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.

 

athiests! why christianity?

page: 11
9
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by eight bits
 



No evidence. All ad hom and bluster. And now you call me untruthful, because you can't back up your tall tales.

We're done here, sirnex.


You've given plenty of contextual evidences on your beliefs.


You claim to be agnostic whilst defending belief in deity and attacking the science as "fairy tales". Clearly not the argument of an agnostic.


No, we're still not done, I know your type rather well.




posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Quite frankly, this is a short one, compared to the grand one.

Man was created to flourish the earthly Paradise, and then he would then be granted the Eternal Paradise after successfully growing in Wisdom and Grace. A jealous Angel, who wanted it all rebelled against God and created Hell. A counter to God. Thus the Serpent, snuck into the earthly Paradise, and lured the two to Sin. Sin removes Grace. What is Grace? God. God's dwelling essence, in Man. Man made the choice here to accept, Satan rather than God. Thus God closed the gates of Heaven, and Paradise vanished. And ever since then, man has struggled. Every man. A priest struggles the most, because he is the target of Satan. But who knows about Satan? Not too many. Ever talk to Satanists?

Without Grace man cannot know God. Thus the world is 90% without this knowledge. This includes, Christians. If the census of the earlier posts reflect an honest figure, than it would be 60-75% have this knowledge.

But this is clearly not the case.

Man fallen from Grace chooses evil over good. Man was created 'Good'. To have only that 'good.' But free will exists does it not? God freely created man and gave man this gift of free will just as God has it Himself.
The right to choose. Why did God allow Lucifer then, to become a devil? He could have imposed to the angel to change or else! But God did not want the angel to lose his freedom. So God after giving Lucifer the vision of the future, knowing Lucifer would still be hard pressed to ascend the Holy Mountain to take the throne, did not force the angel to repent, did not erase the angel from existence, but punished him instead. Of course this punishment is far worse than being erased from existence. Hell is a place of rejection. For those who reject Love. God is Love. Those who do not love, end up there. Love is the commandment given to Christians by Jesus. When we love, we imitate God. We do not kill, we do not force, we do not do these things if we love. Therefore, we cannot love on our own. Without Grace. Grace is the Sanctifier, the Flame of Charity. The Holy Spirit. The One who gives the necessary Lights and graces. To overcome our deficit.

What is fallen really? Fallen means from the Lofty Place. Man fell to the earth as in became just man. Thus all the ancestors of Adam and Eve are just men. Thus you cannot see God nor hear Him. Only Grace can give you that sight and hearing once again and it is not hard to do, nor is far from you. God is true justice. What you did on earth to your fellow man is what is being tallied in Heaven by angels. The guardian angels and we all have one, imagine if I cursed at you and told you were a so and so and I lowered you to a toad. I offended Charity and Justice. Thus, God would punish me( and this is really neat because God choses the punishment) and your guardian angel would report directly to God to write in the book. I persecuted you. That's how God see's it. Persecution of another soul God infused into man. What is the soul? It is the image of God. A mirror sort of speaking. When a man offends another man, they offend God. No two ways about it. This is scary. But who understands this anyway?

God is true Justice, if you were never approached to become saved, regenerated in your soul to live in Grace, then you are outside these laws, but still under God's Justice system. Regardless of the worldly systems. God is over all. Nothing is kept secret from God. His Eye peers everywhere. He see's all. And Guardian angels too. Thus, there's no escaping God. None. As ignorant souls who are devoid of God in their lives, ignorant meaning not stupid or arrogant or the other imaginitives, they are less punishable when they sin because they have no Law. But still punishable by civil morality. I'm not talking about human justice systems, which are corrupt and superficial, I'm talking about True Justice.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by faceoff85


Deuteronomy 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

We are not supossed to change ANYTHING written in the bible lest we change its message. This would ESPECIALLY aplie to gods name... anyone changing anything in the bible is simply commiting a sin. the same goes for the word CROSS. Jesus never died on a cross...


I suppose the same would also apply to Jesus' birth. I have never heard Jesus didn't die on the cross though, can you explain more please?


The original greek word wich is commonly translated to cross is"stau'ros"
the latin word where we actually got the word cross from is CRUX.
the word stau'ros actually translates into stalk, pole or any type of beam from 1 piece of wood.
en.wikipedia.org...
the second greek word used to describe the tool used is "xu´lon"
strongsnumbers.com...
Encyclopædia Britannica tells that the cross was used as a symbol in many ancient religions.
also look at the depictions of jesus hanging from both types of executionpoles used in the wikipedia link. now think over real hard what would be the use of breaking ones legs of those criminals hanging on either side of Jesus if they were hanging on a cross.... there would most definetely be a use if it were a straight pole... in such a condition the chestmuscles would choke a man to death. standing on one's legs would give breath. can the same be said for a cross?
Acts 5:30, Acts 10:39, Galatians 3:13 and deutoronomy 21:22,23 all speak of a tree... fact is that the original greek and hebrew dont speak of anything hinting towards a regular pole fitted with a beam to form the cross...
furthermore the greek Bacchus, the from tyrus originating Tammuz, the norwergian god Odin were all worshipped using some form of cross.” — The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art, Londen, 1900



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by AABacon

Change anything? Oh wow, you do realize the good book has probably been changed more than any other over it's illustrious career, don't you? I remember as a kid the King James was supposedly chock full of spurious verses, then I met a guy who claimed it was the literal only version directly from god himself, as god always works through a king. Plus he said English was the universal language of our dispensation, so yeah, they can't all be right if you go in for that "don't change anything" line. What do you think? I sometimes feel like I've gone to a place so advanced that coming back and seeing these debates is like a college professor debating pre-schoolers. Of course the kids will always win, cause they just repeat "no it isn't, yes it is, no it isn't, yes it is."


Yeah the translation process has messed things up pretty good. as such its hard to syphon out the rubbish and find the true way of worship. But I have faith that the original hebrew and greek transcripts are unchanged. the way the bible had to be copied on those days was by counting all the letters, wich means the chance of altering anything in the bible was slim to nonexistent


Originally posted by Jahosaphat


I would say you are not far from the Kingdom of God yourself.

Somehow I see you as wanting to be a child of God.

The soul of man is different from the flesh of man. Two opposing each other. What happened? How did this happen?


Well I disagree, I believe faith without the works is worth nothing to our father. and I judge myself to not show the works.. yet.. its a work in progress.
but you're right when you say I feel a wanting to be part of god's "sheep"

[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
off topic and useless.. mods please delete.

thnx

[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by faceoff85

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by faceoff85


Deuteronomy 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

We are not supossed to change ANYTHING written in the bible lest we change its message. This would ESPECIALLY aplie to gods name... anyone changing anything in the bible is simply commiting a sin. the same goes for the word CROSS. Jesus never died on a cross...


I suppose the same would also apply to Jesus' birth. I have never heard Jesus didn't die on the cross though, can you explain more please?


The original greek word wich is commonly translated to cross is"stau'ros"
the latin word where we actually got the word cross from is CRUX.
the word stau'ros actually translates into stalk, pole or any type of beam from 1 piece of wood.
en.wikipedia.org...
the second greek word used to describe the tool used is "xu´lon"
strongsnumbers.com...
Encyclopædia Britannica tells that the cross was used as a symbol in many ancient religions.
also look at the depictions of jesus hanging from both types of executionpoles used in the wikipedia link. now think over real hard what would be the use of breaking ones legs of those criminals hanging on either side of Jesus if they were hanging on a cross.... there would most definetely be a use if it were a straight pole... in such a condition the chestmuscles would choke a man to death. standing on one's legs would give breath. can the same be said for a cross?
Acts 5:30, Acts 10:39, Galatians 3:13 and deutoronomy 21:22,23 all speak of a tree... fact is that the original greek and hebrew dont speak of anything hinting towards a regular pole fitted with a beam to form the cross...
furthermore the greek Bacchus, the from tyrus originating Tammuz, the norwergian god Odin were all worshipped using some form of cross.” — The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art, Londen, 1900

Boy I can spot a JW anywhere, if your not you were. In fact this looks to be copy and paste right out of one there pubs.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by the illuminator
 


Because a majority of the world is christian thus we are given christian arguements to debunk.

Boom.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by AABacon
 


yup your instincts were right...
I used to be. but you could have spotted me earlier... its offcourse taken from the numerous books. no copy and paste though... all my books are in dutch... so I translated it..
anyway what do you think about the case I presented?



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by faceoff85
reply to post by AABacon
 


yup your instincts were right...
I used to be. but you could have spotted me earlier... its offcourse taken from the numerous books. no copy and paste though... all my books are in dutch... so I translated it..
anyway what do you think about the case I presented?


Not a bad job at all, however consider this little snippet below.

The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to point out that the Greek word stauros was used to refer to a variety of wooden structures used for execution in ancient days. Robert Bowman notes that stauros as a wooden structure could represent shapes 'similar to the Greek letter tau (T) and the plus sign (+), occasionally using two diagonal beams (X), as well as (infrequently) a simple upright stake with no crosspiece. To argue that only the last-named form was used, or that stauros could be used only for that form, is contradictory to the actual historical facts and is based on a naive restriction of the term to its original or simplest meaning.

Am I saying your wrong? Not at all! But when your religious knowledge only comes from one source, it could be and you'de never know it. Food for thought.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by faceoff85
 


Thanks, definitely going to look into all of that when I get the chance nor was I aware that this was a JW thing either. Interesting stuff nonetheless!



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by AABacon

Originally posted by faceoff85
reply to post by AABacon
 


yup your instincts were right...
I used to be. but you could have spotted me earlier... its offcourse taken from the numerous books. no copy and paste though... all my books are in dutch... so I translated it..
anyway what do you think about the case I presented?


Not a bad job at all, however consider this little snippet below.

The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to point out that the Greek word stauros was used to refer to a variety of wooden structures used for execution in ancient days. Robert Bowman notes that stauros as a wooden structure could represent shapes 'similar to the Greek letter tau (T) and the plus sign (+), occasionally using two diagonal beams (X), as well as (infrequently) a simple upright stake with no crosspiece. To argue that only the last-named form was used, or that stauros could be used only for that form, is contradictory to the actual historical facts and is based on a naive restriction of the term to its original or simplest meaning.

Am I saying your wrong? Not at all! But when your religious knowledge only comes from one source, it could be and you'de never know it. Food for thought.


the sources do actually mention that the + shape was used... I read about that to... but to make my point I left that out

But what do you think of the legbreaking argument? go hang on something and try both positions.. (I did when I was young )
you should know that all of my statements were taken from that religion. Its logical I guess but nonetheless I have done a serious attempt to look at lots of viewpoints objectively... hard to do when my cup has also been filled


[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Wanna see the piece of tekst where it summarizes this?

bear with me as this is Google translator and the quality is so-so

Cross

Definition: The punishment tool which Jesus Christ was executed, by the majority of Christianity known as a cross. This expression is derived from the Latin crux.

Why does "the watchtower" portray Jesus holding a stake with his hands
above his head, instead of the traditional cross?

The Greek word used in many modern Bible translations that are displayed with "cross" ("torture stake" in NW) is stau'ros. In classical Greek the word simply meant an upright pole or stake. Later it became used for an execution pole with a crossbeam. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary recognizes this, and says: "The Greek word for cross, [stau'ros], in the true sense of the word means a pole, an upright pole or fence post, to which everything could be hanged, or that it could be used for the palisade [fencing] of land. ... Even among the Romans apparently the crux (of which our word cross is derived) origin from an upright pole to have been. "- Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Volume I, p. 376.
Was that the case for the execution of God's Son? It is noteworthy that the Bible is the word used to xu'lon tool to indicate which you feel has served. A Greek-English Lexicon Under by Liddell and Scott is the meaning of this "cut logs, which are ready for use: firewood, lumber, etc.... piece of wood, block, beam, style... club, bat... pole to which criminals were hanged... of live wood, tree. "There is also" in NT for the cross ", and then Acts 5:30 and 10:39 as examples cited (Oxford, 1968, p. 1191, 1192). In those verses translate SV, Lu and KB xu'lon with "timber". (Compare this view with Galatians 3:13, Deuteronomy 21:22, 23.)
In the book The Non-Christian Cross by John D. Parsons (London, 1885) states: "In none of the many writings that the New Testament to form, even for a single sentence which, in the original Greek, even indirectly, it indicates that in the case of stauros Jesus used was different than a normal stauros, let alone that, instead of a piece of wood to be two pieces would be in the form of a cross to each other were confirmed. ... It is a criminal piece of deception on the part of our teachers that the word stauros with 'cross' show where they Greek documents of the Church in our native language, and that those translation support through 'cross' in our dictionaries to take as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that in the days of the Apostles certainly not the main meaning of the word was too long after, yet the main significance, and if it ever became, or only because, despite the absence of supporting evidence, for some reason it was assumed that the specific stauros which Jesus was executed, that particular shape. "- Page. 23, 24, see also The Companion Bible (London, 1896 ), Appendix No. 162.
The evidence indicates therefore every reason to conclude that Jesus died an upright pole and not the traditional cross.

What is the origin of the cross of Christianity?

"In almost all parts of the ancient world objects from different periods, long before the Christian era, found that different types of crosses were made. India, Syria, Persia and Egypt have yielded many examples of it all... Using the cross as a religious symbol in pre-Christian times and among non-Christian peoples may probably be seen as almost universal. "- Encyclopædia Britannica (1946), Volume 6, p. 753.


[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]

[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]

[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
"The shape of the [existing two beams cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was in that country and in neighboring countries, including Egypt, as the symbol of the god Tammuz (because the cross had the form of the mystic Tau, the first letter of his name). By the middle of the third century AD. were the churches of certain doctrines of the Christian faith or had waived that twisted. To the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system to increase the Gentiles were included in the churches that were not born again through faith, and were permitted largely to their pagan signs and symbols hold. Hence the Tau or T, the most common form of the cross bar is lowered, was adopted as a symbol of the cross of Christ. "- An Expository Dictionary of New Testament (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256.
"It is strange, yet undeniably a fact that the Cross-century long before the birth of Christ, and since dien country not by the doctrine of de Church are touched as a sacred symbool was used. ... The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norwegian Odin worshipers they were all some form of cross symbolized. "- The Cross in Ritual, Architecture and Art (London, 1900), G. S. Tyack, p. 1.
"The cross in the shape of the 'crux Ansata'... by the Egyptian priests and high priest-kings in the hand held as the symbol of their authority as priests of the sun god and became 'Life Stabbing "called." - The Worship of the Dead (London, 1904), Colonel J. Garnier, p. 226.
"Everywhere on Egyptian monuments and tombs contain several images of crosses, and are considered by many authorities as symbols of the phallus [a representation of the male sex organ] or intercourse considered. ... Are found in Egyptian tombs the crux Ansata [handle cross, cross with a circle or handle on top] in addition to the phallus. "- A Short History of Sex-Worship (London, 1940), H. Cutner, p. 16, 17 , see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 183.
'These crosses were used as a symbol of the Babylonian sun god, [See book], and were first seen on a coin of Julius Caesar, 100-44 BC. And then on a coin by Caesars successor (August) in 20 BC. was beaten. On the coins of Constantine is [See book] the most common symbol, but the same symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with four equal arms vertical and horizontal way, and this was the symbol that we particularly like the "sun gear "honored. The Commission would also indicate that Constantine was a sun worshiper, and previously member of the "Church" was then fourth century, according to legend, a cross in the sky have seen. "- The Companion Bible, Appendix No. 162; see also The Non-Christian Cross, p. 133-141.

There is more but the rest pretty much just discusses why it is inapropriate to use a cross as a symbol even if it were truly the case that a cross was indeed the cause of Jesus death. If you can still prove me otherwise I'll have a giant eyeopener... now dont get me wrong but after reading this I was pretty convinced to bet my odds on refusing the whole cross-thing



[edit on 10-5-2010 by faceoff85]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reading it like this again could there have been some pretty big conspiracy's from about 1700 years ago? we know there are more than a few out there these days. is it really to farfetched to think they havent done so in the more distant past? who knows howfar mainstream thinkin has been misguided. Dont we recognize the vatican today for a very "odd" organization?



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by the illuminator
 


They're not at odds with each other. I am an agnostic atheist in that I do not believe in a specific or personal God or that a God is required for life/the Universe to exist BUT I am open to the possibility of a God existing. Just because I don't believe in it does not mean I rule it out.


Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the differences between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief.


Agnosticism




Agnostic atheism, also called atheistic agnosticism, encompasses atheism and agnosticism.[1] Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not have belief in the existence of any deity, and agnostic because they do not claim to know that a deity does not exist.[1][2] The agnostic atheist may be contrasted with the agnostic theist, who does believe that one or more deities exist but does not claim to have knowledge of such.[1]


Agnostic Atheism

[edit on 10-5-2010 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by sirnex
 


Thanks for your kind answer.
If God is about destruction and hate, Jesus is about love and life.



Jesus said :

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple."


K.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by eight bits
 




As I said T-S, you can pitch woo until the cows come home, and it's all the same to me. As long as it's prefaced with "It is my personal opinion that..."


I don't have to preface it with that, if I typed it and I posted it its probably opinion. Especially in a forum like this which is mainly about batting religious ideas and conspiracies around, actual "evidence" is few and far between here and the professional debunkers and skeptics that frequent other forums are typically absent.

So yeah its my opinion and you have the right to disagree and please do. By no means am I an expert or trying to state my opinion as undisputed fact.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by the illuminator

....sorry a what? an agnostic athiest??? ive herd it all.
...
they contradict eachother. so you are an agnostic. not an athiest


Why do you keep spelling "atheist" WRONGLY ?

So many of you here can't even SPELL the word!
When it's used dozens of times in this very thread.
Are you blind ?!


K.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 


That means, a love of honour and good morals over family ties. It is a call to be objective about even family members when it comes to this, not a blind loyalty that excuses "everything under the sun" because that individual is family. Jesus had a strong way of putting things, but considering the commandment to "Honour thy mother and father" you should definately take this statement as a temper of understandings, not as an instruction to overwrite one of the commandments.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by Northwarden
reply to post by Kapyong
 


That means, a love of honour and good morals over family ties.


Nonsense.
It says quite clearly you have to HATE your parents, and family.

Naturally, Christians tie themselves in knots trying to explain it away.


K.


[edit on 10-5-2010 by Kapyong]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join