Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If only all Christians were this open-minded...

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
They are open minded, they update their religion often.




posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Becoming
 


Christianity is mostly under attack bc they try to force their beliefs on others. They reject other ideology and try to spread their beliefs if you talk to them about beliefs but if they try to spread their word to you and you reject you are automatically going to hell. If a Christian tells me about God and I tell them I reject him/she/it I go to hell automatically to them. If I tell them what I believe I go to hell. I don't tell Christians they are wrong..it is for them to decide and believe...but they force beliefs on people more than anyone...look at the multiple crusaders in history. Judaism don't really care, Islam doesn't say "join us or die" they acctually accept Islam and Judaism are are overall accepting as long as you are a positive good person. Overall Christianity is more hypocritical and disrespectful to other religions. More Jews (Gods people) died during the crusades than Muslims who was suppose to be their primary target.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Parallex

Why is it that on ATS, and beyond, Christians cannot apply this same level of thoroughly critical, empirically based rational thinking without becoming raving lunatics?


To attribute the actions of radicals to all members of any Religion is irrational as it is a lie.

On other posts of yours I've read you make it clear that you want Religion eliminated. That makes your posting this and asking this question disingenuous at the least.

Exaggerations are lies. Resorting to lies and Straw Man arguments are indicative of a persons real motives.

Why are you fearful of peaceful, honest people who wish you no harm? Remember, just because a person claims Christianity does not mean they are a Christian. Being a Christian requires you respect even those who don't agree with you. Live and let live is a good world view. You might consider it if you can lay your hate aside. I say hate after having read some of your posts throughout other threads.


Please discuss the thread and not me. No need for personal comments on here surely? Or are you worried your arguments wont stand up without trying to undermine me first?

Parallex.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Parallex
Especially with the fact that NOW in the U.S. and elsewhere, the 'hidden' far-right is using Christianity as a tool for its' power grab?


Notice how every Christian on here has avoided this sentence, as they know it to be true. The far right in America - The Anti Muslim Brigade, is making a power grab using Christianity to cover it's anti-Muslim hate agenda. Not exactly 'Christian' intent is it?

Parallex.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Parallex

Originally posted by Parallex
Especially with the fact that NOW in the U.S. and elsewhere, the 'hidden' far-right is using Christianity as a tool for its' power grab?


Notice how every Christian on here has avoided this sentence, as they know it to be true. The far right in America - The Anti Muslim Brigade, is making a power grab using Christianity to cover it's anti-Muslim hate agenda. Not exactly 'Christian' intent is it?

Parallex.



Maybe nobody read your post or are just ignoring it. Or it can be that its so ridiculous that some forgot to submit a reply. Or that it simply doesn't make any sense. Your comment is merely a speculation at best, no need to acknowledge it.

edit on 28-9-2010 by DrChuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Parallex, when someone seeks to subvert a group to their own ends, you can hardly accuse the "victim"? You should know by now that tptb subvert everything?

Thanks for this thread, excellent food for thought. I'm christian, but this thread isn't about christianity.

It's about "belief" vs "science" and i believe the point of the quotation was that faith and truth should never have to cross paths, the two are completely seperate. Now your average christian or moslem would contend that his faith IS truth, obviously (other people's) truth would differ.

The crux is as we see on this forum, where people have this desire to "share" their truths, which are built on faith, with people who have different, or no faith, and their owns truths, which conflict. And visa versa. It's clearly not something that can be decided by debate, although the debate itself would likely turn nasty.

The problem here rests with all of us, faith and non-faith. Simply respect for others, and respect for the beliefs of others that you don't share. That's not religious, purely secular, BUT involves basic humanity, which is rare across all religions. Some believe that thair "god" allows them to be bombastic bible bashers, and others, who share the same "god" believe that their "god" prefers them to be humble, and non-confrontational. This mix appears in every religion. It's not about religion, it's about the person.

What i do find curious though, is that people who are first to label "christians" (or others) anything, themselves are most guilty of what they accuse them of. Several "athiests" here are far worse than ANY religious person i've met, in terms of intolerance, bigotry, and being an douche.

The only difference of course, between religious people and non religious people, is that religious people believe in beings higher than themselves, non religious people believe they are the epitome of the universe



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
Maybe nobody read your post or are just ignoring it. Or it can be that its so ridiculous that some forgot to submit a reply. Or that it simply doesn't make any sense. Your comment is merely a speculation at best, no need to acknowledge it.


Now I KNOW I'm onto something with this - when someone acting as a Christian apologist tries to deflect the argument, you know you've touched a sore nerve.

Don't act like a typical Christian apologist and simply dismiss it out of hand - discuss the point, PROVE it isn't true.

Parallex.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller
Parallex, when someone seeks to subvert a group to their own ends, you can hardly accuse the "victim"? You should know by now that tptb subvert everything?

Thanks for this thread, excellent food for thought. I'm christian, but this thread isn't about christianity.

It's about "belief" vs "science" and i believe the point of the quotation was that faith and truth should never have to cross paths, the two are completely seperate. Now your average christian or moslem would contend that his faith IS truth, obviously (other people's) truth would differ.


I thank you for the constructive post - a rare thing on this thread it seems. The Christian supporting 'forum gang' is in full swing today. I knew something was up from the first reply.

In response to you - I agree that indeed TPTB do subvert everything - religion is one of their main tools for subversion and oppression. And you are right, this thread is NOT about Christianity as a subject - although the Christians try to make it that way. This thread is about loving liberty more than ANY OWNED religion. Being selfless rather than selfish!

Indeed - your average religious person will contend that THEIR religion IS the truth, and that anything an atheist like me says is rubbish - as most of the posts on this thread show. They don't analyse the idea of their religion in light modern FACT. They can't, because that would mean they'd have to risk their ego being harmed if they were proved wrong by 'rational enquiry'.

If religion were subject to rational enquiry, most religious people would become historical experts. The simple fact that most of them aren't, suggests that rational enquiry isn't wanted, needed or enabled by most religious people at large.

Priestley would be positively gutted.

Parallex.

edit on 28-9-2010 by Parallex because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller
The problem here rests with all of us, faith and non-faith. Simply respect for others, and respect for the beliefs of others that you don't share. That's not religious, purely secular, BUT involves basic humanity, which is rare across all religions. Some believe that thair "god" allows them to be bombastic bible bashers, and others, who share the same "god" believe that their "god" prefers them to be humble, and non-confrontational. This mix appears in every religion. It's not about religion, it's about the person.

What i do find curious though, is that people who are first to label "christians" (or others) anything, themselves are most guilty of what they accuse them of. Several "athiests" here are far worse than ANY religious person i've met, in terms of intolerance, bigotry, and being an douche.


...absolutely spectacular post...and certainly agree...

I tend to stay out of religious/faith threads as there too often appears to be stereotyping from all sides against the other. Too often a tar-brushing and feathering of Believers as being idiots, closeminded, hypocrites etc etc...and so too I see Believers respond with similar approaches and cranking out scripture like its some kind of copy/pasting competition.


It generally doesn't become a discussion or a debate at that point...it becomes little more than some cyber version of a school-yard peeing match.
Indeed often I see threads that aren't really, when you honestly get down to it, any attempt at discussion...rather they seem to be far more an attempt to *lure* in the intended *target audience* and have their own little showdown.

Do such approaches actually achieve anything?
Well - apart from the presumably smug "Heh, I told them!" of a 'cyber-victory' over some faceless User-Name?
Can't see how it does anything but drive people further apart - the divide wider.

In order to discuss...one must first be ready to listen...and that also requires viewing *the other* as their peer.


"It's not about religion, it's about the person."

...couldn't agree more...



edit on 28-9-2010 by alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by alien
 





Just as an aside - and please I mean no disrespect by this at all and certainly my apologies if its taken as such - but personally the concept of *superiority* to another person, or belief, or 'their God' seems somewhat contradictory in nature...again my apologies and do certainly acknowledge that may come across as 'judgemental'...though perhaps the suggestion that any belief or whatever is *superior* may well be a judgemental perception in and of itself.


No apologies needed dude as no offense taken, I'm pretty hard to offend.

I haven't made the claim that my beliefs are superior to anyone else neither do I claim that I am superior to anyone else.

I merely observe that as my actions are a result of my morals and ethics (and likewise my inaction) and prove themselves to be superior to that off the bible god EG -

The bible god (assuming he is a real entity for the moment) attaches conditions to the love he claims to have for his offspring.

The love I have for my children is unconditional and I cannot foresee any condition that would cause me to desist from loving my child.
It would be fair to say that until the most appalling conditions occur that I may be speaking prematurely fair enough but when I weigh this up against the conditions that are required for the bible god to revoke its love of the child then I cannot help but be repulsed.

Not only would the bible god for example have its' own child killed for merely having sex with the wrong person but he would have one or more of the perpetrators siblings to carry out the execution.

This I find totally repulsive, I wouldn't just feel sad about doing it, i wouldn't even entertain the thought of doing it. As my repulsion is contrary to this god clearly my morals are superior and derive either from myself or elsewhere.

In the western world we mostly find the idea of the torture of another person totally repugnant and for the most part attempt to eradicate the practice many even in extreme circumstances.

The bible god jeus/yahwhe or whatever name we choose to give him, has no problem with this at all. It would be fair to say that millions of people across the globe have at some point or other have knowingly consumed blood. As a punishment for this flagrant breach of his rules this jesus god will torture without ever ceasing in the most appalling abominable manner every last human that has committed this offense.

Again not only do I find this repugnant but also insane and again I cannot help but observe that my morals are superior to this god



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
reply to post by The Djin
 



Originally posted by The Djin

Originally posted by darkelf
The problem does not lie in Christianity or the Bible. The problem lies in those who interpret it and/or use it to enslave or control others.


Kind of hard not to interpret " stone to death" other than how it reads, don't you think ?


It isn't the interpretation of "stone to death" that they get wrong, it is the interpretation of why it says " stone to death."


Kind of hard not to interpret "Because she was not a virgin" other than how it reads don't you think ?



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 





The problem here rests with all of us, faith and non-faith. Simply respect for others, and respect for the beliefs of others that you don't share


Respecting people is one thing but is it necessary to respect a belief ?

Once upon a time many people believed that black people were merely animals somewhat less than human to be treated as chattel, should that belief have been respected what would the outcome have been do you imagine ?

(I'm not attacking you but merely asking)

Edit for speeling

edit on 28-9-2010 by The Djin because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
I have found that Christian and agnostics can be just as if not more logical and rational than atheists...EXCEPT when it comes to their beliefs....then they seem to put all that in a sack and stamp on it repeatedly. The rules and guidelines they use throughout all other aspects of their lives somehow go out the window when it comes to religion, and things such as blind faith become admirable while in any other circumstance would be ridiculed and challenged. I really do hold the belief that religious folks have some sort of split personality disorder..it's the only way to account for such a drastic shift in how they view the world.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Parallex
 

Open minded should have a limit, the balance. Once you are 100% open minded you do not exist anymore.
Cherish limits, once you are 100% open minded you do not see things heading your way. Like a train heading for colision and you are standing in front of it. The power of perception lies in the close minded, sharp and fast. Mister knows it all does not know it all.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by Parallex
 

Open minded should have a limit, the balance. Once you are 100% open minded you do not exist anymore.
Cherish limits, once you are 100% open minded you do not see things heading your way. Like a train heading for colision and you are standing in front of it. The power of perception lies in the close minded, sharp and fast. Mister knows it all does not know it all.


A perception is limited - limited to ONE perception. An open-mind can access many different perceptions, a rational mind can evaluate them seriously, and a reasonable mind can act upon and engage with the logically best choice.

Religion is one perception.

I think this is EXACTLY what Priestley was getting at when he suggested what he did in my OP.

Parallex.

edit on 28-9-2010 by Parallex because: (no reason given)



edit on 28-9-2010 by Parallex because: Removed unnecessary religion bashing.



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Parallex
 


And when I am struck thus, I shall say to the Lord,

"Have mercy on Parallex. He knows not what he does."

God Bless~



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   


A perception is limited - limited to ONE perception. An open-mind can access many different perceptions, a rational mind can evaluate them seriously, and a reasonable mind can act upon and engage with the logically best choice.

How fast can you compute against instinct, you are at the other end.
Instinct just is, a blink of an eye and you react to danger.
Problem with computing is it's flexibility, it sticks to what it has learned, it does not adapt well to new enviorment.
You are about to crash in a car accindent, you do not analise the situation you just pull it, pull the stearing weal in an istance. No time to evaluate the situation, one flash of inspiration without any computing at all.
Computing is not bad, learning is fasinating but if you base your whole self on this then you are going to crash.
Something tells you it's wrong and you pull the stearing weal, you go with what you feel. It's the very definition making you alive. How fast can you compute, evaluate in 1 second to evaluate your chances of survival before you crash in a car accident ?

That is why computers are ran by operators. They are not safe.

So long for planing ehh, 1 second.

I may add instinct is like a black whole, compresed, fresh and it go's to the other end, the computing side.
The computing side may know alot but it's not that fast to react to how flexible the begining is.
From dark to light. The sun is not the middle but the universe is, the inside is the universe and the sun is the outsider inside the universe. The inside is a whole, it is the inside, we may go as explorers with a flashlight.
The very notion of inside, inside a whole.

We are way too computerised and forgot about our true nature, the connection to the divine, god.




edit on 28-9-2010 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Parallex

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Parallex

Why is it that on ATS, and beyond, Christians cannot apply this same level of thoroughly critical, empirically based rational thinking without becoming raving lunatics?


To attribute the actions of radicals to all members of any Religion is irrational as it is a lie.

On other posts of yours I've read you make it clear that you want Religion eliminated. That makes your posting this and asking this question disingenuous at the least.

Exaggerations are lies. Resorting to lies and Straw Man arguments are indicative of a persons real motives.

Why are you fearful of peaceful, honest people who wish you no harm? Remember, just because a person claims Christianity does not mean they are a Christian. Being a Christian requires you respect even those who don't agree with you. Live and let live is a good world view. You might consider it if you can lay your hate aside. I say hate after having read some of your posts throughout other threads.


Please discuss the thread and not me. No need for personal comments on here surely? Or are you worried your arguments wont stand up without trying to undermine me first?

Parallex.
I guess the only need for personal comments is when you u2u name calling etc to people you disagree with. Since this is about all religions, and not just Christianity, perhaps you could explain why it matters since you want all religions wiped out.....I think the poster had a relevant question......it ties in perfectly with your OP.....





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join