10 reasons why your church sucks

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 12:27 PM
link   
again people. sex and religon do not mix. there is no place in religion for sexuality. religon is meant for a spiritual relationship with god.

jazzerman---you cant argue otherwise. --detestable---man lies with another man, as a woman...

you dont have to agree with it, but it is plain as can be...or maybe you own a copy of the bible that condones it? lemme see that quote?




posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   
no...its not as "plain as can be". If it said "if a man has sex with a man..." then I could see your point. Plus, your avoiding my question of why you all rely on the King James version. That version was written to to stabilize issues in the early 1600's, and is not, I repeat NOT a correct version of the original text.

One example of this being that in the original Bible there is no mention of the word "witch", in fact in the original Hebrew language there is no such word for this. It was added in later in the King James version because people needed to be told that the witch trials (in both Europe and America) were justifiable with God. Nowhere in the original version does it ever say a witch is evil. God knows what else is added to the King James version.

The Bible is a book of history and morals, but it can be interpreted in many ways, this is why there have been so many sects of Christianity since its birth. According to Christians, what the Romans did to them was unjust. However, what they fail to mention is that the entire reason Christians were persecuted is because they refused to obey the law of Emperor Worship, which they thought was proclaiming the Emperor a God. This is totally wrong, its the same type of worship you would give to any king that ruled over the land and protected its citizens. The christians were persecuted because they didn't give homage to the king, not because of their religious beliefs. Romans did not care what ones religion was so long as you joined the Empire.

The God of the old Testament is known as a vengeful God, and becomes a loving God in the New Testamant. Why do you think this is? Because God changed its mind? Its because the people writing the original scripts dictated Gods "personality" how they saw fit. If they wanted God to be more vengeful, then thats they way they were going to write it.

Please do your research before you spout off things like "It says in the Bible that God hates Gay's" because you have to take everything into account when you study a book that was given to men by God, and since man in imperfect he/she translated it how they wanted. Not exactly how God saw fit.

Even the very way you proclaim that "God thinks this" or "God thinks that" is wrong. How do you know what God originally intended to say, or how his word would be skewn and interpreted by by the authors of the Bible?



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   
This is not about Christianity itself, rather about what the modern church has become. People are turned off by the problems that people create within a church.

I have taken two of the reasons to illustrate my point.

2. It has poor leadership. (The leaders dont lead by example)
Romans 2:17-24
17Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God; 18if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-- 21you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24As it is written: "God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."

Show of hands: who has attended a church where the pastor was not exactly living the life that he was preaching or where the pastor's wife thought she was better than everyone else? While this is obviously not representative of every church, there are enough instances to constitute a serious problem for some people.


8. Its out of touch with the twenty first century. (doesnt share a relevant message for a relevant time).
1Corinthians 9:19-23
19Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

Teachers must study people and the thoughts of others so they can relate to them as individuals. Using a single approach to all does not work.

Thoughts?

Peace,
BG



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Interesting way to blame the "church". The fact is, at least in Christianity, the people are the Body of Christ, that is, the people are the Church. So are you insulting us all by telling us 10 different ways that each of us suck? Or, are you trying to say that the hierarchy of the church or churches suck? If that's the case, then, since we are the church, it's time for us to change the hierarchy. Now if you don't belong to a church and therefore have no say with the hierarchy, why worry about it and spend your time bashing what you have no stake in. If you do belong, then work to effect change in a constructive manner.



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paraclete
Now if you don't belong to a church and therefore have no say with the hierarchy, why worry about it and spend your time bashing what you have no stake in. If you do belong, then work to effect change in a constructive manner.


Hmmm alas the church effect lives of non members every day. From the rest of us having to foot the bill for the treatment of the victems of priest abuse, to evetually paying the price of the Popes 'No Condoms cause they are a sin" despite the rampant spread of AIDS in Africa. Hmmm can you add up the cost of all the wars in the name of the church? No doubt alot of "Non" members payed a heavy price!



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 02:40 PM
link   
FT, I believe you stated in an earlier post that you were an atheist.If so how would propose to effect change in something you don't believe in or, in all probability, fully uunderstand.



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paraclete
FT, I believe you stated in an earlier post that you were an atheist.If so how would propose to effect change in something you don't believe in or, in all probability, fully uunderstand.


Belief and understanding are seperate entities. Having had to take multiple units of Theology, I do feel I have a good understanding of organized religion, but I make no claims about being an expert. (I went o USF, a jesuit university, for a few years for nursing shool before tx to San Jose State.) Being a nurse, as corney as it sounds, requires you to be a change agent, esp. if its in your patients best interests. I may not believe or like you, but that won't stop me from trying to effect that change.

Do I have a solution? A few, but I doubt the more militant members of your church would exept it in anyform.

1) Become more pragmatic: Society has changed, the church need to recognize the change and embrace it. This does not require a huge change in thier core beliefs. From allowing priest's to marry, to the birth controll stance. Its time to catch up to the 2000's, Heck even catching up to the 80's would be a step.
2) Eliminate the Tax exept status. The vatican in particular is a huge multinational corporation yet it pays almost no taxes.

3) Hold the dicese directly accountable for any activities thier people partake in. ie child molestation.

Thats it off the top of my head.



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Paraclete, I have bashed neither Christianity nor its believers. This topic stems from an essay written by a Christian concerning why he would not go back to a particular church. Did you read the link?

As for constructive change, while I am not a member of a church, these reasons (refined to be a little more sensitive, of course) could be used as a guide to those within a congregation trying to figure out why people don't come.

Peace,
BG



posted on Jul, 24 2004 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I've got a new theory! Any debate about religion will devolve into the discussion of homosexuality. We can call it the Bum Basher Theorum of Religious Disucussion.

Heres my addition:

In Romans 1 we find:

21 They knew God but did not praise and thank him for being God. Instead, their thoughts were pointless, and their misguided minds were plunged into darkness. 22 While claiming to be wise, they became fools. 23 They exchanged the glory of the immortal God for statues that looked like mortal humans, birds, animals, and snakes. 24 For this reason God allowed their lusts to control them. As a result, they dishonor their bodies by sexual perversion with each other. 25 These people have exchanged God's truth for a lie. So they have become ungodly and serve what is created rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen! 26 For this reason God allowed their shameful passions to control them. Their women have exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 Likewise, their men have given up natural sexual relations with women and burn with lust for each other. Men commit indecent acts with men, so they experience among themselves the punishment they deserve for their perversion. 28 And because they thought it was worthless to acknowledge God, God allowed their own immoral minds to control them. So they do these indecent things. 29 Their lives are filled with all kinds of sexual sins, wickedness, and greed. They are mean. They are filled with envy, murder, quarreling, deceit, and viciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, haughty, arrogant, and boastful. They think up new ways to be cruel. They don't obey their parents, 31 don't have any sense, don't keep promises, and don't show love to their own families or mercy to others. 32 Although they know God's judgment that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do these things but also approve of others who do them.

Thats in the Gods Word translation but if you want to check out other translations see bible.crosswalk.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by lockheed
I've got a new theory! Any debate about religion will devolve into the discussion of homosexuality. We can call it the Bum Basher Theorum of Religious Disucussion.


I agree with you totally. You know how this got brought up? if you check the posts, Donttreadonme says her church has a problem with women and sexualtity. then, sublime4372 automatically assumes this means homosexuality, which i dont think is what DontTreadonme was refering to(i could be wrong)

From there, everyone just followed the flow of the typical religion/gay debate. There are enough threads on that subject, so ppl plz take that argument there so we can actually talk about what the author of this thread (probably) wants.

---pineapple





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join