work to compare these two books to see what differences there might be between them. Would you like to know the results of that find? We'll take one chapter for an example - Isaiah 53. This chapter has 166 words. Comparing the two manuscripts, 1,025 years apart, there are 17 letters that are different. Ten of the letters are spelling, simply because over time, words change their spelling. Four of the letters are stylistic - punctuation and things of this kind. Three of the letters create the word "light," which was added in verse 11. So what you essentially have is that, over a period of more than a millenium, the addition of one word, "light" in verse 11, makes no change in the meaning of the verse whatsoever.


so much more.. guess i should stop or you guys will quit reading, if your even reading now :)

Homuncul
08-08-2003, 03:13 AM
The Iliad is considered the second most reliable document of antiquity.

I think that is the other reason to consider Bible sceptically. Evangeli were something of the same pulp fiction everybody read as Iliad in for 300 after Christ's death. It was very popular and that could also be the reason for the authors to make more and more books about. And now it turns that Bible is a book of historical and religious contradiction, but still the greatest piece of art ever.

Homuncul
08-08-2003, 03:29 AM
lukeskywalker1:
Ah, but bashing christianity is the topic. Look what your standing for.. look whos side your on. Your defending wrong doings

I'm on the side of healthy debate. This one disproves itself to be one.

Its not blurred What are you having trouble understanding? Give me an example. Is it the parables? What?

The reason you dont understand is because the bible is a spiritual matter. Only a spiritual person can understand. The bible itself tells you this.

Unfortunately I need more time to find that book. My room is such a mess:p

I'm pretty much spiritual with Bible. It has marvelous statements, artistically speaking. And mostly it was this book that formed my moral code.

And how do you difine spiritual person?

C'jais
08-08-2003, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Its a well known fact that many muslims have killed christians, just for saying Jesus died on the cross or something. Maybe its not there law, but go up to one and say something about christ, you wont be standing for long.

And it's a well known fact that many more Christians have killed Muslims - what's your point? Oh, but those weren't "true" Christians, right?

Maybe those Muslims weren't "true" Muslims either?



actually this is allah

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/images/muslim.jpg

Your point again?

Christianity is only a Jewish sect that survived because of Paul, and Judaism can be traced back to idol-worshipping as well.

NO. Theres no difference. You example is flawed. The catholic church is basically the babylonian (church?)

No it isn't. That's the same as saying Protestants are basically the same as Quakers.

Why is christianity more christian than catholisms? (however you spell it) Because we follow the CHRISTIAN rules. What are the christian rules? The BIBLE. They have bibles, but they dont look at them.

They don't? That's horsesh*t. Of course they do.

I seem to remember you recently talking about how you didn't even need to be in a denomination to call yourself Christian. As long as you believed in the Bible and accepted Jesus as your savior- is that not right?

Well guess what, Catholics do just that. Perhaps some of them don't and they aren't really Christians - but the exact same exceptions are found in your community, so don't come here and badmouth Catholocism.

For the last time, how can it be christian if it calls the FOUNDER of christianity (Jesus Christ) a heratic!!!!!

That's bullsh*t.

The reason you dont understand is because the bible is a spiritual matter. Only a spiritual person can understand. The bible itself tells you this.

I'm a spiritual person. I understand the Bible.

I don't believe in any of it.


Wow, my bible tells me that the only reason for divorce is adultery.

Let me explain something to you. It is impossible for someone to love another person as dear as him/herself for their entire lives. There will always be those moments where you resent your lover for a second or two. Sometimes those moments can grow, and create a gap between two persons. Sometimes their love die. But that's natural, not because one of them "failed". That's why we have divorce, so people can get on with their lives.

Lets just say methodists do follow the bible. Then other christian denominations wouldnt be too different, because they follow the bible also.

Including Catholocism.

It doesnt say we shouldnt love them ;) forgetting, Jesus sat at the table to eat with sinners. Why? He was there for the sinners! To help them see the error of there ways.

So homosexuality is an "error"? That's a flame, I'm afraid.

Skywalker, accept and respect that you can be wrong. Yet again, even the Bible was written by people like you.

Think about Egypt here, its a fact, preist then did plenty of... uhh... things. (going back to the Jediism thread) demonic powers would allow them to do these things.

Egyptian priests did not use magic, no.

1. they worshiped idols, in other words it was demonic.

Jesus is an idol for your servitude.

The books of the old testament (in new testament times) were published (? or whatever they did) and could obviously be bought.

No they weren't. The printing press making large-scale manufacture possible wasn't invented until the renaissance.

“Much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories.

That's not true. The Genesis, for example, is clearly historically and factually wrong.

The Book of Job is one of the oldest books ever written. In it, God tells Job of his greatness as Creator and describes an animal, called Behemoth, as follows: ...

Not this trite again. It's been proved wrong several times, in this very forum. I'm not gonna do it again, when I know well that you were in Hotrod's thread and reading what i wrote about this back then.

ShadowTemplar
08-08-2003, 06:37 AM
What about the Old Testament? Until 1947 the Old Testament was considered to be no more reliable than other books of antiquity. There was no scholarly basis to believe that the documents were essentially the same as those which were originally written - until the spring of 1947, when a young shepherd boy named Mohammed was out looking for a lost goat just on the west bank of the Dead Sea about eight miles south of Jericho. He came to a crevice in the rock. Not wanting to take the effort to crawl down in it to see if his goat was there, he took a large stone and threw it into the crevice. He heard the sound of shattering pottery. He climbed down into the crevice and discovered what is considered to be the most significant and remarkable find of antiquity. Down there were a number of huge clay pots which had been sealed perfectly. They had been untouched. In those pots were thousands - 40,000 fragments of literature from antiquity. One of them, the most complete, was a manuscript of the book of Isaiah. It was on a leather scroll that was 24 feet long and 10 inches high. The materials were sold to a Jewish scholar from the Hebrew University there in Jerusalem. With great interest it was shared with the literary world. The previously oldest manuscript of the book of Isaiah which existed prior to these scrolls, which have now been called the Dead Sea Scrolls, was from 900 A.D. Paleographers have dated the Dead Sea Scrolls at between 100 B.C. and 200 B.C. The scroll for Isaiah was dated at 125 B.C.

Aah, I have been waiting for a chance to pounce upon the subject of the Dead Sea Scrolls:

1) Most of the scrolls were never recovered, since the explorers who were sent to excavate them used local labour, who in many cases simply snatched the scrolls and sold them to collectors on the black market.

2) What was recovered was handed down to a commission for investigation. Unfortunately, this commission had close ties to a biblical research institution that was under the complete control of the Catholic Church. The one person in that group, Allegro, who didn't have such close ties said to a friend who was planning on converting to Christianity, that when he published what the commission had found, "there will be no Christianity to worship". Next thing that happened, the Inquisition had siezed the scrolls, and Allegro was subjected to a witchhunt of historic proportions.

3) In 1991, more than forty years from the finding of the scrolls, only 10% had escaped the Inquisition's archives. How much these criminals have destroyed is anybody's guess.

Source: The Dead Sea Scroll Deciet

shukrallah
08-08-2003, 02:02 PM
That's bullsh*t.

Dude, have you read what i wrote?

Roman Catholic law says that if you say you have assurance of heaven, you are damned as a heretic!!!!

John 3:16 (these are christ's words... look em up if you doubt it)

God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him may not be lost, but have eternal life.

look, it says HAVE eternal life. Christ said it. Roman Catholics say you cant say that, or you are damned as a heretic.

Why is it so hard to understand???

Christ said you have assurence, they say you can have assurence or you are damned as a heretic. But Christ said you do!!! Therefore they are saying that the founder of christianity is a heratic!!!!!!!

Your point again?

Christianity is only a Jewish sect that survived because of Paul, and Judaism can be traced back to idol-worshipping as well.

Yeah, its in the bible too :p

I cant see you have read this thread.. cause i wrote why they werent christians on page 3 i think.



I seem to remember you recently talking about how you didn't even need to be in a denomination to call yourself Christian. As long as you believed in the Bible and accepted Jesus as your savior- is that not right?

Once again you havnt read what i wrote... ill need to edit this after words, so i can cut and paste the entire story :p just so you can read it...



And how do you difine spiritual person?

You know, relationship with christ


why do i even post.. you guys dont really understand. (i can say this because you say 'I do understand, BTW what is this ...???' )
You cant possible understand when you keep asking questions

Skywalker, accept and respect that you can be wrong. Yet again, even the Bible was written by people like you.

lol, never said i couldnt be wrong.. i just try not to post something unless im sure its true ;)


so don't come here and badmouth Catholocism.

Dude, it started when someone said christian's committed crimes, catholics comitted the crimes. I proved they arent christians. Granted, from the world's view, they are. If you really research there history you see that they worship old egyptain/babylonian gods.

Ill quote my entire story, ill even do some searches and see what i can find.

So homosexuality is an "error"? That's a flame, I'm afraid.

I cant prove its wrong, but ill say this, even if you believe in evolution, its wrong. If the evolution process ment for man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, then it would be that way. They could reproduce with each other. Its not that way. I doubt it will ever be that way.

shukrallah
08-08-2003, 03:02 PM
did a search.

Roman Catholic Doctrines and Practices Contradicted by the Bible
1. THE MASS
(a) A sacrifice for sins, 'vs.'-Heb. 10:11-17, 7:27; Rom. 6:9-10; Heb. 9:11-12, 22-28; I Pet. 3:18.
(b) Eating and drinking the literal body and blood of Christ. 'vs.' Mt. 24:23; Ex. 20:13; Acts 15:20; Is. 44:14-20; Acts 17:24-25, 19:26; Jn. 10:9, 15:5, 6:63; Jer. 15:16.

2. CELIBACY
Priests and nuns vow never to marry 'vs.' I Tim.. 3:2-6, 3:12, 4:1-3; Mt. 8:14; I Cor.9:5; Eph. 5:31-32; Acts 21:8-9.

3. MARY, QUEEN OF HEAVEN
Jer. 7:18, 44:17, 25.


MARY, MEDIATRIX - I Tim. 3:5; Mt.11:28; Jn. 14:13-14; I Ki. 8:39; II Chr. 6:30; Ecc. 9:6.
MARY, SINLESS - Lk. 1:46-47, 2:22-24 (a 'sin sacrifice'); Rom. 3:23, 3:10-19.

MARY, EVER VIRGIN - Mt. 1:25, 13:55-56, 12:46; Mk. 6:3; Jn. 2:12; Acts: 1:14; Mk. 3:31.

MARY, WORSHIP - Rom. 1:25; Is. 42:8; Lk. 2:48-49; Mk. 3:31-33; Jn. 2:2-4, 7:10.

MARY, CO-REDEMPTRIX - Acts 4:12; Jn. 14:6; Rom. 5:17; I Jn. 2:1-2; Heb. 7:25; Jn. 10:1, 9; Ps.146:5, 71:5; Jer. 17:7; Joel. 3:16; I Tim. 1:1; Col. 1:27; I Pet. 1:21; Heb. 7:25.

MARY, MOTHER OF GOD -- Mt. 12:46-50; Mk. 8: 19-21; Acts 1:14; Jn. 2:3-4.

4. PETER, THE ROCK
'vs.' God, Christ the Rock .. Dt. 32:3, 4, 15, 18, 31; I Sam. 2:2; II Sam. 22:47; Ps. 18:31, 28:1, 62:2, 94:22; Mt. 16:23; I Cor. 10:4; I Pet. 2:6-8; I Cor. 3:11; Acts 4:12., Eph. 2:20; Mt. 21:42.

5. NO MEAT ON FRIDAY, LENT, FAST DAYS, ETC.
'vs.' I Tim. 4:1-3; Gal. 4:9-11; Col. 2:20-22.

6. AURICULAR CONFESSION
'vs.' Ps. 32:5; Rev. 14:12; Lk. 18:14; Is. 55:7; Acts 8:22; Ezra 10:11; I Jn. 1:9; Ps. 32:5; I Tim. 2:5; I Jn. 2:1-2.

7. PURGATORY
'vs.' I Jn. 1:7; Heb. 1:1-3; Jn. 14:1-6; Rom. 8:38; II Tim.1:12; II Cor.5:8; Lk.23:43; Rev. 5.:91

8. ROSARY
''vs. 'Mt. 6:7.

9. SALVATION BY MERIT, WORKS, SACRAMENTS, WATER BAPTISM
'vs.' Eph. 2:8-9; Rom.10:9-13; Jn. 3:16, 3:36, 5:24; Acts 16:31; II Jn. 5:10-13; Gal. 2:16; Rom. 3:27, 4:2, 4:6, 11:6; Gal. 2:16, 3:2, 3:5, 3:10; Titus 3:4-7; Gal. 3:24-25; I Pet. 1:18-23.

10. ADDRESSING A PRIEST AS "FATHER"
'vs'.'Mt. 23:9.

11. MIRACULOUS MEDALS, SCAPULARS, CRUCIFIXES, IMAGES, BLEEDING HEARTS, ETC.
vs.' Ex. 20:4-5; Dt. 4:16; Is. 42:8, 44:9; Lev. 26:1; Dt. 4:23.

12. POPE AS "HEAD OF THE CHURCH"
'vs.' Eph.5:23; Col.1:18; Gal.2:11; II Cor 11:5, 12:11, 11:28; Lk. 22:24; Mt 20:25-27; Acts l5:13-19; II Thess.2:3, 2:4, 2:9-12; I Jn. 2:18: Rev. 13:18.

13. TRADITION
'vs.' Mt. 15:3; Mk. 7:7-8; Col, 3:8.

14. PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD
'vs.' II Cor. 6:2; Jn. 3:18, 3:36; Prov. 29:1; Jer. 7:16.

15. PRIESTS
'vs.' Heb. 8:4; Eph. 4:11; Heb. 4:14-15, 7:26, 8:1; Mt. 24:4-5, 23-24; 23:9-23.

16. NEGLECT OF INDIVIDUAL SCRIPTURES STUDY AND INTERPRETATION AND OBEDIENCE THERETO, AS THE SOLE RULE OF FAITH
'vs.' Isa. 8:20; Dt. 17:19; Josh. 1:8; Isa. 34:16; Jn. 5:39; Acts 17:11; II Tim. 2:15; Rom. 15:4; Ps. 119:11, 103; II Tim. 3:15-16; Col. 3:16; Ps. 119:105, 130, 72, 97.140; Jer. 15:16; Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12; Ps. 119:9 Jn. 15:3, 17:17, 20:31; Dt. 11:19; II Chr. 17:9; Mt. 22:29; Isa. 30:9; Hos. 4:6; Amos 2:4; Mk. 7:9; Rev. 22:18-19.


hmmmm... i think that speaks for itself.

Its right here if you dont believe me ;) (http://www.orange-street-church.org/text/catholic.htm)

hmm... very interesting after doing a search i found the little book which explained most of the catholic things to me :) someone copied all the pages on the web i guess. Of course, this book didnt totally change my opionion. Back in the thread with Hotrod, i found out about catholics. I thought they were christians, but considering what they said, i changed my mind.

anyways, i didnt quote what i said, cause most of it is here ;)

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0071/0071_01.asp

I disagree with the revelation part though. I dont see how it talks about catholics. Anyways, thats where i got a lot of my info on catholics from.

C'jais
08-08-2003, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Dude, have you read what i wrote?

Yes, but why do you ignore a lot of what we have to say?

Roman Catholic law says that if you say you have assurance of heaven, you are damned as a heretic!!!!

Ok, now there's something we can work with.

See, only God knows for sure whether you are going to heaven or not. You might believe and hope you are, but it's up to God to judge you, and to see if you are worthy, no? Certainly not you.

It's like that point about you not being able to say to me that I'm going to hell. You just don't know. So, if you say that you are sure that you're going to heaven you are actually placing yourself above God - because you are obviously not qualified to know that.

Now, as to what Jesus said, what he was expressing was the Christian ideology. Yes, Catholics believe they are going to heaven if they live a good life(!) and trust in Jesus, but none of them would be so foolish as to make premature assumptions on something they have no knowledge of.

You understand now?

Once again you havnt read what i wrote... ill need to edit this after words, so i can cut and paste the entire story :p just so you can read it...

Instead of backing out of this, clarify your point.

You know, relationship with christ

That is not what being spiritual means. Look it up.

why do i even post.. you guys dont really understand. (i can say this because you say 'I do understand, BTW what is this ...???' )
You cant possible understand when you keep asking questions

Maybe, just maybe, we are asking rhetorical questions in order to make you clarify yourself a little. I understand perfectly well what you are trying to say about Catholics, but you show so little empathy that you are unable to apply this to your own religion.

Dude, it started when someone said christian's committed crimes, catholics comitted the crimes.

Yes, they have commited crimes and acted against the Bible's commands. Some of them have.

But again, so have Protestants. Is this going to be some pissing contest between Catholics and Protestants about who have done the most bad in the name Christ? Is this what you want? I don't think it is, because it's not going to prove a hoot.

I cant prove its wrong, but ill say this, even if you believe in evolution, its wrong. If the evolution process ment for man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, then it would be that way. They could reproduce with each other. Its not that way. I doubt it will ever be that way.

Many species practice homosexuality, and they're doing just fine.

Humans, of all species, should do it more often, as we're close to suffocating this planet in our waste. Homosexuality = less children - but we're gonna do fine anyway.

El Sitherino
08-08-2003, 10:10 PM
homosexuality is a way of keeping the population of a species from growing so massive that it would end up wiping out the entire planet but with these homophobic laws being passed i see mankinds fate looming on the horizon.

shukrallah
08-09-2003, 02:38 AM
Alright, i see what you are saying now. Very good point C'Jais. But i do know this, somewhere in the new testament it says you do have assurance. Ill possibly look it up in the morning, if i remember, because im tired right now.

Yes, but why do you ignore a lot of what we have to say?

Dont have anything to say about it ;) i dont ignore it, i read it all, most of the time more than once.

I must admit this though i was wrong in this statement:

Under Roman Catholic law, they have the right, to kill Christ, Paul, Peter, and everyone of the Apostles, and billions of people throughout history.

I posted that a while back. Assuming with out reading on my part (i got it mixed with something else, and a few days later looked it up, and found it was wrong)


Spiritual, had an experience tonight. Im not talking about ghosts here. I find the best way to teach, is through stories (examples) or personal experiences. So why dont i tell you one.... errr.. another one :) ? My mom and dad are divorcing, and shes got a BF. I wasnt too happy, weve argued and argued (they are both christians, as am i, my dad isnt :( ) anyways, i had some really bad thoughts about him. Not very christian like at all. Me and my mom got into an arguement wednesday night, i told her my thoughts, she told him. I got even more angry. So i just stayed in my room. I didnt talk her unless she talked to, and i didnt even bother to look at him. I skipped church last night, they went. I felt the holy spirit telling me to go, but i ignored him. Not the best decision in my life ;) anyways, i stayed in my room all day today. I played some old video games, stuff like that, didnt do a thing except find that stuff for you guys. Anyways, i dont know why, but at the last second i decided to go to church tonight. (Church on friday? Actually its a special meeting thing this week only. Each night, monday to sunday) I dont even know why I did, i really didnt want to. I go, and she (woman preacher) explains about her life. To cut a long story short, in the end she explained how God told her (she had been ignoring the will of the holy spirit for a long time) that if she didnt start doing his will then it was over for her. She explained how we had to give our lives up. She said you have to live for him 100%. She invited us up to the altar to pray, and seek Gods will, it was called santification i think. I thought, they do this a lot, ill just sit here and pray, like always. Then she said, if you dont come, and pray when you know you need to its only your pride standing in your way (i realised my mom had told me my pride was standing in my way the night before duringour argument, and i knew of several ways i wasnt following God) I thought about going up then, but I thought, theres like 500 people here, ill do it when i get home. Then she reminded me about a bible verse. That one, if your ashamed to show that you follow christ, He will be ashamed of you. I was like oh man, shes right. The thing that was stopping me from going up to pray was that i didnt want to in front of 500 + people. I decided, I had to, what i had to do. So I went up there, knelt down and prayed. There were like 20 people up there when i went. Next time i looked up, almost everyone was down there, just piling up behind people. Id stop, then God would remind me of another place i had fallen short, and sinned against him. I prayed more, and more. My mom was right next to me, and my sister next to her, praying. When i was done, I got up, looked at her boy friend, and continued walking. God had told me while i prayed to apoligize, i knew i was wrong. I just thought id do when i got home. Well, no big deal right? Well, then the amazing thing happend. He approached me and said, God told me to hug you. I was like whoa... and i apoligized for what i did wrong. Sign from God? Sounds like God was determined I did the right thing.

It was amazing. It made me realize, even though i am a christian, im still messing up. God has helped me out a lot, but i need to do more for him. I thought, just teaching his word would do it, but theres so much more to it than that. Wow. This why i believe in God, when stuff like this happens. Just amazing stuff. I didnt know any of this was ganna happen. I didnt even plan to go. I didnt plan to go to the altar and pray. God got me there for a reason, too many areas in my life where i doubted him, or was breaking his commands.

Whether you believe this or not, its all true. Ive just cut it way short, way, way, short.

ShockV1.89
08-09-2003, 12:54 PM
Great story, and it's good to hear you made amends with your moms boyfriend. Sucks about the divorce.

But give yourself a little credit, man. Did it ever occur to you that maybe what you thought was god or the holy spirit telling you to do things was really your own thoughts, and it was actually you who came to the decision to go to church the second night and you who chose to go to your moms bf.

Think about it: You were angry at both of them, even though the right thing to do was pretty obvious. But you were angry, and that anger clouded your judgement. When you went to pray, you had to calm down to do so. You then focused your thoughts on the issue at hand and asked god for an answer. When you focused on the issue without the anger shadowing everything, the answer became clear and obvious.

You did a good thing there. A very good thing. Give yourself some credit and dont just lay it all on God because you happened to be in church at the time.

shukrallah
08-09-2003, 04:24 PM
Thanks, but when I wasnt going up to pray, she would say something, not to me, but it applied to me, ive never met this woman before. Then when I was ganna do it later, God had spoken to him to hug me, which in turn made me apoligize, just like God had wanted in the first place.

Alright so in the end i did the right thing, but still, if it wasnt for God i probably wouldnt have. So he deserves the credit.

ShockV1.89
08-09-2003, 04:49 PM
You think you were the only one who was feeling those feelings about not going up to pray? If you were the only one, then everybody except you would have gone up right away. There's a reason it took so long for so many people to come up.

I'm just saying that God may very well have not had a hand in it. It might be difficult to grasp, but not every amazing thing that happens in the world is an act of God. Maybe, just maybe, it's an act of humanity.

I prefer to think the latter of the two.

CloseTheBlastDo
08-10-2003, 02:26 AM
Just stumbled on this thread and wanted to add my two cents - although I don't want to stir things up, so I'm gonna be careful how I phrase things :) And I apologise in advance for the long post.

Skywalker - I repect the way you are standing up for your beliefs - and please don't be intimidated by people who bash you unnessesarily.
But also don't close your mind to other ideas, and I would hope you read through my post carefully, because I mainly would like to communite with you directly...

I have no intent to bash - but I will say this. I understand why people do - although I wish they would tone down and keep their arguments to reasonable debate - because going over the top doesn't help in any way to come to a conclusion on things.

Firstly, I am a total believer in the principles of scientific knowledge and coming to the truth through scientific reasoning.
There is one BIG difference between scientific reasoning and religious thinking:

When science is wrong, it is willing to admit it's wrong! In fact, it is required to admit it's wrong and alter it's hyphothosis accordingly. In this manner it continually refines it's idea on what is 'true' at any given time.

Most 'fundemental' religious thinking - however, is the total opposite. What has been decided to be 'true' in books written hundreads upon thousands of years ago - often with dubious authenticity issues - is true NO MATTER WHAT. If new evidence comes to light, the most important task for religion is to work out whether it backs your religious views, or not. If it backs it, then that's fine. But if it seems to countermine your idea of the truth in any way, then this new 'evidence' is simply a problem that somehow has to be explained away, discredited or even destroyed completely. The LAST thing religion does is actually take the evidence seriously!

Skywalker, a few posts back someone mentioned Galieo and you asked what the relavence was. I'll tell you what happened to him:

Up until the time of Galileo, the commonly excepted model of the universe was that the earth was at the centre of it and everything else orbited around it (They hadn't discovered anything outside our solar system at that point - so that meant all the planets and the sun!)

Now, Galileo (who was a devout believer as far as I'm aware) discovered that - in fact - the sun was at the centre of the solar system, and every else, including the earth, actually orbited around that.

Skywalker - I am going to mention how the catholic church tried to cover up this dicsovery. Now I know you are going to say that that was just the catholic church, and this does not count for real christians etc. And to a certain extent your right. But please bear with me - I will eventually get to explaining how this example has bearing on all of christian thinking...

Anyway - the catholic church had already officially stated that the model which put the earth at the centre of the universe was TRUE. (After all, it made sense. God made the universe, and Man and the world was his most loved and important creation - so it made sense it would be at the centre of the universe...)

If this new evidence was generally excepted, it would make the church wrong. And since the church spoke for God, it would make God wrong - which of course wasn't allowed!!

...so the solution? They locked Galileo up so that he could not spread his theories!
Pretty shocking eh?! That is an example of religion actively discouraging the discovery of TRUTH so that people's beliefs aren't comprimised.

So - that was the catholics - this has nothing to do with other 'christians' or other religions right?
Unfortunately not. History is FULL of this stuff.

And unfortunately Skywalker, you could very well be guilty of this yourself (to an extent) - quite blatently from things you have said in this thread. There are several I could pick, but probably one of the more obvious and most shocking examples would be that of homosexuality. This isn't the only thing that you've spoken about that I would take issue with, but I think it is probably one of the most relavent topics at this point in time, and one of the most serious also.

To quote you:


I cant prove its wrong, but ill say this, even if you believe in evolution, its wrong. If the evolution process meant for man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, then it would be that way. They could reproduce with each other. Its not that way. I doubt it will ever be that way.


I'm afraid that this comment shows you have not really made any effort to look at the avaliable evidence and make up your own mind. You are simply accepting the 'truth' you have been taught by your religion.

Let's skip over the fact that you find issue with the theroy of evolution - one of the most proven theories in science (there is quite literally mountains of proof on it's side and quite literally nothing of real note to stand in it's way) and get to the part about homosexuality being 'wrong'.

Firstly, as has been previously stated - homosexuality is naturally evident in all kinds of animal species. This has been recently verified, although the evidence has been around for a while but was often ignored or discounted because of the 'taboo' nature of the subject.
Of course - if ALL animals were 'gay', then there would be a reproduction problem!! But the tendancy to be homosexual is a minority. So therefore, most animals reproduce and evolution carries on without problem. The important point is that animals do not 'choose' to be gay - they are born that way. If you don't believe that, let's move on to point no.2:

It has been shown that a certain part of the brain (for all species - including humans) determines the sex we are attracted to. For animals that are homosexual, this part of their brain is identical in make-up to a brain of the OPPOSITE sex.
e.g. the 'sex-orientation' part of a male brain would actually be identical to the make-up of the same section of a hetrosexual female brain - and vice versa.

So - in short - from the evidence found so far - it would seem that homosexuality is not some kind of corrupted upbringing - or the devil tempting us to be a certain way. It is part of basic make-up. i.e. it's as natural to be homosexual as it is to be hetrosexual.

Now of course, new evidence could turn up tomorrow that could mean I have to shift my views. That's one of the things I have to accept as a scientific thinker. I have to realise that what I thought was 'true' today could turn out to be 'false' tomorrow! But one thing I can be sure of is that by doing so, I can be assured I am moving closer to the truth as each day passes...

Now - Skywalker - I would be interested to hear what you have to say about the evidence I have just given - if anything at all. Because this is important stuff. The world is at a turning point in regards to homosexuality. (Just to get my orientation clear, I am hetrosexual. But I believe STRONGLY that homosexuals should be given the same rights that we hetrosexuals enjoy - without quivication)

Do you want to be acting in a similar manner to the catholics who imprisoned Galileo?! I don't mean to the extreme of locking people up obviously! But in the sense of ignoring evidence that's plain to see and keeping a group of people stigmitised in the eyes of society simply because you can't let go of your beliefs?

Be aware that yourself and other 'christians' and people's of all faiths have to think long and hard about what you believe. Do you REALLY believe homosexuality is 'wrong', or are you just believeing what your told by your bible? If so - I would think LONG and HARD about that.
Because I believe saying that homosexuality is wrong IS bigoted - plain and simple. And that more and more people are getting clued up to this fact. I would urge you to think for yourself and not let words written thousands of years ago dictate your beliefs.

In this sense, this is why it is OK to 'bash' christianity as you put it. If it says that one particular group of people are morally corrupt if they engage in an activity which doesn't harm anybody else and is quite frankly no-one else's business, then christianty, or any other group who says this - does deserve to get bashed and should expect it to happen. I'm sorry Skywalker, but that is simply the way it is.

That is all. I hope I have not offended you. You sound like a totally reasonable guy, and I hope you do not think I am bashing you personally in any way. But I am concerned about your viewpoint concerning several issues raised in this thread.

I would welcome any replies and thoughts you and others have...

SkinWalker
08-10-2003, 03:30 AM
Well said. I, for one, would like to welcome you to the Senate Chambers.... I hope that you will continue to read and post in this and other threads...

Actually, this thread might not be open much longer... Should arguments and points continue in a circular fashion, I think it might be best for all concerned if it were closed.

Still, I think it fair to leave it open a little longer.

Either way, I welcome more well-thought postings from you, as I'm sure others will too.

SKin

Jubatus
08-10-2003, 08:50 PM
I considered making a new thread for this but opted to place it here under the thread most fitted.

First off, this is an appeal to some of the socalled Christians of this forum, mainly lukeskywalker1 with wildjedi coming in on 2nd place, to either start arguing rationally in this forum of serious debate or outright leave. You're disruptive to the discussions because you argue dogmatically, not rationally, and whenever your dogmata have been rationally questioned you turn a blind eye and march on down the road of vain dogmatic persuasion.

Example: In trying to prove the truth of the Bible you presented a long parade of facts about historical figures mentioned in the book, somehow assuming that proving these people were recorded correctly in this book is also proving everything else in it true. My head almost exploded with frustration over such an absurd assumption. When we question the validity of your Bible, we question not the accuracy regarding people and places in time, we question the acts of divinity, for which you have no proof whatsoever.

Next, should this appeal fail, I appeal to the rational parties of this forum to do as I; simply ignore them. You cannot overcome in any discussion with these types, for, as I pointed out, they argue dogmatically, and there is no overcoming that, unless God descends from Heaven and proclaims he doesn't exist (I trust you see the paradox).

All we create in arguing rationally against dogma is pointless spam, a spam that interferes with serious debate, therefor heed my words, I implore you all.

Kurgan
08-18-2003, 05:07 AM
While I don't think that its anymore "okay" to bash Christianity than any other group, or that any group of (imperfect) people is above all criticism, I do think that there may be something to this.

Some things I think are behind the perception of Christian bashing being acceptable:

1) The Political Correctness movement run amok. While trying to appear sensitive to "diversity" some people feel that in order to promote the beliefs or attitudes of minorities, the best way is to try to tear down the majority (intentionally or without realizing it). That is why in the US you get people bashing whites, Christianity, European "culture" (if there is such a thing), the English language, etc.

It's seen as "okay" because the wrongs commited by the majority of oppressing the minority means they deserve whatever "payback" can be dished out.

I disagree with this attitude because I find it illogical to blame people today of crimes that were committed by their ancestors, or to blame entire groups for the actions of individuals. It makes just as much sense as those who wish to condemn all Jews for killing Jesus or for slaughtering the Canaanites as it does for people to bash all Christians for the Crusades or the Salem Witch trials.

2) This goes along with the last part of the first one... Crimes of the Past deserve Present Punishment. It's not enough for Christians to apologize for the part their religion took in various crimes and persecutions, modern day people have to pay as well.

3) Past bad experiences with Christianity. A lot of people get annoyed by people knocking on their doors trying to evangelize to them. They get pissed off by Televangelists begging for money and resorting to theatrics to get attention. They are sore because of getting yelled at our their hands slapped by Nuns in private school when they were little. A few are mad because they were abused by clergy (note: despite the media frenzy about priestly sexual abuse, less than 1% of priests have abused anyone, yet you'd think by listening to the reports that nobody was safe to go to church anymore) or told they were "going to hell" which caused them a lot of guilty feelings.

Of course, just as I've had people bash me for being an American (even before they know who I am and what I believe in), people are similarly bashed for the groups they belong to, that is, stereotyped. This is not fair or just. Just because one person in my group treated you badly does not mean I did, or will, or that all people in the group are that way. In fact, the person doing the wrong may be acting in OPPOSITION to the group rather than under its blessing.

4) Misunderstanding. This is perhaps the biggest one. You'd be surprised how many arguments I see on the 'net (especially) from people who have a beef with Christianity (or some branch of Christianity such as Catholicism) based on misunderstanding. Through ignorance, willful or not, they attack strawmen of the people and their beliefs, rather than evaluating each person or the actual beliefs. A notorious example of this is in those little comics you'll often find at bus stops or laundromats in the US.. chick comics. They take the most simplistic ways to attack denominations they disagree with and use heavily debunked urban myths and stereotypes to get their point across that everybody is wrong and going to hell but them.

A lot of this is due unfortunately to how people are raised and their understanding of their own beliefs. There are people raised in every faith imaginable, and even those raised in atheist households who convert later in life. This is not to say that their upbringing was faulty, but that they changed their mind later. Some do convert mainly because they did not have a real connection with what they were taught growing up. In addition, many are not taught the reasons why their parents or family believe or don't believe, but instead are fed the above problematic solutions. They don't learn the history, and so rather than making a thoughtful decision have something forced on them, and then reject it as soon as they can, since they had no real foundation in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, there are people who have genuine grievences with Christianity, or who have thoughtfully evaluated the belief systems and found that they do not agree with them.

I have no problem with these people. No one can be forced to agree with me and likewise they can't force me to accept their ideas. I think discussion is something that is most fascinating. Some people can handle it better than others, some not at all. But I find that a lot of mistrust and hatred comes from the above, rather than from a legitimate source. This is true of many things, unfortunately, and not just between Christians and other Christians or non-Christians and Christians.


PS: Some people say that Christian bashing is a "myth" a persecution complex that Christians have. While in a sense, there is not the level of persecution in the United States that existed in say Ancient Rome or in some parts of the world today (such as majority fundamentalist Islamic nations), there is still a sense of animosity between rival groups, and the kind of public bashing we have seen on the 'net. Why should they care? If we compare it to say "hate speech" against racial groups, one can see how it can hurt a person's feelings to see that kind of venom spewed out about something they hold dear or is part of their cultural heritage.

On the other hand, I see other groups promoting their own "persecution complexes" which seem to have just as much validity. I see Atheists and Wiccans counting their victims among the various purges, massacres and slaughters of history. I see Jews complaining about how they are treated in the media or slights by politicians or etc etc. Blacks and other racial minorities complain of racism. It goes on and on. Suffice to say that many people are unhappy with how they are being treated or percieved they are being treated.

While it is important to be realistic, it is also important not to ignore these problems, since they deal with how we human beings relate to each other.

PS: Being covicted of "heresy" is not a death sentence. Rather, it leads to excommunication (if the person refuses to recant their views that are in conflict with the Church). Excommunication means you are considered "not a part of the Church anymore" and you are not allowed to recieve sacraments. You can come back if you recant of course. In the middle ages, sadly, Secular and Church authority was often combined, so that heresy was also seen as treason, thus it could lead to imprisonment, torture, or execution. Consider also that non-Christians were often treated like second class citizens in theocratic states that were majority Christian in those times. Protestants of course weren't much better in that even those who sought religious freedom from Catholic countries went on to persecute other less powerful sects in areas they controlled or the Catholics that they happened to meet. Religious wars in our modern times continue to be something all people of faith should be ashamed of (note: I do not believe that most armed conflicts are religious based. some definately have religious elements to them though and some are religious based).

Being a heretic doesn't necessarily mean you're going to hell either, though in ancient times theologians tended to think in those kinds of black and white terms. Modern Catholic belief is that people who honestly believe their (wrong as seen by the Church) beliefs are not considered fully responsible for turning away and thus God may have mercy on them in the end.

Kurgan
08-18-2003, 05:31 AM
Oh and one more thing:

Its not that we are attacking DIRECTLY Chatholics all the time. It might seem that way to you because this is the strongest religion in the States, especially in the Southern States.

That's something of a laugh, considering the part of the south called the "Bible Belt" is almost overwhelmingly (some flavor of) Baptist.

Protestants are the majority Christian group in the US. Of course not all of them believe the same thing, as there are tens of thousands of denominations of Protestantism. Catholics are the largest SINGLE GROUP of Christians in America, but they are far from the majority of all Christians. Catholicism is bigger/faster growing in Latin America and Africa. Similarly people are often surprised to here that Islam is growing faster in the world than Christianity (Islam is the second biggest world religion, and Atheism/non-religious/Agnostic is very near to that), and the most Muslims are in Pakistan and Indonesia, not the middle east (most people think of Arabs, while most Muslims are non-Arab).

It would probably be more accurate to say that the majority of Americans are "nominally Christian" (due to various polls on beliefs and practice among professed Christians).

The Catholic Church of today does not advocate crusades or wars (the current Pope recently denounced the war in Iraq for example). The Church teaches that evolution and the big bang are viable scientific theories not incompatible with the faith. The American Council of Catholic Bishops has repeatedly denounced the Death Penalty in the states. In this way, the RCC stands out from a lot of other Christian groups, though it still disagrees with them on issues like homosexuality and female clergy, etc. Obviously Catholics are not perfect, but I think some people are lumping all Christians together as if they all believe, think, and act the same way.

ShadowTemplar
08-18-2003, 10:51 AM
First on the list: A warm welcome to CloseTheBlastDo(ors).

Second on the daily order: Skywalker á la carte:

I cant prove its wrong, but ill say this, even if you believe in evolution, its wrong. If the evolution process ment for man to be with man, or woman to be with woman, then it would be that way. They could reproduce with each other. Its not that way. I doubt it will ever be that way.

I seem to remember having smacked that down somewhere around here... You are speaking as if Evolution was Larmarkian, where in reality it's Darwinian. And by the way, Evolution is not believed in.

She explained how we had to give our lives up. She said you have to live for him 100%

You frighten me. Seriously. I could have taken that straight out of a textbook about Hitler-Jugend. Straight out, and I'm not sh/tting you.

Thanks, but when I wasnt going up to pray, she would say something, not to me, but it applied to me, ive never met this woman before.

Another fine example of how skilled an orator she was... That technique is well known, and has been for centures - at least. It has nothing whatsoever to do with divine inspiration.

Skywalker, a few posts back someone mentioned Galieo

Hehe. One of my personal favorites when it comes to showing why dogmatic thinking is fundamentally harmful to your sound judgement.

While I don't think that its anymore "okay" to bash Christianity than any other group

You are making the fundamental mistake of assuming that 'Christianity' denotes a group of people. It does not. Christianity is a religion, or an ideology or mindset, if you will. Much like Marxism, you can bash the ideology without bashing the person professing it. Take Marxism as an example. It is perfectly OK to bash Marxism. After all, it does contain some quite large and obvious logical holes and short-circiuts. Oh, and it caused upwards one hundred million deaths worldwide (that's twenty times as many as Nazism). Does this mean that I think that every Marxist is an idiot? Certainly not. The same goes with Christianity and Christians (you could, litterally, substitute the names in the example given above).

While in a sense, there is not the level of persecution in the United States that existed in say Ancient Rome

That Christianity was persecuted in Ancient Rome is an unfounded myth. Ancient Rome had religious freedom, and was, spiritually as well as culturally, a mix of a lot of different people, none of whom were persecuted for their beliefs ('cept slaves who thought that slavery was unfair, ect.). The ruling elite, however, was a uniform mass, with the same general cultural and religious background (the original 'Romans'). This is not to say that Rome was a model society, but compared to both what was around at the same time, and most that came after it, it was very open minded. The same, coincidentially, goes for the Arabian world in the Middle Ages. Endnote: This age of religious freedom ended abruptly about 400 A.D., because of the ascention of Christianity. What other religions were present, were persecuted with extreme prejudice, had their temples torn down and churches built on top of the ruins and/or had their temples converted to churches (an act that can best be described as sacrilege).

Islam is the second biggest world religion, and Atheism/non-religious/Agnostic is very near to that

Actually No Religious Preference is the correct term for the 'Atheist' cathegory that you mention. The former term covers, aside from Atheists also people who are 'Closet Christians/Muslims/Hindus/Jews/whatever'. These, in fact, make up the majority of the group that you cite. At least in the US, that is, and probably in the rest of the world as well.

Apart from your misconception about the relationship between the terms 'Christians' and 'Christianity', I agree with much of what you said, Kurgan, although my post may not indicate that (no need to repeat what one agrees with, unless it's very spectacular).

SkinWalker
08-21-2003, 06:37 AM
Where did lukeskywalker1 go? I kinda figured it would end that way... A tribute to a tenacious attempt (http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=1C0702C0-9920-487B-ACE8-2458E130AF53)

Kain
08-21-2003, 06:56 AM
In light of recent events, I've found that bashing Christianity is a ban-worthy act. They Christian-biased people, having a common bond, have apparently decided that us (for lack of better term) heathens should be warned at every turn. If lil Dubya got his way, the USA would turn into Iraq, but Christian based, in which case I'd feel sorry for those of us who don't stand under 'God'. We'd all be tortured into conversion or simply shot.

Jubatus
08-21-2003, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by SkinWalker
Where did lukeskywalker1 go? I kinda figured it would end that way... A tribute to a tenacious attempt (http://www.fanta.dk/showmovie.asp?mid=1C0702C0-9920-487B-ACE8-2458E130AF53)

Mayhaps he got the message; Christianity, despite its size and vast influence, cannot justify itself in a rational debate, for which this forum calls.

Or maybe he's on vacation without access to the interweb. Or maybe he took me up on my request for him to leave. Maybe he's dead and gone to Heaven, thus proving us all wrong....Maybe not.

In any event I stand by my request of not getting yourselves dragged into an attempt of rationally disproving Chrisitianity to a Christian - it simply is a waste of time and argumentative skills. That's not to say we can't discuss religion rationally, just that we shouldn't discuss against dogmatic religion...at least not in any other way than simply pointing it out to be dogmatic and hope this will speak for itself.

By the way, good Fanta movie, SkinWalker - why didn't you finish it? :cool:

El Sitherino
08-21-2003, 06:28 PM
no luke has access to the web. i've talk to him on occasion in the #echonet IRC channel.

shukrallah
08-22-2003, 08:32 PM
Uhhh..... :confused: ***waits for movie to load***

i stayed offline a week cause of the blaster virus, while i was offline i was working on my JKII movie :p and i just kept working then found out about some really sweet terrain stuff and learned that then checked back here :)

no luke has access to the web. i've talk to him on occasion in the #echonet IRC channel.

Yeah, it kept distrating me from the stuff i was supposed to be mapping... Thats why latley ill join say hi, then 10 minutes later just disapear :)

rofl very funny skinwalker :D

Look, i just use the web to tell God's word... thats the main reason i come to these threads.

Anyways, to just say this thread doesnt really matter:


Luke 21: 12-14
"But before all these things happen, people will arrest you and treat you cruelly. They will judge you in their synagogues and put you in jail and force you to stand before kings and governors because you follow me. But this will give you an opportunity to tell about me.

Always have been bashed, always will be.

Eldritch
08-23-2003, 05:04 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Luke 21: 12-14
"But before all these things happen, people will arrest you and treat you cruelly. They will judge you in their synagogues and put you in jail and force you to stand before kings and governors because you follow me. But this will give you an opportunity to tell about me.

Always have been bashed, always will be.
The ability to rationalize away any and all logical arguments has always been, and will always be, one of the key unwritten tenants of Christianity.

"But before you realize the truth, your faith will be questioned and your logic argued. They will debate you in the Senate and ask you to account for your reasoning despite the lack of any hard evidence. But this will give you the opportunity to expand your mind, and one day perhaps you will realize that you are the only God you will ever know."
Eldritch 15: 27-29

shukrallah
08-23-2003, 12:33 PM
Eldritch.. i think i missed that gospel... I hope you know there is a gospel called luke... its the 3rd in the new testament. Also the thread is called 'why is it ok to bash christiainity?' I was just sort of saying, people have always bashed christians, they always will, and it doesnt matter if i can pursuade you not to, half the world will bash anyways :)

Eldritch
08-23-2003, 02:30 PM
Yes, I do realize there is a gospel called Luke. I was raised Catholic, and attended a private Catholic school until 8th grade, in which I attended mass at my church 6 times a week. Please try not to make such assumptions of others. Its not very Christ like.

There's a major difference between "bashing (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=bashing)" and respectfully questioning the validity of some of its claims.

My point is that by quoting that passage of the bible and going along with that line of thinking, you're able to rationalize any good logical arguments that come along. "God told me this would happen, so I can just ignore you and everything you say."
I know he's said that he is a shepard, but that doesn't mean that you have to be sheep (although I think perhaps a Lemming would be a more accurate way of describing it).

shukrallah
08-23-2003, 03:55 PM
There's a major difference between "bashing" and respectfully questioning the validity of some of its claims.

I see the difference, but we both know, its not always like that. Thats when it become bashing (not talking about this thread, im talking about in the real world)

My point is that by quoting that passage of the bible and going along with that line of thinking, you're able to rationalize any good logical arguments that come along. "God told me this would happen, so I can just ignore you and everything you say."

My point was, whats the point of discussing why we should or shouldnt bash christianity, when we know nothing will change. There is no point.

El Sitherino
08-23-2003, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
My point was, whats the point of discussing why we should or shouldnt bash christianity, when we know nothing will change. There is no point. because it's fun debating things, showing off our vast knowledge of things. :)

Eldritch
08-23-2003, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
My point was, whats the point of discussing why we should or shouldnt bash christianity, when we know nothing will change. There is no point.
So you're saying we should become complacent and do nothing? This is exactly what i'm talking about - the general attitude most people (including many hardcore Christians) adopt is, "I'm comfortable where I am. It's too difficult to change / nothing will change, so I'm just going to do nothing."

It's this attitude that is responsible for so many of today's problems. Everyone thinks "nothing will change," so they do nothing.

shukrallah
08-23-2003, 11:21 PM
I was saying this thread doesnt accomplish anything :)

So do you think people will stop bashing christians? People still bash other peole for their skin color! (you dont see it a lot, but it happens)

Acrylic
08-24-2003, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by The Count
Christianity: Kill All Gays because they are Gay.


WHAT THE HELL!

Where did you hear or read that? From some of your atheist friends, or did you make it up just to piss people off?

Sure people can dislike gay people. I do. It just sickens me. If someones gonna bash me or my religion (which I dont think in christianity you're supposed to hate gays) go ahead. It is MY belief, just like atheists belive in "ooooooooo science" and "oooooooo big bang!"

Anyways...I hate it when other people say to accept THEIR beliefs, if they dont accept yours. I'm only willing to accept someones beliefs if they accept mine.

End of post.

Eldritch
08-24-2003, 03:18 AM
Originally posted by Acrylic
WHAT THE HELL!

Where did you hear or read that? From some of your atheist friends, or did you make it up just to piss people off?

Sure people can dislike gay people. I do. It just sickens me. If someones gonna bash me or my religion (which I dont think in christianity you're supposed to hate gays) go ahead. It is MY belief, just like atheists belive in "ooooooooo science" and "oooooooo big bang!"

Anyways...I hate it when other people say to accept THEIR beliefs, if they dont accept yours. I'm only willing to accept someones beliefs if they accept mine.

End of post.
Way to turn the other cheek there, Acrylic. God would be proud. :rolleyes:

@ lukeskywalker1 - Yes, I think that it's possible that eventually we will get to the point where other beliefs are accepted (even if others don't accept ours, Acrylic).

ShockV1.89
08-24-2003, 04:40 AM
Sure people can dislike gay people. I do. It just sickens me.

Too scared to post this in the homosexuality thread, where people would actually notice it and you might have to defend your statement?

:disaprove

Kurgan
08-24-2003, 08:19 AM
*Sings*

Flames, flames, go away.. come again some other day...


That's a hint guys... hope you caught it.


Now to comment:

nitpicking]That Christianity was persecuted in Ancient Rome is an unfounded myth. Ancient Rome had religious freedom, and was, spiritually as well as culturally, a mix of a lot of different people, none of whom were persecuted for their beliefs ('cept slaves who thought that slavery was unfair, ect.). The ruling elite, however, was a uniform mass, with the same general cultural and religious background (the original 'Romans'). This is not to say that Rome was a model society, but compared to both what was around at the same time, and most that came after it, it was very open minded. The same, coincidentially, goes for the Arabian world in the Middle Ages. Endnote: This age of religious freedom ended abruptly about 400 A.D., because of the ascention of Christianity. What other religions were present, were persecuted with extreme prejudice, had their temples torn down and churches built on top of the ruins and/or had their temples converted to churches (an act that can best be described as sacrilege).[/nitpicking]

Evidence for it being a myth?

By all counts the Romans were quite an intolerant people, since after all, they ruled by right of conquest and force of arms (brutally suppressing any percieved insurrection, including speech against the government). I'm not even sure how many thousands (millions?) they murdered in their bloody empire. Perhaps for their time they might have been considered refined and tolerant, but by today's standards there's no possible way we can suggest they were anything but brutal. These are the people who killed human beings for specator sports, and yes, they kept slaves as did many people in those days (and still do today).

Nero may not have "fiddled when Rome burned" but he certainly did his share of nasty deeds that make modern day presidential scandals look like nothing. Perhaps the only reason they didn't do more damage in their time was that they didn't have the technology to control as much power as our modern leaders have.

The fact that dead Roman Emperors were worshipped as divine in their own right and had their faces put on the coins of the realm was considered a grave insult in the eyes of Jews and Christians. Jews were persecuted when from among them rose "messiahs" who dared to stir up sentiment against the Romans.

Christians persecuted each other for centuries of course, but that doesn't make their own persecutions a myth. The same could be said of the Jews. They were persecutors and then persecuted, and now some are persecutors again.

Likewise, Islam could be viewed as tolerant, because they allowed Christians and Jews (and sometimes other Monotheists) who paid a special tax (basically protection money) to practice their religion in peace, while at the same time Jews were treated like second class citizens in theocratic Christian countries. But, if someone were to do that today, they would be branded as barbaric and intolerant.

Just so you know, I reject the notion that past persecution justifies persecuting other people as some kind of payback. Obviously people who had nothing to do with what some dead people a hundred years ago did can't be blamed for the mistakes of their ancestors. That isn't justice. It's true that some people see that as an excuse, and this is something I just don't buy.

Unfortunately, there has been a tendency at various times in history (such as for example the 19th century in the West, or the Renessainse in Europe) to romanticize and idolize the Romans and the Greeks, glossing over their mistakes and modeling them more into how we wish we ourselves were. I've even heard it stated that Romans and Greeks were "really atheists at heart" (spoken of course by atheists who admired them). So considering the source is important... and historians disagree.

Now if you like, I can dig up books that support the idea that the Romans were intolerant and brutal. I'd also like to see your sources for the "Christian persecution was a myth, because the Romans were so tolerant." It would be interesting to see...

Kurgan
08-24-2003, 08:40 AM
PS: Maybe last bit should be started in a new thread? I guess it's getting off topic, and what more could be said on the thread title anyway?

shukrallah
08-24-2003, 03:57 PM
Yeah, romans did mistreat christians, like.... PAUL!

These are the people who killed human beings for specator sports, and yes, they kept slaves as did many people in those days (and still do today).

Yeah, they fed the early christians to lions for entertainment :(

I've even heard it stated that Romans and Greeks were "really atheists at heart" (spoken of course by atheists who admired them).

why would an athiest say that when everyone know the romans and greeks had their own gods (there is even a greek god in a court.. uhh.. i think its the court with the statue of moses or the 10 commandments statue....)


Sure people can dislike gay people. I do. It just sickens me. If someones gonna bash me or my religion (which I dont think in christianity you're supposed to hate gays) go ahead.

nope, not SUPPOSED to hate gay people... (but then again it goes back to what i said before, just because you walk into a christian church doesnt mean your a christian)

I stand by the fact that the bible says its wrong its imoral (you dont need a bible to know this)

(although I think perhaps a Lemming would be a more accurate way of describing it).

hehe... interesting. Everyone is a Lemming, whether you believe in one thing, or another.

Eldritch
08-24-2003, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I stand by the fact that the bible says its wrong its imoral (you dont need a bible to know this)
Immoral to you, perhaps. When you say, "the bible says it's wrong," I'm assuming you're referring to the following passages:

"You shall not lie with a male as those who lie with a female; it is an abomination."
Leviticus 18:22
"If a man lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and they shall surely be put to death."
Leviticus 20: 13

If you read the history of the bible, you'll find that both of these verses refer not to homosexuals but to heterosexuals who took part in the baal fertility rituals in order to guarantee good crops and healthy flocks. No hint at sexual orientation or homosexuality is even implied. The word abomination in Leviticus was used for anything that was considered to be religiously unclean or associated with idol worship.

And since we're on the subject of Leviticus, let's see what other rules it lays down (and these are much more specific):

In Leviticus 11:1-12, all unclean animals are forbidden as food - including rabbits, pigs, and shellfish such as oysters, shrimp, lobsters, crabs, clams, and others. They are all called an "abomination."

Leviticus 12:1-8 declares that a woman is unclean for 33 days after giving birth to a boy and for 66 days after giving birth to a girl and goes on to demand that certain animals must be offered as a burnt offering and a sin offering for cleansing.

Leviticus 18:19 forbids a husband from having sex with his wife during her menstrual period.

Leviticus 19:19 forbids mixed breeding of various kinds of cattle, sowing various kinds of seeds in your field or wearing "a garment made from two kinds of material mixed together."

Leviticus 19:27 demands that "you shall not round off the side-growth of your heads, nor harm the edges of your beard." [this means you're committing a sin every time you get your haircut]

The warning is given in Leviticus 26:14-16 that "If you do not obey me and do not carry out all of these commandments, if instead, you reject my statutes, and if your soul abhors my ordinances so as not to carry out all my commandments ...I, in turn, will do this to you: I will appoint over you a sudden terror, consumption and fever that shall waste away the eyes and cause the soul to pine away; also, you shall sow your seed uselessly, for your enemies shall eat it up." The list of punishments and terrors that will come from not keeping all of the commandments continues through many verses.

Why don't Christians organize protests and picket seafood restaurants, oyster bars, church barbecue suppers, all grocery stores, barber shops, tattoo parlors, and stores that sell suits and dresses made of mixed wool, cotton, polyester, and other materials? All of these products and services are "abominations" in Leviticus. When have you heard a preacher condemn the demonic abomination of garments that are made of mixed fabrics?

Christians today like to selectively apply their own morals to this section of the Bible. They interpret the section of Leviticus incorrectly and use it to condemn homosexuality because it doesn't suit their personal tastes. I don't see any of them so concerned with the fact that they're not following any of the other guidelines from those passages - you'd be hard pressed to find someone who actually lives like that.

So let's not use the Bible to say that homosexuality is wrong anymore, m'kay?
hehe... interesting. Everyone is a Lemming, whether you believe in one thing, or another.
I wouldn't mind an example or something to represent this. I don't see your point.

shukrallah
08-24-2003, 05:10 PM
Awesome.. was thinking of leviticus chapter 18!
just i didnt want to type all of that... but not just leviticus...

If you read the history of the bible, you'll find that both of these verses refer not to homosexuals but to heterosexuals who took part in the baal fertility rituals in order to guarantee good crops and healthy flocks. No hint at sexual orientation or homosexuality is even implied. The word abomination in Leviticus was used for anything that was considered to be religiously unclean or associated with idol worship.

Interesting.... uhh i dont think the word homosexual wasnt 'inveted' back then... (another thing, if a man has sex with a man, he isnt really heterosexuall anymore... maybe bisexual, well unless it was raped or something...) really quick... when it says death you know it means Hell right? (I have to explain this to people, back then it was the death sentence, now its Hell...)

(and these are much more specific):

very specific, as is much of the bible...




And since we're on the subject of Leviticus, let's see what other rules it lays down (and these are much more specific):

In Leviticus 11:1-12, all unclean animals are forbidden as food - including rabbits, pigs, and shellfish such as oysters, shrimp, lobsters, crabs, clams, and others. They are all called an "abomination."

Leviticus 12:1-8 declares that a woman is unclean for 33 days after giving birth to a boy and for 66 days after giving birth to a girl and goes on to demand that certain animals must be offered as a burnt offering and a sin offering for cleansing.

Leviticus 18:19 forbids a husband from having sex with his wife during her menstrual period.

Leviticus 19:19 forbids mixed breeding of various kinds of cattle, sowing various kinds of seeds in your field or wearing "a garment made from two kinds of material mixed together."

Leviticus 19:27 demands that "you shall not round off the side-growth of your heads, nor harm the edges of your beard." [this means you're committing a sin every time you get your haircut]

The warning is given in Leviticus 26:14-16 that "If you do not obey me and do not carry out all of these commandments, if instead, you reject my statutes, and if your soul abhors my ordinances so as not to carry out all my commandments ...I, in turn, will do this to you: I will appoint over you a sudden terror, consumption and fever that shall waste away the eyes and cause the soul to pine away; also, you shall sow your seed uselessly, for your enemies shall eat it up." The list of punishments and terrors that will come from not keeping all of the commandments continues through many verses.

Why don't Christians organize protests and picket seafood restaurants, oyster bars, church barbecue suppers, all grocery stores, barber shops, tattoo parlors, and stores that sell suits and dresses made of mixed wool, cotton, polyester, and other materials? All of these products and services are "abominations" in Leviticus. When have you heard a preacher condemn the demonic abomination of garments that are made of mixed fabrics?

Christians today like to selectively apply their own morals to this section of the Bible. They interpret the section of Leviticus incorrectly and use it to condemn homosexuality because it doesn't suit their personal tastes. I don't see any of them so concerned with the fact that they're not following any of the other guidelines from those passages - you'd be hard pressed to find someone who actually lives like that.

So let's not use the Bible to say that homosexuality is wrong anymore, m'kay?



nokay

nice... but u see the thing is, those rules were "rewritten" when christ died for our sins... we were (i hope this is the right way of explaining this) made holy by his blood. And about the food part, check acts chapter 10

now then... mostly everything is covered by the blood of christ, but homosexuality, as you read in Romans... chapter 1 verse 26-27 it talks about how men and woman have given up natural sex for unatural sex... (read it ;) i bet you though) My paster said, God formed, sin deformed, Christ transformed. (lucky you, most of his sermon today was on homosexuality)


I wouldn't mind an example or something to represent this. I don't see your point.

well.. you follow something dont you :p ? evolution, atheism.. buddhism, hinduism, christianity.....

Eldritch
08-24-2003, 05:15 PM
If the rules were re-written, then why not take Leviticus out of the bible? Re-write the bible, or let the Christian bible be made up of the New Testament only. Then you'd actually have some ground to stand on, here.

No, the fact is just that Christians today selectively ignore parts of the bible and obey others.

The word "homosexual" of course didn't exist back then, anymore than the word "heterosexual" did. But they had other words for it - they knew what it was. It still doesn't change the fact that it's NOT what the bible is referring to, though.

And no one "follows" evolution, atheism, or anything else. It's an informed choice. There are no rules governing those things like there are Christianity. You either believe in it or you don't, based on your knowledge of the subject. So stop shining your smug smile at me - your arguments don't have ground to stand on.

CloseTheBlastDo
08-24-2003, 06:22 PM
OK guys, I'm with Jubateus now - there is no point in trying to discuss rationally with a person whose mind is as closed as LukeSkywalker.
This is not to say you shouldn't discuss religious subjects with religious people - just that talking about these things with someone like LukeSkywalker really is a waste of breath.
(At least at this point in his life - maybe later in life he could become a bit more clued up...)

Unfortunately, we are only fueling his ignorance. We are playing the role of the doubting heretics he heard so much about back in Sunday School - kind of like the 'baddie' you boo at when you watch a pantonime!! And remember, the heathens are SUPPOST to make sense. We are meant to sound convincing. That's how people are lead astray into hell. So trying to use logic and evidence to back up your argument is useless!

Basically, it comes down to the saying:
'Don't argue with a fool'.

SO fair enough LukeSkywalker. If God told you it's ok to be a bigot, then who am I to disagree... :rolleyes:

However, out of sheer curiosity, I'd still like to hear your answer to a question I posed to you a while back, and which you (conveniently) forgot to answer...


I'd like your view on whether these people are going to hell for an eternity of torment and whether they deserve to (I know you can't know FOR SURE in each case, but just an educated guess from what you know of their lives...)
* Florance Nightingale
* Ghandi
* Mother Teresa

Dagobahn Eagle
08-24-2003, 06:42 PM
Well, let's estabilish the difference between bashing and questioning here. I think it's needed.

If I say that "all christians suck" then I'm bashing. If I say that "it's stupid to believe that homosexuals go to Hell", yes, I'm bashing then too, but in response to christian bashing of homosexuals. Saying "I don't think I'll go to Heaven" is not bashing, but stating your opinion.

Truth is, christians bash people as much as people bash christians. People who bash christians just have to learn to direct their anger towards the "Bad" christians, like what I've dubbed the "holy homophobes".

shukrallah
08-31-2003, 12:29 AM
I'd like your view on whether these people are going to hell for an eternity of torment and whether they deserve to (I know you can't know FOR SURE in each case, but just an educated guess from what you know of their lives...)
* Florance Nightingale
* Ghandi
* Mother Teresa

Before my other post (where i said the bible verse in red, i skipped everything before it, so i didnt read your question) besides I answered jubatus in another thread about this...

anyways, my view is, if they hear it, and they hear it, and they hear it, and they still dont believe, then they put themselves there. God doesnt choose what path you take. You do. I know people are going to Hell, I dont like it (who would like to think that anyone would suffer like that?) but its like this: When a child misbehaves, a mother punishes the child, does she like to punish the child? No, but she does what must be done. Same with God.


If the rules were re-written, then why not take Leviticus out of the bible? Re-write the bible, or let the Christian bible be made up of the New Testament only. Then you'd actually have some ground to stand on, here.

Ok, ill agree with that. But i know it changed the rule on food, but im not sure about the others. Hmmm... im not sure why he made the rules, ill have to reread leviticus (been about a year)

And no one "follows" evolution, atheism, or anything else. It's an informed choice. There are no rules governing those things like there are Christianity. You either believe in it or you don't, based on your knowledge of the subject. So stop shining your smug smile at me - your arguments don't have ground to stand on.

You follow the ideas. You believe in it right? (an idea can be a deity, after all, if God isnt real, then he is an idea right?)


@CloseTheBlastDo: I love how said when you first joined:

Skywalker - I repect the way you are standing up for your beliefs - and please don't be intimidated by people who bash you unnessesarily.
But also don't close your mind to other ideas, and I would hope you read through my post carefully, because I mainly would like to communite with you directly...


But then you change your mind? Ill take you were having a bad day... and forget about this.


OK guys, I'm with Jubateus now - there is no point in trying to discuss rationally with a person whose mind is as closed as LukeSkywalker.
This is not to say you shouldn't discuss religious subjects with religious people - just that talking about these things with someone like LukeSkywalker really is a waste of breath.
(At least at this point in his life - maybe later in life he could become a bit more clued up...)

Unfortunately, we are only fueling his ignorance. We are playing the role of the doubting heretics he heard so much about back in Sunday School - kind of like the 'baddie' you boo at when you watch a pantonime!! And remember, the heathens are SUPPOST to make sense. We are meant to sound convincing. That's how people are lead astray into hell. So trying to use logic and evidence to back up your argument is useless!

Basically, it comes down to the saying:
'Don't argue with a fool'.

SO fair enough LukeSkywalker. If God told you it's ok to be a bigot, then who am I to disagree...




Ill make one thing clear, nothing will change my mind about the bible. I have not completly closed my mind, just partially (about the bible) About other sciences, I think they are true, or other facters (that scientists may, or may not have thought about) have influenced the results. Other things, I dont believe are true.

Let me ask you something? Is mind completly open? Partially closed? If its open, then why not accept God? Granted, I could never show you any tangible evidence of his existence. But that doesnt mean its not real... correct?

ShockV1.89
08-31-2003, 08:05 AM
anyways, my view is, if they hear it, and they hear it, and they hear it, and they still dont believe, then they put themselves there.

Bull. Completely and utter bull.

Lets say you are raised Hindu. It's your way of life, it's how you've been living for 30 years. Someone comes along and says "Thats wrong, Christianity is the right way" and you dont agree.... then you're to be burned in hell? For being raised a certain way?

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. And if there is a god, then I honestly cannot believe that he would be so stupid, irrational, and illogical as to do such a cruel, cold thing to someone. God made me. I can see the crappy logic in that decision. Surely he can too.

CloseTheBlastDo
08-31-2003, 11:50 AM
@CloseTheBlastDo: I love how said when you first joined:

But then you change your mind? Ill take you were having a bad day... and forget about this.


When I first joined, I noticed that people were making very personal comments about you, and I didn't really like it. So I wanted to show that some of us were not interested in just blasting you for no reason. It also seemed to me that you were trying to explain your opinions rationally.

However, things have changed since then... not only from your replies since then, but I've also taken the time to back-read more of the threads. I thought you might have the ability to take on new ideas - but unfortunately I was wrong.

Now yes, my last comments weren't exactly complemetary, but I'm not blasting you for no reason.
You have shown a total inability to listen to my, or anybody else's arguments and actually debate it properly. Anything you don't agree with and you don't have any evidence to counter it, you simply dismiss with a quote from the bible more times than not! This is no way to carry on a debate (if we were on a bible study thread, then the situation might be different) - and it is useless for us to try.

OK, I take back the 'argue with a fool' section, I don't think that was nessesary and I apologise. But the rest of it, I'm afraid - is spot on.

...and you think that someone like Ghandi DESERVES to go to HELL?!
Believe me LukeSkywalker, you get away lightly with the s**t you say. Seriously, I have never heard a more ignorant, arrogant or flat out dumb thing to say.

Don't get me wrong, I don't actually think there is a hell, and that Ghandi, or anyone else, is there. But for you to totally ignore the greatness of someone like that and simply dismiss such a man just because he was bought up with a different religion...

OK - I DON'T take back the 'argue with a fool' bit. Sorry man, but you deserve it.

..at least admit that someone like Mother Teresa (who has done more good for the people around here than you, or anybody on these forums - she spent her ENTIRE life serving and helping others) is going to hell for an ETERNITY of TORMENT is totally irrational, and that while you don't understand how that's fair or right, it's the way your God told you it is, so you have no choice but to believe it.

...if you said that, you'd gain back SOME of my respect.

I should be more polite, I know, but words cannot describe how wrong you are...


When a child misbehaves, a mother punishes the child, does she like to punish the child? No, but she does what must be done. Same with God.


Shouldn't you have said 'when a child misbehaves, a mother puts her child in the oven for eternity...'.
Then the analogy would make some sense...

SkinWalker
08-31-2003, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by CloseTheBlastDo
OK, I take back the 'argue with a fool' section, I don't think that was nessesary and I apologise. But the rest of it, I'm afraid - is spot on.

Some great words of wisdom found in two fictional works:

"How long, O naive ones, will you love being simple-minded?
And scoffers delight themselves in scoffing
And fools hate knowledge?"

And from another fictional character, "Who is more the fool? The fool? Or the fool that follows him?"

Originally posted by CloseTheBlastDo
OK - I DON'T take back the 'argue with a fool' bit. Sorry man, but you deserve it.

:p

The way I see it, there are only three ways to handle circular arguments: [list=1]
Continue the cyclical nature of the argument.
Resort to ridicule.
Resort to humour.
[/list=1]

SkinWalker
08-31-2003, 05:03 PM
Hypocrisy is the single best reason to "bash" Christianity.

For instance: Moses was a war-criminal.

In Numbers 31:3
Moses spoke to the people, saying, "Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian

to execute the LORD'S vengeance on Midian.

In Numbers 31:7
So they made war against Midian, just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed every male.

In Numbers 31:9
The sons of Israel captured the women of Midian and their little ones; and all their cattle and all their

flocks and all their goods they plundered.

In Numbers 31:10
Then they burned all their cities where they lived and all their camps with fire.

In Numbers 31:12
They brought the captives and the prey and the spoil to Moses, and to Eleazar the priest and to the

congregation of the sons of Israel, to the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by the Jordan opposite

Jericho.

In Numbers 31:14
Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds,

who had come from service in the war.

In Numbers 31:15
And Moses said to them, "Have you spared all the women?

In Numbers 31:17
"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man

intimately.

In Numbers 31:18
"But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.

In Numbers 31:35
and of human beings, of the women who had not known man intimately, all the persons were 32,000.

In Numbers 31:40
and the human beings were 16,000, from whom the LORD'S levy was 32 persons.

And finally in Numbers 31:53
The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.


This describes the practice of ethnic cleansing. Moses ordered that even the youngest male be

destroyed. Killed. Slaughtered. Put to sleep.

The women were mere booty, to be split among the spoilers. What happened to the 32 that went to god? Were

they sent via federal express or was it close enough to god to share the priest's household?

The only difference I see between Moses and Milosovich is that the latter didn't bother with taking concubines. I'm sure there are significantly more differences, though.

shukrallah
08-31-2003, 10:21 PM
Whoa, back up a bit... I wasnt talking about those people, I was talking about people in general. You put them in your post... I dont know about those people. And who am I to judge that? Only God can do that, not me, nor you. And the bible clearly says that. You must follow God, or no heaven for you. You cant take good without the bad. Im not ganna sit here and say they are in Hell, if they didnt follow God, then they are. But if they did (which i think mother teresa did) then they are in heaven. I hate to hear that someone would go to Hell. God doesnt like it, and he still loves you while your there. Hes just left you. Its tough to understand, and i understand why you would be mad.

..at least admit that someone like Mother Teresa (who has done more good for the people around here than you, or anybody on these forums - she spent her ENTIRE life serving and helping others) is going to hell for an ETERNITY of TORMENT is totally irrational, and that while you don't understand how that's fair or right, it's the way your God told you it is, so you have no choice but to believe it.

...if you said that, you'd gain back SOME of my respect.


I know she did a lot. Did I say she is going to Hell? No. I said PEOPLE.

Like it or not, God commands you to follow him. Christ said not everyone will go to heaven. Only the people who do God's will.

Good deeds dont matter. How can you make up for your wrong doings. If i kill someone, I go to jail, does it make up for the murder? No. I could give a million dollars to everyone on earth, but thats not enough. Think it foolish, do whatever.


You cant have good without bad!!! Why are christians bashed? Because they are taking the bad now! Why would God send someone to Heaven, who has cursed his name, lied, stolen, said "God is a fairytale, lets get rid of him!" (its in this thread) They call him a liar, false, stupid, unfair, ********** and all other kinds of crap ive heard people say about him. Why would he send you to Heaven? You didnt love him! You didnt respect him! You didnt do anything for him, except degrade him! And you deserve Heaven? (this was not ment at you, just in general, lots of people do this, this thread is a good example of this) Topday, people worship themselves. They say they dont need God. The nicest person on earth would go to Hell because of this. Do you understand this? think about it like that. Wouldnt you be mad? Is Hell still irrational!!!???? Dude, people like me are telling you this stuff for a reason: So you can get away from that. If you dont want it fine. I wont force you, im just a messenger.


Moses was a war-criminal.

Lol, thats perspective. To Israel (at that time, because not many believe he was real now) he would have been a war-hero.


However, things have changed since then... not only from your replies since then, but I've also taken the time to back-read more of the threads. I thought you might have the ability to take on new ideas - but unfortunately I was wrong.

So you were trying to convert me? LOL. And people constantly complain about christians trying to do that.
And from my first arguement with C'Jais (before there was a senate!) I said neither of us would change, so we argue for nothing.

And from another fictional character, "Who is more the fool? The fool? Or the fool that follows him?"

This is also perspective. Think about this, if christianity is true, then your following Satan (unknowingly) and hes a fool... you get pic. I see how you could relate that to christianity.

Moses ordered

Moses, or God? Id have to look it up. If you dont like it, tell it to God.


Lets say you are raised Hindu. It's your way of life, it's how you've been living for 30 years. Someone comes along and says "Thats wrong, Christianity is the right way" and you dont agree.... then you're to be burned in hell? For being raised a certain way?

For continuing it. God would do a lot more than "your wrong, im right" then send you to Hell, if you dont follow. Why does the bible say take the gospel to ends of the earth? Or the four corners? Because there are no four corners! There are no "ends of the earth" That means continue to preach it, till you reach the four corners. There are no four corners, so we keep preaching forever! God didnt say you could stop when your halfway through Africa. Then of course Hell wouldnt be fair, but he says, tell everyone! So they all have an equal oppertunity to get to Heaven!

Shouldn't you have said 'when a child misbehaves, a mother puts her child in the oven for eternity...'.

You have lifetime. Think of all your sins... and read the other thing above.

I noticed that people were making very personal comments about you,

Why do you think im one of the few (very few) christians here? because a lot got mad and left (ive done the same) Why did they get mad, because of peoples comments. Dude, people have said all kinds of stuff about me. Im not letting it get to me. Ill just forgive em, and walk on. I do thank you for your concern though.

The thing is, if my mind is closed, and im not accepting ideas (I do hear what you say... or read :) but i dont have to accept it) Then ill die, and people will just think im stupid. And it really doesnt matter. If evolution is correct, I dont have a thing to worry about. Youve heard the rest, i wont bother to type it for the 50th time

CloseTheBlastDo
09-01-2003, 08:56 AM
I am hereby ending this pointless, circular debate.

Reasonable, sound-minded people will see clearly the illogicalities, contradictions and plain ignorance in almost all your arguments.

The fundementalists will no doubt see you as someone who has bravely stood up to the slings and arrows of the heathens.

...in the end I guess this is as it must be. You cannot fight ignorance in a place where enlightenment is not welcome...

I'm sorry if I seem offensive. Deep down I think your a decent guy LukeSkywalker - I've said so before. But you've been bought up with some pretty f***ed up beliefs, which you are unable to see past.

You believe that people that have been taught the 'lies' of other religions are going to hell.
I on the other hand believe that you being bought up in your religion may very well have condemned you to a lifetime of (self-inflicted and self-sustained) ignorance.

Who is right...?

I'll end with a classic :
'I'll see you in hell!'

ShockV1.89
09-01-2003, 01:00 PM
For continuing it.
Suppose I'm a convert to Hinduism. I decide to try to convert you. You, understandably, resist, claiming your religion is the right one. I continue trying to convert you, and you continue to resist. After all, Christianity is what you've been raised as from birth. It's all you know, and you truly, deeply believe it in. There's no way you're going to convert, right?

It goes the same way the other way around. A christian can try and try to convert a muslim or a hindu, but if that person has been raised from birth to be part of that religion and has strong convictions in it, it's not gonna do squat.

I've always said, there's an element of brainwashing in being taught to believe in a certain religion from birth, or as a little child.

So if these people cannot change (and many of them have faith that is even more unshakable than yours) because this is who and what they were raised to be... why send them to hell?

shukrallah
09-01-2003, 01:49 PM
I wasnt raised to be a christian :p I said it was all a waste of time, and other things. I never was mad at it the way you are though.

ShockV1.89
09-01-2003, 01:59 PM
I'm not mad at Christianity. It's never done anything to hurt me. And if you werent raised Christian, fine. Good for you. But can you respond to any of the other points? Or are you just going to make your smug smiley faces?

shukrallah
09-01-2003, 02:43 PM
smug smiley face :) :D :p :fett:



Anyways, God gives people more than one oppertunity to turn around. Yeah, it can be hard. You dont have to... of course. Dude, satanists have turned to God. Buddhists, muslims, hindus, athiests.. or just average people, who dont ever think about religion at all have turned. Its very possible. As possible as you will let it.


I never was mad at it the way you are though.

Well... other people seem to be...


EDIT: the law is the law. Suddam's sons were raised to kill... they still paid the price.

ShockV1.89
09-01-2003, 03:06 PM
I understand it's possible. Anything is possible, in my opinion. I just think it's pretty messed up to condemn someone to eternal damnation for something like not wanting to change their entire belief structure just because someone "says" that it's wrong. You can claim all you want about the bible, but to someone who is not of that faith, it's just a book to them. They have no more reason to believe in the bible than they do something that I may have written.

Sure, they could do a little research and maybe see that the bible has some historical authenticity. But then, so does the Quran! That means very little, and moreover, they probably wouldnt bother. After all, they are happy where they are. Why should they change? Because you say so? Because the bible says so? Well, we're back to the same circle, then...

Eldritch
09-01-2003, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Moses, or God? Id have to look it up. If you dont like it, tell it to God.
Interesting.
If it was Moses, following your logic, he should go to hell for killing people.

If it was God telling him to do it... what then makes Moses any different then a serial killer that murders because he believes God is commanding him to do so?

Who draws the line between delusional [crazy] and a divine command from the almighty himself?

And for that matter, why not worship the homeless man on the street that proclaims himself Jesus? How can you be sure it's not him, and that he is not somehow testing you?

Originally posted by ShockV1.89
I understand it's possible. Anything is possible, in my opinion. I just think it's pretty messed up to condemn someone to eternal damnation for something like not wanting to change their entire belief structure just because someone "says" that it's wrong. You can claim all you want about the bible, but to someone who is not of that faith, it's just a book to them. They have no more reason to believe in the bible than they do something that I may have written.

Sure, they could do a little research and maybe see that the bible has some historical authenticity. But then, so does the Quran! That means very little, and moreover, they probably wouldnt bother. After all, they are happy where they are. Why should they change? Because you say so? Because the bible says so? Well, we're back to the same circle, then...
Right on. And besides, there's no more proof that Christianity is the "correct" religion than there is that Islam or Judaism or anything else is the "right" religion. So how do you know that you're not just telling lies? Faith? Followers of other religions have just as much or more than Christians do.

SkinWalker
09-01-2003, 05:55 PM
I want to take a moment to remind everyone here that the topic of this thread is "why is it okay to bash chrisianity?" not an invitation to do so.

My posting of the Moses - War Criminal piece was an attempt to get this back on track.

However, many seem to think that this is a good outlet for releasing their frustration and anger, rather than engaging in a reasonable discussion of the same. The arguments have become circular and their perpetuation hasn't been the fault of just one side of the argument. i.e. lukeskywalker1 isn't the only person who keeps saying the same thing over and over.

What we need to do is offer "reasons" why we feel that christianity is "bashed" (ridiculed, criticized, frowned upon, etc.) followed by our feelings on the issue. For instance, is it fair/unfair to do so in the manner described.

I could even agree with substituting the word 'christianity' for the word 'religion' so as to open it up to mulitple religions... just say so in the beginning of the post to make it clear. As an example, "Islam also gets unfair/fair treatment from critics because....."

As a warning, I'm considering paying close attention to this thread as far as editing and perhaps splitting threads off of it. If your post disappears or things don't look quite the way they did the last time you were in the thread, you know why.

My goal is this: keep the discussion civil, reduce the anger, avoid flames, maintain the topic, yet preserve free speech!

Please don't respond to this post In-Thread, but PM me if you have questions or comments. This is only because I don't want to start a sub-topic "about the thread." :cool:

shukrallah
09-01-2003, 09:59 PM
Should have checked this out earlier...

SkinWalker, your arguement is false because:



NIV BIBLE

Numbers Chapter 31 Verse 1-2

The LORD spoke to Moses and said, "Pay back the midianites for what they did to the Israelites; after that you will die."



So.... God was having his revenge. In other words, like when i said earlier theres more than one punishment (hell) he does other things as well. Also, God is justified in his revenge:



NIV BIBLE

Romans Chapter 12 Verse 19

My friends, do not try to punish others when they wrong you, but wait for God to punish them with his anger. It is written: "I will punish those who do wrong; I will repay them," says the Lord.




In the end, isnt it right to punish people when they do wrong? (this is on topic, because it applies to what skin said with his verses) So really, Moses isnt a war criminal, it was form of self defense (kind of) And if you dont believe what the bible says about Moses, you cant make that claim, because you dont believe he existed, so he couldnt have been a war criminal, correct? Because in your veiw, he wasnt real. (not saying you dont believe, because I dont know, but i know someone here doesnt believe he was real)

SkinWalker
09-01-2003, 11:32 PM
Ahh.. whether he was a real person or not is irrelevant.

We can critique Moses as we would Ahab and compare him to other characters, fictional or real.

Moses was allegedly doing god's work (the revenge), but did god instruct him to employ a method of ethnic cleansing? In a fraternally relevant society, this form of ethnic cleansing would be effective since it stops the blood lines of the people he was at war with.

If this form of punishment was acceptable back then (3000 - 10000) years ago, why wouldn't it be today? Why wouldn't it during the time of Christ? Are the characters of the Bible governed by a different god after the New Testement?

This kind of inconsistency is why I think a lot of groups (theist and non-theist alike) attack christianity. There is much said within the bible, particularly the Old Test., that is not consistent with modern times.

Personally, I think it is a wonderful source of wisdom... Proverbs are among my favorite books. Wisdom can be found in nearly all works of great literature, however, and I think that if people would accept that much of what was written, particularly in the Old Test., is meant to guide people of a different time who have different needs and therefore different values, they would be more tolerant of christian fanatism.

But bible inconsistency isn't the only thing that creates animosity toward christians. The 'holier than thou' attitude can be unnerving as well. Perhaps it is true, perhaps it is not. But to non-christians, this attitude comes off very matter-of-factly as "I'm right and you're wrong."

Case in point: the deal with the 10 commandments monument in Alabama. Very clearly, this was a violation of the edict of separating church from state. Having a christian idol in the center of the public area of the place where people must come to settle legal differences sends the wrong message. It says, "if you are not christian, then your case is lost." Think of the owner of a chinese restaurant coming to fight a law suit. Or the Pakistani cab driver who is trying to get a fair hearing regarding vehicular accident. What about the atheist that has a civil rights case that she's trying to get heard?

I'm not suggesting that the court is biased, but to these people, there is a certain amount of bias before they even present their cases. In places like this community, a certain amount of animosity toward christians is inevitable.

Kurgan
09-02-2003, 11:37 AM
I just had a thought, and this isn't really profound or anything, but this might explain a lot.

I think some of the notion that "it's okay to bash christianity" comes from a misunderstanding of christianity.

Let's use an example:

You're a Christian who doesn't know anything about Islam or other faiths.

You turn on the TV and you see Osama Bin Laden saying "I'm a Muslim, I call on all faithful Muslims to kill the Christians and the Jews... JIHAD!!!"

Then you read an article about some Islamic Militants blowing up cars or suicide attacks in Israel and Iraq. You see pictures of Muslims calling America "the Great Satan" in Iran and them watch people burn the American Flag.

Then you read a Jack Chick comic about how Muslims worship a false god and promote terrorism in their religion.

You decide: gee, all the Muslims I've seen are violent and hateful, it must be a violent religion and therefore false. Therefore, it's okay to hate Muslims.


The trouble is, this hypothetical Muslim hater would be seeing Islam as an impersonal, monolithic entity that shares commonality with its negative elements.

It's the same kind of bias that one might see watching shows like "Cops" and then make the assumption that only black people commit violent crimes (or that most crimes are committed by blacks).

Likewise, I think people who don't understand the diversity of belief in Christianity see people like Phelps, abortion clinic bombers, televangelists like Robert Tilton and Jim Baker, and assume "ah, Christians are all corrupt and hateful, therefore its okay to hate them."

They may see that Christians are the majority in their country and assume that at any moment they will be persecuted because these negative elements are in power and they are not. I think you're right about the "holier than thou" attitude problem. Of course this is not something limited to Christians. But since some Christians are this way, and Christianity is the majority religion in America, perhaps all Christians are assumed to be this way?

And yes, there is a difference between hating a religion or philosophy and hating people, but in practice it usually ends up being that you already assume you hate a person because they belong to a group you hate.

Just a thought.

Likewise I think some Christians have misconceptions about other faiths and about atheists. Assuming millions of people all think and act alike, and thus stereotyping them.

Education can help some of this, but sadly a lot of people just make up their minds and won't listen to anyting that disagrees.

I'm talking here mainly about the US, because I know in some parts of the world what group you belong to determines "what side you're on" in civil wars and conflicts and stupid stuff like that.

shukrallah
09-02-2003, 12:19 PM
Then you read a Jack Chick comic about how Muslims worship a false god and promote terrorism in their religion.

Eplain this, is he right? I think thats where i got the catholic and muslim stuff from...

If this form of punishment was acceptable back then (3000 - 10000) years ago, why wouldn't it be today? Why wouldn't it during the time of Christ? Are the characters of the Bible governed by a different god after the New Testement?

This kind of inconsistency is why I think a lot of groups (theist and non-theist alike) attack christianity. There is much said within the bible, particularly the Old Test., that is not consistent with modern times.



Wish I had my bible, but i only have about 5 mins and im school...

Anyways, the book of mciah (spelling :) ) says that God never changes. The people have changed, but God hasnt. He never will. The technology has changed, back then they had swords and spears, now they have missiles and bombs, or other explosives. Its still happening (suicide bombers, things like that) You also read in the bible about God using Nebuchadnezzer (spelling?) even though nebuchadnezzer didnt worship God, until near the end of the book of Daniel. Therefore, God used him to attack the israelites. Why couldnt God use the terrorists, or other groups? Why couldnt he use the US, or Israel? (not saying he is, but its possible) Really, the only thing thats changed is our technology, and the "way" we fight...

Back then, they would burn villages, and whole cities to the ground. Thats kind of like what happens today, just not to the level that it was back then.

Case in point: the deal with the 10 commandments monument in Alabama. Very clearly, this was a violation of the edict of separating church from state. Having a christian idol in the center of the public area of the place where people must come to settle legal differences sends the wrong message. It says, "if you are not christian, then your case is lost." Think of the owner of a chinese restaurant coming to fight a law suit. Or the Pakistani cab driver who is trying to get a fair hearing regarding vehicular accident. What about the atheist that has a civil rights case that she's trying to get heard?

I'm not suggesting that the court is biased, but to these people, there is a certain amount of bias before they even present their cases. In places like this community, a certain amount of animosity toward christians is inevitable.

I could see how the person would feel that way, but it should be fair, as long as the judge doesnt have any prejiduces... The examples you listed, did that happen, or are they just examples? But I see your point. Even so, the 10 commandments is much more than a religious symbol, its a symbol of right and wrong, of morality. If you get what im saying. Why remove what says is right, and what says is wrong. We know the stuff was made by the christian God, and it has a lot to do with christianity. But doesnt it have anything to do with today? Whether christian or not, its still a symbol of whats right.


There is a greek idol in a court room, but no one cares to take that out. But they take out the christian symbol, which can be appiled to everyday life.

CloseTheBlastDo
09-02-2003, 01:25 PM
Kurgan,

I understand what your saying.
MOST times, I clarify things by saying 'fundemental' christian as opposed to just christian.
Of course the word 'fundemental' can be prefixed to ANY religion. So I'm not actually critizising christianity, I'm critizising ALL fundamentalism - in ALL faiths.

If a fundemental muslim were to be posting on these boards - saying that his beliefs are just the way it is and ignoring any evidence anyone else bought to the table, then I would be JUST as critical of him / her as I have been of any fundemental christian.

So - to be perfectly clear. It's not christianity I am taking issue with - it's fundementalism, in any form it takes, and within any religion.

You Kurgan, for one, certainly don't fall into the 'fundemental' category...

Eldritch
09-02-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Eplain this, is he right? I think thats where i got the catholic and muslim stuff from...
Of course not. There are violent and nasty people in every religion. Islam actually promotes many of the same things Christianity does (and even shares some of the same prophets) - things like non-violence, tolerating other's beliefs / religions, etc.

The problem arises when fundamentalists take the "word" too literally and misinterpret passages, or selectively apply others (like some Christians do with Leviticus). Unfortunately, fundamentalists can be found in most religions; this includes people like Osama bin Laden, or the Christians who kill abortion doctors, or the Catholic / Protestant war in Northern Ireland.
Even so, the 10 commandments is much more than a religious symbol, its a symbol of right and wrong, of morality. If you get what im saying. Why remove what says is right, and what says is wrong. We know the stuff was made by the christian God, and it has a lot to do with christianity. But doesnt it have anything to do with today? Whether christian or not, its still a symbol of whats right.
It's a symbol of what's right and wrong to Christians (original Hebrew scripture for Jews even has a slightly different version). It's wrong for Hindus to kill or eat a cow, for they are considered sacred... but there's no "Thou shalt not kill the cow, for it is sacred" commandment. So it's hardly representative of what's right or wrong for all religions. It represents only the moral ideals or Christianity. If you want to put a book of rules in the courthouse, I suggest a listing of all the criminal codes for the state.

Besides, like Skin said, we have a little thing called "separation of Church (meaning religion - any religion) and State" (meaning government regulated bodies). The idea is to keep bias out of it entirely... Justice is supposed to be blind (Lady Justice is not Greek, btw - although she may share some similarities to a old Greek mythological (non-religious) figure).

shukrallah
09-02-2003, 10:18 PM
I understand what your saying.
MOST times, I clarify things by saying 'fundemental' christian as opposed to just christian.
Of course the word 'fundemental' can be prefixed to ANY religion. So I'm not actually critizising christianity, I'm critizising ALL fundamentalism - in ALL faiths.

If a fundemental muslim were to be posting on these boards - saying that his beliefs are just the way it is and ignoring any evidence anyone else bought to the table, then I would be JUST as critical of him / her as I have been of any fundemental christian.



Just so you know, in past debates, ive changed my views, not for a while though.

Besides, like Skin said, we have a little thing called "separation of Church (meaning religion - any religion) and State" (meaning government regulated bodies). The idea is to keep bias out of it entirely... Justice is supposed to be blind (Lady Justice is not Greek, btw - although she may share some similarities to a old Greek mythological (non-religious) figure).

Ive argued this before. There is a mandatory class (not sure about all schools) called world geography, which touches on islam, buddhism, hinduism, judaism, and christianity (although, leaving important things out... and barley mentioned... like 2 sentences worth, they say they wont talk about it because we go to church and we should know about it, ok fine... even though really, its that law.) I asked the teacher about seperation of church and state, and she said it was only if she was preaching it. Even though, it was only touched upon, it wasnt preaching. But how does having a statue of the 10 commandments violate seperation of church and state (from her view... i doubt its right... so ill check it out in a few mins) the statue cant preach, you dont even have to look at it.


@Eldritch- most of our laws are based on the 10 commandments, the 10 commandments is basically a very short version of our law. But I do see what your saying.

shukrallah
09-02-2003, 10:41 PM
Of course not. There are violent and nasty people in every religion.

Ive read at different sites about allah, but then again, rumors spread, and are followed. Even though the stuff they said was convincing. The catholic one, isnt as convincing, so they may be wrong about the baal worship... maybe. I dont know. But I do know, there are big differences in the religion. The bible does teach one thing, and they do different things.. not all different, but what they do, is enough. But maybe they have a different bible, compared to mine... Ill forget about the baal worship... but i still dont believe that its christianity, because the bible teaches a different road.

Let me ask, how do you become a christian?


(like some Christians do with Leviticus).

How do you get this? it says dont do this, so it means dont do it. What are you saying?

Eldritch
09-03-2003, 02:46 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I asked the teacher about seperation of church and state, and she said it was only if she was preaching it.
Uh, no.
Even though, it was only touched upon, it wasnt preaching. But how does having a statue of the 10 commandments violate seperation of church and state (from her view... i doubt its right... so ill check it out in a few mins) the statue cant preach, you dont even have to look at it.
I think this quote says more than I could to help you understand:

"When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some."
-Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun in the Lee v. Weisman ruling, 1992.
@Eldritch- most of our laws are based on the 10 commandments, the 10 commandments is basically a very short version of our law. But I do see what your saying.
Really? Wow, how simple. Perhaps to gain a better understanding, let's look at each of the commandments.

ONE: 'You shall have no other gods before Me.'
Interesting... didn't know that one was illegal. I'm pretty sure we've got freedom of religion.

TWO: 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'
Same as number 1.

THREE: 'You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.'
Man, just LOOK at all the similar laws! Wait, nope... I don't see a law prohibiting that one either.

FOUR: 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.'
This is more of a request than a law, but it's still not illegal to work on Sundays in our justice system.

FIVE: 'Honor your father and your mother.'
Again, this is a request - not a law.

SIX: 'You shall not murder.'
Ok, you got me here. Murder is prohibited, but Christianity is by far NOT the only religion to state this.

SEVEN: 'You shall not commit adultery.'
No law against this one - unless there's a prenuptial agreement involved.

EIGHT: 'You shall not steal.'
See number 6.

NINE: 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'
Don't tell lies - only time it's illegal is when you're under oath, as far as I know.

TEN: 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'
I've seen some weird episodes of Judge Judy, but this one's never come up. You know why? Coveting ISN'T illegal. Stealing it would be, though.

So that makes it what? 2 out of 10? And it's nothing other religions don't say as well? Perhaps you've got stronger evidence our laws are "based" on the 10 commandments.

Eldritch
09-03-2003, 02:59 AM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Ive read at different sites about allah, but then again, rumors spread, and are followed. Even though the stuff they said was convincing. The catholic one, isnt as convincing, so they may be wrong about the baal worship... maybe. I dont know. But I do know, there are big differences in the religion. The bible does teach one thing, and they do different things.. not all different, but what they do, is enough. But maybe they have a different bible, compared to mine... Ill forget about the baal worship... but i still dont believe that its christianity, because the bible teaches a different road.
This was a little incoherent. Can you say what you mean more clearly, or perhaps less reference to "stuff" and more reference to actual material proof / arguments?
Let me ask, how do you become a christian?
You're either raised as one or you convert (from nothing or from another religion).
How do you get this? it says dont do this, so it means dont do it. What are you saying?
I'm saying that when people misinterpret the bible, or only obey selective parts of it, you can have problems. Let's take the widely publicized James Kopp murder of an abortion doctor in 1998 (a crime for which he was just convicted). He told his lawyer to ask his detractors, "What's your plan to save babies?" and is quoted as saying that killing abortion doctors is justifiable homicide. This is an example of a fundamentalist (and anti-abortion extremist) - of what can go wrong when you take the "word" too literally.
The bible says it's wrong to kill, but he did it anyway. That's what I'm saying. He saw that part of the bible, but I guess he interpreted or reasoned that "Thou shalt not kill" doesn't apply to abortion doctors. :rolleyes:

On a side note, I don't see any of these anti-abortion protesters rushing to adopt the babies that the mothers don't want (but would have to give birth to if abortion was made illegal). So who will take them? What about victims of rape? Another topic for another time, I suppose.

shukrallah
09-03-2003, 12:37 PM
I dont think theres anything wrong in givinig a baby up for adoption... But killing someone because of another reason would make him a hipocrite...

I only have 2 mins, so ill post when i get home

Eldritch
09-03-2003, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
I dont think theres anything wrong in givinig a baby up for adoption...
Nor do I. I wasn't implying that. What I was suggesting was that all of these pro-lifers are not willing to adopt all the babies that would otherwise be aborted. Especially minority babies or ones that are born addicted to drugs or have fetal alcohol syndrome because of the mother.
Until they're willing to help out the system, they should have no cause for complaints. I wish there were a better option for these babies, as I don't want to see them killed either - but for many it's a better option than what they would've had... being raised in an orphanage or dying young because of birth defects.
But killing someone because of another reason would make him a hipocrite...
Exactly my point. Kopp's view was, "It's wrong to kill, but it's not wrong to kill abortion doctors."

Eldritch
09-04-2003, 12:12 AM
Here's a story found on MSNBC about the anti-abortion killer Paul Hill (just executed for his crimes in Florida earlier today):

STARKE, Fla., Sept. 3 — Paul Hill, a former minister who said he murdered an abortion doctor and his bodyguard to save the lives of unborn babies, was executed Wednesday by injection. He was the first person put to death in the United States for anti-abortion violence.
HILL, 49, WAS condemned for the July 29, 1994, shooting deaths of Dr. John Bayard Britton and his bodyguard, retired Air Force Lt. Col. James Herman Barrett, and the wounding of Barrett’s wife outside the Ladies Center in Pensacola.
As he has since the slaying, Hill showed no remorse and urged abortion foes to use whatever means necessary to protect the unborn.
“If you believe abortion is a lethal force, you should oppose the force and do what you have to do to stop it,” Hill said as laid strapped to a gurney in the execution chamber. “May God help you to protect the unborn as you would want to be protected.”
Hill was pronounced dead at 6:08 p.m., Gov. Jeb Bush’s office said.
Death penalty opponents and others had urged Bush to halt the execution, some of them warning Hill’s death would make him a martyr and unleash more violence against abortion clinics. The governor said he would not be “bullied” into stopping the execution.
Florida abortion clinics and police were on heightened alert for reprisals. Several officials connected to the case received threatening letters last week, accompanied by rifle bullets.
“Paul Hill is a dangerous psychopath,” said Marti McKenzie, spokeswoman for Dr. James S. Pendergraft, who runs clinics in Orlando, Ocala, Tampa and Fort Lauderdale.

HILL DIDN’T FIGHT EXECUTION
Outside Florida State Prison, extra law enforcement officers, explosives-sniffing dogs and undercover officers were in place to prevent protests from getting out of hand. About 50 abortion and death penalty foes quickly left following the execution as rain fell and lighting struck near the prison.
Hill, a former Presbyterian minister, had final visits with his wife and son, his mother and father and two sisters. His two daughters visited him earlier in the week. His religious adviser stayed with him until just before his execution.
Since losing his automatic appeals, Hill did not fight his execution and insisted up to the day before his death that he would be forgiven by God for killing to save the unborn.
“I expect a great reward in heaven,” he said in an interview Tuesday, during which he was cheerful, often smiling. “I am looking forward to glory.”
Hill suggested others should take up his violent cause.
Fringe elements of the anti-abortion movement that condone clinic violence have invited attacks on Web sites that proclaim Hill as a martyr. Members of the mainstream anti-abortion movement have denounced the calls for violence.
Most abortion clinics in Florida reached by The Associated Press on Wednesday declined comment. McKenzie said security is always high at their clinics, but they are particularly cautious now because of Hill’s call for people to follow his actions.
“The bottom line is when you work in the industry you’re aware those people are out there every single day,” she said.
Inspired by the 1993 shooting death of another abortion doctor in Pensacola, Hill purchased a new shotgun and went to a gun range to practice. The morning of the murder, as Britton and the Barretts entered the clinic parking lot, Hill shot James Barrett in the head and upper body. He then reloaded and fired again, hitting Britton in the head and arm. June Barrett was wounded in the arm.

KILLINGS TOOK PLACE NINE YEARS AGO
Hill put down the shotgun because he did not want to get shot by police and walked away. When officers arrested him within minutes without incident, he said, “I know one thing, no innocent babies are going to be killed in that clinic today.”
Hill was the 57th inmate executed since Florida resumed executions in 1979 and the third in Florida this year.
The killings of Britton and Barrett happened during a time of increased violence at clinics nationwide.
Another abortion doctor had been killed in Pensacola in 1993 by Michael Griffin, who is serving a life sentence. Two receptionists were killed at Boston-area abortion clinics in 1994 by John Salvi, who committed suicide in prison two years later.
Earlier this year, James Kopp was convicted of killing an Buffalo, N.Y., abortion doctor in 1998, while fugitive Eric Rudolph was captured and charged with a 1998 bombing that killed an off-duty police officer at an Alabama abortion clinic.
The article can be found here (http://www.msnbc.com/news/960563.asp) if you're interested.

shukrallah
09-04-2003, 12:22 AM
I see what you say, and i do agree.

except this:

I wish there were a better option for these babies, as I don't want to see them killed either - but for many it's a better option than what they would've had... being raised in an orphanage or dying young because of birth defects.

Whos to say abortion isnt painful to the baby? You could argue that they couldnt feel anything, but still, we dont know for sure.

With your point (not saying you ment this, just a little different perspective) but its like saying they would have died anyways, which justifies the murder. You dont really know how there lives would have gone. There have been many people will disabilities, that have made a huge difference in the world. (once again, not saying you said that...) We dont even know if they would have died.


This was a little incoherent. Can you say what you mean more clearly, or perhaps less reference to "stuff" and more reference to actual material proof / arguments?

i posted this before, so your probably read it. But i dont remember any arguements.. i dont know.Islam (http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm)

And then with the catholic stuff, purgatory, mary interceding for us, different ways to get to heaven, confession, church setup, and i guess thats all... im not sure.

The bible never mentions purgatory. The bible says christ is interceding for us, and christ said there is only one way to get to heaven, the bible also teaches about pasters and deacons, not popes, nuns, monks, preists, and bishops. And with the confession, the bible says to confess your sins to God, only God can fogive you of your sins. And you cant make up for your sins, so theres no point in trying.

There may be more differences, but thats enough to get my point accross... i know ive said it all before.


You're either raised as one or you convert (from nothing or from another religion).

Ok, ill refrase it, how do you become a born again christian?

NINE: 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'
Don't tell lies - only time it's illegal is when you're under oath, as far as I know.

slander?
Stealing can come under many different forms though...

like copying CDs and selling them. Or, conterfeit money... things like that. Alright, point taken though.

Eldritch
09-04-2003, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Whos to say abortion isnt painful to the baby? You could argue that they couldnt feel anything, but still, we dont know for sure.
Depending on the point in their development, the brain may or may not have the capacity to understand pain. So they may not feel anything.
With your point (not saying you ment this, just a little different perspective) but its like saying they would have died anyways, which justifies the murder.
That's not at all what I meant. I'm not trying to justify it - I'm only saying that there are many babies that due to choices of some mothers will be stillborn, born addicted to drugs, born with defects, etc. There are very few people that would adopt children like this, and I especially don't see any pro-lifers rushing to do so.
You dont really know how there lives would have gone. There have been many people will disabilities, that have made a huge difference in the world. (once again, not saying you said that...) We dont even know if they would have died.
I don't know where there lives would have gone - I'm not a seer. But we can reasonably predict what will happen to some babies if certain factors are met during pregnancy. It's extremely likely that if the mother drinks during pregnancy, the baby will be born with fetal alcohol syndrome, whose hallmarks are low birth weight, severe retardation, and physical deformity. I'm not talking about disabilities here.
If you've ever been to an orphanage (although now I think the PC term is Group Home) and seen how these kids live... you might change your mind. Especially if they are severely impaired, or are born with addictions - no one wants them, so they grow up unloved or with severe health problems that can be very painful, and often don't have the money for proper treatment. Their deaths can be agonizing and slow. So given the choice between an agonizing and slow death for a child, or a quick (and possible painless) one...

As a side note - all these aborted fetuses weren't Christian, so by your logic, wouldn't they be in hell?
i posted this before, so your probably read it. But i dont remember any arguements.. i dont know.Islam (http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm)
From biblebelievers.org? Hmm,you think they report biased or slanted information? I wonder... :rolleyes:
And with the confession, the bible says to confess your sins to God, only God can fogive you of your sins. And you cant make up for your sins, so theres no point in trying.
So then what the hell is the point of confession, penetance and all that stuff? That's a Jewish belief, you know - that only God can forgive your sins.
Ok, ill refrase it, how do you become a born again christian?
You want me to say something like, "They see the TRUTH!" or "They accept the LIGHT! What's RIGHT! The MIGHT of the Lord!" "Hallelujah!"
... bull s---. Same as before, you become a born again Christian by converting (either from nothing or another religion).
slander?
Stealing can come under many different forms though...
like copying CDs and selling them. Or, conterfeit money... things like that. Alright, point taken though.
I'll grant you slander. But 3 out of 10 is hardly the basis for our entire justice system, and that was my point. Plus the 3 weren't even exclusive to Christianity - the Code of Hammurabi outlawed many of those acts many years before Christianity was even invented.

Breton
09-04-2003, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
painful to the baby? You could argue that they couldnt feel anything, but still, we dont know for sure.


Even though all sense nerves are complete after 20 weeks, it is only after 29 weeks, when there comes a connection between the sense nerves and the brain, that the fetus can feel any pain at all.

shukrallah
09-05-2003, 11:39 AM
As a side note - all these aborted fetuses weren't Christian, so by your logic, wouldn't they be in hell?

They were never born! When did they sin! How could they hear about God? They would have never heard about God, so they never had the chance to change.

be back later

shukrallah
09-05-2003, 11:51 AM
back...

anyways, even with a young child, do they really have a sence of right and wrong? Not really, not till around age 3 or 4. They really cant make a decision to follow christ. They arent held accountable for their sins...

shukrallah
09-05-2003, 12:48 PM
Sorry about the triple post


the Code of Hammurabi outlawed many of those acts many years before Christianity was even invented.

Are you sure? I know hammurabi was before christianity, but was it before the desert wanderings?



From biblebelievers.org? Hmm,you think they report biased or slanted information? I wonder...

What other site would post it online? Not many. Like you say im closed minded, you have been shown to be closed minded, because of the name of a site. Well, all of it could have been made up, but also, how do you know someone didnt just type up a crap load of stuff about a scientific expermiment? You dont.

Eldritch
09-05-2003, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Are you sure? I know hammurabi was before christianity, but was it before the desert wanderings?
Yes. Which desert wanderings were you refering to? The Jews went through many different periods of wandering and settling. Even so, Hammurabi's code predates it.
What other site would post it online? Not many.
How about an islamic site? Or better yet, one that independently showcases many world religions without focusing exclusively on one or the other.
Like you say im closed minded, you have been shown to be closed minded, because of the name of a site.
I'm not closed minded because of the name. I'm not closed minded at all. But that site did not accurately report facts - after all, it's job is to get you to believe in the bible (hence biblebelievers.org), not some other religion.
Well, all of it could have been made up, but also, how do you know someone didnt just type up a crap load of stuff about a scientific expermiment? You dont.
Because there's no reason to type up a "crap load of stuff" about a scientific experiment. For findings to be posted, there is a process that must be gone through. The results are tested at least once more by a totally different team using the same procedures to see if the results are the same. If they are, the findings are reported.
And even if that process wasn't followed, other scientists would test their findings, and it'd be proved as fraudulent.
They were never born! When did they sin! How could they hear about God? They would have never heard about God, so they never had the chance to change.
Doesn't matter. Ask obiwan13, your fellow Christian - if they're not Christian, they're going to hell.
anyways, even with a young child, do they really have a sence of right and wrong? Not really, not till around age 3 or 4. They really cant make a decision to follow christ. They arent held accountable for their sins...
No, most don't have a sense of right and wrong at that age. Not that it would matter, since that implies there's a "right" religion and a "wrong" religion (both equally believeable). I've said it before - there's no more proof for Christianity being true than there is for Islam or Judaism or any other religion.

shukrallah
09-05-2003, 09:18 PM
Because there's no reason to type up a "crap load of stuff" about a scientific experiment. For findings to be posted, there is a process that must be gone through. The results are tested at least once more by a totally different team using the same procedures to see if the results are the same. If they are, the findings are reported.
And even if that process wasn't followed, other scientists would test their findings, and it'd be proved as fraudulent.


Hmm, that does make sense. Even though it is possible, it does seem extremly doubtful. There are plenty of reasons, just to convince others of your opinion, or whatever.

Yes. Which desert wanderings were you refering to? The Jews went through many different periods of wandering and settling. Even so, Hammurabi's code predates it.

Ill try and find a date. But then again, hammurabi was the babylonian king right? It probably was after him...

Doesn't matter. Ask obiwan13, your fellow Christian - if they're not Christian, they're going to hell.

I doubt he was talking about children, especially unborn children! You dont know what a religion is at that age. Why would God send you to hell especially when you probably cant control your actions, or your not really aware of whats going on around you? The bible doesnt mention anything on this, so its up to God to decide, if you believe that.

Eldritch
09-05-2003, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Hmm, that does make sense. Even though it is possible, it does seem extremly doubtful. There are plenty of reasons, just to convince others of your opinion, or whatever.
If you actually believe that, then you really are ignorant of what science is truly about.
I doubt he was talking about children, especially unborn children! You dont know what a religion is at that age. Why would God send you to hell especially when you probably cant control your actions, or your not really aware of whats going on around you? The bible doesnt mention anything on this, so its up to God to decide, if you believe that.
No, he was quite clear. I believe children were used as an example after he made the statement. He must be from one of those "wrong" versions of Christianity, eh?

shukrallah
09-06-2003, 01:24 AM
No, he was quite clear. I believe children were used as an example after he made the statement. He must be from one of those "wrong" versions of Christianity, eh?

I dont know what he said...


If you actually believe that, then you really are ignorant of what science is truly about.

I was agreeing with you sort of... saying ok, but its possible that someone could make up something, and get away with it, but it is doubtful.

There are evil people out there who will try to manipulate things for their own self gain correct? That doesnt exclude scientists. It would probably get cought soon after though, like you said...

Eldritch
09-06-2003, 03:01 AM
Of course it's possible. Anything is possible. But when has a scientist completely made something up and gotten away with it? The fact that he/she must publish how they did it prevents such a thing from happening. No one would ever say "Oh, great. They figured that out - no need to test it and make sure."

And there are malicious people out there that do manipulate things for their own self-gain. But the difference is that a claim made by a scientist can be tested and confirmed or refuted. No such thing can be done with religion.

Master_Keralys
09-25-2003, 01:12 AM
People keep saying that there is no more proof for Christianity that any other religion. I beg to differ. First off, nearly every event in the Bible that can be confirmed by historians and archeologists at this time have.

Secondly, and more importantly by far, is this. If the disciples of Christ were simply making up His resurrection and all, would they have been willing to die for it? Remember, every one was martyred. How logical is that? Think back to Watergate - men were jumping out of the boat in droves at the mere threat of exposure. Would anyone stay for mere power or respect? I don't think so.

Thirdly, the extraordinary of very early manuscripts of the Christian texts all line up nearly word for word. We're talking one or two-word discrepancies per epistle, and maybe five or six for the gospels. Moreover, there are thousands of copies of these, dating less than fifty years after the events actually occured. MInd you, Aristotle is regarded as an historic and valid figure - and the earliest manuscript referring to him comes some 1200 years after his death. And there's not many in that range of age. This is remarkable. How can one doubt the validity of Christianity, and believe that Aristotle actually existed?

Homuncul
09-25-2003, 05:46 AM
Running in circles, chasing our tails
Coming back as we are

Nobody said it was easy
Oh it’s such a shame for us to part

ColdPlay, The Scientist.

Sorry for the spam :)

shukrallah
09-25-2003, 12:11 PM
Remember, every one was martyred.

John wasnt martyred, he was the only one who wasnt, i think...

Anyways, I agree with every thing you said, and that was a good question.

SkinWalker
10-01-2003, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by Homuncul
Running in circles, chasing our tails...

Sorry for the spam :)

I don't know.. it seems relevant to me.... these discussions can become quite circular. But as they come back around, let's hope we are improving our understandings of each other and ourselves... in the end, this is what matters most, regardless of where you stand on a subject/topic.

Also, in case you were wondering... I deleted a couple of posts... spam is also complaining about spam :cool:

XERXES
10-02-2003, 03:23 PM
I cant wait till Jesus comes back and goes "you havent listened to a thing I said for 2000 years" while God says "I told you so"


(yes even me =S but I try.. :) )

Elijah
10-11-2003, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by TheJackal
The Pope doesnt allow people to use anti-contreceptive pills, why not? Your speaking of a catholic rule.

Here is one thing to remember about christianity,
There is MANY different branches/denominations, and we all believe different things, although we hold many things in common.
It all depends on how you translate scripture.

I would also add, I'm a VERY open minded person, who believes you should be able t believe what ever you want to, which is why I dont force my beliefs on to other people...

Christ said not everyone will go to heaven. Only the people who do God's will. What christ said was,
"I am the way, the truth and the life, and noone gets to the father except through me." it was also said "anyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved." so many christians try to add all these strings and attachments. God isnt about what you CANNOT do, but what you CAN do through christ.

Last thing, has when will people understand, Pointing out how "bad" God was in the old testement does NOTHING. The old testement is mearly history.

Excuse my jumpness in this post, I need to get going, just skimmed over the last page of this thread.

shukrallah
10-18-2003, 06:32 PM
What christ said was,
"I am the way, the truth and the life, and noone gets to the father except through me." it was also said "anyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved." so many christians try to add all these strings and attachments. God isnt about what you CANNOT do, but what you CAN do through christ.



Zdawg, i know what your talking about, but christ also says more than that, read MATHEW Chapter 7, verse 21-23 i think ive quoted it somewhere... but it says what im talking about.

El Sitherino
10-19-2003, 01:28 PM
I have a hard time understanding why people would still go to hell for worshipping god but not jesus. (according to christianity)

ShockV1.89
10-19-2003, 05:01 PM
Seems to me that people often come to certain conclusions about certain topics, and then turn to scripture to prove their point. Not the other way around. The end result is people interpreting scripture with an extreme bias towards a certain viewpoint.

Would make more sense if they turned to scripture in the first place without any pre-conceived conclusions, if they really feel the need to live by the bible.

shukrallah
10-19-2003, 05:29 PM
im really confused by the last 2 comments; what are you two talking about? Where did you get that sith? And who are you talking to shock?

ShockV1.89
10-19-2003, 07:13 PM
Hmm, I should not have put that comment here. Apparently I put it in the wrong thread. I meant to put it in my "Oh..my..god.." thread about Rev. Phelps and his campaign of idiocy....

But I'm gonna leave it here, perhaps it will spark discussion. After all, some people might bash Christianity because of people like Phelps...

SkinWalker
10-19-2003, 09:54 PM
A good reason to "bash christianity" is missionary work.

Christian missionaries have done irrepairable harm to socio-cultural traditions the world over. Often (nearly always prior to the turn of the century), missionary work is a tool, albeit unwitting at times, of colonialism and capitalism.

Missionary work has:

Community ownership of land and forest, which was the traditional means for subsistence was lost due to their commercialisation and barter economy was replaced by the market economy of the west.
Practices of making social decisions on the basis of consensus, which was a form of tribal democracy, was replaced by the concept of democracy with Christian tradition. Egalitarian practices gave way to more stratified social norms, which didn't fit the need of the culture (they were Western/christian norms that fit Western/christian needs).
Traditions of the cultures, even the languages themselves, were frequently criticized, demonized, and even prohibited by the missionaries.
Missionaries nearl always brought and bring diseases.
Ethnocentric and religiocentric views were/are imposed by extortion and bribery with food/clothing/shelter and other basic and essential needs like medical care, particularly in war torn nations. In short, christian missionaries take advantage of the distraught and weakened.
With the assistance of colonial rule and capitolistic exploitation, christian missionary work has destroyed, and is now destroying, many cultures of indiginous peoples.

ShockV1.89
10-19-2003, 10:27 PM
But wouldn't it be fair to also say that MIssionary work can help as well as hurt? I remember going to a church thing with a friend of mine once (she wanted to go, and I liked her), and there were missionarys there talking about what they were doing to help this third world country they had spent a year in. Not everybody was converting to Christianity in droves, but at least they were getting a square meal and immunizations.

I ended up donating $20 to the basket going around, mostly because I didn't have any $1s, and I wanted to look good in front of the girl. :p :o Not that it worked or anything. :rolleyes:

shukrallah
10-20-2003, 12:28 AM
Ethnocentric and religiocentric views were/are imposed by extortion and bribery with food/clothing/shelter and other basic and essential needs like medical care, particularly in war torn nations. In short, christian missionaries take advantage of the distraught and weakened.

Thats a bit judgemental now isnt it? There are some, ive heard, that go in a basically rob the people through offerings (somewhere in africa) the people really want to serve God, so they continue to pay these people money. Thats just plain wrong. But with what your saying, it makes it sound like all missionarys have bad intentions, which is not always so! Some missionaries truly really want to do the will of God (if you believe that)


In the early church when Paul, and other apostles came to help out, they actually helped out! They worked for their food. Paul said, if he ate their food, he always made sure he paid for it. He had rules, such as if you dont work, you dont eat. In my opinion, thats a good rule. They all worked, and did there fair share.

But I'm gonna leave it here, perhaps it will spark discussion. After all, some people might bash Christianity because of people like Phelps...

ill be posting there in a sec ;) but still, just because of one or a group of christians is wrong, doesnt mean they all are right? If the missionarys are doing wrong, i trust that God will punish them accordingly, maybe they can leanr of there wrong doings, and repent, and hopefully undo the damage they have done. The same with this guy your talking about in the other thread.

ShockV1.89
10-20-2003, 02:10 AM
But maybe whether or not something is wrong should be judged by the outcome which we can observe.

For example. Communism is a great idea, in theory, right? I mean, everyone is equal, no want for anything, nobody lording over you. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea.

But look at it in practice? Sucked pretty hard, right? I mean, corruption, starvation, and so on.

In short, it's a great idea, but it's not something that people are even remotely capable of pulling off with any degree of success or prosperity.

Perhaps Christianity is the same thing? Say what you want about "Those people were not true Christians." But they were the result of Christianity, or religious fervor in general. It sucks for those who were more moderate about it and didn't burn babys in the name of God, but those others were the result of the religion. That is what it produces.

Christians are not capable of living to the standards they hold themselves to. Furthermore, this drive to "spread the good word" cannot be trusted in the hands of humanity. Look what it's done. I'm sure many hundreds of thousands were "converted" to death over the past 2000 years....

SkinWalker
10-20-2003, 04:19 AM
Say what you want about "Those people were not true Christians."

This is a common and repeated phrase for those that justify christianity. The fact is, however, that many of the missionaries that travel the world in the periphery doing good have ulterior motives. In fact, I would say that they are the same motives that created the failure of communism: the capital of status.

It is considered necessary by some christian-based religions to embark on missionary work in order to advance within the religion. In other christian denominations, missionaries of the church are highly praised and revered (worshiped even... though no christian would ever admit it) and a status of high honor is obtained. Greed of status is probably as much a motivation for embarking on missionary work as "doing god's will."

Once the missionary arrives at a region populated by indigenous people, it is assumed that because their lives are simpler and different, that they "need to be helped." It is also assumed that they are in need of salvation. Regardless of their own religions. In these cases, missionaries often have little success, since the indigenous people have little reason to listen to the missionaries.

However, during times of calamity or deprivation (such as after war, natural disaster, or famine -which, incidently, usually has political causes), missionaries are unusually successful. This is because they have what the people need. Food. Medicine. Clean water. This amounts to extortion.

It's interesting to note that in the highlands of Mexico's rural countryside, missionaries set out to provide medical assistance in return for spreading the gospel. What they offered, in particular, was pre-natal and post-natal care for pregnant women.

That all sounds good on the surface, in fact, the women thought so too. After all, who wouldn't want the best possible care for their unborn or newly born child?

The problem is, that the Mexican women, of Mayan descent, in this area are small in stature and would be considered petite. The prenatal vitamins offered by the missionaries, among other treatments, increased the birth=weights of infants. Again, this sounds good to Westerners. Unfortunately, the low birth-weights were an adaptation of the small Indian women. Many complications occured and many women died in childbirth.

That is but one of many examples of ethnocentric/religiocentric assumption that had deleterious affects on indigenous people.

Communism is a great idea, in theory, right? I mean, everyone is equal, no want for anything, nobody lording over you. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea.

To which I say that communism failed due to its capitalistic shortcommings. Communism would have worked had the Soviet Union's leaders adhered to strict Marxist ideology. Unfortunately, this type of ideology is likely only possible in theory with humans. The need / drive for status among peers is overwhelming. (just look at those in LF who are concerned with their post-counts and want to be mods... ;) ).

The Elite Minority of the Soviet Union held the power and the wealth. They were the ultimate downfall of the "empire."

SkinWalker
10-20-2003, 04:42 AM
Another good reason to bash christianity:

Pat Robertson, former Presidential Candidate, leader of the "Religious Right," and host of the "700 Club," made a terroristic threat against the United States Government.

See this link (http://cryptome.org/xtian-fatwah.htm)

As stated in the text of the article linked above, "If an Islamic cleric in the United States were to say what Robertson said, I am sure he would now either be under arrest or detained incommunicado under the provisions of the Patriot Act."

rujoking99
10-21-2003, 09:49 PM
I'm a man, which means all I want to do is rape women and play football.

I'm a musician, which means I can play "Stairway to Heaven."

I'm a liberal, so I must hate soldiers in the US Army, and call them "baby killers" when I meet them.

I speak English, so it follows that I'm familiar with the works of Keats.

I'm white, which means I hate any person of an ethnicity other than mine..

I'm German (one half, anyway) therefore I must hate Jews and want to kill them all.

And I'm a Christian, so I must hate gays and people who believe differently than myself.

Please, don't make massive generalizations about people just because they belong to a specific group. It's like saying that ALL muslims supported the WTC bombing, or that ALL native Americans were savages who lived in teepees and scalped enemies.

ShockV1.89
10-22-2003, 12:10 AM
I dont think anyone is really saying that.

SkinWalker
10-22-2003, 03:15 AM
Nope. Nobody is saying that at all... that would be the non-existent "Why is it okay to bash christians?" thread.

Nope. What we're discussing is why is it okay to criticize a set of paradigms that may, or may not, be out-of-date. The criticisms so far, are valid. That's not to say that these criticisms imply that all christians hate gays, jews, or muslims. Though I think it's safe to say that nearly every christian would like to "save" these "wretched" beings.

shukrallah
10-28-2003, 06:42 PM
Nope. What we're discussing is why is it okay to criticize a set of paradigms that may, or may not, be out-of-date. The criticisms so far, are valid. That's not to say that these criticisms imply that all christians hate gays, jews, or muslims.

Exactly my point, so in other words you just admitted its not ok to bash christianity, but the people who are doing these things you dislike. (if thats even a reason to "bash" them)

SkinWalker
10-28-2003, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
Exactly my point, so in other words you just admitted its not ok to bash christianity, but the people who are doing these things you dislike. (if thats even a reason to "bash" them)

What I said was, I prefer to be very critical of the paradigm (or the way of thinking) but understanding of the majority of the culture. A leader of the culture, however, is fair game to harsh, even brutal, criticism since he/she represents the culture as an institution.

I wouldn't say, "christians are *******s" for instance, but I might say that Pat Robertson is. If I do, though, you can rest assured I'll provide some reasons why I think that.

It's okay to "bash" christianity. As long as by "bash" we're talking about criticisms backed with reasons. Several of my posts above have done this well.

Kain
10-29-2003, 01:51 AM
This thread isn't fair. Its a representation that all Christian's think everyone is out to get them. Sure, I've done my share of Christian bashing, and I continue to this day. That isn't to say that I haven't been bashed for being a 'heathen', 'wretched', 'sinner', 'hellbound', and 'heretic'(I used to go to church, so that kind of applies to me) by the Christian's who are so apposed to bashing, but only if the bashing is directed at them. VERY few atheists will complain if you make fun of their religion (well, their lack-there-of).

Not to flat out say that Christian's are insecure, but they do get offended with mind numbing quickness.

Joetheeskimo
10-29-2003, 11:41 AM
You're making a generalization, Kain. Actually, most Christians are supposed to ignore threats and bashing. Christianity is supposed to be one of the most secure religons.