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.

 

A Message To Christians... A Message of Peace...

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


The factual part of that video is interesting (plus I like the mood of the rest of it) , this is the text that displayed:
---------------------------------
What about His second coming?

We await Christ, they [the Muslims] await the Mahdi.

The Mahdi brings a 7 year peace treaty.
The Antichrist brings a 7 year peace treaty.

Mahdi will change times and laws
Antichrist will change set times and laws

Mahdi will rule from the Temple Mount
Antichrist rules from the Temple Mount

Islam does not honor women's rights
Antichrist does not honor women's rights

Muslims honor Allah with gold and silver (Zaka)
Antichrist honors his god with gold and silver

Mahdi honors Allah, a god of war
Antichrist honors a god of fortresses (war)

Mahdi advances Allah's cause through war

Antichrist will advance his god by war
Islam beheads Christians

Mahdi will demand a badge on the forehead
Antichrist demands badge on forehead

American Christians think the Antichrist comes from the West

We say he comes from the East

Which one is right?

We, Christians from the East can provide thousands of biblical references to prove our point.

Can you?[
----------------------------------------------------

Nearly every quality that the Bible gives to the Antichrist, in Islamic eschatology, they believe that thier Mahdi will have those exact same qualities... and doing very similiar things. Making a treaty with Jews, engaging in genocide... ruling from Jerusalem.

The Muslims also believe that Jesus (Isa) will be the partner of the Mahdi, and he will help establish Islam as the only religon on earth and demand worship of Allah.

This is very similiar to the role given to the False Prophet, who is a dragon (fake Jesus) who appears like a lamb (real Jesus)

[edit on 22-8-2009 by VinceP1974]




posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


Ok, I watched it, but I inferred from your previous post that you were no longer a Futurist? That video and the similarities that you mention above are all based on Futurism (7 year tribulation, and the Peace Treaty). The Christian version of those events came from the Jesuit Order of the RCC in the Counterreformation. It was part of a deception to shut up the guys like Luther who were saying exactly the kind of stuff I was showing you above. This I personally believe is the “Great Deception”, and it does not surprise me to see that a similar set of facts appear in a different non-Christian Religion. Consider the (potential) source of both of these lines of prophecy, its not coming from God.

I can say this with certainty because it goes against everything that Christ had to say about the “End Times”. Both Christian Futurism, and Muslim Prophecy give a timeline of events that can be followed, which goes against Christ’s teachings that the End would be “as a thief in the night”.

This is also why I say that Israel is not important in the “End Times”, because its not in Historicism, there is no peace treaty worked out, and there is no Temple. The role of Israel in Prophecy, according to Historicism, ended in 70 AD when it was destroyed by the Romans. That was the end of the “age of the Jews” and the beginning of the “Age of the Church” (gentiles).

The whole peace treaty thing comes from this verse in Daniel, in case you do not realize it:

Dan 9:25 -27 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Specifically this part:
“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease”

But the Historicist interpretation of this verse is about Christ, not the Antichrist. It basically says that “Christ confirmed Gods coventant with man (to send a messiah to save us) for one week, and 3.5 years into his ministry he was put to death on the cross, making the ultimate sacrifice and replacing the Jewish sacrifice.”

There is even scripture to back up that Christ’s death invalidated the Jewish Sacrifice:


Luk 23:45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.
Mar 15:38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

This is the veil that the High Priest would go through to splash blood from the animal sacrifice on the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant, once a year, for forgiveness of the sins of the nation of Israel.

Even here:
“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”

We see that this verse is talking about Christ, the Messiah, not the Antichrist. “The People of the Prince”, of course being the Romans who come in and destroy Jerusalem shortly after the death of Christ.

If you recall the Desciples were even told to continue to work on converting the Jews to Christianity for 3.5 years after the death of Christ, finishing up the 70 weeks of Daniel’s prophecy. After that they were sent to convert the Gentiles:

At exactly the right time he began his ministry. Exactly three and a half years thereafter it ended on the very day indicated in the type. On the very day indicated our Lord arose from the dead. On the very day indicated in the type the Pentecostal blessing came. And we may be sure that it was on the very day indicated that the incidents of this lesson occurred. That day must have been exactly three and a half years after our Lord's crucifixion.
Why? Because, according to Divine prophecy, "seventy weeks" of years, 490 years, had been specifically set apart as a period of favor to the Jewish nation. It had been foretold that at the beginning of the last seven years of that period Messiah would come and that in the exact middle of that seven years Messiah would be cut off in death, but not for his own sins, but for the people's. It had been foretold that the prophecy would be marked by the anointing of the "most holy" at Pentecost and the further end of the seventieth week would also be marked as the termination of God's special, exclusive favor toward Israel. It was so marked by the sending of the Gospel message to Cornelius, and by his begetting of the holy Spirit after he had believed the message.


If you follow Historicism, everything falls neatly into place, and you can see that many of Gods Prophecies have happened, not just the one that Futurism professes (that Israel would be a nation again). To be honest, the whole Israel being re-founded thing could be nothing more then self fulfilled prophecy, and if you look at who was involved in the re-founding of Israel you will see that the Vatican was involved in that process.

The Vatican was involved with the Zionist
movement long before the establishment of the
state of Israel in 1948. In 1904, Theodore Herzl
had an audience with Pope Pius X; in this audi­
ence the founder of the Zionist movement


Remember that if Satan is going to try and pull a bait and switch on what the meaning of prophecy is, he certainly has the ability to manipulate events so they look like the are occurring in a way that agrees with his version of the prophecy.



[edit on 8/22/2009 by defcon5]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


Ok, I watched it, but I inferred from your previous post that you were no longer a Futurist?


I'm still a Premillenial Tributionalist. I do not have an opinion one way or another about the so-called Rapture.

I used to subscribe was the Pre-Trib Revived Roman Empire Antichrist.

I replaced it with a Pre-Trib Revived Islamic Empire Antichrist. This framework has organically been developing all decade long.


I believe that God and the Jewish nation still have unfinished business, and that during these years of the Church Age, the Jews are spiritually exiled as well as physical, but the OT is adament that there will be a return to the land after a long exile. And that her neighbors will attack from all sides, and that her redemmer shall come and she'll morn for Him and repent for their 1000s of years of disobedience, the remnant that is left..and they shall be His people and He will be thier God.

And us Gentile believers will go worship him in Israel.

With Islam assuming the role at the end time, nearly all End Time prophecy, especially what used to be very obscure adn seemingly pointless ones all throught the OT, make perfect literal sense... in fact some of it seems too "easy" to fit.

I think it's fitting that Islam / Arabs should be in such a role. It ties up so many things introduced in Genesis. Allah is essentially the babylonian moon god... (he's really Satan). The Arabs are from Ishmael. So you have the Jews' spiritiual and human enemies , joined in one Islamic system.

Antichrist is called King of babylon, king of tyre, pharoah of egypt, prince of Persia, Gog,.. all islamic countries today.

Islam fits every definition for antichrist found in the letters of John, and it fits the historical symbolism in Daniel.

Here is a Matrix which correlates the various prophecies

(I dont know how to scale the pictures to fit, so each picture has a link for the full thing)

home.comcast.net...


The first column is a reference to the Rev 17 8 Headed Beast.

This chart I made, to demostrate the inheritence of one empire to the next

home.comcast.net...


And this one here is a geographical matrix, correlated with the nations listed in Ezekiel 38, fighting with Gog.

home.comcast.net...


The nations listed to be fighting with Gog are having the interesting coincidence that they are heavily populated by Shia Muslims.

So not only might the Antichrist be the Mahdi.. but he might be the 12th Imam.. which has deadly consequences for the Islamic world.

That's why the Arab countries want us to strike Iran.

home.comcast.net...





Even here:
“And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”


We see that this verse is talking about Christ, the Messiah, not the Antichrist. “The People of the Prince”, of course being the Romans who come in and destroy Jerusalem shortly after the death of Christ.


The actual people who were in the Legions were Arabs , Asyrians, and Greeks. Read the historical accounts. That is who did the most brutal of the fighting.


I agree that many of the things that happened in the past, especially surrounding the destruction of Israel and the vanquishing of the Jews seem to fit a lot of the prophecies. I think these prophecies, some of them, were designed that way.. to be fullfilled two times. But I think, clearly, there is still more to come and that they are not by any means all totally fullfield.


[edit on 22-8-2009 by VinceP1974]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by VinceP1974
Can you really be this shallow? Is that all you do is look for any opening to make a cheap (and utterly vapid) shot?

Pacifists do not make peace. Pacifists just sit there and tell those who might actually be able to make peace (by stopping aggression) not to do anything.


Not at all. My tongue is my sword. There is a difference, I do not fight with the physical, I fight with my tongue and speaking the truth.

Have you not heard, the pen is mightier than the sword?

Why did they kill Jesus? Because he was a threat to their power. And yet, with what army? None other than his tongue and ability to speak the truth and point out the hypocrisy.

You are simply speaking of a path of death and destruction.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
With the left hand, and worked in darkness with the right hand. Although it is a bit unfair to group them all up as 1 in this case - in both directions. But if you want to treat people as a group like this, then you must also attach all the bad things Christians do. Otherwise, you are just hiding the bad behind the good, aka left hand and right hand.


What darkness with the right hand?


Originally posted by badmedia
How about the economic slavery going on for starters?


What economic slavery?


Originally posted by badmedia
As I said before, Christianity is all about Paul. Jesus didn't do such things, and I'm pretty sure the phrase was "blessed are the peacemakers", not "blessed are the warmakers and call anyone who doesn't go along a pansy".


Jesus Christ came to Paul and Paul seen Him and Jesus taught him and helped him. There is nothing different from what Jesus taught and Paul taught.


Originally posted by badmedia
As well, Jesus said those who try to save themselves will lose themselves. The entire justification for war is about saving yourselves and so forth.


That has nothing to do with war, that has to do with salvation. There's nothing wrong with saving yourself and your family and country if we are under attack. The Founding Fathers did it. Jesus saved Himself when the Jews took up stones to kill Him and He passed through them.


Originally posted by badmedia
Christianity teaches the sacrifice of truth(Jesus), so that the live may live. They conspired against him for that reason, they killed him for that reason, and it's all a Satanic religion built on sacrifice.


How could Christians conspire against Jesus to kill Him when there was no Christians back then?


Originally posted by badmedia
Btw, the kind of sacrifice you think Jesus is, is considered the least form of sacrifice in the OT, and is only valid against the sins the person was unaware they had done wrong. It does not in any way provide atonement. The greatest way is to repent for your sins, or to fix your mistakes. To which Jesus provides an example of how to fix it - including where he died rather than taking up evil and fighting back.


The Bible states in Romans 5:11:
"And not only [so], but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement."
His atonement took care of ALL sins. You have confess and repent of your sins. Don't forget the Jesus is coming back to goto WAR. You can find that in Revelation.


Originally posted by badmedia
Go learn what this means - I desire mercy, not sacrifice.


You need to read the Bible in context


Originally posted by badmedia
Buddha was like 300-400 years before Jesus.


John 1:3,
"All things were made by Him [Jesus]; and without Him was not any thing made that was made."

Thanks,
TT



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
reply to post by texastig
 


I've already answered those question, and Buddha was way before Jesus...


John 1:3,
"All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

That means Jesus was before Buddha.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Well, I celebrate Christmas and Easter myself. More so for the kids and such than for myself, I don't really consider them "holy" however.

But the things I'm really talking about being the same go much much deeper. It includes the things Paul teaches.

IMO, the entire story of Jesus has been flipped upside down. The RCC, as well as Protestants both believe in the sacrifice. They both find salvation in the death of Jesus, and in his blood. And that is the #1 reason I say what I said before.

This is why I do not consider myself a Christian, although it's pretty obvious I love Jesus and the father. I'd say it's quite confusing to most.

Now, if you look in the OT, there are 3 basic types of atonement. Sacrifice is the least of them, and actually is only good for atonement of sins the person is unaware they have committed. It is even warned not to get caught up in sacrifices - as the pagans of the time were based on sacrifice(hint).

The highest form of atonement is to repent for your sins, aka to fix your mistakes. Which is what David did after the man and his wife thing. The middle form is to do good things, but I think that would include the above in all honesty.

Jesus fulfills the commandments and by doing so brings understanding. He does this to be an example for people to follow - which is why he is constantly saying to follow him and to keep his commandments, take up the cross and so forth.

Because it is by understanding that one is able to keep the commandments(Psalm 111:10), and it is wisdom and understanding that guide men to the "holy city" and they light up the path(Proverbs 8 and 9). Jesus speaks in parables to give understanding, and the church he is founding in Peter is within Peter and is built of wisdom and understanding(the kinds of houses Jesus built). As well, wisdom in understanding is how the father rewards and the true riches over anything material.

So it is by his life example that one can find salvation, rather than his death. Those who find salvation in his death are finding salvation in the sacrifice of truth, so that the lie of this world may live(why they killed him).

The entire basis of Christianity is based on sacrifice, which is in fact Pagan. And that is what the Protestants still carry on from the RCC.

OT:


Hosea 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings


Jesus:



Matthew 9:13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Matthew 12:7
But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.


Paul:



Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.


Do you see the differences? Why would Paul say to present yourself as a sacrifice, when both the OT and Jesus say - I desire mercy, and not sacrifice?

Because it's pagan. You mention politics, and it was first in politics that I noticed how these manipulations work. Paul is a politician(called sorcerer in the OT). He does exactly what politicians do. He praises that which the people care about(Jesus), but then in practice does things against it. Just as a politician praises the constitution, but then does things that goes against it. Thus, Paul makes up half the NT, yet only quotes Jesus directly 1 time.

So, the entire Jesus being a sacrifice/ransom stuff is just pagan tradition, and not what Jesus or even Judaism is about. It completely changes around everything Jesus did, and not for the better. And that is what each and every church that has branched away from the RCC carries along with it. So much so, that it is what 99% of Christians will tell you that is what it means to be a christian.

I can go deeper if you would like. Coincidence that both beasts are of a population of Christians? Not at all.




[edit on 8/22/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


That is talking about the father. You do not seem to at all understand the father and son relationship.

Why do you think Jesus says things like: The father is much greater?



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


First, if you can not see the darkness, then you are blind.

You can find out about economic slavery in my sig. This you are also apparently blind too.

As for Paul and his story. The simple fact that the men he was among had any clue what was going on was a lie. The father is within, and thus he appears to people in visions and dreams, unless you are saying Paul is like Moses - which he clearly wasn't.



Numbers 12

6And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.

7My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.


Thus, it would be impossible for the men to have seen or heard anything. Paul's story changes 3 different times as well, sometimes they see a light, but do not hear, sometimes they hear but do not see and so forth. And yet, none of those 3 are how visions actually happen.

The disciples themselves were very skeptical of Paul, and Paul brags about "putting Peter in his place, because Peter was clearly in the wrong".

Which we could probably overlook, except that Paul makes up nearly half the NT, quotes Jesus directly only 1 time, and contradicts Jesus many more times.

As for the war:

You say it yourself - there is nothing wrong with saving yourself. And yet, Jesus says - do not fear those who can only kill the body, if you try to save yourself you will lose yourself. Of course it is talking about war and things of that nature.

He does not come in peace, because he does not come to serve the powers of this world. He does not submit to them, except in flesh - because he does not take to the physical sword.

I was speaking of the Pharisees as the "they". I can see how you thought I meant Christians in that, as I said that is what Christians teach, and then didn't clarify the they. My apologies on that one. What I mean is that Christians teach that is the most important thing, they celebrate his death as their salvation, rather than his life.

In your atonement thing, you quoted Paul. While you can believe Paul if you want, I only accept the words of Jesus as being legitimate. That is what Paul says, but the OT and Jesus says otherwise.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 



Have you not heard, the pen is mightier than the sword?


The pen is only mighty because of the sword.

Consider this:

If the constition of the United States was only penned and no one would be willing to pick up their "swords" and fight for it...we would still be considering ourselves a british colony...

I agree the pen is mighteir than the sword, but again; It is the sword that enables the pen to be mighty...

Im not looking to argue with you, and I dont mean to pick apart your post, but I hear this all too often in the "no-vilent" movement. I just wanted to make that point...



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by open_eyeballs
 


It depends on how it's being used.

I understand what you are saying and all. But it's a bit more complicated than that. You have to take into account who's kingdom this is, and why certain things work like that. It is more so due to ignorance of the truth among people, which is done on purpose by the wicked.

Those same people use fear in order to get people to fight and "save themselves". And so it turns people into the path of death and destruction.

But if you could give all those people understanding, real understanding then that would do much more than any war could ever do.

In a world full of people like Jesus for example, such things as war would have no merit at all.

And so as it was explained to me - I have to be the change I want to see in the world. When I look at what it means to do that, I find all the things Jesus spoke of, and did in his example. I find the commandments and their reason/purpose.

So how can I expect to live in a world that doesn't solve it's problems with war, if I myself advocate it? How can I expect to live in a world without thieves, if I am myself a thief? Same for murder and the rest of the commandments. If I do and advocate those things, then I by default set myself up and make it impossible for such a thing to actually happen.

So I have to be the change, and that change I see means walking the path and following the example of Jesus. And by that, I do not mean going to church and such.

Sure, there is a reason why these things have happened and in the end even evil serves the purpose of god. But that is not my way, I am a student not the teacher. I am not the tester, I am the tested. Those things are for me to learn from, not to partake in.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 



Those same people use fear in order to get people to fight and "save themselves". And so it turns people into the path of death and destruction.


I coulnrt agree more.




But if you could give all those people understanding, real understanding then that would do much more than any war could ever do.


Absolutely.



So how can I expect to live in a world that doesn't solve it's problems with war, if I myself advocate it? How can I expect to live in a world without thieves, if I am myself a thief? Same for murder and the rest of the commandments. If I do and advocate those things, then I by default set myself up and make it impossible for such a thing to actually happen.


Advocating it and it solving your problems are two different things. In todays world, I agree that every war since WWII has been nothing short of fraud. Necessity it has not been, but if you look at history, and other examples of war; there are times in fact it is and was necessary. Just as there are times to defend yourself with violence.

In fact Jesus taught his fellow Jews to fight back...To not take the Romans "crap"...if you will...never does the Bible say to not fight back. To let yourself be defiled and beaten and barred.

Jesus was very much a revolutionist. I have heard arguments where his entire sermons were to dispell the Roman arrogance and to lift his fellow Jews up and out of their self loathing slave status.



So I have to be the change, and that change I see means walking the path and following the example of Jesus. And by that, I do not mean going to church and such.


I think this is a great example of universal wisdom. You need not learn this from the Bible or any book. Ghandi was a big proponent of this teaching as well. I say continue on that path...Surely people will recognize it and emmulate it...



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia

The entire basis of Christianity is based on sacrifice, which is in fact Pagan. And that is what the Protestants still carry on from the RCC.


It's based on the sacrifice of whom? Does it require a sacrifice of any human being ? (either literally (blood) or some metaphorical sacrifice)

No.


For whatever reason, God's Holy demand for the mitigation of sin is blood.. because sin is death.


So , He having such a demand and seeing the condition of humankind.. what was the solution?

That God Himself would come to earth and be His own sacrifice.

What greater testament of God's affection for his creation can there be?

I would be careful about diminishing what he did. For if it is true.. if He did sacrifice Himself for you, and you are mocking it.. well...



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


What you are saying is that god couldn't just forgive sin on his own. The idea is completely ridiculous. That instead of just being able to forgive people, he had to come here and sacrifice himself. Such is absurd.

But what does in fact make sense, and what is in line with the OT is that Jesus fulfilled the commandments in order to bring proper understanding, and that by his example people could follow it and see how to get to fix their errors. Because it is by understanding that one follows the commandments.

Because go ask a Jewish Rabbi what the 3 kinds of atonement there are. And they will tell you that sacrifices is for only 1 type of sin, those which the person doesn't realize they have done. The one at the top is to repent for sins, fix your mistakes, and by following the example and gaining the understanding.

And all that becomes lost and replaced with a Jesus did it so you don't have to lie, which keeps people from taking the narrow gate, and instead follows a path of death and destruction, which has been shown in history.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


What you are saying is that god couldn't just forgive sin on his own. The idea is completely ridiculous. That instead of just being able to forgive people, he had to come here and sacrifice himself. Such is absurd.


I am just explaining the Biblical logic. I am not inventing theories based on anything else. Just what the book says. So any speculation about motivations or reasons that are not based in the Bible means you're coming up with subjective reasoning. I am merely discussing what is in the written record. I am not telling anyone what to think or believe. They're free to do what they like



But what does in fact make sense, and what is in line with the OT is that Jesus fulfilled the commandments in order to bring proper understanding, and that by his example people could follow it and see how to get to fix their errors. Because it is by understanding that one follows the commandments.


He did that and more.


Because go ask a Jewish Rabbi what the 3 kinds of atonement there are. And they will tell you that sacrifices is for only 1 type of sin, those which the person doesn't realize they have done. The one at the top is to repent for sins, fix your mistakes, and by following the example and gaining the understanding.


The events of the first Passover was a prophecy for what God was going to do through His own coming to earth a few thousand years later. All of the commands that the Jews were to follow that week in preparation for the Angel of Death's coming foreshadow the events of the Jesus' last week. Including the selection of an unblemished lamb, inspection for blemishes by the public and the priests, the killing of the lamb, and the putting of the lamb's blood on the middle of the upper part of the door frame, and on the upper portion of each side of the doorframe (blood in the shape of the cross)



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by VinceP1974
 


All you are really saying to me is that you don't know the father, and the only knowledge you have of the father is what men have told you.

If men had instead told you god was a flying spaghetti monster(popular atheist claim), you would believe them. As you do not actually know for yourself, and your beliefs are merely the product of chance.

But even the bible you speak of talks of greater things beyond it, a personal relationship and so forth. Why would you throw such things away in favor of what men say?



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   
that is the most stupid thing i have ever heard ....the past four presidents have been christians. Are you new to ats or conspiracies . the past four prez are freemasons ect.... and one world religion are you part of them. or they. or just clueless. one world religion is there goal. .....we should all follow same religion...... please get off of that crap.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
I have read a lot of this thread but not all, this is my opinion and one I have brought forward before.

Most Americans are not Christian.


Most Americans are Consumerists!

Most are only hobbiest Christians. They go Sunday, They cry Lord Lord, but then they spend their time and energy trying to one up the Jones' They know they are supposed to love their neighbor but they would stick a knife there if it meant a flat screen TV.

They know they are supposed to care for the poor and needy, but bring up welfare, medical care, etc. and they go crazy that their money through taxes are going there.

Eddie Burnays, changed the world in a way that would have horrified people if it was written up in sci-fi novel. But it's the life we live now. every little edge of psychology is used against them and their kids, even toddlers and they don't care.

Century of self


If Christians were true Christians the world would be a wonderful place to be. If there were true Buddhists, the same.

[edit on 25-8-2009 by MadameGuillotine]

[edit on 25-8-2009 by MadameGuillotine]



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Gah, sometimes I really hate being the voice of reason.

Take this



See all these religions here? Now I want you to pretend none of them exist.

Now I want you to ask yourselves, without these would there still be war? Would there still be a looming indifference of good men?

Would doing away with all of these get rid of greed, tyranny, and oppression? Will there still be gang violence, serial killers, and rapists plaguing our streets? Will our governments let us be truly free? Will bad men still find reasons to do bad things?


Of course the answer to all of these is yes. The world would be the same awful place. I think you are putting too much emphasis on other religions (such as Christianity) when the one religion you should be focusing on most is the religion of money!



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


Exactly, getting rid of religion won't change anything. The people who want to do things will just use something else in it's place and do the exact same things. It's really just a symptom, not a cause.

But. What if the world instead had the understanding and way of someone like Jesus, or Buddha and so forth? If people acted on wisdom and understanding? If people instead started looking at the world in terms of actions, rather than images? Where "who" did it, wasn't as an important as "what" they did.

When people focus on the "who" did it as being able to tell right and wrong, it becomes a huge bowl of hypocrisy. You get 2 sides doing the exact same things, each pointing out the evils of the other side, and justifying their own actions based on that - which are the same. They only focus on who is doing the actions, rather than the actions themselves. If they instead looked at the actions, they would see that they are doing the same thing. Then they can fix their end, and show the other side their actions.

But instead we get this round and round cycle back and forth of hypocrisy.

It's tiresome really. And it's near impossible to even talk to them, because as soon as you even think about saying something about the actions they do, you are immediately classified as "one of them".



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join