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.
Originally posted by bogomil
Re adjensen:
Your quote:
"How can I do homework on your misconceptions?"
My idea was,. that you did homework on your own misconceptions.
And in any case, it's now YOUR turn to prove yourself and disprove me, instead of the other way round.
After all it's your fairytale, we're talking about, not mine. And try to do a little better this time instead of presenting sources like "kingdavid8". It was the worst trash I've read, since a fundie lady called environmentalists for 'satanic'.
Originally posted by adjensen
You're doing some impressive "reading between the lines" there, friend-o, if that's what you were able to pick out of my sentence!
Originally posted by adjensen
Why do you keep using the term "Christ"? You realize that this is a title which is indicative of him being the Messiah, it's not his last name, right? As you do not believe him to be the Messiah, you are misusing the address.
Originally posted by adjensen
I find it unlikely that no one has even answered, but I'll save you the trouble of saying it in the future by answering you. You are correct, he condemned no one. Nor do I. Nor should you.
Originally posted by adjensen
And that's kind of the whole point of Christianity. Sorry that you don't see it.
Originally posted by IAMIAM
Originally posted by adjensen
I find it unlikely that no one has even answered, but I'll save you the trouble of saying it in the future by answering you. You are correct, he condemned no one. Nor do I. Nor should you.
And that's kind of the whole point of Christianity. Sorry that you don't see it.
Does it take so much blood and condemnation to not condemn in his name?
I am sorry that you do not see the amount of pain Christianity as we know it has brought the world.
Originally posted by adjensen
So, a matter of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, without any reason for doing it at all.
Originally posted by adjensen
The Doctrine of the Trinity is very difficult to understand, but is summarized by Augustine's seven parts:
1) The Father is God
2) The Son is God
3) The Holy Spirit is God
4) The Father is not the Son
5) The Son is not the Holy Spirit
6) The Holy Spirit is not the Father
7) There is only one God
Originally posted by adjensen
The Doctrine of the Trinity is very difficult to understand, but is summarized by Augustine's seven parts:
Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by lambs to lions
I don't know, think of it as religion being a map.
Originally posted by Michael Cecil
This Rainbow Bright, pixie dust doctrine of "loving all" is not to be found in the Psalmsof David, for example.
It is considered to be in violation of the requirement of justice.
Michael
Originally posted by adjensen
I don't know, think of it as religion being a map. If you are going from point A to point B, sometimes you want to go direct, sometimes you want to meander around a bit and take the scenic route. Religion, the doctrine and theology, ensures that, regardless of route, you'll wind up in the right place, if you happen to subscribe to that religion.
I'm a Methodist, so my map is somewhat different than a Catholic's, somewhat different than a charismatic's, or an evangelical's, but we'll all pretty much wind up in the same place. No offense intended to IAMIAM, Bogomil or Michael, but our maps are way different, and there's little chance that we'll wind up in the same place (metaphorically,) unless there's a lot more latitude granted than most people, including myself, think.
Originally posted by Michael Cecil
Originally posted by adjensen
The Doctrine of the Trinity is very difficult to understand, but is summarized by Augustine's seven parts:
So, who are you to accuse me of being an elitist?
So, does one need to have a Ph.D. in Christian theology in order to get into heaven?
Originally posted by bogomil
You've earlier stated, that only one religion can be true (or most 'truest'), but with your usual semantic fabulations, it's now convenient that all the numerous 'christian' sects suddenly only disagree on which scenic route, they are taking. I'm sad to repeat it, but you should really consider doing some homework, and general semantics and epistemology would be a good place to start.
.....your quote: "Prove what?"
Obviously you still have the impression, that your authority alone is enough to silence opposition. That's how you run your congregation, like some miniature totalitarian system? You tell people how to think, you dig up dirt, misquote... as you've done here?
How can YOU give anybody a clear understanding of christianity, seeing as you obviously know less about it than most individuals on this thread. You have accused a participant here of paranoia, to me it seems more likely, that you yourself suffer from megalomania.
"The decision is yours, not mine. And, although it may seem insensitive, I don't really care whether you accept it or not, because although I would be happy to have another member of Christ's community, your decision is between you and God."
Oh dear, oh dear. You really do believe your own semantic shufflings, don't you? You reek of missionary zeal, but you don't 'care' if you can bring a few more lambs to your dark masters? And what 'God'? Your god, the demiurge, who just wants blood and submission (I'm convinced he exists). Or IAM's God (I hope he exists).
Do you really believe, that you can fool anyone (except the zombies), by selling the same old manure just by giving it a new wrapping?
Originally posted by adjensen
You don't need to understand the Doctrine of the Trinity to be a Christian...
Originally posted by bogomil
The religious effort of indoctrination these days has been moved to a level equalent to what happened in the cold war. Steamroller-like repetition of the same clichées, dirt-digging as in politics, using pseudo-logic, plain cheating and generally any other known method of bringing opposition to silence through propaganda means.
Originally posted by bogomil
The mostly ignored fact, that paulinism is based on one man's postulated claims of divine contact, information and inspiration.
Originally posted by Michael Cecil
So, are you suggesting here that Christians should simply believe what they are told and sit down and shut up rather than trying to understand things?