It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Keep Posting Religion on a Conspiracy Site?

page: 14
45
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Grimpachi




So you cannot or will not come up with a good reason why religionists feel the need to adorn public land with their religious monuments.


I guess actually you mean don't want them removed as they have in many cases been there a long time. I guess if we remove all the history we definitely need new money and many other things replaced.


How you extrapolated that from this I do not know.



So you cannot or will not come up with a good reason why religionists feel the need to adorn public land with their religious monuments.


I am asking for the reason why people that have religious beliefs are so intent on placing their religious monuments on public lands.

It can't possibly be an issue of not having enough space on their own tax free lands they have more than enough.

Why do they feel the need to tag every new courthouse that goes up.

The supreme court has ruled on existing buildings and have set the guidelines I am fine with their ruling.




posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: inbound
As I said, I would not bash you or anyone else for your religious beliefs no matter what they are. I guess its more of a "hey! we are not talking about that in this thread" kind of thing. (Not in this one obviously)


Well, you could start by acknowledging that I am not religious for instance, and like most of your kind such a thing is preposterous and normally messes up with your bias that tells you everything bible related is church related, is Christian, has to do about faith. Fact is, that when 'someone tries to insert their favorite scripture into a discussion' (sic.) people allergic to Christianity all go vey oi vey as if it was cyanide coming down stream. The thing is, books like the Bible, Plato's Republic or the Homer's Odyssey contains timeless truths and ever so often you can find time and place for a quote or two, perhaps. Damn some people are willing to go a long way for a lousy fleeze.

That said I can personally get annoyed by people who has to refer to the thermo-dynamic laws and stuff like porridge. It's awful!


No, I do not subscribe to one of the 4000+ religions on earth. Im not sure what "my kind" is supposed to mean, but I will take a stab. My kind does believe that the bible, church, and faith are deeply intertwined. Please explain to me how they are not, if they are not as you point out. Once again, this thread, and my comments are related to injecting these things in conversations where they are not relevant to the topic at hand. I guess the most simple way for me to explain my stance on the thread, is to stay on topic. As someone pointed out a few entries ago, there is a subforum for this, and Im quite sure other places on the web to proclaim faith. By people interjecting religious stuff into a conversation thats not about religious stuff, it comes across as derailment



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: inbound




until someone tries to insert their favorite scripture into a discussion where it is not relevant.


Where they feel it is relevant and you do not.


If you are having a discussion about something religious and I constantly chime in wanting to discuss the batting averages of the new york yankees, you would probably find it irrelevant to the conversation and annoying.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   
I did think of one place where the religious might have grounds to inject into an otherwise non-religious subject.

There are many people today who do sincerely believe that we are watching prophetic events unfold. That takes events from the mundane for them and into the realm of the religious. For those of you who do not believe, you don't see it, but for those of us who do believe, we see it like giant flashing red signs.

For example, I keep tabs on eschatology because I've mentioned before - prophecy fascinates me. I happened across a guy on YouTube doing Bible codes, and in that particular one, he had a lot of stuff about the US including plagues and Obama being in danger of assassination. At the time, I found it amusing because I don't put anymore credence into Bible codes than I do Tarot cards, but these days, with enterovirus-68 running around and ebola and now the SS scandal cropping up showing how Obama was basically surrounded by incompetent security measures ... It gets a bit spooky. Was that guy just lucky? or what?

It's those little coincidences that tempt you to chime in with some religious based stuff in a conspiracy forum.

And, fair warning, but if the fighting in Syria should lead to Damascus being leveled ... well, you better be prepared for a flood of religious posts.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I wonder if you asked the same question of the individual who came up with sacrilegious art and put it on display. One of the goals of communism is to display ugly art forms. Why do they have the need to do that? Pour qui?



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

So are you equating sacrilegious art that isn't forced on anyone with religious monuments being forced upon public lands?

One of the goals of those who want a theocracy is to intertwine the religious monuments into government.

BTW I find it very ironic that people wish to place things like the ten commandments on public land or anywhere for that matter while doing so is breaking one of those commandments. One could say it is sacrilegious.

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"


IRONY!!!!!
edit on 13-10-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi
As it seems most religious folk here support Bible quotes in replies I shall use one myself, sorry OP:


Deuteronomy 27:2 "So it shall be on the day when you cross the Jordan to the land which the LORD your God gives you, that you shall set up for yourself large stones and coat them with lime

That would indicate to me they are actually encouraged to build their monuments, and would also explain resistance to their removal.
I don't personally see any case for such things on tax funded property, but off topic I do wonder what render mix a god would suggest.
When I'm rendering 'large stones' with my trowel I use a 5 sand/1 cement/1 lime ratio, but then I haven't had any divine inspiration.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Ehh they pick and choose what they want to follow. The Christian religious book is chock full of contradictions. Thats why it is such a go to when they are faced with a dilemma because no matter what it is they want to believe they can find a passage somewhere within it to justify their actions of course they ignore the parts that disagree with them.

It is a conundrum for sure.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi
I agree, it took two seconds to find a quote which fitted my reply, I'm sure many religious ATS members just use a search engine as I did.
It is curious though how Christians like to downplay the brutal stuff in their bible and rarely post quotes like this:


Deuteronomy 22:23-24 "If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and another man finds her in the city and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor's wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.


The Bible in my opinion is never useful for mature debate outside of religious forums.

edit on 2Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:33:54 -0500pm33102014f54pm10 by grainofsand because: Typo



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi



originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Grimpachi

I guess actually you mean don't want them removed as they have in many cases been there a long time. I guess if we remove all the history we definitely need new money and many other things replaced.



How you extrapolated that from this I do not know.
So you cannot or will not come up with a good reason why religionists feel the need to adorn public land with their religious monuments.

Simple most of these arguments have been around removing such items that have been there a long long time, not in the placing of new ones.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: grainofsand

Ehh they pick and choose what they want to follow. The Christian religious book is chock full of contradictions. Thats why it is such a go to when they are faced with a dilemma because no matter what it is they want to believe they can find a passage somewhere within it to justify their actions of course they ignore the parts that disagree with them.

It is a conundrum for sure.


One of the most "commonly accepted lies" on the net & frankly I'm sick of hearing it.

Isn't the Bible full of contradictions?

For every website you can copy & paste the "contradictions" I can equally do the same from the other POV.

So now who is being disingenuous?



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: inbound

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: inbound
As I said, I would not bash you or anyone else for your religious beliefs no matter what they are. I guess its more of a "hey! we are not talking about that in this thread" kind of thing. (Not in this one obviously)


Well, you could start by acknowledging that I am not religious for instance, and like most of your kind such a thing is preposterous and normally messes up with your bias that tells you everything bible related is church related, is Christian, has to do about faith. Fact is, that when 'someone tries to insert their favorite scripture into a discussion' (sic.) people allergic to Christianity all go vey oi vey as if it was cyanide coming down stream. The thing is, books like the Bible, Plato's Republic or the Homer's Odyssey contains timeless truths and ever so often you can find time and place for a quote or two, perhaps. Damn some people are willing to go a long way for a lousy fleeze.

That said I can personally get annoyed by people who has to refer to the thermo-dynamic laws and stuff like porridge. It's awful!


No, I do not subscribe to one of the 4000+ religions on earth. Im not sure what "my kind" is supposed to mean, but I will take a stab.


Well, for one the mentioned kind never subscribe to one of the 4000+ religions on earth (sic.), never do they apply courtesy or show respect or decency in discussions relating to any of said 4000+ religions.


My kind


There you go...


does believe that the bible, church, and faith are deeply intertwined. Please explain to me how they are not, if they are not as you point out.


Things aren't always black and white. And like I said, eventhough I am not a very religious person, infact I am not religious at all, except perhaps if I am to some breathtaking concert or having just survived something even more breathtaking-- I am not religious, but somehow I still have to defend stuff of moral matters, often concerning gays or whatever people were doing in Sodom and how stupid I am to believe this believe that. Sod that crap. THAT's the nonsense which is irrelevant and completely arbitrary to any discussion. It's hate and has no place in a discussion and should be moderated more carefully. But since you ask, though coupled with a sharp object, the pen is mightier than the sword, and the Bible is a remarkable piece of truly timeless human literature, bringing light to several different religions and customs in the ME between a mythical Eden believed to have existed some 6000 years ago, and the time after the fall of Jerusalem in year 70.

Inspired by your words, I know I may be stabbing my own back here, or shooting my own foot, or disembodying my own bleeder here, I am certainly not known to be especially polite or tactful-- but the thing is, trolling, no matter in which form or shape, well, it's trolling. Some Christians tend to it, sure, but so does a rather uniform group of non-Christians, a few specimens in this thread I'd bet. The kind you identify with in your reply who "believe that the bible, church, and faith are deeply intertwined". There are obvious connections between the Bible and the Church, but did you know it was illegal for any common Catholic to own a copy of the Bible, or even read it with own eyes, and certainly in no other language than Latin-- until just a few decades ago? Not strange though, since the Bible is the evidence that the Church is truly godless or satanic even, going by their own definitions.


Once again, this thread, and my comments are related to injecting these things in conversations where they are not relevant to the topic at hand. I guess the most simple way for me to explain my stance on the thread, is to stay on topic. As someone pointed out a few entries ago, there is a subforum for this, and Im quite sure other places on the web to proclaim faith. By people interjecting religious stuff into a conversation thats not about religious stuff, it comes across as derailment


You are aware that you attack all religion and people discussing religion on ATS in the friggin headline of your thread? And you expect people to respect that even so, any mentioning religion in this your sacred thread is derailment. Hm. Help me here, I don't get it...
edit on 13-10-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: ...



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: inbound

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: inbound




until someone tries to insert their favorite scripture into a discussion where it is not relevant.


Where they feel it is relevant and you do not.


If you are having a discussion about something religious and I constantly chime in wanting to discuss the batting averages of the new york yankees, you would probably find it irrelevant to the conversation and annoying.


Not if you were pointing out a belief you have that God granted some batters help. Do you see what I am saying, anything can be part of any conversation and some people will see it as relevant and other will not...that simple it is how we each differently perceive things, if the reply is annoying it is just a small thing is it not?

We are each allowed our say and our view and we have the freedom to see a name and skip their posts because we always feel annoyed.

Personally I read everyones post, I am here to learn, I also star my opponents posts when I feel it strikes a good point. If it annoys me I go looking for answers as to why I believe it wrong so I can produce some form besides my own feeling to share.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Grimpachi



originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: Grimpachi

I guess actually you mean don't want them removed as they have in many cases been there a long time. I guess if we remove all the history we definitely need new money and many other things replaced.



How you extrapolated that from this I do not know.
So you cannot or will not come up with a good reason why religionists feel the need to adorn public land with their religious monuments.

Simple most of these arguments have been around removing such items that have been there a long long time, not in the placing of new ones.


So you are asking me to argue something I haven't endorsed instead of addressing what I have.

OK if you want I can play at that. Why do you want to destroy all religions except yours is there not room enough for all.

If you don't think that is a fair question then don't answer but I will ask that you address my position and not attribute other positions to me.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Now what have we all learned from this topic? I l aways wonder what I have learned from the other poster and by participating.

Gonna think about it for a while




posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Age old religious trick. Put tons of contradictions in your text then quote mine your religious book to suit your needs. Sprinkle in some vague wording and you can make the book say anything you want it to.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi




Ehh they pick and choose what they want to follow.

Clearly everyone in every walk of life is doing just this on every subject all the time.
That is called freedom. I reject and I decide to accept by my will alone. No one should be bother by this.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand




The Bible in my opinion is never useful for mature debate outside of religious forums.


The bible is a collection of some of the worlds ancient texts, as such they have value anywhere.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: schadenfreude




For every website you can copy & paste the "contradictions" I can equally do the same from the other POV.

So now who is being disingenuous?



Eww goody. Then clear up these contradictions.

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Which first--beasts or man?

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Is it folly to be wise or not?

PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1CO 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

The sins of the father

ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Those are just a few. Sorry OP for putting these here. Here is the link to many moreinfidels.org...

And more www.thethinkingatheist.com...

Here are 143 contradictions

24. Robbery commanded
Ex 3:21,22/ Ex 12:35,36
Robbery forbidden
Lev 19:13/ Ex 20:15
25. Lying approved and sanctioned
Josh 2:4-6/ James 2:25/ Ex 1:18-20/ 1 Kings 22:21,22
Lying forbidden
Ex 20:16/ Prov 12:22/ Rev 21:8
26. Hatred to the Edomite sanctioned
2 Kings 14:7,3
Hatred to the Edomite forbidden
Deut 23:7
27. Killing commanded
Ex 32:27
Killing forbidden
Ex 20:13
28. The blood-shedder must die
Gen 9:5,6
The blood-shedder must not die
Gen 4:15
29. The making of images forbidden
Ex 20:4
The making of images commanded
Ex 25:18,20

29 applies to what I have been saying about religious monuments.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: jude11

If the subject of religion does come up, I (and others) comment on it (or not) it is likely not to 'convert' someone but to perhaps defend or give a precise written example with a quote from scripture that applies to the particular thread as a whole. Perhaps if one were to mail another with harassing 'change your life now and become born again bla bla' that would be a different matter.

If a person(s) constantly (or only) comments (for or against) or quote from articles on say the subject of 'moon landing hoaxes, for/against in Freemason activity, 9/11 real or faked, etc etc.', is that person just making points or are they trying to CONVERT you/other readers into believing the same?? or is it merely their opinion? If so, should all Moon Landing topics (etc) also be shut down? Some others (non religious) just find the topic of religion interesting without being particularly active nor are a member of any organized denomination. *Some of us have never been to the Egypt, but still have interest in reading/writing about the pyramids, you know?

Also, it can be said that MANY people (Atheists or ex-church members alike) believe that religion itself is a CONSPIRACY (to keep mental/physical control over any given population). If so, then how can one believe that something (religion) with such a large influence on the entire world (and it's cause and effect upon events) is a CONSPIRACY in itself, yet should not be discussed (and or banned totally) if brought up on a CONSPIRACY website? lol

That would lead to a dismissal of MANY other topics as well. So no more discussion about 'the war on terror, 9/11 and how these two topics include Muslims, Jews debate. No more discussion of 'the speculation that the Gulf wars' premises were about oil and not religion', no more topics such as Freemasonry because of the questioning from those curious about the topic of religion within the brotherhood, ..... and on and on? If the topic of religion was banned, what is left?

Religion holds the hearts and minds of 2/3s of mankind in every geographical area across the globe. That would be like someone censoring the topic of 'the common cold' because a scientist has not yet found a cure and the actual 'bug/cause' hasn't been discovered. Everyone gets it, Nobody has proven (or disproved) what it is, and it will likely NEVER go away.


I'd also like to add one of my fave jokes while on the subject:

"One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. They picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him. The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."
God listened patiently and kindly to the man and, after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well! How about this? Let's have a man-making contest."
To which the man replied, "OK, great!"
But God added, "Now we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."
The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.
God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"
edit on 13-10-2014 by dianashay because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
45
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join