The TRUE Evil: The Christian Agenda

page: 20
80
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Welfhard
 


Nice one! Click and ....saved.
Thanks for the laugh!




posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


So why would a true believer fear this? They wouldn't, but they rather yearn for it to come for it is proof of better things ahead.



This is why you people scare me. You believe the things in an ancient tome on faith alone - faith being belief without evidence - and then admit to yearning an event which is equatable to the then of the world, some to the extent on hurrying it along. You foolhardily do not consider that your baseless beliefs may be wrong and the consequences thereof. I personally would rather the bombs didn't fall that you very much!


Many so called non-believers claim faith is belief without evidence. Where did you get that from? Ohhhhh do you adhere to Christian doctrine? Figures.

Well it is not the believers that hurry anything along but rather those who don't believe. Are you saying that believers invented the bombs and the technologies that are polluting and destroying the planet? And when we say believers we are not speaking of adherents to Christianity like you seem to be assuming. According to the scriptures faith is based on evidence. If evidence is lacking there is no condemnation because there is nothing to base one's faith on.

Why do non bible believers take the interpretations of a group of people they think are so messed up as factual? They have proven capabilities to think for themselves. So please tell us where in the bible does it say faith is believing without any form of evidence?



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


So why would a true believer fear this? They wouldn't, but they rather yearn for it to come for it is proof of better things ahead.


This is why you people scare me. You believe the things in an ancient tome on faith alone - faith being belief without evidence - and then admit to yearning an event which is equatable to the then of the world, some to the extent on hurrying it along. You foolhardily do not consider that your baseless beliefs may be wrong and the consequences thereof. I personally would rather the bombs didn't fall that you very much!



But none of those groups follow after the cannon they claim to believe in anyway. If they wrote it why don't they follow it? They do however follow after their doctrines, which they did write but which are completely anti-scriptural.


Once again, they determined what scripture is. In the end, because of that fact, it doesn't really matter what they do or do not do, they determined what future christians would believe with blind faith to be the truth.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by Welfhard]


So why do they condemn not only themselves but their very own children as well? That is what the cannon does, both what is called the old and the new.

Again you make it so obvioius. they determined what scripture is even though they didn't follow then nor now. Why would they do that?

[edit on 2-3-2010 by The Riley Family]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


Many so called non-believers claim faith is belief without evidence. Where did you get that from? Ohhhhh do you adhere to Christian doctrine? Figures.


Well I used to be a Christian if that makes any difference. Faith is defined as belief without evidence - that's what it means, that's the definition of the word.


Well it is not the believers that hurry anything along but rather those who don't believe.

Not true. The non believers are just trying to live their lives and enjoy their liberty while the majority of the world, religious, are intent of dukeing it out. "The end is nigh" Any one with half a brain can see that believers will turn that into a self fulfilling prophecy.


So please tell us where in the bible does it say faith is believing without any form of evidence?

Well the bible says that faith is evidence of things unseen. But this is irrational as nothing which can't be observed/demonstrated can be defined as evidence. But in the end I don't have to, the word itself gives that meaning. It's all a matter of faith, the same for every religion - which is convenient because there's no evidence for any of it.


So why do they condemn not only themselves but their very own children as well? That is what the cannon does, both what is called the old and the new.

I don't know, nor do I care. All I'm saying is that they established doctrine, the same doctrine which eventually spawned your variation.


Again you make it so obvioius. they determined what scripture is even though they didn't follow then nor now. Why would they do that?

Well what you claim about them not following their doctrines is debatable, it's certainly true that they adhere less now but that's only out of the need to adapt to a secular society. The bible commands to burn witches so they did, but not any more because it's illegal and immoral. They burn heretical texts but don't any more for the same reason and because some of the things they suppressed were true, like Evolution and the heliocentric orbit of the earth.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by Welfhard]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:43 AM
link   
On the topic of Christians of any sect, i would like to share an experience of late that has changed my mind set..only to an extent, but hey thats something lol.. Christianity as a whole has left a repugnant taste in my mouth now since i left the church as a child..for the most part i have met few people of the faith that would make me feel otherwise.. an exception being a women who i know locally that is a Jehovas Witness..she understands my beliefs and that i do not take kindly to religion, let alone the christian populace as a whole.. (and IMO, blanket terms such as that works in this because those that cant be blanketed by it are the very rare and few exceptions....anyhow, this women and i have been talking for only a few months now, but its very nice to be able to talk to her and not have either of be overtly biased, simply exchanging ideas, thoughts and theories and going through the old testement together to talk of our views on certain passages.. she understands fully my dislike of the christian faith and most of those who claim the title for themselves unrightfully so a lot of the time..as she pointed out, that is her problem with religion as a whole are the christians that call themselves such yet couldnt be further from the actuality of it.
Often i have found that such faiths and religions blind people, take over their minds and confuse them in order to spread their confused 'logic' onto others as fact.. thats my biggest gripe i think, is all the bible thumper Jesus drones telling others of their beliefs as though there were evidence of fact behind the theories they put forth.. a scary thing to do with any life aspect or topic, i would think..

As for Catholics.. ohhh my gooodness hats happened there?! My father has always said it is the biggest cult in the world... later in life i came to fully understand what he means...



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


Well I used to be a Christian if that makes any difference. Faith is defined as belief without evidence - that's what it means, that's the definition of the word.

Yes it is obvious you used to be Christian and it does make a difference. biblically faith is not defined as belief without evidence, never has never will. You couldn't prove differently, because it is the evidence in and of itself that proves it. Why hold onto the Christian philosophy? it may be fiblical but it isn't biblical.


Not true. The non believers are just trying to live their lives and enjoy their liberty while the majority of the world, religious, are intent of dukeing it out. "The end is nigh" Any one with half a brain can see that believers will turn that into a self fulfilling prophecy.

So who is inventing the bombs and all this technology that is polluting the environment?


I don't have to, the word itself gives that meaning. It's all a matter of faith, the same for every religion - which is convenient because there's no evidence for any of it.


You couldn't prove it even if you tried. Just because it is an accepted understanding doesn't make it biblical. the bible actually states the complete opposite of what you and other say. Regardless of what anyone believes if the bible states its case differently it is what is is. Biblical understanding of faith evidently doesn't fit with other religions or non-religious definitions. That is a fact.


I don't know, nor do I care. All I'm saying is that they established doctrine, the same doctrine which eventually spawned your variation.

You call it a variation but it isn't. That is one difference between you and us. We do care. However if you don't care why waste your time with such words towards religion especially Christianity? Do you think Christianity is your best weapon you have against the bible?


Well what you claim about them not following their doctrines is debatable, it's certainly true that they adhere less now but that's only out of the need to adapt to a secular society. The bible commands to burn witches so they did, but not any more because it's illegal and immoral. They burn heretical texts but don't any more for the same reason and because some of the things they suppressed were true, like Evolution and the heliocentric orbit of the earth.


Where does it say to burn witches? As for evolution there shouldn't even be an argument. The scriptures don't disprove evolution but rather support it. The scriptues don't disprove the big bang theory either but rather support it. The theories themselve create their own shortcomings. Over time this has proven to be the case and will continue so till it gets gotten right. a little at a time as it has been doing.

So where in the bible does it say faith is blind, or is supposed to be based on a lack of evidence?

[edit on 2-3-2010 by The Riley Family]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:55 AM
link   
So, basically we have another "my group is better than your group and heres why" thread!

Oh the joy...

Of course, it is only Christians who have ever done anything wrong in history!

Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics, Hindus, Sikhs... All innocent... not one has ever hurt a fly...

Curse those evil pesky Christians Grrrr!


This thread is a joke that, in my opinion, spreads ignorance


[edit on 2-3-2010 by Muckster]

[edit on 2-3-2010 by Muckster]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Full_Vision
On the topic of Christians of any sect, i would like to share an experience of late that has changed my mind set..only to an extent, but hey thats something lol.. Christianity as a whole has left a repugnant taste in my mouth now since i left the church as a child..for the most part i have met few people of the faith that would make me feel otherwise.. an exception being a women who i know locally that is a Jehovas Witness..she understands my beliefs and that i do not take kindly to religion, let alone the christian populace as a whole.. (and IMO, blanket terms such as that works in this because those that cant be blanketed by it are the very rare and few exceptions....anyhow, this women and i have been talking for only a few months now, but its very nice to be able to talk to her and not have either of be overtly biased, simply exchanging ideas, thoughts and theories and going through the old testement together to talk of our views on certain passages.. she understands fully my dislike of the christian faith and most of those who claim the title for themselves unrightfully so a lot of the time..as she pointed out, that is her problem with religion as a whole are the christians that call themselves such yet couldnt be further from the actuality of it.
Often i have found that such faiths and religions blind people, take over their minds and confuse them in order to spread their confused 'logic' onto others as fact.. thats my biggest gripe i think, is all the bible thumper Jesus drones telling others of their beliefs as though there were evidence of fact behind the theories they put forth.. a scary thing to do with any life aspect or topic, i would think..

As for Catholics.. ohhh my gooodness hats happened there?! My father has always said it is the biggest cult in the world... later in life i came to fully understand what he means...


Nice post. It does seem many can't let go of the "confused 'logic'" when they look at the scriptures. If they could it does make for an interesting conversation.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


Yes it is obvious you used to be Christian and it does make a difference. biblically faith is not defined as belief without evidence, never has never will. You couldn't prove differently, because it is the evidence in and of itself that proves it.

No, it's not.

“A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.”
Friedrich Nietzsche

Just because you have faith, doesn't mean it's true. The universe is not obligated to conform to your beliefs. Such thinking is irrational and can hardly be thought of as evidence.


So who is inventing the bombs and all this technology that is polluting the environment?

You make it sound as though people are inventing things with the intent of doing damage - the only people who do that are weapons specialists.


You call it a variation but it isn't. That is one difference between you and us. We do care. However if you don't care why waste your time with such words towards religion especially Christianity?

I don't care because it's irrelevant. Catholicism is the parent of modern Christianity and the religion which established your beliefs. You didn't inherit a new bible when Martin Luther came along, it's still the one the catholics made.


Where does it say to burn witches?

Exodus 22:18
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."


As for evolution there shouldn't even be an argument. The scriptures don't disprove evolution but rather support it. The scriptues don't disprove the big bang theory either but rather support it.

We must be reading different bibles. Mine describes a 6 day creation event of a flat disk shape world with a dome firmament floating on an abyss of water. That's pretty clear. Evolution is nowhere even hinted at let alone a big bang.


So where in the bible does it say faith is blind, or is supposed to be based on a lack of evidence?

Every single place the world faith is used because the definition of faith is evidence-less belief. If that's not what the bible intends (in your opinion) then you must blame the authors for using the wrong word.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by jinx880101
 


The catholic church is a corrupt institution that has defiled christianity.
The catholic church does just about everything the Bible tells us not to do.
The root of my christian faith is judaism,not catholicism.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by The Riley Family
 

No, it's not.

“A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.”
Friedrich Nietzsche

Just because you have faith, doesn't mean it's true. The universe is not obligated to conform to your beliefs. Such thinking is irrational and can hardly be thought of as evidence.


Again according to your interpretation but we are going by biblical interpretation regardless of what the word is. Like is stated a rose is a rose by any other name. So even if the word used has taken on a different connotation the meaning remains and can be seen in its context. This is similar to the word love. The way people use it and the definition are different than the bible's definition and use. What dictionary calls love patient or kind or long suffering etc... But the bible doesn't use it as sexual passion, sexual intercourse, an affair, an intense emotional attachment, intense desire or attraction toward another person. etc... or even an expression. The bible says not to love by word of mouth, as is common, but rather in truth and in deed.



You make it sound as though people are inventing things with the intent of doing damage - the only people who do that are weapons specialists.

So it is the weapon specialists who all own guns and pollute the atmosphere and kill other species for the fun of it, drink and drive which kill and hurt many, and are the only ones who desire techonology which is destroying the planet faster than technology can restore it? Shame on them and the rest of you are just going to sit their and enjoy your life so your ancestors can clean up the weapons specialist's messes.



I don't care because it's irrelevant. Catholicism is the parent of modern Christianity and the religion which established your beliefs. You didn't inherit a new bible when Martin Luther came along, it's still the one the catholics made.


You know what our beiefs are? So you know then we don't believe in jesus? You must have quite the insight. So how did Christianity influence our lack of belief in jesus?


"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."


Again where does it say to burn witches? So the Christians took love your enemy, do good to those who mistreat you, put others above yourself and decided that meant to burn witches?



We must be reading different bibles. Mine describes a 6 day creation event of a flat disk shape world with a dome firmament floating on an abyss of water. That's pretty clear. Evolution is nowhere even hinted at let alone a big bang.


I suppose you interpret the bible as stating those days were 24 hours? or 1000 years also?


Every single place the world faith is used because the definition of faith is evidence-less belief. If that's not what the bible intends (in your opinion) then you must blame the authors for using the wrong word.


Neither the "authors" nor the "interpreters" used the wrong word. Like we state previoiusly a rose is a rose by any other name. The context and the information prove without a doubt. Whether you believe the stories in the bible or not the concept is there. How is it that people who don't even speak the same language can communicate. They don't have to use words. Gestures can speak, actions can speak, and you can use different words and still come up with the same concepts. Is it amazing how non-believers view the bible and interpret it the same way as supposed believers do yet react so differently to it? Interestingly both of you interpret jesus to be the christ and we don't.

By the way there is more than one definition of faith

-Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

We just don't think that this confidence is based on NOTHING EVIDENT



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Welfhard
reply to post by The Riley Family
 


Just because you have faith, doesn't mean it's true. The universe is not obligated to conform to your beliefs. Such thinking is irrational and can hardly be thought of as evidence.


Besides even one's faith is supposed to have evidence. Faith without works is dead. Dead faith is nothing, worthless.

So even faith has to be proven. Faith and beliefe are often used interchangably. To believe in something that isn't true what is that? We call that believing in a lie. According to the scriptures that isn't faith. like false teachers, and false gods, as he says "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder." but he says there is a way that seems right to a man but in the end it leads to death.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeakerofTruth
 
Well, those who can see what is going on in the world today will pray for you as well. You're trying to say that this phoney "war on terrorism" isn't a religious war between Islam and Christianity in order to usurp even more control over people's spiritual life?
_____________________________________________________________
A true christian does not believe in war, for war never solves anything. In the bible, if you truly know what it's all about, God declared war on 2 things, and they were sin and satan's minions trying to breed out God's people. I am sure you are familiar with the scripture: They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, and shall learn war no more?

Being a true christian, YES I do welcome my muslim brothers and sisters just like I welcome anybody, whether they are believers or not. God loves one and all, and it's our decision to follow him or not, for he forces none of us to do anything! It's called "free-will".

Now to address the phony war of the muslims and christians. That war blueprint was planned out long ago by freemason Albert Pike back in 1870. History shows this already. You can nit-pick religion all you want to, but God is not a religion!



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   


Many so called non-believers claim faith is belief without evidence. Where did you get that from? Ohhhhh do you adhere to Christian doctrine? Figures.


Faith is the belief in things that's not proven.

Nothing more.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


You have all missed the point. The religious scholars, the political scholars, all have missed the point. Here it is: The people of the books are not important. What is important is civilization. The difference between civilized people and barbarians are their agreements. Two people have weapons and agree not to use them on one another. These agreements are called ethics. Life is short, and we must teach our children those agreements at an early age, and they must understand them. So we tell them stories. The stories infuse them with the knowledge of right and wrong, good and bad.

When the leaders at any point diverge from these agreements problems occur. When the general public or individuals sway from these agreements problems occur. Remember that back in the day the armies were brutal. Some of the people stood up and said, "Hey! Stop that you uncivilized barbarians. Of course, we still war, because the leaders either have not received the message, or have chosen to ignore it.

The moral of the story is that if we all actively use these agreements in our daily lives, that is to say that we lead ethical/moral lives then we are at peace with our civilization. Our civilization rests. If we are unethical then we bear the burdens of the consequences. Simple as that.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by dennisys]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Full_Vision
 


That's interesting I was a Jehovahs witness, they are nice to talk to, however after you join the watchtower and tract society, they are the most controlling group I have ever been associated with.

I remember when I had major surgery and they showed up to lecture me on the ramification of a blood transfusion,



[edit on 093131p://bTuesday2010 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I Agree 100% with this post. I went to a catholic school until I was 14 and the main idea was to reinforce the fact that they are always rite and any opposition is wrong or evil, basically how most governments work these days as well



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
This goes all the way back to ancient Greece, at least. And I have to agree wholeheartedly with your sentiments. Thought I haven’t set foot in a church for over a decade and a half, I was forced to attend Sunday morning, Sunday evening and Wednesday evening services each and every week while growing up. I suffered through more sermons like this than I can recall. One of the preacher’s favorite topics to harp on was the evil that is television. He’s pick whatever TV shows were popular the time, work up some lame, half-baked, asinine reasons why the show ought to be considered evil, rant about it, get people in the congregation worked up to the point where people were crying and falling to their knees to pray for forgiveness for watching such an evil show, then he’s pass the collection plate with a greedy gleam in his eyes while people would load the plate up with cold, hard cash and personal checks in thanks for saving them from the evil TV shows they watched.


How asinine were these sermons? I remember once, when I was little and the “Smurfs” were at the height of their popularity and he started preaching about the evils of that cartoon. His reason for labeling the show evil? Nothing to do with Gargamel, the evil wizard, or having a cat named Azrael, named after the Angel of Death, as I would have expected. Nope. According to the preacher the show was evil because of Papa Smurf! Papa Smurf did magick while acting as a good guy, unlike Gargamel, who was blatantly, unrepentantly evil. The preacher claimed that because Papa Smurf used magick for acts of good, it sent a message to children that they, too, could try using magick, working miracles, and cut in on the supreme being’s action in that regard, and basically play God. That, he said, made the show evil. He had similar arguments regarding “Star Wars” - the Force was evil, the Light side more so than the Dark side for the same reasons as Papa Smurf’s magick use - “Star Trek” - special alien powers = magick - and every other genre show you can imagine from the time.


Anyway, he loved to use fear to control the congregation. And how better to scare and fleece the sheeple than point out to them that they’re willing and knowingly partaking in evil? And enjoying it! I have no idea how many overflowing offering plates that man pocketed after such sermons. All I saw growing up was a con man fleecing a bunch of gullible people who took everything he said as fact without spending the first second to think for themselves. In my personal experience, Christianity has been nothing but a big con game run by people like that preacher.

My parents? Sorry to say, but still devoutly attend church each week. Even though the pastor at a different church they attended up until a few years ago was arrested for scamming an elderly woman out of her life savings and stealing thousands of dollars from the church’s bank accounts… Far as I’m concerned, it’s all a fear-mongering scam to make the con men preachers rich.

Scott Harper



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 





The catholic church is a corrupt institution that has defiled christianity.



M, although I agree it's totally corrupt the catholic church practically owns the copyright to xtianity , christianity is basically what the RCC says it is.




The catholic church does just about everything the Bible tells us not to do.

This may well be correct but at the end of the day the bibles (all ten copies if I recall correctly) were compiled and edited as dogma by Rome.





The root of my christian faith is judaism,not catholicism.



Here is some weirdness M, it was only yesterday that you were telling me how I was going to burn in hell but as mentioned heel was not a judaen concept.

Incidentally M seeing as how you reject catholic Christianity are we to assume that you accept the gnostic gospels ? Nicea seemed to have rejected those if in fact they had access to them, so one would expect that you welcome them with open arms.

Do you use the Gnostic gospels M , do they add greater clarity to your faith or haven't' you read them yet ? If not why not ?



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandKitaro777


Many so called non-believers claim faith is belief without evidence. Where did you get that from? Ohhhhh do you adhere to Christian doctrine? Figures.


Faith is the belief in things that's not proven.

Nothing more.


You appear to have blind faith in that statement though there is proof contrary to this.

There is no statement in the bible that faith is belief in things not proven or provable, or lacking any evidence, rather the contrary. As for the words that are translated to faith they don't convey this thought either but rather the opposite.

Here is Wikipedia

The word "faith", translated from the Greek πιστις (pi'stis), was primarily used in the New Testament with the Greek perfect tense and translates as a noun-verb hybrid; which is not adequately conveyed by the English noun. Pi'stis in the New Testament context is a physical action, based upon a mental belief and sustained with confidence. Belief, in this context is non-synonymous with faith because, belief primarily conveys the mental action, thought of confidence, trust, and/or firm persuasion, not the physical act. Depending on the context, the Greek word may also be understood to mean "faithfulness" or "fidelity" (cf. 1 Thess 3:7; Titus 2:10); indeed, Karl Barth consistently translates "pistis" as "the faithfulness of God" in his commentary Epistle to the Romans.

Commenting on the function of faith in relation to the covenant of God, the writer of the letter to the Hebrews says, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (Heb 11:1 ESV). Υποστασις (hy-po'sta-sis), translated "assurance" here, commonly appears in ancient papyrus business documents, conveying the idea that a covenant is an exchange of assurances which guarantees the future transfer of possessions described in the contract. In view of this, James Hope Moulton and George Milligan suggest the rendering: "Faith is the title deed of things hoped for" (Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, 1963, p. 660). The Greek word e´leg-khos, rendered "conviction" at Hebrews 11:1 (ESV), conveys the idea of bringing forth evidence that demonstrates something, particularly something contrary to what appears to be the case. Thereby this evidence makes clear what has not been discerned before and so refutes what has only appeared to be the case. This evidence for conviction is so positive or powerful that faith is said to be it. Christian faith, described in these terms, is not synonymous with credulity.

Nothing here says that faith is a belief in something unprovable or lacking any evidence. The common understanding of the Christian doctrine of faith does not coincide with the meaning of the Greek words used to translate into faith. Not that the Greek or English words themselves don't but the common understanding of the doctrine doesn't. So in that sense I have no faith in your assessment since you have no proof to back it up. How about some evidence? You want evidence why not give it when you make assertions?





new topics
top topics
 
80
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join