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.

 

Christianity is a death cult

page: 21
32
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

originally posted by: rom12345
All beliefs that tell us that death is better than life,
are death cults/ extortion rackets in my opinion.


What?

Christianity is about eternal life.

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever”

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.

For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Jesus said , “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die;

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.



. I think I speak for most people posting here when I say we'd prefer to hear your own words and thoughts, if any.




posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
Revelation 22

Eden Restored
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


(post by Tangerine removed for a manners violation)

posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I never said the names attributed to each gospel is accurate, I was only pointing out the hypocrisy in your words. You make bold claims that have no real evidence to back them up, or at the very least weak evidence, then when someone makes a claim of their own you demand undeniable proof and evidence that it's true. There is no "proof" that the names attributed to the gospels are wrong, but you still claim it as true.

That's all I was saying.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: TzarChasm


...
Death is the only solution to sin. Do you know of any other solution to prevent the practice of sin by a person?


Sin is an offense against God. No God = no sin.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   
originally posted by: Tangerine
originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: TzarChasm

...

Seede: Death is the only solution to sin. Do you know of any other solution to prevent the practice of sin by a person?



Tangerine: Sin is an offense against God. No God = no sin.

God allows for the act of sinning; otherwise humans would not be so entertained by pushing the 'no rules really apply concept', man came up the rules as was a heathen and knew it; you would be afraid of your neighbor if understood some rules (to them) just do not apply (some wrote scripture)(some demonstrate it (ISIS). The Boss, (in its defense) is in a state of constant change, growing in knowledge; it has to experience everything, good/bad/indifferent that its creations provide/produce. This is not "The Time Machine", where there is what seems to be a perfect Utopian existence (morlocks somewhere hiding), or maybe it is? No hatred/love = no growth for God aspect.
edit on 16-2-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Tangerine

I never said the names attributed to each gospel is accurate, I was only pointing out the hypocrisy in your words. You make bold claims that have no real evidence to back them up, or at the very least weak evidence, then when someone makes a claim of their own you demand undeniable proof and evidence that it's true. There is no "proof" that the names attributed to the gospels are wrong, but you still claim it as true.

That's all I was saying.


Are you seriously unaware that the Gospels have been dated by Biblical scholars/historians? Are you seriously unaware that Biblical scholars/historians don't claim that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the Gospels?



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

you aware that these stories and accounts were passed down before being written down? bibles information is older than the qurans.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Tangerine

you aware that these stories and accounts were passed down before being written down? bibles information is older than the qurans.


Are you aware that you can't prove that the Gospel stories were passed down before being written down? How is it relevant that the Bible was written before the Koran?



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Are you unaware that scholars' dating of the gospels widely varies between each scholar? No one date has been pinned down for one gospel, the dates vary between each scholar. That makes it opinion, not fact.

The fact remains, you ask for undeniable proof for claims you disagree with but think opinions are enough to "prove" your claims. That's hypocrisy.

By the way, if you read through my threads/posts you will realize that I am neither a Christian nor a proponent for the bible's legitimacy. I prefer fair debate, the style you debate in is anything but fair.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 07:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Tangerine

Are you unaware that scholars' dating of the gospels widely varies between each scholar? No one date has been pinned down for one gospel, the dates vary between each scholar. That makes it opinion, not fact.

The fact remains, you ask for undeniable proof for claims you disagree with but think opinions are enough to "prove" your claims. That's hypocrisy.

By the way, if you read through my threads/posts you will realize that I am neither a Christian nor a proponent for the bible's legitimacy. I prefer fair debate, the style you debate in is anything but fair.


I don't consider someone with three months of training at the Okie Backwoods Bible School to be a scholar. Do you? There is very little dispute among legitimate scholars about the dating of the oldest Gospel. In any event, it was written two generations after Jesus and the disciples allegedly lived which is the relevant point.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Mark's gospel is widely held by scholars to have been written sometime in the 60's or 70's, that leaves plenty of room for it being written by someone who knew Jesus personally. Then again, this dating is opinion and not fact. Opinion based on plenty of evidence and scholastics, but opinion nonetheless.

Again, you base your belief on opinion just like anyone else, yet you seem to think otherwise. At least that's what the tone of your replies imply.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Tangerine

Mark's gospel is widely held by scholars to have been written sometime in the 60's or 70's, that leaves plenty of room for it being written by someone who knew Jesus personally. Then again, this dating is opinion and not fact. Opinion based on plenty of evidence and scholastics, but opinion nonetheless.

Again, you base your belief on opinion just like anyone else, yet you seem to think otherwise. At least that's what the tone of your replies imply.


In order for it to serve as contemporaneous documentation proving that Jesus actually lived, the author would have to be known and it would have to be known that said author had the opportunity to witness Jesus living and so stated.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
ATTENTION

As mentioned in the Welcome Thread for the Conspiracies In Religion Forum:


Debates on whether or not a religion is true is not an acceptable topic unless the conspiracy is made clear in the opening post.


Ill also direct your attention to the topic of this thread:

Christianity is a death cult

The topic is not others. Nor is the topic the validity of religious belief. Please post on topic, as per the guidelines of this forum. Further off topic/uncivil posting will result in further post removal and a potential posting ban.

Do not reply to this message.



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 17 2015 @ 12:34 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 







 
32
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join