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.

 

The Anti-Christian conspiracy

page: 137
16
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:00 AM
link   
The Socialist nations that abandoned religion hardly became utopias...

Oh, and as for creating the universe, you obviously haven't read Asimov's "The Last Question".




posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:07 AM
link   
The socialist nations failed because capitolism put them under, that's politics, has nothing to do with religion.

And Asimov is one human, with one humans perspective, hardly what I'd call infallable.

Do you believe everything that is written? Cause I could really screw you up with a single book if you want.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by johnsky]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   
How about you read my book and I'll read yours?



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
He's leaving because you didn't even show the slightest effort in considering anything he said. Which is arrogance. I can see why he decided it was a waste of his time.


I addressed many of the things he raised. But because I didn't nod my head and agree with everything he said, he didn't want to hear it.



Who f***ing cares how bad you are, it's still a belief in a figment of your imagination, an 'imaginary friend' that is supposively going to keep you alive once you are dead.


What does this have to do with the Anti-Christian conspiracy?



Wake up, open your eyes,
and lets start focusing on making this planet better for the NEXT generation


What's your proposal?



YOURE GOING TO DIE, GET OVER IT.


Done and done, I'm over it. Next.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I find it tough to leave, because you sit there making rediculous claims and seeing nothing wrong with it.

Almost all of the points I made, you did not address them. You asked if I can elaborate on why I said you cannot read...& I did. I began to elaborate alot of the things I said, because you did not understand them. Now that I've done so, you asked what has that got to do with the topic. I never said it had anything to do with the topic. I am trying to get a point across of and explain some of my statements so that you understand.

I didn't leave because you weren't agreeing. I am 19 years of age, quite young, but I live in the real world. I know everyone cannot agree with me. I do not leave an argument because of that. I leave most arguments because if I find I am wasting time arguing a point...there is no point arguing. You claim to understand what I am saying...but I doubt that. If you do not understand what I am saying, then why am I here? One cannot agree or disagree if one does not understand. That's why I said we are in a circular-shaped argument. It is not going anywhere.

Nothing has been gained since we both started debating directly. Many times I asked that question, what have we gained from this little verbal scuffle? And I haven't gotten an answer in anyway...unless you were answering indirectly; which may be the case; because it is clear that nothing has been gained. The last time I asked that, you asked what is my point? My point is just that, when I asked that question; what have we gained?

I mentioned the bible being edited. You go about this childishly)re-read your comment), we all know the bible was not edited like that. If it were, what you stated in your comment is what we would be reading in the bible. Ever wondered why the old testament and new testament seem to sound like different Gods?

It was suggested on National Geographic that some heads of the Catholic church changed some parts of the bible, because they didn't see it as being Godly enough. I further went on to state that what I hear on National Geographic is simply that, nothing more and I stated myself that I have no proof that the bible was edited, just like you have no proof it was not.

I said, based upon a logical decision, I'm sure it has been misinterpreted since it's original translation & also, dare I mention...typos.

I mentioned foolish teachings, such as not allowing females to be pastors in some churches and the damnation of gays. You mention great teaching such as a priests efforts to not practice sex. Did I mention anything about priests and sex? No, I actually have a lot of respect for that teaching. I wouldn't consider that practice foolish. What do you think about females not being able to be pastors? Answer that please.

Saint mentioned that this is not practiced by all Christian churches. I agreed, and stated my point was that they are practiced by some Christian churches...so some Christians practice it. I mentioned that that is exactly what religion is & female pastor or male pastor has nothing to do with your spiritual beliefs and understanding. Apparently, he did not get that point though. Seeing that he did not get my point, I said that the two of you can read, listen and hear and speak, but cannot understand(therefore missing a key element in communication), therefore not being able to communicate. He calls this "ignorant attacks".

You mention you chat on msn, talk on the phone and such.
That is simply speaking, not communicating. Communication entails understanding. You may ask again, what has this got to do with the topic? This has nothing to do with the topic really, I am simply trying to explain myself thoroughly, because I am apparently speaking with minors.

You say you understand me...tell me what you understand? And how have we gained anything from this rather long, circular debate?
And also, next time you try to quote me, quote everything I said and reply, because you only seem to quote what you want to reply to.

For instance, when you(shauny) quoted my thoughts about the bible being edited. You only answered the part that asked; which books were edited(although I never asked such a thing), by beginning to explain in a sarcastic way...in what way the bible was edited in an attempt to mock me. In that same quote I mentioned that I do not have proof of this and yet you still continue to go on as if it is fact that the bible was edited. I said that I got my sources from National Geographic and that I can only heed what they tell me, but cannot prove it myself. So, there is no fact that it was or was not edited.

You then asked what has the bible being edited got to do with Anti-Christian conspiracies? Hello, Christians follow the bible!

Before I go, if you want to quote me...quote all my points and then read them, understand them & then make your reply. Then answer what we've gained from all of this and then tell me what you've understood, so I know that I won't have to be explaining myself, again, and again in the future. Or so that I would know if I was wrong coming back here to discuss nothing really, which we've been doing for quite some time.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by sdrawkcab]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Ohh...and out of all the religions I know of, I actual love & respect Buddhism the most.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by sdrawkcab]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrawkcab
It was suggested on National Geographic that some heads of the Catholic church changed some parts of the bible, because they didn't see it as being Godly enough. I further went on to state that what I hear on National Geographic is simply that, nothing more and I stated myself that I have no proof that the bible was edited, just like you have no proof it was not.


The Bible is edited to a degree. It's a collection of books/works/writings so obviously there was a process to put those books together to create a single piece of work.

And there's 100s of different Bibles out there. The wording is slightly different from Bible to Bible, but does that mean the original 'message' is lost?



I mentioned foolish teachings, such as not allowing females to be pastors in some churches and the damnation of gays. You mention great teaching such as a priests efforts to not practice sex. Did I mention anything about priests and sex? No, I actually have a lot of respect for that teaching. I wouldn't consider that practice foolish.


Now who is cherry picking..



What do you think about females not being able to be pastors? Answer that please.


I'm English, I have no idea what a 'pastor' is or does, over here we have vicars, maybe they're equivilents. I don't know if they're allowed female vicars, the same as I don't know if they're allowed female pastors, and also whether or not this changes from church to church. I'd say not allowing females to be pastors is less of a religious thing and more of a male dominance thing, just like when women didn't have the vote.

As for what I think about it, I don't know, because I don't know anything about females not being allowed to be pastors. I'd have a guess though, I'm pretty sure we have female vicars over here in England.



You mention you chat on msn, talk on the phone and such.
That is simply speaking, not communicating. Communication entails understanding. You may ask again, what has this got to do with the topic? This has nothing to do with the topic really, I am simply trying to explain myself thoroughly, because I am apparently speaking with minors.


You're 19, wow so grown up.

It's your assumption that led you to believe I've not understood what you've said. I have understood what you've been saying. However, because I'm not agreeing with everything you say, you see that as me not understanding.



Before I go, if you want to quote me...quote all my points and then read them, understand them & then make your reply. Then answer what we've gained from all of this and then tell me what you've understood, so I know that I won't have to be explaining myself, again, and again in the future. Or so that I would know if I was wrong coming back here to discuss nothing really, which we've been doing for quite some time.


I do read your whole post, I choose to quote certain parts because it's a rule to not quote excessively.

What have we gained? I'm not sure what you've gained. You didn't respond to many, if any, of the questions I raised. I'm not sure why I need to gain anything, and what it is exactly that I need to gain from this discussion in order to make it successful.

What do you mean 'what you've understood'. Exactly what am I supposed to understand? I've read your post, I know where you're coming from, because you sound like I did a year ago with the Bible editing stuff, so yes I do understand you.



Ohh...and out of all the religions I know of, I actual love & respect Buddhism the most.


Then why did you say you have a problem with Christianity and all religions? 'All' encompasses Buddhism.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Like I said, you cannot understand English language. *And you're English...right...*

I never said I do not have a problem with Buddhism. I never said I loved and respected Buddhism. I said "out of all the religions, I respect and love Buddhism the most." Because it does not teach constraints. It does not put you in a box and tell you do not come out of this book. It actually encourages one to enlighten himself & question if need be.

I have answered many of your questions that you have asked me, if you read carefully you will see this. Can anyone tell me where in shauny's previous posts he has even hinted that he understood what I was saying?

They have found the Gospels of judas and Mary Magdeline(Did I spell that right).

Some of the things in those Gospels contradicts what some of the Bible says, meaning, something has to be wrong somewhere and in some places. Maybe with the Bible, maybe the found gospels, you decide.

*Man's dominance* you say. The fact of the matter is that it(pastors[heads of church or whatever] cannot be female) is in certain religious sects. That is the point. The point is not it is male dominated or that is just mans doings. As a matter of fact, that is the point. It is simply just mans doings. What has that got to do with your spirituality? That is my point, and simply because you argue this part of it in a very weak, childish manner it shows that you're very understanding(irony).

Most of the questions you have put to me, I have answered. Most of the questions you have put to me deal with what I say. I later explain them and yet you still put forth questions that are equally rediculous. I can recall when you made many statements asking what has that got to do with Anti Christian Conspiracies. you asked why I said this and that, even asked to elborate in certain instances. I answered you as to why I said certain comments,I did elaborate. But apparently seeing it that my explanations have nothing to do with the topic, it is...I do not know what it is. You my friend are wasting my time. Honestly, I couldn't care very much if you agree/disagree, understand/misunderstand what I am saying, because...it is pointless.

Thank you for making it official that I am wasting my time.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by sdrawkcab]



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Enough with the personal attacks and the irrelevant replies. The conversation will be directed towards the topic at hand. If you need a refresher, you can read the original post here.

As is at the top of all Big-Threads, these rules are in effect.

To recap the rules:

Replies: Short, pointless replies that do not add to the subject matter of the thread topic will be removed, and the poster subject to a red-flag warning (and 250 point deduction).

Big Quotes: Large quotes (especially quoting entire posts, or nested posts) will be removed from your post (your post will not be altered, just the quoted portion). Repeated big-quoting will result in a red-flag warning (and 250 point deduction).

Trolling and Abuse: Events of trolling and related abuse (including "thread hijacking") will result in a 3-day posting ban.


Again, stay on topic. If you want to go off topic, start a different thread or find a thread talking about the topic you wish to discuss.



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdrawkcab
I never said I do not have a problem with Buddhism. I never said I loved and respected Buddhism. I said "out of all the religions, I respect and love Buddhism the most."


So I take it you don't respect Christianity, would you say you 'hate' Christians, or are Anti-Christian?

You said that you had a problem with 'all' religions. The reason I brought up Buddhism is because I can't think why anyone would have a problem with that. People do however seem to have qualms with Christianity, admitedly I'm one of them.



What has that got to do with your spirituality? That is my point, and simply because you argue this part of it in a very weak, childish manner it shows that you're very understanding(irony).


Irony doesn't work very well when it's forced.

If females had a problem with there being no female pastors, don't you think if that was truly important to them, that they would go to a place that did have female pastors? These churches that don't allow female pastors, they're not boys-only-clubs. I'm sure they have many female members. So obviously this isn't a big deal to them.

Why is it a big deal for you though?



You my friend are wasting my time. Honestly, I couldn't care very much if you agree/disagree, understand/misunderstand what I am saying


Well you could care less about me 'misunderstanding' what you've said, because you've brought it up countless times. You only ever waste your own time, you don't have to be in this discussion, and quite frankly I wouldn't miss your company in this discussion. You've not added anything at all to the 'Anti-Christian' topic at hand.

*I've tried to steer this in the direction of 'Anti-Christianity' at the top of this reply*

Trying to keep ontopic JJ.



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Im Christian but i dont believe everything they talk about i am starting to now believe in religion because it wasnt the first thing on earth and there for alot of the stuff they say are lies



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Some people are strongly against Christianity because they don't want to take a good hard look at themselves. They won't like what they see. So, instead, they lash out at things that are good. They want to keep doing the same things, make the same bad decisions over and over and proceed to blame someone else. They try to kill everything good around them because they are so unhappy and don't want to have there conciences rattled. They will go to the grave before they admit their flaws.
Being Christian means your supposed to admit your faults, practice humility and live your life with discipline and integrity.
Nowadays, people are so angry or sad and lonely, that they just can't get over the foolish pride and admit they need to do some things differently. I know. I have been there and done that till I finally wised up. You can go at it alone, but things just don't work as well for you. Rich people are unhappy, movie stars are unhappy with all the fame and fortune they could want. But it is just not enough. Everyone is searching for something in all the wrong places. You need something solid to stand on to help you cope with the ups and the downs in life. Many who are chrisitians also don't do a very good job at being the best person they can be. And, they are made examples of by those who would love to see a world without religion in it. However, we are all humans flawed and weak. People are people wherever you go. Everyone, no matter thier profession, religion or race does things and says things that are foolish and without thought. Therefore, you can not label an entire group based on the failings of some. But many, too many, do just that.
Now, you can't say anything these days about alot of groups who have gotten to be in the protected status. It does not matter if you speak the truth. But christain bashing seems to be ok. Of course if your not chrisitian, this may not bother you, but why is it acceptable? I think because many Christians do what they believe is right and take it with humility and character. Many other groups become hot and bothered and think they don't have to listen to anything, even if it is the truth. And, they get plenty of media coverage So, truth is getting lost in alot of areas which seems to be ok to some. But remember, my truth getting lost means yours can get lost too. It is my opinion that there is an all-out assualt, not only on religion, but on our constitution in order to remake society as some think it should be. But what than? When there is no one left to hate and blame and be critical of, they will realize(maybe) that the problem was within themselves. Christianity is not flawed It's what humans do to twist it into what they want that is flawed. It is also one one of the only things holding it all together. Some may not like us, but face the facts, you need us if for no other reason than to keep you from really going off the cliff and doing God only knows what. Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler all tried to destroy God and religion in there reigns of terror except for whatever beliefs they may have held, which were irrational at best. Millions dead and for what? maybe to eliminate any opposition or maybe to hide the fact that they were wrong. That damn pride will get you everytime. Unfortunately, so many pay the price for someone's pride. That may very well happen in America at some future date. It won't suprise me in the least based on where we are headed. Right now it's just a culture war, but that will eventually no be satisfying enough for some and they will take it to the next level. "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it". (Abraham Lincoln)



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I have taken this issue on many times with people who use the argument you presented about Christians being hypocritical in preaching forgiveness, tolerance and then condeming same sex relations. So, let me at least give you a clearer view of where I coming from as a Catholic. Part of the problem with your argument may stem from a lack of understanding of the Catholic/Christian faith. It is not that we are intolerent of homosexuality. The bible calls it and every other relationship like beastiology and relations within the 3rd degree of kindred "an abomination against God". Catholics/ Christians believe that you can be guilty of anothers sins by giving approval, making light of it, helping to conceal it etc.. ? Basically, the same kinds of things a you could be convicted of in a court of man's law. Its the same as someone who helped plan a crime like murder, but did not pull the trigger. Frankly, I have enough to make up for in my life. I don't need your sins or anyone else's to carry around. Jesus walked with sinners and forgave them, but he did not hang around them. His most trusted followers, good men, were the peoole he spent his time with. He helped people, showed them kindness and compassion, and moved on, but they were not his close friends. You may disagree with what I have said, that is your choice, but I as a christian, can have nothing to do with people who practice an alternative lifestyle. My soul is more important than who someone sleeps with. I too have shown kindness and compassion to people who I did not care for, meaning I was respectful, polite and listened to what they had to say, but I was not chummy with them anymore than you might be chummy with a herione addict or someone who beats his wife. Would you label youself intolerant because what they did disgusted you? I doubt you would. I don't believe homosexulaity is a choice. It is a learned behavoir. There DNA is no differnet than a hetero. It is a pshycological problem, not a choice and not a birth defect. I have spoken to doctors and therapists who stated this. I did my research on this one. I have spoken to and worked with people who live in alternative lifesytles and got to know some them. They were nice. Some very arrogant, but all in all nice folks. However, in each case I noticed some sort of dysfunction within the family unit, whether it was substance abuse by a parent or just an emotionally unavialable parent or abusive in some way. No, not everybody who grew up in a situation like those described is gay. Ten kids who suffer the same trauma may react ten different ways. What I am saying is that it is born out of some kind of trauma and/dysfunction. Sexual abuse happens way more than you think is does which contributes greatly to the homosexual lifestyle. Normal behavior? I think not.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Though you say you have done your research, you demonstrate ignorance, friend. Though there are many studies which claim one way or another concerning homosexuals and the cause of their lifestyle, there is nothing definitively conclusive.

There is much in the Bible that may have been tainted by the ecumenical preferences of the mother church, one particular instance is "Thou Shalt Not Suffer a Witch to Live", which was changed to WITCH from "Poisoner of Wells".

The changes are subtle, but important. While you preach strongly of sin and human frailty, as a gnostic I believe Christ's true message was of unconditional love, forgiveness, and acceptance of all mankind. Sinner and Saint alike.

The doctrine of original sin can often lend itself to abuse, and it is not a doctrine that I am particularly in favor of. We are wholly cut from the cloth of our maker, the Creator Divine, and have divinity within grasp inside of each of us. We become too focused on sin and penance, of which was invented late in the formation of Christianity as a control mechanism for the Mother Church.

The spark within each soul cannot be tainted, it is immaculate and unblemishing regardless the actions taken by our own hands. The true sin, the only sin, is in damning ourselves willfully by being incapable of forgiving past transgressions we made against others, and also by being incapable of forgiving others their transgressions against us.

The weight of our souls depends entirely upon our communion with the Maker. If we feel heavy, then we shall weigh heavily when we are measured. The shackles we bear are not for our actions, but for what we hold against ourselves and others.

For myself, I love unconditionally regardless the person. Regardless what the Book says of sin or transgression.

You also talk of Christ not commiserating with sinners, drawing from the busy life of the Messiah to excuse intolerance of others. To shun others, to make them feel unwelcome at your table, to not open your arms in love and acceptance of them as your brethren regardless of if they have wronged the Maker in your eyes is not Christian. If sin exists, if they are condemned of their actions, it still is not your cross to bear. Yours is to love without reserve others.

Those who are your enemies. Those who trespass against you. Those who wrong you, and do nought but wrong you... to embrace them, with nothing but love and forgiveness. That is the true challenge of a Christian heart... that is the true measure of Christ, that no matter the deeds done unto him, his forgiveness and love belonged not to the spiritual elite. Not to only those who believed unto him. His measure of sacrifice and meaning of message speaks loudly only that all are loved, and all are forgiven the error of their ways.

And with flesh and blood, was that message given. The resurrection evidence that those who can find in themselves the capacity to love all mankind, even those most unbeloved and hated.... and to give of themselves all of it. They are immortal for all eternity in the light.

Amen.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 02:44 AM
link   
They claim that christians are hypocrites, while what they say is very much hypocracy itself!



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 06:04 AM
link   
I think right now a lot of religion just ''isn't fitting in''. I caught a glimpse of a story from Iraq about honour killings. The jist of it was that a girl had a relationship with a boy of a different religion. She was then condemned to be stoned to death. Thousands of people watched including policemen and other people in authority, and around 9 people took it upon themselves to do the stoning, perhaps it's their job, I don't know. She screamed in agony throughout, laying in a pool of her own blood, after 20+ minutes someone threw a big rock to crush her head.

This is somewhat 'religion' from the middle-east. Does this have any place in the 21st century?

Christianity is much the same, obviously they don't have honour killings. However, theirs is more a psychological thing. Telling us if we don't love our enemies, turn the other cheek, or do as Christ would do, then we're a bad person. If Christianity was more about 'love' and less about 'telling people what to do' it'd be a fantastic religion. Christianity keeps hold of it's old doctrines, updating some to try and fit in and some churches even doing away with some altogether. In the 21st century, noah's ark, adam & eve, okay these stories are okay for 5 year old children, but most of us here are adults, yet lots of you believe these are literal events. this is why Christianity is losing it's place in the 21st century.

I've heard Saint say part of the Anti-Christianity conspiracy are these new-age, cult, satanic religions etc. but those religions are pretty much fads, they're popular, then they're not, they're popular, and then they're not.

So to sum up, religions that kill people for pathetic excuses, don't have a place in the 21st century, and religions that try to tell people what to do, feel, think etc, they also have the same fate.

People aren't anti-christianity, they just ''don't like it''. Christians need to learn to deal with that.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Christianity is much the same, obviously they don't have honour killings. However, theirs is more a psychological thing. Telling us if we don't love our enemies, turn the other cheek, or do as Christ would do, then we're a bad person. If Christianity was more about 'love' and less about 'telling people what to do' it'd be a fantastic religion. Christianity keeps hold of it's old doctrines, updating some to try and fit in and some churches even doing away with some altogether. In the 21st century, noah's ark, adam & eve, okay these stories are okay for 5 year old children, but most of us here are adults, yet lots of you believe these are literal events. this is why Christianity is losing it's place in the 21st century.


I do not know if other's are saying that you are a bad person if you do not follow the teachings of Christ literally. I can only speak for myself. As I wrote in my prior posting, I was addressing another Christian, not necessarily other people. I am not given purview to hold judgment over human beings.

How one behaves does not make one good or bad. The choices one makes does not make you good or bad, it merely makes you you. It is up to each individual to decide what that means to them. As a Christian, I am responsible for certain edicts to be carried out if I am to honor the sacrifice and life of Jesus Christ.

It is a doctrine of personal behavior, and perhaps this is what many Christians seem to forget. You can only ever be responsible for yourself, even though you may care for the world and more. You cannot force that care, and you cannot preach fire and brimstone without forcing your concepts on another.

Some are receptive to such devices. Even this is a choice in how we represent ourselves and, subsequently, our Divine Maker.



I've heard Saint say part of the Anti-Christianity conspiracy are these new-age, cult, satanic religions etc. but those religions are pretty much fads, they're popular, then they're not, they're popular, and then they're not.

So to sum up, religions that kill people for pathetic excuses, don't have a place in the 21st century, and religions that try to tell people what to do, feel, think etc, they also have the same fate.

People aren't anti-christianity, they just ''don't like it''. Christians need to learn to deal with that.


Have you not just contradicted yourself, Friend? Decrying Christianity and Islam due to oppressive behaviors is your own choice, if that was indeed what you are doing. Do they have a place in the 21st century? If your words of tolerance are to be taken at face value, and we are not to tel people what to do, feel, think, etc.... then you must accept even the most egregious activities as part of the 21st century.

It is presumption at best to view Islam as barbaric, backwards, or primitive just because they stone people to death. It is even more presumption to view western values and practices as infinitely more superior than other cultures. We in the west appreciate thinking we are the pinnacle of both civilized development and personal behavior.

Such that, when we invade a country we tend to impose our world views on their culture, and at times have the sole aim of destroying that culture if they do things we find hideous and abhorrent. It is a testament to our hubris, evidence to our thinking "Our Ways Are Better."

Is this not what you decry within Christianity, Friend? The core precept of "Our Ways Are Better"?

Are you not, then.... claiming that Your Way Is Better(TM)?

Peace and Light.

[edit on 16-6-2007 by TheColdDragon]



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
I do not know if other's are saying that you are a bad person if you do not follow the teachings of Christ literally. I can only speak for myself. As I wrote in my prior posting, I was addressing another Christian, not necessarily other people. I am not given purview to hold judgment over human beings.


I didn't say 'you'. Christianity does however.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
As a Christian, I am responsible for certain edicts to be carried out if I am to honor the sacrifice and life of Jesus Christ.


Is there anyway to carry out these edicts without the over shadowing organized religion of Christianity on your shoulder? I would admire someone for following the life of Jesus Christ, and living their life as near to how Jesus would have wanted them to, by loving thy neighbour etc. However, as soon as 'religion' is thrown in, the taste gets very sour.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
It is presumption at best to view Islam as barbaric, backwards, or primitive just because they stone people to death. It is even more presumption to view western values and practices as infinitely more superior than other cultures. We in the west appreciate thinking we are the pinnacle of both civilized development and personal behavior.


Stoning is barbaric, it'd be barbaric if we brought back public executions, such as hangings, or ''orrf wiv is ed!''. I didn't presume our customs are 'infinitely superior'. That's neither here nor there.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Such that, when we invade a country we tend to impose our world views on their culture, and at times have the sole aim of destroying that culture if they do things we find hideous and abhorrent. It is a testament to our hubris, evidence to our thinking "Our Ways Are Better."


Couldn't have summed up the way in Iraq any better.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Is this not what you decry within Christianity, Friend? The core precept of "Our Ways Are Better"?

Are you not, then.... claiming that Your Way Is Better(TM)?


I didn't say people need to believe what I believe, or what I believe is better.

There were whole civilisations that no longer exist that had their beliefs, and those beliefs are now taught as mythology, from the Greek Gods to the Egyptian Gods, that were not so disimilar to your beliefs. Why treat something like Christianity as anything other than mythology?



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby

I didn't say 'you'. Christianity does however.


And I was clarifying that your experiences with other Christians is not something I can comment upon, as I am ultimately only responsible for myself and how I treat my brothers and sisters.



Is there anyway to carry out these edicts without the over shadowing organized religion of Christianity on your shoulder? I would admire someone for following the life of Jesus Christ, and living their life as near to how Jesus would have wanted them to, by loving thy neighbour etc. However, as soon as 'religion' is thrown in, the taste gets very sour.


I do not ascribe to a church, and do not attend a denominational congregation. My communion with our Divine Maker is held within my heart, my soul is its vicar, and my actions its congregation.

Yes, you are able to be a Christian without ever setting foot in a church. It is not in rite and rituals that Christianity is found, but in the spirit and intent of ones actions. The measure of ones character, and the conviction of ones heart.

My Maker's church is all around, if you look for it... it is there. Seek and ye shall find.

If you do not wish to look, that is alright as well. You are still beloved of your maker, for it breathed upon you its divine providence.



Stoning is barbaric, it'd be barbaric if we brought back public executions, such as hangings, or ''orrf wiv is ed!''. I didn't presume our customs are 'infinitely superior'. That's neither here nor there.


Provided there was a circumstance where you felt someone should be killed for their actions, would you feel good if an entire society sneered at you for your barbarism? We may find it appalling, Friend, but it is what it is. Given time, it may change. Or it may not.

However, one should remove the planck from ones own eye before addressing the speck in another's. We westerners have our own barbarisms.

Though even I may never understand why some cultures persist in horrendous atrocities, they are still beloved of their maker... and I am charged to love them, no matter the error of their ways or the choices that they make.

After all, I am not capable of discerning the error of them... only what is in error for myself.




Couldn't have summed up the way in Iraq any better.


Providing that you are English, friend... your Imperial Era is much the same as the U.S.'s current story. Western Civilization is responsible for much ignorance, bigotry, and superior thinking. Not solely responsible, perhaps, but we should certainly be eating some crow for our past transgressions... rather than vindicating further errors towards our brothers and sisters.




I didn't say people need to believe what I believe, or what I believe is better.


Though you have stated certain things are barbaric in other cultures, such as stoning. You also have expressed a dislike of Christians who pressage you into service to The Lord as a primary tactic.

Are you concerned about being tricked with religion/faith/spirituality? People deceiving you unknowingly? What concern do you have, that you have participated so actively in this thread of conversation?

Or is it mere boredom, Friend?



There were whole civilisations that no longer exist that had their beliefs, and those beliefs are now taught as mythology, from the Greek Gods to the Egyptian Gods, that were not so disimilar to your beliefs. Why treat something like Christianity as anything other than mythology?



Are you suggesting that treating Christianity as Mythology is "Better"? What is to say that no other religion is more correct or less? Should any religion be taught to be mythology?

We enlightened Westerners look unto the past and often insinuate our views to superimpose upon it. That ancient man was plagued with the scheisters and tricksters of religion... do you think that people were foolish to believe?



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
And I was clarifying that your experiences with other Christians is not something I can comment upon, as I am ultimately only responsible for myself and how I treat my brothers and sisters.


It's not specific Christians, it's the organized religion itself.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Yes, you are able to be a Christian without ever setting foot in a church. It is not in rite and rituals that Christianity is found, but in the spirit and intent of ones actions. The measure of ones character, and the conviction of ones heart.


Then what's the need for those insanely massive new Christian churches that hold thousands of people? Surely there's no need for 'Church' anymore?


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
and I am charged to love them, no matter the error of their ways or the choices that they make.


Why?


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Though you have stated certain things are barbaric in other cultures, such as stoning. You also have expressed a dislike of Christians who pressage you into service to The Lord as a primary tactic.


Voicing an oppinion, since when was that hypocritical or oppressive?


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Are you concerned about being tricked with religion/faith/spirituality?


No. I'm not stupid. Thankfully I can think for myself. However, there are some people who seem to have a need to be told what to believe.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
What concern do you have, that you have participated so actively in this thread of conversation?


There's no anti-Christian conspiracy. I don't like organized religion, it's sick. I've met many disillussioned religious people, and quite frankly I find them laughable, with the rubbish they come out with.

Many religions use scare tactics. The whole sin thing is one of them. If you sin and don't repent, you go to hell. If you don't believe in me, you go to hell. Infact you're going to have to try damn hard if you don't want to go to hell. And you wonder why people don't like Christianity? Christianity is like the teacher's pet, and no one likes a teacher's pet, well apart from you, you love them.


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Are you suggesting that treating Christianity as Mythology is "Better"? What is to say that no other religion is more correct or less? Should any religion be taught to be mythology?


They can't all be right. Hindus have their many Gods, but Christianity insists there is only One God. If other religions are taught of as myths, then how is Christianity any different?


Originally posted by TheColdDragon
We enlightened Westerners look unto the past and often insinuate our views to superimpose upon it. That ancient man was plagued with the scheisters and tricksters of religion... do you think that people were foolish to believe?


Not at all, I think they knew nothing else. We also need to remember that manby people were not educated, reading and writing wasn't exactly on the curriculum so to speak.

That's why I'm so bewildered that in an educated world, that educated adults believe in fairytale stories of world wide floods, virgin births and people coming back from the dead and ascending to heaven. It's a little hard to swallow, but many people do, but many people do either as impressionable children, or adults who have lost their way and are desperate to find something to fill their lives.




top topics



 
16
<< 134  135  136    138  139  140 >>

log in

join