Doesn't Christianity Contradict The Ten Commandments?

reply to post by slugger9787


Where does choice get you? If you choose to do what you are told to do, all is well. If you choose to do what makes more sense, you are either criminal, anti-social, psychotic, or in need of help to conform.

The most devote bible worshippers are socially viewed as not right in the head in the US society. Even YOU consider a devote bible worshipper that follows the scriptures to the letter a lunatic, so where does that leave us?

The Christian religion is just one interpretation of the bible and it is used as a means of control. What people fail to realize is that the ten comandments were part of the old Jewish religion adopted by others as each evolved but it was not just TEN commandments that were stated as "God's laws" because the religions evolved and some of those laws were dropped. The new testament was different sides of new religions, each trying to control the masses. They [the different books in the bible] were evolutions, upsets, declarations that the old religion was no longer working and there was no such thing as a royal class of "chosen Jews" that will be going to heaven. Constantine recognized the need for unity in order to control the masses. The meek shall inherit the earth; in other words, shut up, do what you are told, and you will win in the long run; but, for now, you must obey or die. Many of our modern beliefs are not even in the bible. But it worked and it is still working today... well sort of working.

Knowledge is power and since we are no longer burning evidence of differing views, we can go back and study what is available to study. Unfortunately our history is dated because every conquering nation knew that knowledge was power and destroyed all evidence of different views and different histories. Rebels began writing in code for the enlightened. If the Christian God is omni anything it would not have made mistakes nor changed its mind.

People who interpret the bible misunderstand the message of free-will. It is a message to shake off your shackles of slavery. Those Catholics were so good in manipulating perceptions that they got everyone to believe that slavery was good and independence is bad. Free will: do as you are told or suffer the consequence is more believable than don't be a slave to power because they can only control you if you give them the control. Doubt is a very useful tool. You doubt your own god's power. That is very useful for someone who will be more than willing to give you direction.

Take a look at how you live and your behaviors; what you do. Is it really Christian or is it what you were told to do. It takes about a month to read the bible and take notes of interest. I suggest you do it without the influence of outside control, and ask the one question..."what does this really accomplish?" Then go back through and find the subtle messages that tell you religion is a powerful tool used by those you give power to control you. I want you to find it for yourself, otherwise you will just doubt me if I give you the answers.

The assignment is to read the bible to prove what you believe and please take notes. The you are to read the bible and disprove your belief, and please take notes. An open mind is the only way you are going to see the proverbial light. The messages are there in the bible but you are too closed minded to see them and waste your time being controlled to want to know the truth.

Our ancestors were not stupid but I fear we have become idiots. We fail to see what is in front of us because of our manipulated beliefs. The bible explains it if you care to take the time out of your busy schedule to read it. Read the entire canon in context, knowing that people only wrote about what they knew at the time. Many natural disasters were attributed to God's power but you will see a different side of the story when you read the entire thing cover to cover and pause to take notes, then go back through and disprove your notes. Both sides are there and you will see it.

Religion has evolved to control the mass slaves. It always has and it always will. You don't have to take my word for it... its in your bible.

reply to post by helen670



your informative post stated:

.......21/// Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22/// And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.



Sacrament of Repentance.
The first time He said to the Apostle Peter that He will give him the keys of the kingdom of heaven so that whatever he will bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever he will loose on earth will be loosed in heaven (Matthew 16:19).(this is given also to all of the twelve Apostles)
Some time later He gave the authority to forgive and to retain sins to all the apostles. [...]

This dialogue is exactly what the Roman Catholic Church is based on..

the Apostolic Catholic Church... where only they are the true continuance of the original Apostles...all other Christians are merely Christ followers, but the Apostolic Church of the Holy Roams are the only true leadership of Christ on the Earth (or so they attest)


thanks for the info. helen670

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
reply to post by CookieMonster09

 

The woman of Revelations is the Church

Revelations 17:
[4] And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
[5] And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
[6] And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

[18] And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

No other church has such influence over leaders of the nations.

No other church has a city/nation all to it's self.

whore from Strongs Concordance

www.blueletterbible.org...

1) a woman who sells her body for sexual uses

a) a prostitute, a harlot, one who yields herself to defilement for the sake of gain

b) any woman indulging in unlawful sexual intercourse, whether for gain or for lust

2) metaph. an idolatress

a) of "Babylon" i.e. Rome, the chief seat of idolatry

So it seems that the Vatican which happens to be in Rome is the Chief seat of idolatry.

You can find a statue of just about any saint to bow down to and buy a replica of it in the stores of the Vatican.

Look at the Pope, cardinal or bishop and you will see them robed in scarlet and purple decked in jewels

www.jesus-is-savior.com...

Notice the Catholic religion calls herself a woman. The Bible calls Catholicism a whore, and what a GREAT WHORE she is—committing spiritual fornication with the kings and rulers of the earth (nearly every king throughout history has had some type of political, economic or religious ties with the Vatican).

John 5

[38] And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
[39] Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
[40] And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
[41] I receive not honour from men.
[42] But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
[43] I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

Your missal

The Missal contains the structure of the Mass

Rom.9

1. [31] But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
2. [32] Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
[44] How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

[edit on 23-5-2010 by ACTS 2:38]

I just had to quote this entire post because it has two sides. Take notes when each of you read it and go back to the source to get the rest of the story so each of you are not tempted to take it out of context.

At the time it was written, men were in power and women were just vessels to use. The other side of the story is that women are the vessels that will continue a legacy by giving birth to heirs of the throne. That is what makes women evil... they give life and produce offspring that can be manipulated while at the same time produce heirs to the control freaks. However; there is another side to this and that is a woman used as God's vessel to produce an heir to the kingdom of heaven. It all says the same thing: women are baby factories and if a child grows up after being tutored by men to do evil, it is the woman's fault for giving birth to the evil idiot. But if the evil idiot makes no mistakes and all is well, the shrine will be erected in honor of the mother who gave birth to the savior.

You really need to read the entire story and not just the quoted clips that I quoted. Otherwise it is like watching movie trailors and thinking you watched the whole movie. Using clips to prove a point may have worked several generations ago, but we have grown more knowledgeable and learned how to research sources...part of high school and college[ not sorry: blame society and democracy in the US].

Let us start with the two different philosphies: War and peace. Can't have both but the canon does represent both. Read the entire bible canon and judge for yourself. Don't just read what the religious leaders and those who maintain control tell you to focus on...read the whole thing and take notes.

Let those in misery drink but ye of authority must not tip the glass to your mouths lest you lose control... That is in the bible and I know where to find it! Cocktail anyone? I'll just have water, thank you.

Whe you kiss the Pope's ring are you really worshipping God?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/51c43e2cd23def7f.jpg[/atsimg]

Who is being Worshipped here, God or the Pope?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/2884d074bd487ddd.jpg[/atsimg]

What would God/Jesus say about all the money spent on this church instead of helping a starving child?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/95a99bacf2c568a8.jpg[/atsimg]




There is no logical answer to any of these questions in my opinion.




..

Whe you kiss the Pope's ring are you really worshipping God?

"Kissing the Ring of the Fisherman, or the Pescatorio in Italian, is a Roman Catholic tradition that has been passed down for centuries. Each newly ordained Pope is given a gold ring with his name in raised lettering and the image of St. Peter in a fishing boat. The Pope is believed to be the spiritual inheritor of the apostle Peter, who was known as one of the “fishers of men” (Mark 1:17). Originally the ring was used to seal documents, historically called papal briefs. However, this custom ended in 1842 when the wax seal was replaced by a stamp. Today, followers of the Catholic faith pay respect to the reigning Pope by kneeling before him and kissing his ring." (Wikipedia)

There is a huge difference between showing respect and worship. Just as you show respect to your elders, it does not correlate that you are worshiping your elders.

No Catholic worships the Pope. Don't confuse simple Italian traditions with religious worship.

Who is being Worshipped here, God or the Pope?

Roman Catholics do not worship the Pope.

Showing a picture of the Pope walking down a church aisle, with his assistants and cardinals helping him to lift his cloak (so he doesn't trip), doesn't mean that they are worshiping the Pope.

What would God/Jesus say about all the money spent on this church instead of helping a starving child?

Read. Educate yourself:

www.catholiccharitiesusa.org...

The Catholic Church is by far the largest philanthropic institution in the world, donating more money to charitable causes than any other institution bar none.

Originally posted by CookieMonster09

Read. Educate yourself:

www.catholiccharitiesusa.org...

The Catholic Church is by far the largest philanthropic institution in the world, donating more money to charitable causes than any other institution bar none.

Thanks for the advice, let me ask you this.

Maybe the Catholic Church is the largest philanthropic institution in the world, I dont know.

But, if just one more child could have been saved by building something a little cheaper, what would be the correct choice?
Are buildings more valuble that a childs life?

I would be very happy if we just kept it as a "What Would God Do?". It is that simple, What would God do?

What would God say to the Pope standing there dressed up in thousands of dollars worth of Gold CRAP!

Think. Common Sense yourself!

But, if just one more child could have been saved by building something a little cheaper, what would be the correct choice?

There is no shortage of money to feed starving kids in Africa. In fact, there is plenty of aid sent to Africa every year, only to be stolen by African warlords and their thugs - ultimately starving their own people. These are political problems, not monetary ones.

You can't blame the Catholic Church for the internal political problems of a country like Africa, or any other Third World country for that matter.

The Roman Catholic Church does more than any other organization in the world to alleviate poverty, hunger, homelessness, etc. If anything, you should be commending them, not attacking them by demeaning their public places of worship because you feel, based on your own opinion, that a particular church is "too extravagant".

This church, as with practically any Catholic cathedral, was created from the voluntary contributions of ordinary Catholics that wanted a beautiful, sacred space to worship.

Are buildings more valuble that a childs life?

Of course not. See above.

I would be very happy if we just kept it as a "What Would God Do?". It is that simple, What would God do?

God would appreciate the fact that His people want to worship Him in a sacred space as beautiful as that cathedral. He would also appreciate all of the voluntary contributions by Catholics to alleviate poverty, hunger, and homelessness in NYC as well as around the world.

What would God say to the Pope standing there dressed up in thousands of dollars worth of Gold CRAP!

Priestly attire is not "Gold Crap" as you put it. The actual clothing is of a gold color. It's not like he's wearing gold cuff links, or gold "ghetto" chains around his neck.

This particular picture was probably taken at a very special Mass for a particular feast day, such as Easter. Happens once a year. Big deal.

Based on the liturgical season, you can find pictures of the Pope wearing white, red, purple, gold, green, or many other colors.

Most priests, when they are not at Mass, wear traditional black pants, black shirt, white collar. Very conservative dress if you ask me.

What about monks - of the Franciscan, Carmelite, Carthusian, Benedictine orders? They wear a very simple, plain robe. Not flashy at all.

[edit on 1-6-2010 by CookieMonster09]

reply to post by CookieMonster09


Well, we have a big difference in opinion.
In my opinion it is totally illogical to spend in that much excess just so they look good.
God could care less how big, how much or how pretty a Church or Priest should be.
I think it would have made God happier if they had build a cheap church and took the extra money and helped a family. True or False?

Well, we have a big difference in opinion.

Let's not state the obvious.

In my opinion it is totally illogical to spend in that much excess just so they look good.

Most of the time, the Pope is dressed in pretty plain attire - usually white. Priests wear plain, traditional black attire, with a white collar. Nuns dress conservatively as well. Monks take vows of poverty in many cases, and wear nothing more than a simple robe.

The picture you posted is probably for a very, very special yearly liturgical event, such as Easter or Christmas. These vestments are worn once a year.

You are totally taking the picture out of context. I could just as easily show you hundreds of pictures of the Pope in more simple attire, as well as priests, nuns, and monks.

Easter and Christmas are very sacred times for Roman Catholics, and it is perfectly acceptable for the Pope to be wearing special liturgical vestments for this special occasion - the Catholic Mass at Christmas and Easter. Even the picture you posted of the Pope is a very simple liturgical vestment, in the color of gold. He is not wearing physical gold (other than perhaps the Fisherman's ring) - The color of the robe is gold.

This is no different than any other religious institution where their rabbis, pastors, priests, etc. dress for a special event.

And, for crying out loud, he's the Pope - the spiritual leader of Roman Catholicism with literally billions of adherents. Do you want him to dress down in drab, depressing colors on a liturgical holiday like Christmas or Easter? Of course not. These liturgical holidays are celebrations and the clergy should dress accordingly for the festive occasion.

I think it would have made God happier if they had build a cheap church and took the extra money and helped a family. True or False?

There is a long historical tradition of worship of God, dating back to the days of Noah and Abraham. I am quite certain that God appreciates when His servants worship Him in sacred -- even beautiful --- surroundings, all the while, at the same time, devoting time, energy, and money to helping the downtrodden. Catholics do both.


[edit on 1-6-2010 by CookieMonster09]

reply to post by CookieMonster09


You dance around logic.

Do you want him to dress down in drab

Well at least I would have more respect for him, right now he looks like the Sith Lord.

The fact is, God isn't materialistic as you suggest.

Try inserting logic into your post instead of historical tradition. Does historical tradition make it right?

Lets not forget, the Vatican has untold Wealth, beyond imagination.
It's not for nothing they own most of the Worlds telescopes, Soho Satellite...... the list goes on and on.

Not surprising that the Vatican has large investments with the Rothchilds. It could be said, the Catholic Church is the biggest corporation in The U.S.A.

Not to mention the Billions of Dollars of Gold they own.

Personally, I don't think anyone knows for sure the total wealth of the Church, 2000 years of asset accumulation, take a wild guess!

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Village Idiot]

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Village Idiot]

reply to post by CookieMonster09


Cookie - Look, I'm Methodist, so I'm not attacking the faith, only the institution that I feel has so severely drifted off course.

Kissing the Pope's ring as sign of worship or respect is just flat wrong when compared to the image that Christ Jesus gave us.

Jesus washed the feet of his freaking disciples. He went to the sick and healed them, he fed the hungry and hung out with prostitutes to redeem them.

If these duties, attire, and humbleness were good enough for the Lord of Lords - surely they are good enough for the "cornerstone of the church".

IMO - Man took it upon themselves hundreds of years ago to prop up the Pope as a king because they felt that the pure message of Christ wasn't enough to exist in the world.

Barbarian tribes from Gaul simply would not respect something as humble as Christ so man took it upon himself to construct a new version of Christ - one that was a mighty king, rich beyond belief, to be respected and feared.

What was the last reported act of agape love the Pope preformed? Who's feet has the Pope washed? When had the Holy See humbled himself before his flock and given himself over to them as a sacrifice?

God isn't in a billion dollar shrine, we cannot rebuild the temple, and Jesus taught us the that the truth of our existence is that "he who loses his life will gain it"

The Pope (institution, not the man) has done the complete opposite.

If you compare the biblical account of Christ, the disciples, or Paul (who was Saul) to what the Catholic church is today - it's almost tragic.

If you compare early worship and Paul's letters to the church to today's church structures (Methodists are guilty of this too) it's just as tragic.

When the Roman Empire assumed control of the church - that's when it all started going down hill. The humble beginnings that Christ wanted us to remain a part of was lost in the pomp and pageantry of emperors and kings.

You dance around logic.

No, I gave you concrete reasons for the Pope to wear liturgical vestments on a legitimate feast day - Easter and Christmas - as celebrated by billions of Christians worldwide.

Logic and cultural tradition are two complete separate topics. Just because you don't understand a cultural or religious tradition, does not necessitate that the tradition is illogical.

If we are talking logic, then why did you avoid discussing the traditional conservative attire of priests, monks, nuns, and such?

How can you claim objectivity when you only magnify a single picture of the Pope taken completely out of context?

If we are being truly objective, and factual, you would also have pointed out that the Pope, cardinals, and priests only wear liturgical vestments such as those shown in the picture during Holy Mass on special feast days - I.e., rare occasions.

The rest of the time the Pope wears very simple, plain, white robes - Very conservative.

Don't talk to me about logic and objectivity if you are not willing to honestly look at the whole picture. I can post several pictures of the Pope wearing very conservative attire in public if that will spark your objectivity and logic.

And what about other religious institutions? How about the religious attire of the Dalai Llama? Or Orthodox Jews? Or Hindus? Or female Muslims that wear the burqua? Let's be really objective and lay out all of the facts.

The fact is, God isn't materialistic as you suggest.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never once said that God was materialistic.

Not surprising that the Vatican has large investments with the Rothchilds.

I would be curious to know the factual evidence supporting this statement.

The Pope (institution, not the man) has done the complete opposite.

How would you, therefore, explain the truly immense charitable contributions of the Catholic Church, the single largest philanthropic organization in the world?

What about all of the millions of nuns, priests, and monks that earn but a pittance, and devote their entire life to the service of others?

The Church runs thousands of churches, schools, universities, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, etc. all over the world. They do more for the dispossessed and downtrodden than any other institution on the planet, and have done so for centuries now.

Cookie;
I didn't say that they were evil. I didn't say that the local churches were not doing their part. But the stuff you discussed is just a very typical part of being Christian.

I'm talking about the rigid dogma that they adhere to and my perception of how that is diametrically opposed to the example that was set by Christ.

I'm not suggesting you should abandon your faith or convert to another denomination. I'm simply saying that there are some things in the Holy Roman Catholic Church that absolutely don't jive with what we read in the Bible.

Last example I'll give. Jesus commanded respect and authority through a humbleness and constant display of self sacrifice. Do you think the Pope has ever gone to share a meal with the college of Cardinals and proceeded to wash their feet?

Or instead do the Cardinals circle around and kneel to kiss his ring?

The image contrast is startling.

[edit on 2-6-2010 by gncnew]

[edit on 2-6-2010 by gncnew]

Cookie; I didn't say that they were evil.

I don't recall ever saying that you thought that they were.

I'm talking about the rigid dogma that they adhere to and my perception of how that is diametrically opposed to the example that was set by Christ.

Be specific. What rigid dogma are you referring to?

When I read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, it falls very much in line with the example set by Christ, as well as the New Testament.

Please provide me a specific dogma within the Catechism of the Catholic Church that you feel is too rigid.

Christ was not some mealy-mouth, wishy-washy Savior. Christ was pretty strong and rigid in terms of his faith and religiosity.

I'm not suggesting you should abandon your faith or convert to another denomination. I'm simply saying that there are some things in the Holy Roman Catholic Church that absolutely don't jive with what we read in the Bible.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree. From my perspective, the Catholic Church very much exemplifies the teachings in the Bible. And I can give you dozens of examples:

- The Catholic Church runs literally thousands of Catholic schools that educate children in the Christian faith. This in and of itself is an incredible accomplishment. These schools teach and adhere to the Ten Commandments, and teach their classes from a Christian perspective.

- The Catholic Church runs more soup kitchens, homeless shelters, and missions in the Third World than any other denomination of faith that I can think of.

- The Church has literally millions of nuns, priests, and monks that live a pretty meager, poverty-stricken existence, and dedicate their entire lives to serving and praying for others.

- The Church is the only religious institution that I know of that regularly speaks out against the evils of our secular society. Just a couple of examples: The Church is adamantly pro-life, and isn't shy about saying so, much to the chagrin of the liberal media. The Church is also adamantly anti-war, having publicly voiced its disagreement over the initiating of the Iraq-U.S. wars.

- No other institution on Earth is involved in more charitable and philanthropic causes than the Church. The Church champions the causes of the poor, the downtrodden, and the hungry. And this is not a new phenomenon - This has been going on for centuries.

Last example I'll give. Jesus commanded respect and authority through a humbleness and constant display of self sacrifice. Do you think the Pope has ever gone to share a meal with the college of Cardinals and proceeded to wash their feet?

Pope Benedict is a very humble, quiet, and intelligent man. He is very scholarly, having written several books on the faith. He is neither arrogant, outspoken, nor is he vicious in any regard whatsoever. He is an excellent ambassador for the Church given the current state of world affairs.

He has dedicated his entire life to the service of others.

Or instead do the Cardinals circle around and kneel to kiss his ring?

From an American perspective, kissing the Pope's ring may seem quite unusual. But you have to understand cultural and religious tradition, and not look at this from an insulated set of American eyes:

"Kissing the Ring of the Fisherman, or the Pescatorio in Italian, is a Roman Catholic tradition that has been passed down for centuries. Each newly ordained Pope is given a gold ring with his name in raised lettering and the image of St. Peter in a fishing boat. The Pope is believed to be the spiritual inheritor of the apostle Peter, who was known as one of the “fishers of men” (Mark 1:17). Originally the ring was used to seal documents, historically called papal briefs. However, this custom ended in 1842 when the wax seal was replaced by a stamp. Today, followers of the Catholic faith pay respect to the reigning Pope by kneeling before him and kissing his ring." (Wikipedia)

It's simply a matter of paying respect to the papal office.