It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Unfair criticism of the Christian religion...

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 04:57 AM
reply to post by Chillimac

Thanks for your reply-

But that brings us back to the topic of the thread. The behavior you describe is not unique to Christianity, so how is it fair to attack the system as a whole.

No, it is not unique of Christianity, and yes it is unfair to put them all in one basket. But I think there is a difference between questioning and attacking. There are of course people who attack the Christian religion- but that does not mean that people who fairly question it are attacking it too.

Just like you cannot/ should not put the devout believers and extremists of Christianity in one basket, neither should you do so with all non-believers.

Pretty confusing to write, lol- but I think you get what I mean.

I think tolerance, understanding and education is the best form of of keeping the peace between the clashing of cultures.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:32 AM

Originally posted by bogomil
Even when talking about religionists from all religions together (which certainly makes up some billions), my personal impression is, that only a small percentage of them have any significant 'spiritual' encounters. And even then some of these encounters are a desperate wish for something 'spiritual' to happen, resulting in a mild hysteria, leading to a 'spiritual' explanation of completely normal phenomena (or ofcourse sometimes just plain selfdelusion).

If you're talking "big picture, seeing visions of the Virgin Mary" kinds of things, yes. And even for a staunch believer, those sorts of things need to be taken with a grain of salt because, while we believe that miracles can happen, we also believe that they generally don't.

But, for a reasonably devout Christian, at least, spiritual encounters are a fairly common occurrence. We believe that the Holy Spirit exists in each of us, and helps us not only to be closer to one and another and to God, but to actively be the hands of God on Earth. If I get the feeling that I need to reach out to someone at random, particularly if the feeling doesn't go away when I ignore it, I put that down to the Spirit, and almost always find that there was, indeed, a reason to reach out to that person.

Can someone look at that and say "oh, that's all just coincidence and learned behaviour"? Absolutely! If you have not experienced a spiritual life, I would say that's probably the right conclusion to draw. But a person of faith sees the constancy of it, the consistency of that part of their lives, and recognizes that it goes beyond a natural explanation, and that's why they have faith.

Actually I have the misfortune to live in a place (in the backwoods), which for lack of better explanations could be said to be a kind of interdimensional portal. Sofar seven people, individually or collectively, have had strong experiences of anomalies, repeatedly over a period of 20+ years. Some of it nightmarish, with dramatic consequences. This is my 'sasquatch', and I can assure you, that I've considered all options of explanations, from me and the rest of the experiencers being totally bonkers to 'launching a scientific inquiry'.

This sounds very interesting, I hope that you write up some details to share with ATS at some point (in another thread, of course, lol)

My own experience in the past few months is that there is, at times, a very fine line between reality and madness, and when you walk along that line, wavering from one side to another can lead to some very odd experiences.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by Tripple_Helix

I understand what you are saying and agree, questions are fine. I even find answering them makes me investigate things more and I come out better informed for future questions. And many times I come out with better 'ammo' than what I went in with.

I think tolerance, understanding and education is the best form of of keeping the peace between the clashing of cultures.

Totally agree.

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:02 PM

Originally posted by marsvoltafan74
I propose a question: Have any of you even read the New Testiment?

I've read the whole bible may times.

So though I respect your opinions I will have to respectfully disagree with your false claims for it is not the religion itself which is flawed, but its followers, excluding the true Christians.

And who would those people be?

posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 06:35 PM
reply to post by bogomil

Hi bogomil,

I think you have a point in that not all people who are religious have had significant spiritual encounters. However, to say:

"And even then some of these encounters are a desperate wish for something 'spiritual' to happen, resulting in a mild hysteria, leading to a 'spiritual' explanation of completely normal phenomena (or ofcourse sometimes just plain selfdelusion). "

Is also what you describe as "over doing it a bit"

I do believe that some things can be mentally influenced, such as speaking in tongues and interpreting the message from that. Also, when watching really good scam evangelists whip up a crowd. But these are not what I term an experience. Perhaps miracle is a more appropriate term. What adjensen mentioned above is certainly true and I have seen many examples of that.

However, I have had experiences that, being a scientifically minded person, I am unable to ignore and are at the core of why I believe in God and Jesus. They were physical in nature and involved real observation, not merely warm fuzzies.

And I am not sure I can agree that experiences vary from doctrine to doctrine. Perhaps the explanation of them do. But the fundamental feelings and emotions are very similar within certain classifications of experiences. Demonic activity or miracle healings for example. (No I am not bringing these into the discussion, just an example of a classification

Your 'sasquatch' story is very interesting. But let me clarify what I was talking about in my quote. You had the experience, now you may want to investigate it to determine the particulars. But what you saw was real. You may not fully understand it, but you know the phenomenon exists. This is very similar to what I was referring to. I have had physical experiences with God, things I cannot ignore. I know that God exists. I may wish to investigate further and find out the particulars of the nature of God and Jesus. But the fundamental knowledge that they exist is there, because of those experiences. I hope that is a little more clear.

"Just to 'trust my own eyes' exclusively is completely out of the question. I'd rather die curious than filled with halfbaked 'explanations'. "
Unfortunately this means we will all die curious.
Although I agree, I don't like halfbaked explanations either.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:37 PM
reply to post by Tiger5

I can speak for no person, save myself. And I, by no means, want to represent people of any belief for that is not what God wants, he wants you to represent Him. Representing man would be representing the ways of man.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 09:43 PM
reply to post by Tripple_Helix

Wise words from a wise man no doubt. Questions will always be welcomed by true men of any faith or practice. Only a man who doesnt soundly believe in something has reasons for fear from inquiries. Questions hold no quarrles with I, just sometimes the way they are stated. I will always respect someone with humility.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:01 AM
Re: adjensen and chillimac

thanks for your answers, and I appreciate your attitudes of not bringing completely black/white perspectives into the debate. Also I'll apologize for my recent silence. I've been searching for evidence on an earlier line adjensen and I had: Constantine and his involvement in the Nicene creed. It's been a merry dance, as practically everybody are using smokescreens, unjustified speculations, twists or outright lies/fabulations/total ignorance on the subject (sad to say also those, whom I hoped could support my opinions). If time and interest allow it, I will present my observations in a later post.

Presently I find it more interesting to answer the posts of the last few days.

I have no intention of taking up my own anomalous experiences in detail. But there is one aspect of them, which may be relevant now. These entities I on one of the occasions percieved (in this situation 50-80 individuals), gave a direct message of a christian character. One by one they came close to me (1-1½ meter) to greet me, and all had stigmata-like blood running down their faces. The was no question about, that part of the passion was being re-enacted. I was also involved in some ritualistic activity.

As so often is the case in such situations, correspondingly 'spiritual' energies manifested in me. A kind of rapture, if you like. And parallel to Chillimac I could see and hear, and on a later occasion touch some of such entities. But it didn't take me long to realize, that I wouldn't or couldn't 'buy' this christian roleplaying (or anything else demonstrated by the 'others'). An attitude I still have, supported by later anomalous experiences. These guys are advanced masters of psi-technology, and even I, who's always on guard against premature conclusions, had to fight to avoid being totally overwhelmed by the 'brainwashing' sent at me. For a 'believer' (of any kind), it would probably be next to hopeless to resist finding confirmation of what you already wanted to have confirmed from the start, exposed to this mindinvasion and propaganda.

These were very, very bad guys (fundamentalists would have called them 'demons' , I guess), and they use the human mind's weaknesses, for purposes of their own

As an alternative to a debate of the various virtues or atrocities of christianity, I will tentatively suggest, that the above can form a basis for an analysis of 'reality'. While I can't very well accuse adjensen or Chillemac for being responsible for the vicious part of christianity, I can still voice a very strong criticism on the epistemological methods of christianity. Trying to be civilized in the present context, I'll restrict myself for the time being to say, that I find 'christian faith' both highly peculiar and unsatisfactory, except as an individual and totally subjective phenomenon.

And being such (subjective), it's no wonder, that those of us, who distance ourselves from this beliefsystem, find it an insult or even an invasion, when the in christianity inbuild evangelization-efforts manifest.

It doesn't matter if the christian support of such missionary activity is active or passive, the thing is delievered as an ideological package (with a very few exceptions the bible), and the noise and confusion intrinsic in it and in the delievery process is an answer to the original question here: Why are christians being picked at?

Last year I had a kind of small confrontation with a person, who's a ph.d. in history of ideology, and I waited for almost a half year to get anything except bible-citations and faith-confessions from him. No such response. So it would be a pleasant change to hear some constructive ideas on how to evaluate 'reality' in a meaning broader than subjective faith. Considering my own example from above, where a direct experience isn't a proof of anything (except that 'something' happened), christianity based on similar experiences (Paulus' e.g.) could just as well imply, that christianity is build upon visions of 'demonic' origin (as expressed in christian mythology).

So please, a little more bearing on 'reality' (or IF 'reality' exists at all), less on subjective interpretations.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:20 AM
Let me see now Im supposed to appoint an imaginary friend as an all powerful all knowing Lord and master because some woman made from a guys rib ate an apple given to her by a talking thanks I think i'll pass.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 05:46 AM
Remember when the catholic church used to sell absolvences?
You could do what ever you wanted, all you had to do was buy an absolvence from the church and you were forgiven...

The reason the church invested in and promoted the first printing press was not to make books, it was to print absolvences, because the Monks that hand wrote them were expensive and slow...
The press could just crank 'em out.
It was the fiat currency of the church...which went along with the fiat currencies of the Luciferian ( Babylonian bankers).

So when people think they are forgiven for what ever atrocities they commit ahead of time, well then you just wind 'em and point em at what ever you want...IN this case countries like Iraq and Iran which don't have luciferian ( Babylonian central banks)
Ireland is a good example, how can both side claim to speak for the true god?
Or the absolutely atrocious invasions of the muslim countries,
the NA indians, the aztecs...the island (state) of Hawaii
or " thou shall not suffer a witch to live"
Sure witches in those days might actually cure you as opposed to the christian doctors that killed 9 out of 11 pregnant women during childbirth because they wouldn't wash thier hands...
The churches did good business in the burial departement and in grave site sales.
My how those doctors suffered what with the loss of revenues and all.
Midwives got burned at the stake because they were charging much less, they would work for chickens or the like, and they weren't killing every woman that showed up to have a baby.

But if you point out that hey, you folks shouldn't be in charge of things because you aren't "ABLE"...your thought process isn't optimal for this position...or you suggest that christians shouldn't hate Muslims based on flawed and untrue logic
well you are a "CHRISTIAN HATER"

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 06:19 AM
Well the Xtian mindset is one of being one of the chosen people. Their commiunication with non-Xtians is therefore tained from the start. I have seen the closed-mindedness and intoleranc eof Xtians on this website.

I remeber wastin time on a Xtian OP asking about a chosen religion she did not seem to be able to have any form of two way dialogue just the bible sday thi sor that. Such acts can hardly be seen to be endearing.

Their inital hostility make them fair game so bring it on!

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 04:24 PM
reply to post by Tripple_Helix

Minus all the people who give their lives to Christianity. People who major in Theology or become preachers of the faith. You probably do know more then them. How ignorant of a statement.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by Tiger5

Actually you are wrong, the Jews were the chosen people while the Christians were gentiles. Christianity is about excepting anyone who excepts Christ into their lives. No matter what you've done or where you came from.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 04:48 PM
This is a *conspiracy* site, not a religious debate site. I see entirely too many posts that have nothing to do with conspiracies, but everything to do with using this forum to recruit athiests/others. If there were less non-conspiracy religious threads, there would be less criticism of chritianity on this board.

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 09:09 PM
reply to post by virraszto

Actually there are many different purposes for this board. Not only conspiracies but viewpoints on all subjects. If you don't want to be involved with religious threads ignore them and leave the rest of these posters alone

posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 09:35 PM
Criticism of the Christian religion is no more unfair than it is for any other religion or non religion. I believe in a creator - not the God in the bible, so I receive a lot of criticism. I welcome that, it means that people are questioning and not just following something because it seems the in thing to do - or because of my parents beliefs, or something a preacher or a book said.

If you really, truly and strongly believe enough in something criticism will not bother you. Just make sure you know why "you" believe.

posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 04:44 AM
Re: Marsvoltan? (it's difficult to read your name)

Please look up 'solipsism', before writing more posts. In one of your former posts you declare yourself to 'represent no-one but yourself', after which you boldly goes on to generalizing about a 'god', who in your 'know-it-all' is a kind of final answer/reality.

Sorry mate; there's a lot of us outside your mindset who would disagree.

posted on Aug, 20 2010 @ 03:20 PM
If Christians would follow the example set by Christ, this world would be alot better off. His teachings were beautiful and revolutionary. For most Christians though, the NT is reserved for themselves while the OT is thrown at gays or anyone who disagrees with their politics. How anyone can claim to be a Christian and hate and discriminate against people is beyond me. Maybe it's like the old telephone game. Somewhere between Jesus, the preacher and the politician, the message gets lost. Read your bible, Christians. Don't get it second hand from someone with a hidden agenda. If Jesus ever does come back, you guys are going to feel pretty bad when he shows you the same mercy you've shown everyone else. Jesus may have died for your sins but he shouldn't have to bear the cross for your ignorance. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Guess most of you just skipped this part, huh?

posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 01:02 AM
reply to post by bogomil

You attack my words with no grounds of doing so. You just restated what I said and tried to make it sound bad. This is playground criticism.

posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 02:31 AM
Re: Marsvoltan

Your cit:

"I can speak for no person, save myself. And I, by no means, want to represent people of any belief for that is not what God wants, he wants you to represent Him. Representing man would be representing the ways of man."

What is there to misunderstand, misinterpretate or twist in this statement of yours? You are in a generalizing way postulating the absolute existence of a 'god', which in my book is pure fantasy, cooked up by you and other christians. You take this fantasy of yours so much for granted, that you can't even imagine, that a majority of mankind doesn't share it.

If you're talking about an entity called Yahve, the 'god' of the bible, it may possible have existed. Either as a demon from the blackest part of the dungeon dimensions, who lusted for blood and power. Or alternatively as some kind of other non-human entity, who like the european robber-barons pretending 'religion' to take over the Americas, has pretended 'religion' to take over mankind.

IF there is a real 'god', Yahve would be the least likely candidate.

If I may suggest a bit more concern about your semantics in the future, you'll probably avoid appearing as a missionary fanatic. You could have written: "....... is not what god wants, he wants me to represent him...". ME to represent him, not YOU to represent him.

You and other christians will now possibly accuse me of being unnecessarily pedantic about language, but as I see it, christianity is often an invasive and infiltrating movement, trying to take over anywhere it can, and in any way it can; also so in language, symbology and representations from various systems searching for 'truth'. Examples can be provided.

[edit on 22-8-2010 by bogomil]

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in