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 Absolute Power of Christianity!

page: 116
7
<< 113  114  115    117  118  119 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
dbrandt, your definition for christianity is no more valid than any other definition of christianity. there is no "true christianity"



Find out how the catholic church says you are saved and then find out what the Bible says about salvation and you'll find there is a difference, and it the same timeyou'll find what this means

John 8:[31] Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
[32] And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.




posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by sb2012
So, why do you use same books, if Christianity is not represented in Church and why Christians go to the Church then? Why not stay at home on Sunday and tell Church it's time to get real and requesting reformation?

About Africa and AIDS, no it's not a problem. Just give poor people condoms because they risk infection and diseases, they have poor sanitation, no running water and other problems typical for poor countries.

It's wrong to exploit this situation and to spread Bibles instead of educating them with some practical knowledge and ensuring healthy living. Very, very selfish and irresponsible. People are dying, you are aware of that? Is this not enough reason to help them? Children dying because we can't decide to give them some help? And we justify that by reading some old book?


Also, i see your view on condoms and AIDS is same as Vatican's official response, yet you are telling Church is not representing Christians.

I hope God forgives Vatican and all other people who refuse to help people in need just because they think it's better to let them die than help them for some twisted reason.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by sb2012]



If you'll note the vatican uses extra biblical books as authoritative, which can lead one away from the truth of God, when they are esteemed to be of the same value as the Bible. Also they consider that it is possible for a man too hold an office, that makes this man the vicar of Christ(which means in place of Christ). Now in place of can be taken a couple of different ways, but no matter which way it is taken it's balspemous because the is no substitution for Jesus Christ.

As far as giving poor people condoms, seems to me that has already been the battle cry and plan of attack for several years now yet AIDS keeps increasing. What is selfish and irresponsible is to not let people know the truth. Condoms are not 100% effective as a matter of fact I listened to a Dr. talk several years back on the AIDS disease. He made mention of the fact that the AIDS virus is small enough to pass through the pores in a condom. Now if you do a search on this fact you will find out the opposite mentioned, gee I wonder why, because then if the truth about condoms and AIDS was known, the "magical problem solving condom" would be made nill and void.

p.s. the vatican/catholic church has taken away truth from athe Bible and added books to the Bible.



[edit on 22-6-2007 by dbrandt]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
It's extremely unatural to expect a species that has a sole purpose to reproduce,

but you'll never experience the full extent of what life has to offer unless sometimes you take risks.


Mankinds "sole" purpose is not to reproduce. I was told not to be selfish in another person's post, yet your statement is one of extreme selfishness, yet I'm sure you will not be chastised as being selfish.

You views are in the vast majority of people on the planet,so look around and you'll see why we are where we are and have the problems we do.

risk-exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazard or dangerous chance:

What don't you understand about the word risk?



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt
(...)
p.s. the vatican/catholic church has taken away truth from athe Bible and added books to the Bible.


I agree. I am not sure how much they did manipulate it, but it distorted true teachings of Christ. in favor of oppression and political power.

About Africa and AIDS, well i wanted to show my point how religion sometimes prevents people from helping people and makes them violent. Still, if you live in Christ, nothing is to fear. Africa needs multiple regimes change and international support. Focusing just on AIDS and letting all militia running around and killing people is ineffective.



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt
Mankinds "sole" purpose is not to reproduce.


Yes it is. Survival is our goal. And to do that we reproduce.


Originally posted by dbrandt
I was told not to be selfish in another person's post, yet your statement is one of extreme selfishness, yet I'm sure you will not be chastised as being selfish.


By having fun or taking risks, you're not being selfish.


Originally posted by dbrandt
You views are in the vast majority of people on the planet,so look around and you'll see why we are where we are and have the problems we do.


Exactly what problems are there? Starving people in Africa, AIDS epidemic in Africa? These aren't my problems.


Originally posted by dbrandt
risk-exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazard or dangerous chance:

What don't you understand about the word risk?


Why are you afraid of risk though? Are you afraid of dying, is that why you don't take risks?



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt
Find out how the catholic church says you are saved and then find out what the Bible says about salvation and you'll find there is a difference, and it the same timeyou'll find what this means


the bible contradicts itself on how you're "saved"
it says that you're only saved by doing good works...then it says that you're only saved by faith...then it says you're only judged by your deeds...

so.. um.... yeah...



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
We're mammals, we are not special unique snowflakes, we are people, and we act on instinct.


When we are angry, should we kill? That is what we feel when we're angry. If one feel sexual urges, should we rape? If we want something, should we just take it? To many, this would be fun, taking risks, etc. It is astounding how these things can be considered unselfish and I'm curious to see what happens to a society that acts on instinct.


[edit on 23-6-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
When we are angry, should we kill? That is what we feel when we're angry. If one feel sexual urges, should we rape? If we want something, should we just take it? To many, this would be fun, taking risks, etc. It is astounding how these things can be considered unselfish and I'm curious to see what happens to a society that acts on instinct.


Not every urge or anger wants us to kill and rape. We have all sorts of urges, this is how our body works and how brain tells us what to like or dislike based on our past impression and programs.

Suppressing urges while still being concerned with carnal usually means violent outbursts which you can see even in priests, just look at all the scandals. History is rich with examples what happens when you tell people not to do something (in the name of ...) and when that something comes back with greater power and violence.



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
When we are angry, should we kill? That is what we feel when we're angry. If one feel sexual urges, should we rape? If we want something, should we just take it? To many, this would be fun, taking risks, etc. It is astounding how these things can be considered unselfish and I'm curious to see what happens to a society that acts on instinct.


we DO act on instinct. the morality in place to not kill, rape, or steal is ingrained in humanity as instinct through evolutionary psychology.



posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
we DO act on instinct. the morality in place to not kill, rape, or steal is ingrained in humanity as instinct through evolutionary psychology.


So humans essentially have many different instincts acting on them when a stimulant comes along.... okay.

Let's say that there is a young man staring at a particularly large loaf of bread. The only thing he's had to eat in the last two days was a moldy piece of fruit, and he's quite hungry now. He has two instincts that act on him now because of the stimulant of bread. The instinct of morality, to preserve justice and social stability, and the instinct of self preservation, to save oneself by whatever means possible, in this case stealing the bread.

What force compels the young man to steal or not to steal?



posted on Jun, 26 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
we DO act on instinct. the morality in place to not kill, rape, or steal is ingrained in humanity as instinct through evolutionary psychology.


If this were true, there would not be killing, raping, stealing nor the justifications for doing so. We CAN act on instinct, or we can choose not to. This series of choices is an integral part of being sentient.

[edit on 26-6-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Jul, 2 2007 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
If this were true, there would not be killing, raping, stealing nor the justifications for doing so.


your statement is false. i never claimed that evolutionary moralitiy was perfect. and again, we still have deviations in evolution.



We CAN act on instinct, or we can choose not to. This series of choices is an integral part of being sentient.


sentient by what definition? are dophins sentient?


Originally posted by TheB1ueSoldier
So humans essentially have many different instincts acting on them when a stimulant comes along.... okay.


yes, we do. best example: fight, flight, or fright. quite the common example, all of us have experienced it. do you stand your ground, run away, or cower. it's an example of 3 reactions that all work to certain situations being brought up at once. i'm not going to address your example because i've just explained the underlying psychology of it.



posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
your statement is false.


It's an "if/then" statement. If this is false, then explain the incorrect part of the reasoning.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
i never claimed that evolutionary moralitiy was perfect.


I did not say you did, merely what would be the case if your statement was so.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and again, we still have deviations in evolution.


A pseudo-philosophy built upon a pseudo-science. As stated on a more topically-associated thread we have not evidence of evolution nor its deviations so let's more that discussion to the other thread. It's off-base here.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
sentient by what definition? are dophins sentient?


The dictionary has no difficulty defining sentient. Why do you? And, what does this have to do with the discussion? I say there is instinct and that we have the ability to either choose to follow that instinct or not to. Do you disagree with that? If so, why?



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
your statement is false.


It's an "if/then" statement. If this is false, then explain the incorrect part of the reasoning.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
i never claimed that evolutionary moralitiy was perfect.


I did not say you did, merely what would be the case if your statement was so.


um, quote A of mine is supported by quote B, you said we'd have no bad behavior, i said that i never claimed evolutionary morality was perfect. if and only if there was a claim that evolutionary morality was perfect, then your if/then statement would be true.



A pseudo-philosophy built upon a pseudo-science.


no, not creationism, i'm talking about evolution



Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
sentient by what definition? are dophins sentient?


The dictionary has no difficulty defining sentient. Why do you? And, what does this have to do with the discussion? I say there is instinct and that we have the ability to either choose to follow that instinct or not to. Do you disagree with that? If so, why?

i say we have instinct, i say we also have higher thought. but do other animals have higher thought? octopi and dolphins display remarkable problem solving abilities, why must we place ourselves above them?



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
i say we have instinct, i say we also have higher thought. but do other animals have higher thought? octopi and dolphins display remarkable problem solving abilities, why must we place ourselves above them?


Humans have art, literature, music, technology, and we've built monuments that have lasted thousands of years. No other species has even come close to achieving what humans have achieved. In many respects we are far above other species. However, put us in a situation where we're not protected, and we're extremely vunerable.

One thing all religions seem to do is add one more thing on to the hierarchy of 'life'. This thing is God. And we must all bow down and be humble in the presence of this God. That's why I see religious people as weak because they are following something they think that is above them. We're the most powerful species on this planet, and religious people spend their days belittling themselves to spiritual deities.

The absolute power of christianity has the ability to create an insane amount of people who can't think or feel for themselves, and who become unable to live without God, becoming dependent like an addict.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
um, quote A of mine is supported by quote B, you said we'd have no bad behavior, i said that i never claimed evolutionary morality was perfect. if and only if there was a claim that evolutionary morality was perfect, then your if/then statement would be true.


I see, perhaps I was being too extreme in my statement. Is there a way of show any progress at all that result from 'evolutionary morality'?


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul


A pseudo-philosophy built upon a pseudo-science.


no, not creationism, i'm talking about evolution


Har har, funny. We're already talking about physical evolution on other related threads. It doesn't apply here.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
i say we have instinct, i say we also have higher thought. but do other animals have higher thought? octopi and dolphins display remarkable problem solving abilities, why must we place ourselves above them?


When was the last time a dolphin did your taxes? I agree we should cherish our animals, but I wouldn't recommend going into the business of being an octopi math tutor.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Humans have art, literature, music, technology, and we've built monuments that have lasted thousands of years. No other species has even come close to achieving what humans have achieved. In many respects we are far above other species. However, put us in a situation where we're not protected, and we're extremely vunerable.


I think this is a good answer. Much better than my sacrasm about dolphins doing taxes. I'm only sacrastic though because I know madness knows better. I don't care about the game of debating. I'm interested in progress. Needless to say progress is impaired when it becomes a game.


Originally posted by shaunybaby
One thing all religions seem to do is add one more thing on to the hierarchy of 'life'. This thing is God. And we must all bow down and be humble in the presence of this God. That's why I see religious people as weak because they are following something they think that is above them. We're the most powerful species on this planet, and religious people spend their days belittling themselves to spiritual deities.


I can understand this perspective, having had it in my life at one time. The hope is the discovery that being below an all powerful God will eventually be seen as comforting and beneficial. Which it is. God is empowering, not one who exercises power to induce slavery. That's a human trait...because humans do not know how to love as much as God loves. I have done so much more with God than I ever could without. I know because I've tried.


Originally posted by shaunybaby
The absolute power of christianity has the ability to create an insane amount of people who can't think or feel for themselves,


Tell me what to do shauny! Baaa baaa baaa



Originally posted by shaunybaby
The absolute power of christianity has the ability to create an insane amount of people who can't think or feel for themselves, and who become unable to live without God, becoming dependent like an addict.


How does it feel having a dialogue with someone who can't think, shauny? What does that make you?


Need my God fix today! How I wish it were true. Unfortunately it takes a great amount of care, energy and discipline to have God on my mind & heart all the time everyday. I keep getting wrapped up in this world of petty misery all the time and forget to do things like pray. I'm working on it though, not because I need to but because I'd like to. God doesn't chase people down when they turn away, He hopes that the come back. If this were untrue, we would not have ex-Christians/ex-believers.

[edit on 24-7-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
Tell me what to do shauny! Baaa baaa baaa



That's okay, I don't need to, you've got The Bible to do that.


Originally posted by saint4God
God doesn't chase people down when they turn away, He hopes that the come back. If this were untrue, we would not have ex-Christians/ex-believers.


There are ex-believers because people get sick of the whole regime.



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
That's okay, I don't need to, you've got The Bible to do that.


Okay, that I agree was funny. The point being is I'm not one who merely follows someone just because they tell me too, it needs to make sense and the results I have to see in order to believe.

I wish it were that easy to just read and follow, unfortunately more often than not, the Bible advises how to think instead of what to think.


Originally posted by shaunybaby
There are ex-believers because people get sick of the whole regime.


Yeah. Problem #1 is that there was a regime. It's supposed to be about a person's personal connection with God. If you connect with God however, why on earth would you leave that? Many Anti-Christians I know were so because they were "raised Christian" or joined a church and didn't like what they were doing. Well, okay, I'll admit if I were raised in a faith I would question it or went to a place that told me to do things I didn't buy into I'd question that too. Nothing wrong with questioning, just something wrong with rejecting before you get an answer.

[edit on 25-7-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Jul, 25 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I think what saint is right. Its all about the connection with God. If you do or ever had one why would you leave it.here's my take I call it a personal relationship with God. To have that you got to pray to God. You got to talk to God. Then you must let God talk to you by reading the bible to which he sent for you to see. Not by listening to the preacher. And yes the problem always comes the same. When bad things are happenin God is horrible, or none existence. But when good things are going God is great and all powerful. What we as true christain got to remember is that everthing happen for a reason. Bad or good. And that not everthing that happens is cuz god said let it be done. Sometimes things happen because of our own choices (free will) or the choices of other (which can effect us)

About the aregional topic.

I think the problem with the force of christainity on the people is not true believers. I think its more about churches trying to make themselves bigger. We get all these new churches and old churches who want more and more to follow them, they tell the people follow us or your going to hell. When in fact the simple belief in God and Jesus only is what saves you.

My point is I think Christian churches are the Conspiracie. Its almost like all the churches and christain churches are one cuz they do the same things. God world was not about telling people your going to hell and that your not saved. It was telling them about the gospel and that Jesus gave up his life for you. Let themselves understand the being of going to hell.

As for the force of christainity I do believe there is a bad way and a right way. Every 4 of july in vegas, we get thousand of people that go to the strip. And we also get christain pixits holding signs shouting the end of the world is coming. You see them forceing their words of the church and preacher on other who dont want to hear. Do you think Jesus ever once talk to a person who didnt want to hear what Jesus had for him. No. In fact I think it would be better if it was the end of the world to do the work of God. Spread the words to those who dont know, help the poor, give life, save lifes. SAVE A SOUL would be a better thing to do than hold a sign and force Christainity. I just dont think any church would change there laws cuz they saw the bible say different, which is wrong. The bible is the way of life. God and Jesus are the way of life, not religion or how many people can walk through the door. Peace, god is out there.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 113  114  115    117  118  119 >>

log in

join