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.

 

passions my a**

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by soothsayer
You want violence and strife? Read what Jesus had to say in this hidden gnostic text.

"I was not brought here to bring peace, but to bring the way of fire and the sword and war amongst the nations".


What's funny is that Christians don't acknowledge to books of the bible that were left out. How do you expect to understand the story of "Jesus" if Chapter 3, 6 9, 10 etc are left out. The Gospels are an interpretation of the teachings of Jesus not his exact words. look a the headings of the new testament "The Gospels according to_______". Open your eyes people. I think the statement above is referring to taking on all the secret societies that run our lives and nations.




posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:38 AM
link   
First of all, The Passion of The Christ has nothing to do with Muslims, as others have already pointed out.

Second, Blade, anyone who tells you you are going to hell are ignorant and not being a true christian. there is definitely a branch of christians that think they need to tell people what's going to happen to them, and with arrogance. they do probably more damage to the christian faith than any outside force. it's important to separate these people out from the reality of christianity. in truth, they have no power to judge others, and can't KNOW what they claim they do.

Third, for all you who are saying the movie didn't do anything to promote Jesus or His life or what have you, you are wrong. A few people I went with are now Christians after watching it. I had been telling them about christianity before, but the movie gave them a final nudge. Now I doubt that I just witnessed the only 2 people that have been affected. There are probably people who have been impacted to one degree or another whereever the movie is shown.

Fourth, about the crusades. Before I say this, I don't believe that christians are flawless by any means and have never done anything wrong. However, the crusades were a response to Muslims pressing and forcing westward. A number of them actually reached Spain and started to take over. Now, I doubt the crusaders didn't do anything wrong, but they were making sure the Muslim forces didn't completely take over. Obviously they were successful. It's important to remember that when you look at the crusades, or the blatant scandals in the current catholic church, these are products of man's corruption of the original church and doctrines that arose around Jesus' death. People shouldn't focus on these parts of religions because they ARE going to happen because people will be people. Instead, focus on what the actual doctrines are, and not how certain people use them for wrong things.

And last, about how people view Muslims. When the majority of terrorist acts and attacks on this nation, and Israel ARE Muslim, what do you expect people to think? If there was a short fat bald man who was a serial killer and on the loose, would you be upset if people were more cautious of, or even avoiding any guy who was short fat and bald? Would you be surprised? Of course, there are many Muslims who are far from terrorists, but they will experience people being more uneasy around them because they are unfortunately in a predicament from people of their faith committing terrorism. There are those people who accuse all Muslims without any proof that they are supporting terrorism, and they are the ignorant ones. But please, given the circumstances, no one should be justified in being upset if people are more suspicious of Muslims because that's who these malicious terrorists are!



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:44 AM
link   
SimpleTruth: I am not doubting this movie's ability to impact someone. What I am saying is it didn't promote any of the ideals of Christianity or what he taught. The only thing it covered was him dying for our sins. Is that the only important thing of Christianity? No. This is a typical Catholic type movie. Focus in on the gory hell, but don't touch what he had done while he was alive. It is almost a scare tactic and if not, it is a guilt inducer, which is another thing that Catholics love, guilt.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Fourth, about the crusades. Before I say this, I don't believe that christians are flawless by any means and have never done anything wrong. However, the crusades were a response to Muslims pressing and forcing westward. A number of them actually reached Spain and started to take over. Now, I doubt the crusaders didn't do anything wrong, but they were making sure the Muslim forces didn't completely take over. Obviously they were successful. It's important to remember that when you look at the crusades, or the blatant scandals in the current catholic church, these are products of man's corruption of the original church and doctrines that arose around Jesus' death. People shouldn't focus on these parts of religions because they ARE going to happen because people will be people. Instead, focus on what the actual doctrines are, and not how certain people use them for wrong things.

The Crusades were all aboaut power. The Catholic Church gained the most from the Crusades. More about the Crusades:


What was the legacy of the Crusades? Williston Walker et. al. observes: Viewed in the light of their original purpose, the Crusades were failures. They made no permanent conquests of the Holy Land. They did not retard the advance of Islam. Far from aiding the Eastern Empire, they hastened its disintegration. They also revealed the continuing inability of Latin Christians to understand Greek Christians, and they hardened the schism between them. They fostered a harsh intolerance between Muslims and Christians, where before there had been a measure of mutual respect. They were marked, and marred, by a recrudescence of anti-Semitism....


The papacy gained the most from the Crusades. Its authority was greatly increased. The power of European kings also increased in that a number of barons who had given them trouble went to the East.


from: gbgm-umc.org...



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by OXmanK
SimpleTruth: I am not doubting this movie's ability to impact someone. What I am saying is it didn't promote any of the ideals of Christianity or what he taught. The only thing it covered was him dying for our sins. Is that the only important thing of Christianity? No. This is a typical Catholic type movie. Focus in on the gory hell, but don't touch what he had done while he was alive. It is almost a scare tactic and if not, it is a guilt inducer, which is another thing that Catholics love, guilt.


ah, I see what you're saying. but understand this; Jesus did many incredible things during his life. However, this movie really DOES reflect the ideals of christianity, because the central REASON Jesus lived was to die for our sins. Because, if sins aren't paid for, and we are all guilty of them, we can't get to heaven, because God, being perfect, can't be amongst sin or sinners, otherwise he wouldn't be perfect or pure. So, Jesus' death really is the most important part of his existence. Because, he went through that whole process shown in the movie, plus descended to hell to take punishment for every sin of every person before and after him so that they are then removed from us so that it is possible for anyone to reach heaven despite our imperfections.
There are other things about christianity, but Mel never said this was a movie about the whole nine yards of it, just about Jesus carrying out his central purpose. This is why it was called The Passion of The Christ, because he paid for the very sins of the people who slaughtered him, and prayed for their forgiveness, as they spit at him. This was his passion, and power and expanse of his love and forgiveness.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Ummm...Christians only won the first Crusade. The rest were seen as failures.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

The Crusades were all aboaut power. The Catholic Church gained the most from the Crusades. More about the Crusades:


What was the legacy of the Crusades? Williston Walker et. al. observes: Viewed in the light of their original purpose, the Crusades were failures. They made no permanent conquests of the Holy Land. They did not retard the advance of Islam. Far from aiding the Eastern Empire, they hastened its disintegration. They also revealed the continuing inability of Latin Christians to understand Greek Christians, and they hardened the schism between them. They fostered a harsh intolerance between Muslims and Christians, where before there had been a measure of mutual respect. They were marked, and marred, by a recrudescence of anti-Semitism....


The papacy gained the most from the Crusades. Its authority was greatly increased. The power of European kings also increased in that a number of barons who had given them trouble went to the East.


from: gbgm-umc.org...


thanks for the input. now, i agree that the crusades were about power to a degree. however, lots of it was trying to preserve what they believed in, namely Christ and his teachings. like the above excerpt says, the Muslims were advancing west, which the Christians fought back. Now after they had, they then pushed farther east in turn, to yes, take back the holy land. they wanted to deliver that region back to pre-muslim days, because it's the birth of christianity. honestly, it was important to them, but they didn't succeed in taking back control. that is what happened basically. i don't know every detail though.
plus, it's important to cross reference the above excerpt with other ones from other people, to eliminate bias as best as possible. for example, his view that the crusaders are responsible for fostering animosity between the two sides can be viewed as opinion.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTruth

Originally posted by soothsayer
You want violence and strife? Read what Jesus had to say in this hidden gnostic text.

"I was not brought here to bring peace, but to bring the way of fire and the sword and war amongst the nations".


What's funny is that Christians don't acknowledge to books of the bible that were left out. How do you expect to understand the story of "Jesus" if Chapter 3, 6 9, 10 etc are left out. The Gospels are an interpretation of the teachings of Jesus not his exact words. look a the headings of the new testament "The Gospels according to_______". Open your eyes people. I think the statement above is referring to taking on all the secret societies that run our lives and nations.


soothsayer, that is a good verse to bring up. it no doubt says that in the bible. Jesus said this because, well, it's true. The point is, He knew that his life and teachings WOULD actually lead to war and death. He KNEW that wars would be fought because of what he did. Now, realize that Jesus taught about peace, and wanted peace, but He knew what would happen. In other words, just because He could foresee conflict, doesn't mean he caused it or endorsed it. Just because we know there will be night and then day, doesn't mean we have anything to do with it. This is what Jesus means when he says that. It's not like he was super happy about the conflict it would bring.

Da truth, you bring up a good point. In regards to the gospels, they followed Jesus and wrote down what they witnessed, almost like reporters or paparazzi of today. Either mark or matthew, i forgot which one, had special skills in transcribing. He actually wrote down Jesus' teachings and speeches word for word. He was able to do this. This is one thing to support that the gospels are accurate. Also, the four gospels and the other authors of the bible were inspired and lead by the Holy Spirit on what to write. Think of people who are hypnotized. They can still move around and perform things, but they do exactly what they are told. I actually witnessed my own bro under hypnosis, and believe me, it WORKS! some of the things he did, i just cried from laughing. anyway, the point is, this is why the bible is said to be accurate.

Also, there are some accounts that aren't in the bible, because they were never meant to be, for one reason or another. there are various reasons of credibility and such. the books that are actually in the bible are the most credible and pertinent out of all the documents of the various time periods.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The Muslims conquered Spain and brought forth 800 years of knowledge, peace, and prosperity between all three Abrahamic religions... so what was so negative about the Muslims pressing westward?

Islam brought Europe out of the Dark Ages. If you forgot, it was Christianity that put Europe into the Dark Ages.

Please tell me what was so negative about the Muslims moving to Europe?



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
They didn't move so peacefully westward. They brought much knowledge from their culture, but they were not clean of bloodshed. I'd say the Muslims were guilty of pressing westward, and the the Christians were guilty of pressing eastward into Muslim land, after they kept back the Muslim advance.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
They didn't move so peacefully westward. They brought much knowledge from their culture, but they were not clean of bloodshed. I'd say the Muslims were guilty of pressing westward, and the the Christians were guilty of pressing eastward into Muslim land, after they kept back the Muslim advance.


Man, give me a break with that bull#.

How do you suppose they should move peacefully? Give everyone milk and cookies and sing Kumabayah?

Every single war has bloodshed, that is why it's called war.


Sometimes you have to be bloody to get your point across.

In this case, the Muslims fought WARS to create PEACE, which is what they did in Spain and Jerusalem.

The only reason why Muslims invaded Spain was because Jews who had escaped Spain from Christian torment asked them to.

[Edited on 3-2-2004 by Illmatic67]


oui

posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
However, the crusades were a response to Muslims pressing and forcing westward. A number of them actually reached Spain and started to take over. Now, I doubt the crusaders didn't do anything wrong, but they were making sure the Muslim forces didn't completely take over.



It's been a LONG ASS TIME scince I took history, so I know some of my facts are definitly warped... but if I remember correctly this is my take on the crusades... (please correct me if I'm wrong, because I know somewhere in there, I messed up with the facts...)



--The crusades were to stop the pressing, and advancing of Muslims to the west?



Sure there were Muslims in the west (as far as modern day portugal), I'm not denying that at all (the majority of those muslims being traders...) but the crusades were not a response to muslims moving west... (remember this is my opinion/rememberance of S.S. classes.)

Muslims started moving westward to expand their market ( by trade), by following the mediteranian (typo?) trade routes. The majority of those traders finally landing in sicily, and italy.

The products they brought with them were never seen in europe before these times... the products ranging from rare spices, dried meats(ka'bobs), perfumes, silks, and other items. (such as the astrolabe)

The europeans were a HUGE market for these items, especially silks, and spices... eventually after years of buying from the muslim traders, people soon decided to cut out the middle man (ie. muslim traders), and go directly to what they thought was the source... (Modern day palestine also the "holy land") The europeans moved there to gather silks, spices, etc, and started to take the land as well! Unforunately the silks, spices, etc were not coming from there, they were coming from even more eastern nations (as far as china), via the silk road. It was the Muslims that responded to the Europeans moving eastward, that caused the crusades that we now know of... because of the muslims responding to the europeans it seemed back home in europe that the muslims were trying to "take the holy land, back from the church."

As the initial battles were fought the Church got heavily involved (more so than ever)... eventually Pope Urban the 2nd, promised land to all noble christians that went to serve god, by helping to claim the holy land. This led to many lords, knights, and everyone, and there mother to go over to the "holy land" to get in on some of the action...

once again... I'm only going off of tiny pieces of what I remember from Social studies... I'm probly wrong in certain areas if not all of them... please feel free to correct me, just don't kill me for it if im wrong though...



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   


yeah, i saw it the opening day, and needless to say, it didnt "touch" me like everyone else. this self-gloification makes me sick. you never hear about allah, confusius, buhdah; just jesus. on top of that, we are in a conflict with a country that is primarily muslim. the general public have this idea that muslims are bloodthirsty hetians. has everyone forgot the witch trials, the crusades, slavery in the us. must have. this whole "we're right, you're wrong s***" really gets too me.


Wow, I must have missed the " Mulsims " betraying Jesus in the movie.

Deep



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
As two people have pointed out before (including me), Islam DIDN'T exist in Jesus' time. Which means Muslims DIDN'T exist. How can a culture exist without it's religion?

[Edited on 3-2-2004 by EmbryonicEssence]



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 07:55 PM
link   


As two people have pointed out before (including me), Islam DIDN'T exist in Jesus' time. Which means Muslims DIDN'T exist. How can a culture exist without it's religion?


You mean true Islam was not institutionalized during the reign of Christianity. Prophet Muhhamed only brought forth what would be Christianities biggest rival, it was always thier though.

Deep



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroDeep



As two people have pointed out before (including me), Islam DIDN'T exist in Jesus' time. Which means Muslims DIDN'T exist. How can a culture exist without it's religion?


You mean true Islam was not institutionalized during the reign of Christianity. Prophet Muhhamed only brought forth what would be Christianities biggest rival, it was always thier though.

Deep


I was going to write that but I knew people wouldn't understand.

Good comment.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illmatic67

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
They didn't move so peacefully westward. They brought much knowledge from their culture, but they were not clean of bloodshed. I'd say the Muslims were guilty of pressing westward, and the the Christians were guilty of pressing eastward into Muslim land, after they kept back the Muslim advance.


Man, give me a break with that bull#.

How do you suppose they should move peacefully? Give everyone milk and cookies and sing Kumabayah?

Every single war has bloodshed, that is why it's called war.


Sometimes you have to be bloody to get your point across.

In this case, the Muslims fought WARS to create PEACE, which is what they did in Spain and Jerusalem.

The only reason why Muslims invaded Spain was because Jews who had escaped Spain from Christian torment asked them to.

[Edited on 3-2-2004 by Illmatic67]


Give ME a break. YOU are the one who said they brought knowledge PEACE and prosperity. So WHICH IS IT?! Why don't you decide on what 'history' you want to talk about and stick with it!



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Muhammad didn't even exist until six centuries after Jesus.

Muhammad ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-hmd, -hmd) also Mohammed (m-, m-), 570?-632 A.D.

Arab prophet of Islam. At the age of 40 he began to preach as God's prophet of the true religion. Muhammad established a theocratic state at Medina after 622 and began to convert Arabia to Islam.

So if Muhammad is known as the forefather of Islam, then how could have Islam existed in Jesus' time?



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Well, a little under six centuries I should say.



posted on Mar, 2 2004 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
You do know there were no Muslims around when Jesus is said to have lived, right?
Jesus, dead at 33 AD.
The Muslim religion began over 600 years later.


Yea I know but there were christian around when muslims were fighting in the Crusades




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join