It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


What is with all the "Christianity-Debunking" attempt threads?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+41 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:04 PM
Before I begin tearing holes in posters and their posts, I thought I would ask this question of the site members.

Why is it happening, and why is it ok?

First of all, IF there are threads out there, that are attacking other religions, I wasn't able to find them. So, at the very least, Christianity seems to be assaulted more than any other belief system on this site.

Second, why is this happening? Why are there so many people bent on the downfall of Christianity? All religions have components that are debatable. All religions have histories that are less than pristine. At one time or another all religions have been twisted by men, used for personal gain, and have been responsible for much human suffering. But, on the other hand, few have done as much good as Christianity. Definitely a double-edged sword.

Finally, why is it condoned on this site? As I write this, I look at the top of the page, and see the title of Springer's thread- The Issue of "Hate Speech" on
Now, I understand that "debunking" may not be considered flat-out "Hate Speech". But, the Springer's thread, he does also point out the more subtle forms of "hating", where little hints, buzzwords, articles and target news articles are used to influence and "steer" views in a negative manner. I relate this activity to the activity targeted by springer, as per the following:

We have seen an increase in hate speech couched in "news articles", subtle innuendo hidden behind professed disagreement with government policies and blatant, outright ignorance spewed forth for all to see.

The most sickening examples of this are seen when certain individuals appear to be joining in the chorus of protest against the evil that men do only to spread their own hate to the unsuspecting by introducing it a little at a time and couching it in the buzz words and rally cries of the day.

I am, by no means, a hard core "Christian". But, I have encountered friction from ATS staff before, for counter-attacking rude site members, "haters", people with obviously negative agendas, and others that seem to be given free run by staff to attack and bully. And, I am sure I will encounter the same friction here.

Whatever the result, I am stating right here, right now, that it bothers me that every time I come to this site and check out recent posts, there are usually multiple posts that are directed, in one way or another, at bringing down everything from the wording of the Bible, to the existence of Jesus, and anything in-between.

To me, it's more annoying than anything else. But, it just doesn't sit well with me, that this is totally off-leash, and in my opinion, practically encouraged by it's blatant lack of restraint or monitoring by ATS staff. Glaringly so in the shadow of all the other attempts that are made to protect and cushion the feelings of other groups of site members.

That being said... fire when ready!


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:14 PM
well put and well noticed.......i have thought the same thing and am reminded of the lunacy that goes on at other forums whose posters are not as "civil" as most here at ATS........i wonder, and then wonder some more.......

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:30 PM
A lot of people find it is a sport.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:34 PM

Originally posted by GTORick
A lot of people find it is a sport.

Well put. When someone knows how to push your buttons it gives them a certain amount of control, maybe? s'n'f op.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:35 PM

Originally posted by GTORick
A lot of people find it is a sport.

You are absolutely correct! That is how it seems. Like people are actually "digging" for anything negative, so it can be posted, and then stroked by others.
And, make no mistake, it is an attempt at spreading a view of hate directed toward this belief system.

+18 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:39 PM
I think it's great that Christianity is under attack, it means the message is still vital enough to be under attack. Further, I see it as simply another sign of the times and validation of the bible. That men will be lovers of themselves, etc. Nobody wants to be confronted by their sin and I'm no different than anyone else on that issue. However, God confronted me with my own sin, chastened me, and eventually set me free. He changed my preferences for the better. I'm glad for that and I want to follow him and obey him because of it. That involves spreading the good news of what Jesus did for us all. Unfortunately, that involves discussions on the nature of sin and that gets people very hot under the collar and very defensive. It gets me defensive too!

I find the 'hate speech' construct to be a rather slippery slope for me because the God I worship clearly hates sin and has more than once exercised his wrath on the sinful, for example, in Sodom and Gomorrah, which is now evidently a pile of salt. By agreeing with God and obeying him, I put myself in direct conflict with the "hate speech cleansing" crowd who seem to be working tirelessly to abridge freedom of speech, personal preference, and the ability to discriminate on personal issues. I'm not advocating anything other than being honest about our sin and examining what God really has to say about sin. I'm not advocating taking matters into our own hands and creating civil unrest or committing civil crimes related to the expunging of various sins. I sincerely hope though that it does encourage people to turn from their sins.

What I am advocating is that sinners like me be honest and stop calling what is evil, good and what is good, evil. I spent a lifetime doing that and there is no happy end to it - only misery.

I realize that this is a privately owned site, and so I'm willing to be cast out if I offend the owners. Those are the breaks. I guess in some very weak way I am involved in missionary work here as a contender for the faith. I try to defend my God and be true to what is said in the bible. I think that's a legitimate way to participate on this site. If the owners disagree, that is certainly their prerogative and they can leave me bloody and beaten outside the city gates.

+4 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:50 PM
Major turnoff...

By no means do I want or expect free thought and/or opinion to be restricted because it offends me. But, IMHO there is an anti Christian, anti American vibe here that keeps me from posting. To be frank, it makes me sick.

It's a strange world where the trend is to be more sympathetic towards radical Muslims than to conservative Christians....quite prophetic too.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:02 PM

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:05 PM

Originally posted by distortion9
Major turnoff...
It's a strange world where the trend is to be more sympathetic towards radical Muslims than to conservative Christians....quite prophetic too.

"Sympathetic"??????? How about scared. Try saying about Islam/Koran/Muhammad what is said about the KOG/Bible/Jesus and see what happens to those who do.

Fatwā anyone........

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:13 PM

Originally posted by distortion9
It's a strange world where the trend is to be more sympathetic towards radical Muslims than to conservative Christians....quite prophetic too.

Why is this strange? Everyone knows that they are the same, except the means they use to get it their way. The christian has more power and can just nag to society and the army does the dirty-work, or some lawmakers come to fix it to their advantage.

A radical muslim is probably radical because he doesnt get help from a big army etc, and so aint got better ways to get things his way. So they resort to violence. They are desperate.

But in no way do i think there is a trend to have sympathy for any of those types of people. I think people wants to be free from getting others will or way forced upon them, from conservatives or radicals. People are tired of all the insanity i think.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:24 PM
reply to post by SumnerKagan

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

Your post speaks for more people than you will ever know.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:26 PM
reply to post by SumnerKagan

Awesome thread my friend
. I stay away from any threads involving Christianity because they all end up with the same people saying the same things (on both sides). My opinion is it is becoming "cool" to bash Christianity on ATS. Well, this is my first and last post in a thread regarding Christianity. Keep up the good work OP.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:27 PM

Originally posted by Daniem

Everyone knows that they are the same, except the means they use to get it their way.

Are you saying that Islam and Christianity are the same? That couldn't be further from true! The differences between the two faiths are many. Any similarity stems from Islam steming from the Abrahamic line.

As for the Christian bashing, as a Christian, it bothers me but it doesn't at the same time. Sometimes, I wish that people would take the time to see what Christians believe and why we believe it before attacking us. Reading up on things may make it a little clear. One thing, that I can think of off the top of my head, is the difference between Protestant Christians and Catholic Christians. We're not the same, yet I see the terms used interchangably!

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:28 PM
reply to post by distortion9

By no means do I want or expect free thought and/or opinion to be restricted because it offends me. But, IMHO there is an anti Christian, anti American vibe here that keeps me from posting. To be frank, it makes me sick.

Isn't it better to engage in possibly heated discussions in a forum such as this, than slug it out with violence?

Even an uneducated old bugger such as myself, is required to at least think a little about what another poster is trying to say, before responding.

If you feel someone is attacking you beliefs, then you have the option of turning the other cheek and ignore them, or engage in a discussion to find out why, we could all learn something.

Unlike the real world, here we have moderator and ignore buttons. Add that to the fact that we have complete anonymity, has to be ten tmes better than who has the biggest bombs.

Don't take it personal dude, it aint Hotel California.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:33 PM
reply to post by octotom

Exactly! Ok i'm posting again lol. Many people don't take the time to understand Christianity. I'll be the first to admit there are MANY fake Christians out there.

Matthew 22:36-40 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

My favorite scripture and also what I believe Christianity is all about.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:12 PM
Well, you have the evangilical aithiests and the New Age / Luciferians spreading their vision across the internet now. And the primary tactic of course is to blast Christianity which stands in their way.

The Lucifer Plan

Here is some interesting information from various sources (mostly other ATS threads on the same subject):

Share International Foundation is a member of the NGO (non-governmental organization) community at the United Nations

SI has a long list of prominent, well respected international diplomats, religious leaders and political figures who have had articles published in this magazine. They include articles written by former UN leader Boutros Boutros-Ghali; present leader Kofi Annan; former President of Ireland Mary Robinson; Gro Harlem Brundtland who is director-general of the World Health Organization and former Prime Minister of Norway; the Dalai Lama; and recently even Britain's Crown Prince Charles.(7) Even though the average man on the street would most likely dissolve into hysterical laughter upon being presented with the beliefs of Creme and Share International, it is easily shown that this magazine is well-respected and taken seriously by many influential members of the Global Elite. In fact, Share International Foundation is accredited as an official non-governmental organization (NGO) by the United Nations,(8) and the magazine, as stated on the inside cover of each issue, is published by SI " association with the Department of Public Information at the United Nations."

Now The Lucis Trust, formerly known as the Lucifer Publishing Company was formed by Alice A. Bailey a Theophsist and disciple of Madame Blavatsky (Helena Petrovna Blavatsky). Blavatsky was the founder of Theosophy and is considered the "mother" of the New Age movement and modern occultism. She taught in her Secret Doctrine that Lucifer was "higher and older than Jehovah. She further expressed in her "great work" that Satan, under different god-names, is really an allegory of "Good, and Sacrifice, a God of Wisdom." Blavatsky believed that Satan was the only god of earth, "is one with the Logos," and is the "cosmic reflection of God.". Blavatsky also equated Lucifer with Jesus Christ.

The Lucis Trust (or Lucifer Publishing Company) is a United Nations Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) and is represented at weekly sessions at the United Nations in New York and Geneva and a member of the UN Economic and Social Council.

The Lucis Trust promotes IoNs as one of the "New Group of World Servers". The Lucis Trust are pushing for the establishment of a permanent "Age of Aquarius" ruled by one "christ" figure, "Lord of the Word" or Maitreya (the new age messiah) and a One World Religion.

Lets take a step away from IoNS for a minute and take a look at the intenet movie Zeitgeist which appears to have taken in millions of people across the world:

Zeitgeist Part I used the controversial author Archarya S as the consultant for the movie. Part I of the movie is based on her book "The Christ Conspiracy", she also penned the companion guide for Zeitgeist.

Archarya S plagiarised her book from a book written in the 1800's by a Quaker who claimed without any evidence that there were 16 previous crucified saviours. This book was heavily cited by the Theosphical Society (founded by Madam Blavatsky - see above).

Archarya S expanded on the themes of the original book by drawing on material from Madam Blavatsky; revered 33rd degree Freemason Alber Pike who stated "Yes, Lucifer is God"; controversial researcher "Jordan Maxwell" (a pseudonym: derived from one of Maxwell's mentors, Madame Blavatsky's, works-- i.e., Jordanus Maximus); Gerlad Massey (High Chief Druid and contributor to Blavatsky's Lucifer Magazine); Albert Churchward (Freemason); James Churchward (Freemason); Michael Baigent (Freemason); Godfrey Higgins (Freemason / Cheif Druid) and others. To this day there are unclaimed financial rewards for anyone who can actually back up any of the claims made by Archarya S or Zeitgeist Part I.

Also, there is a large movement by the "Evangelical Atheists" to

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:17 PM

Great internet article on the topic. Below are selected quotes from the source.

Nevertheless, some of the brightest minds in the English-speaking world right now argue that religion is the problem. And we know they’re the brightest minds because they keep telling us they are. The New Atheists are positively evangelical. They want to make a convert out of you, although if you’re a “dyed-in-the-wool faith-head” they’ll settle for peppering you with insults and sarcasm instead.

What is most worrying is that the New Atheists seem to gain the most followers precisely among the most ambitious and intelligent young people—the people who will be actively shaping government policy in the years to come. Attracted by the intellectual rebelliousness of the movement, young people fall for its insidious message: join us and you can be one of the smart people.

In the 1800s, Karl Marx and other thinkers systematized this anti-religious hostility. When the followers of Marx gained power in Russia, they were even more ruthless than the French revolutionaries in their suppression of religion. Similar horrors followed dogmatic Communism wherever it came to power.

But most of the English-speaking world was spared this excessive institutional atheism. The United States, in particular, has always zealously guarded the freedom of anyone to practice any religion that does not seriously interfere with public order.

That’s why we’re so surprised and baffled by what we call the New Atheism. For the first time in our relatively tranquil history, we’re facing a determined attempt not just to keep organized religion out of government (which most religious Americans agree is a good idea), but to suppress religion completely.

What we call the “New Atheism” is a bit different than its predecessor. It’s more aggressive, and it has more power. The leaders of the sect are well placed in the academic world, and they have a strong determination to mold government policy.

And you wouldn’t like the government if the New Atheists molded its policy. Richard Dawkins has asserted that teaching your religion to your child is a form of child abuse and should be criminalized. Other New Atheists have argued that churches should have to post a sign reading “for entertainment purposes only,” since after all they’re no less a fraud than telephone psychics.

The New Atheists see religion as a disease to be exterminated. Their dream, in short, is not a government neutral to religion, but a government actively hostile to religion. The evangelical atheists assume that religion must inevitably breed mindless fanaticism. Countering that image means not just answering the atheists’ arguments against God, but also correcting their false impressions of religion.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:28 PM
If you we're to review both sides of the story, you'd see the answer is quite simple and relevant to most anything. A great comparison, is a UFO skeptic and a UFO believer.

The reason why Chirstian skeptics are so rampant is because they wan't everyone to believe as they believe, and they are hellbent on destroying anyones sanctity at whatever cost.

They are more than likely insecure with themselves, any intelligent person knows that trying to converge someone's belief is usually a very hard thing to do, especially when it comes to religion.

My advice, stay clear of these threads like I, and just continue on with your way. There is no stopping the endless debate of religion.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:43 PM
I find the anti-Christian threads to be a minor irritant, but nothing more than that.

What I truly find annoying (and maybe this is being petty on my part) is when there will be a thread speculating about something religious related, such as the impact of Marian apparitions on the Church of England or exegesis of a particular part of gospel and a thread troll will pop in and reply with something akin to:

'Religion is stupid. You are all sheeple. Wake up!'.

It happens WAY too often. Some of the antireligious often use other peoples threads to promulgate their off topic vitriol instead of doing the intellectual honest thing and starting a new thread.

Another irritant is when people start threads instead of adding to existing threads on the same topic. If I see another Zeitgiest or 'Jesus = Horus' thread I'm going to scream.

What I would really like to see an analysis of is if there is a tendency to allow anti-religious or anti-Christian threads and posts that would deleted if the topic was anything else.


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:44 PM
People are allowed an opinion. Characterizing them as 'debunkers' undermines both parties. Religion doesn't define the existence of everybody. It represents a point of view. Anything more than that is just contention. Like it or not, people will develop their own ideas based on whatever they choose to believe. Religion is based on Faith and will always be subject to questions it can't answer.

Enjoy your Faith and ignore any awkward questions

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in