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: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2010 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by the illuminator
 



why do athiest's seem to always try and disproof christianity?


That isn't what atheist's have to do. The onus is on any religion to prove it's claims.

Atheism is lack of belief of any god, and that disagrees with all the religions.

Perhaps the atheists get harassed by christian's more often because in the west there's more christian's, than say, muslims. So, as usual, christians will whine and pretend to be a victim because an athiest has dared to respond to them with healthy scepticism.

So, atheist responses to christians is about as proportional to the number of christians, and it shows that atheists don't tend to go out of their way too often with any serious agenda to bother telling others of their lack of belief in god.






[edit on 8-5-2010 by john124]




posted on May, 8 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   

disagrees with all the religions


Buddhists can be atheists. Depending on the branch they are. Typically the branches closer to Buddha's original teachings include little to no form of worship of any being, entity, or prophet. Even an adherence strictly to Buddha's original teachings only regards The Buddha as a teacher, and nothing more.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
And just to go a bit further, atheism isn't exactly a concrete, defined concept.

Not all definitions of an "atheist" are in the dictionary.

For example, a disbelief in the concept of a personal god can be considered as being an atheist. This person though, like I said, could be a Buddhist. He could be a Deist. He could follow some other esoteric tradition.

An atheist could be someone who does not worship a god but does acknowledge the possibility of a god existing.

An atheist can also, like the common understanding, be the belief that no gods exist at all nor any sort of higher meaning.

So right there you have a rather large span for what an "atheist" is. I consider myself one, but I'm also a spiritual individual (basically I would be the first kind of atheist mentioned).

And the attacks are justified. Quite a few religions are rather ridiculous. The common understanding of Christianity is one of them. Not to say that everyone who considers themselves Christians are ridiculous, but rather the main stream Christianity of the past 1500 years has been rather ridiculous.

You would think the very fact that the bible has been altered, manipulated, and erroneously translated over the ages would solidify the possibility in some Christians minds that the bible may not be the de facto word of god, yet it persists.

Faith is fine, faith is great. But there can be reasoning behind faith. There's wonderful reasoning in the philosophy of Buddha that justifies the faith many put in his original teachings. When you blind your reasoning with faith, you're never going to find the truth.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC
And just to go a bit further, atheism isn't exactly a concrete, defined concept.

Not all definitions of an "atheist" are in the dictionary.


Mind if I ask where you found other definitions for it then?


For example, a disbelief in the concept of a personal god can be considered as being an atheist. This person though, like I said, could be a Buddhist. He could be a Deist. He could follow some other esoteric tradition.

An atheist could be someone who does not worship a god but does acknowledge the possibility of a god existing.


No. That is what an agnostic is. This is why we use words with definitions. Atheism means - NO BELIEF IN GODS. It does not leave room for the possibility.


An atheist can also, like the common understanding, be the belief that no gods exist at all nor any sort of higher meaning.

So right there you have a rather large span for what an "atheist" is. I consider myself one, but I'm also a spiritual individual (basically I would be the first kind of atheist mentioned).


Nope, Atheism is still pretty well defined.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by the illuminator
 




what questions did you have?


Questions like:

If God is perfect where does evil come from? Why would he create creatures capable of evil, imperfect ones, if he were good? The Bible says very little on the subject just that sin was found in Lucifer all of a sudden.

Why would an loving merciful God drown everyone and everything in a horrific flood? I mean sure the Bible says they were sinful but is that a reason to smite them all, including all the innocent animals and CHILDREN? Could God not have thought of a better plan than a giant flood? Pretty limited thinking if you ask me.

Why did God plant the tree in the Garden and do nothing to keep the serpent out? Why did God punish and blame Adam and Eve for sinning when they were ignorant to the very concept of Good and Evil?

Why should people who work on the Sabbath be put to death? The Bible says they should, doesn't make much sense though.

Why would a loving merciful God slaughter the children of Egypt instead of punishing the man responsible, the Pharaoh?

And many many many many more. Every time I brought up these questions in Church or to my parents they just said "Well you'll have to ask him when you get to Heaven" or "That's just the way it happened," or "The Lord works in mysterious ways" ... these aren't acceptable answers, they just further my ignorance. I was supposed to be gaining spiritual knowledge but if the answers aren't there all I gain is spiritual ignorance.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by SpectreDC
And just to go a bit further, atheism isn't exactly a concrete, defined concept.

Not all definitions of an "atheist" are in the dictionary.


Mind if I ask where you found other definitions for it then?


For example, a disbelief in the concept of a personal god can be considered as being an atheist. This person though, like I said, could be a Buddhist. He could be a Deist. He could follow some other esoteric tradition.

An atheist could be someone who does not worship a god but does acknowledge the possibility of a god existing.


No. That is what an agnostic is. This is why we use words with definitions. Atheism means - NO BELIEF IN GODS. It does not leave room for the possibility.


An atheist can also, like the common understanding, be the belief that no gods exist at all nor any sort of higher meaning.

So right there you have a rather large span for what an "atheist" is. I consider myself one, but I'm also a spiritual individual (basically I would be the first kind of atheist mentioned).


Nope, Atheism is still pretty well defined.



Sigh...got to love people who use a dictionary to define philosophical concepts...

Even WIKIPEDIA disagrees with you en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC


Sigh...got to love people who use a dictionary to define philosophical concepts...


You mean people that use words as they are defined? Do you know what the dictionary is for? If you want to change the meaning of a word, that is all good and fine but all you did was offer an example of what is already called AGNOSTICISM.


Even WIKIPEDIA disagrees with you en.wikipedia.org...


LOL. And wikipedia is who?



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by faceoff85
 



But even though they call themselves christians, can they really be called true christians? as pointed out before it would be good to differentiate between christians and true christians. I think a better way to describe christian terrorists attacks would be to call them false flag attacks since the bible clearly states that christians shouldn't take up arms under any condition. unlike the Koran wich I believe does advocate acts of war on non-muslims.


WTF is that supposed to be?

Christians who kill citing biblical reference as justification aren't true Christians.

Yet somehow, Muslims who cite Qur'an reference as justification are just doing what Muslims do?

Are you trying to be a bigot, or you just messing with me?

Not all Muslims are extremist terrorist and the Qur'an does not preach killing in the name of Allah any more than the bible can and has been referenced to kill in the name of God and is still used to this day to do such.

If you believe the Qur'an advocates war on non-muslims then read this site which list numerous verses in the bible that advocate killing non-believers.

www.evilbible.com...

Christians wonder why they picked on yet say the most ignorant bigoted garbage I've ever heard in my life.


I looked over the list. What you seem to have missed is that there is only two passages that is listed from the New Testament, and in both of them the Christians did not kill anyone. The person that died was not killed by Peter but rather God.

When Christ came a new revelation came with him. Christ cannot be held responsible for what anyone does in his name that goes against his teachings.

Let's say you told me not to kill anyone. Then one day I killed someone and said it was done in your name. Who's fault is it?



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by SpectreDC


Sigh...got to love people who use a dictionary to define philosophical concepts...


You mean people that use words as they are defined? Do you know what the dictionary is for? If you want to change the meaning of a word, that is all good and fine but all you did was offer an example of what is already called AGNOSTICISM.

Agnosticism is the belief that we don't have the ability to firmly determine the existence or non-existence of deities. Feel free to point out which definition of atheism I proposed suggests that atheism is the belief that we can't know the existence/non-existence of a deity.


Even WIKIPEDIA disagrees with you en.wikipedia.org...


LOL. And wikipedia is who?

You see those little numbers? Those are called sources. They give links from which the knowledge put down on the site come from.

Do you want the sources from the section I linked instead?


# ^ Britannica (1992). "Atheism as rejection of religious beliefs". Encyclopædia Britannica 1: 666. 0852294735. www.britannica.com... Retrieved 2006-10-27.
# ^ d'Holbach, P. H. T. (1772). Good Sense. www.gutenberg.org... Retrieved 2006-10-27.
# ^ Smith 1979, p. 14.
# ^ Cudworth, Ralph (1678). The True Intellectual System of the Universe: the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted and its impossibility demonstrated.
# ^ See, for instance, "Atheists call for church head to retract slur". 1996-09-03. www.lds-mormon.com... Retrieved 2008-07-02.
# ^ Lowder, Jeffery Jay (1997). "Atheism and Society". www.infidels.org... Retrieved 2007-01-10.
# ^ a b Flew, Antony. "The Presumption of Atheism". The Presumption of Atheism and other Philosophical Essays on God, Freedom, and Immortality. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1976. pp 14ff.
# ^ Rowe, William L. "Atheism". Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward Craig (editor). Routledge: June 1998. ISBN 0415187060. 530-534.
# ^ Cline, Austin (2006). "Strong Atheism vs. Weak Atheism: What's the Difference?". about.com. atheism.about.com... Retrieved 2006-10-21.
# ^ Maritain, Jacques (July 1949). "On the Meaning of Contemporary Atheism". The Review of Politics 11 (3): 267–280. doi:10.1017/S0034670500044168. www.nd.edu...
# ^ Stevens, Robert (1813). Sermons on our duty towards God, our neighbour, and ourselves (4th ed.). London: Self published. pp. 10–11. OCLC 26059549. books.google.com... Retrieved September 1, 2009.
# ^ Bishop Burnet (1813). "Discourse of the Pastoral Care". The young minister's companion: or, A collection of valuable and scarce treatises on the pastoral office.... Boston: Samuel T. Armstrong. pp. 166. OCLC 7381237. books.google.com... Retrieved September 1, 2009.
# ^ Kenny, Anthony (2006). "Why I Am Not an Atheist". What I believe. Continuum. ISBN 0-8264-8971-0. "The true default position is neither theism nor atheism, but agnosticism ... a claim to knowledge needs to be substantiated; ignorance need only be confessed."
# ^ "Many atheists I know would be certain of a high place in heaven". Irish Times. www.irishtimes.com... Retrieved 2009-08-19.
# ^ Baggini 2003, pp. 30–34. "Who seriously claims we should say 'I neither believe nor disbelieve that the Pope is a robot', or 'As to whether or not eating this piece of chocolate will turn me into an elephant I am completely agnostic'. In the absence of any good reasons to believe these outlandish claims, we rightly disbelieve them, we don't just suspend judgement."
# ^ Baggini 2003, p. 22. "A lack of proof is no grounds for the suspension of belief. This is because when we have a lack of absolute proof we can still have overwhelming evidence or one explanation which is far superior to the alternatives."
# ^ a b Smart, J.C.C. (2004-03-09). "Atheism and Agnosticism". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. plato.stanford.edu... Retrieved 2007-04-12.
# ^ Cudworth, Ralph. The true intellectual system of the universe. 1678. Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Bantam Books: 2006, p. 50. (ISBN 0-618-68000-4)
# ^ Rao, Goparaju (1972). Positive Atheism. Vijayawada, India: Atheist Centre, Patamata, Vijayawada, India.
# ^ Walker, Cliff. "The Philosophy of Positive Atheism". www.positiveatheism.org... Retrieved 2008-11-19.


There you go.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conclusion


When Christ came a new revelation came with him. Christ cannot be held responsible for what anyone does in his name that goes against his teachings.


I guess you're just ignoring the passages in the new testament from Jesus saying you should still follow the old testament

www.greatcom.org...



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by faceoff85
 



Nobody can use the bible today as a justification for violence because the bible condemns violence


Sorry, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but the first statement you made in which I replied to was made in error, which I pointed out. You then proceeded to sweep it under the rug so to speak by claiming those people are not 'real Christians' and then made another erroneous statement that the Qur'an calls for Muslims to be violent.

I'm not sure if your screwing around and being a bigot, or if your just uneducated in the Qur'an. With that said, the Qur'an teaches the value of life just as much as the bible teaches.


The Qur’an says about the prohibition of murder, (…Take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.) (Al-An`am 6: 151) and Allah says in the Qur’an, (Nor take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, We have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the law)) (Al-Israa’ 17: 33). According to the Qur’an, killing any person without a just cause is as big a sin as killing the whole humanity and saving the life of one person is as good deed as saving the whole humanity. (See Al-Ma’idah 5: 32) Read more: www.islamonline.net.../FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544502#ixzz0nLf7JTNF


Point of fact is, I'm trying to correct an error in your argument. You can't just claim one group of people are not true to their religion for using choice verses out of context and then claim another group for doing the same thing are just doing what their religion "teaches" when both religions equally teach the same message of 'thou shalt not murder'.

If you were unaware that Islam is a peaceful religion, then I'm sorry for calling you a bigot.

Case in point, both religion have adherents of them that use choice verses to justify acts of terrorism and killing. No amount of sweeping under the rug is going to change that. You should make it a point to study various religions before making claims against them. I'm not sure if your Christian or not, I don't remember you saying so outright, but if you are then your a perfect example for why Christians get picked on. In this case, making an uneducated and intolerant claim towards another religion that teaches the same message.


Now you know better than that...don't you. It has the word except behind the do not kill anyone. So they have grounds for actually killing people. Jesus taught to harm no one.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC

Originally posted by Conclusion


When Christ came a new revelation came with him. Christ cannot be held responsible for what anyone does in his name that goes against his teachings.


I guess you're just ignoring the passages in the new testament from Jesus saying you should still follow the old testament

www.greatcom.org...


Oh no. Jesus fulfilled the law, because no one else could. That is how he saved the world.




One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." (NIV, Mark 12:28-31).



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by AlreadyGone
 


I applaud your post! SO very very true!



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   


If God is perfect where does evil come from? Why would he create creatures capable of evil, imperfect ones, if he were good? The Bible says very little on the subject just that sin was found in Lucifer all of a sudden.


Perfection is distinct from knowledge of good and evil. God created imperfect beings because only he is perfect, anything perfect by definition would also be God, e.g. Jesus. He created us and the angelic beings as willing companions and heirs in his creation, past, present and future. He doesn't want slaves, he has given us free choice, the freedom to choose rejection of our creator. Hell isn't His rejection of us, it is our rejection of Him. Evil has always been around, God has knowledge of it but in his infinite wisdom he knows embracing evil, even just a bit would corrupt him so he eschews it.



Why would an loving merciful God drown everyone and everything in a horrific flood? I mean sure the Bible says they were sinful but is that a reason to smite them all, including all the innocent animals and CHILDREN? Could God not have thought of a better plan than a giant flood? Pretty limited thinking if you ask me.


The world had become so evil and corrupted that it needed to be wiped clean. Personally I believe, and the bible indicates, that children under the age of accountability are granted mercy and enter into His glory at death. It was bad in Noah's day, children were sacrificed regularly, burned alive. Dying by a flood and entering heaven or sacrifice,.. or if lucky growing up to be as evil as your parents doomed to an eternity separated from God. God was granting the children an out, and punishing the wicked at the same time.



Why did God plant the tree in the Garden and do nothing to keep the serpent out? Why did God punish and blame Adam and Eve for sinning when they were ignorant to the very concept of Good and Evil?


Free choice, they were punished for disobedience, the 1st act of sin. God explicitly told them not to touch.



Why should people who work on the Sabbath be put to death? The Bible says they should, doesn't make much sense though.


I don't pretend to completely understand this but here is my answer. The people of Israel had shown that they could be easily led astray away from the Lord. The rules were established to help keep the Israelites in line, death seems extreme but I am sure it was an effective deterrent. You have to remember the people of Israel had made a covenant with God they were and are His people. I admit putting people to death is a common theme in the old testament that seems extreme in modern day but Christ had not yet come. Salvation required ritual sacrifice and adherence to Gods law, sinning against this law not only threatened the sinner but also those around him.



Why would a loving merciful God slaughter the children of Egypt instead of punishing the man responsible, the Pharaoh?


The people of Egypt were complicit with Pharaoh and his actions towards the Israelites. Something to remember when your government adopts a policy or does something that is against God and you agree through silence.



And many many many many more. Every time I brought up these questions in Church or to my parents they just said "Well you'll have to ask him when you get to Heaven" I was supposed to be gaining spiritual knowledge but if the answers aren't there all I gain is spiritual ignorance.


These answers aren't complete,.. far from it. We don't have the wisdom of the Creator and can't see the whole picture like He can, hence the pat 'ask him when you get there' answer. Ignorance leaves room for faith, another thing that God values,... leaning more on him for understanding that you may or may not receive on this earth or the next. Realizing how little you know will either bring you closer or take you further from God,... once again your choice. God Bles

[edit on

[edit on 8-5-2010 by slane69]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,


Originally posted by Fromabove
Christianity by and large is a tolerant belief.


Rubbish.
Many christians are violent and intolerant.



Originally posted by Fromabove
If one attacks Islam, they will kill you, or torture you first then kill you, or kill all your family, no wait, torture all your family, then kill them, then torture you and and then kill you, and maybe blow up something just for laughs and virgins. So if someone, say, an atheist attacks Christianity, everyone goes "ho hum..." and goes about their day.


Complete and utter fantasy.
There are frequent attacks and criticism of Islam.
You must have you eyes and ears fully closed.
Typical for a Christian.



Originally posted by Fromabove
You will never see atheists attack Islam. They don't sue them for religious schools, prayer in schools or public places, or for open displays in the public square. But Christians, they are easy to attack, to bash, and insult. And let us not leave out the Hindus and others religions. They never get attacked by atheists. You never see a post, " Ten reasons why Islam is fake ! " or " 50 Contradictions and claims by Hindus.." They would be tracked and hacked and set upon by these groups, but not by Christians. Now, if any of you ATS atheists would like to prove my statement wrong, point me to the many threads the criticize Islam, Hindus, etc. and mock their religion and insult their intelligence and beliefs. See anyone poking fun at Muhammed ? yeah, right... Wanna give it a go ? I won't be responsible for the reaction of those groups. But, you never will. But then, there could be that one brave atheist out there that intends to prove me wrong in the fair and equal criticism of all religions alike. We'll see, but I think the OP has this one right.


There are frequent criticism of Islam and all religions.
If you ever open you eyes and ears.

Your post is a complete fantasy that bears no relation to reality.


K.




Since my post is complete fantasy, could you please point me to your thread that debunks Islam and discredits the Quran, and also how it pokes a little fun at Muhammed ? I can't seem to find it.

Or maybe at least point to one like it from another ATS atheist. There just seems to be reams of anti Christian threads and no anti Islam threads. Thanks for the help.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by faceoff85
 


God said a New Covenant would be made, not that the old covenant would be utterly abolished as this would make God a liar and would further indicate that he is a contradictory God by nature. I gave you a link on what a covenant means, did you read it?

God made his first covenant, the ten commandments. The verses you've listed is the second covenant God says he will make, without mentioning any abolishment of the first covenant. Then I quoted Jesus saying he was NOT here to destroy the covenant or the laws of God, but only to fulfill prophecy.

It's like your demanding God and Jesus to both go back on their word because you don't agree with the few bad things God allows.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Conclusion
 



Oh no. Jesus fulfilled the law, because no one else could. That is how he saved the world.


You didn't even read the link as is evident in how you replied. Your scriptural reference is a commandment, not a covenant, Christians need to learn that distinction when attempting to defend their invented religion.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by the illuminator
 


I myself am a Christian and have been since I was baptized at 1 year old. I have studied with a few scholars. I have given up all my possessions and my place to live to walk the earth in Florida, preaching the word of Jesus Christ. As well is preaching some of my own spiritual ideas and believes. Out of my time on this earth and my studies of religion, I have clearly come to see that Christianity has been the most tyrannical and power abusive over all.

Many religions or cultures (such as ancient Egypt, Sumer, and Asia) have been vary controlling, belittling and condemning towards others. Christianity out of all cultures is the super power of control over freedom and self expression. This is mainly due by the Catholic Church. What the Catholic Church and Christianity in general have done is pushed people away from believing in the word since most Christians are hypocrites. I try to not preach hell and sin condemning you there. I do preach the revelation of john but I don’t believe that hell is a fiery touchier but an absence of God. I believe that you are blinked out of existence for all of eternity. To never again, feel the love of the lord Jesus Christ.

This idea of hell has caused fear and control for thousands of years. When people are told that they cannot do something pleasurable, they become angry and rebellious. I myself as a teenager rebelled horribly and spent time in an adult detention center. The reason I myself had rebelled was that as a young chilled I was not allowed to do anything without my parents and I was yelled at and told I was bad for being who I was. Christianity does that to people. It tells people that they are bad and should feel pain for it. That they should suffer for just being who they are. No one is perfect. The good book itself explains that as a human you are always with sin and could never be perfect. It also explains that God always loves you even so.

People can’t seem to get over physical pleasure. Be it visual, taste, feel, or sound modern humans feel the need to be pleasured. Now don’t get me wrong, in retrospect pleasure is...well pleasurable. The problem is people seem to surround their whole lives around it. In turn, becoming ignorant to what is true in life. There is much more pleasure in life other than physical. Christianity understands this.

If the bible is looked at for what it truly is it would be seen as an anti physical manual. It preaches about not caring about your possessions, the way people think about you as well as aesthetics. It tell you to not cut your hair to not care about money and not even care about what you are going to eat tomorrow. You are supposed to leave all your cares with God and God will take care of you. People don’t like being humble and giving up pleasure. If Christianity would stop picking on people and imposing on the “God given” choice and freedom of humans; people would stop picking on Christianity.

Christianity is very forceful in their ways. Pride is a sin that causes hate and anger in one’s self and others. Christianity has a lot of pride in its self and that pride causes pride in others. That pride causes enemies and war. If people would stop worrying about what they are not allowed to do, pleasure and what others think of them; as well as imposing believes and power on each other then Christianity as well as other religions might be left alone.

Stop worrying about what others believe in and the way that others live. Worry about what you can do to help others.

I hope that someday we can all live free. Until then may God be with you all.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Could I just interject here ? Christians, when discussing scriptures with atheists remember that scripture is spiritually discerned and so they do not understand it. However, what they like to do is to wear you down and weary you with endless disputations to keep you running on the treadmill until you are tired out.

How about keeping it on point as the OP started by asking atheists why they only prefer attacking Christianity and not Islam or some other religion.

Atheists, feel free to point me to your anti Islam threads anytime so I can read them. Thanks.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Conclusion
 



Oh no. Jesus fulfilled the law, because no one else could. That is how he saved the world.


You didn't even read the link as is evident in how you replied. Your scriptural reference is a commandment, not a covenant, Christians need to learn that distinction when attempting to defend their invented religion.


LOL. Seriously? You think that Christ did not bring a covenant? Well it is obvious to me you just want to argue against Christ and not actually read and understand his teachings and what he has actually done for me and you. Your conjecture and speculation of what you think of Christianity is noted.

No I did not read all of the passages you linked. I did however look for what I knew would be the downfall of what you called proof. You need to read it. Read the one's that talk of the New Testament. Then show me where it says that they, the followers, killed someone. Please use the link you posted to proof it.

I decided to edit this just to say that my response that you posted was to someone else s post. Reply to my post to you.

[edit on 8-5-2010 by Conclusion]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join