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.

 

Jesus Was Not Religious, so why hate Christians because of what religion has done?

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by FugitiveSoul
 


I have heard the arguments against the bible and poor interpretations. If one truly understands the message in the bible than it is easy to see that the word is well persevered in each translation. The minor differences in translations are just that minor.

Unless one knows the language that they were written in there is bound to be some inconstancies in translation. What we do know as fact, because of the archeological evidence, that the messages is virtually unchanged in 2000 years.

I have looked at many translations and often times like looking at different translations when I reach a line of scripture that is difficult to understand. And even with these verses once I understand what the verse is saying the message indeed remains intact in each translation, it was just one translation was easier for me to understand.

The argument against the validity of scripture based on interpretational issues fails at every level. The simple truth is the word is well preserved in every translation that I have read. (Note) I do know of a few religions where they have intentionally translated verses to match what they believe so I would not put any faith into those translations. But all the major translations, KJV, NIV, NLT, ESV, CEB, and many more have done a good job preserving the message so that the reader can understand what is written.




posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


How is the introduction of fear into religion a "minor addition" to the bible? I don't think the core message is evil, and neither do any non-Abrahams. The problem we have is the use of fear to promote a message, the use of death and corruption to infiltrate the minds and governments of the world. You can say you don't condone that sort of Christianity, but you also do nothing to stop it, making you just as guilty.

I've said this already, but I shall repeat myself again; we are what the majority of us make us. You may feel like love and compassion are the ways of Christ, but upon the millions of other Christians on this rock, you are in a very small minority, almost incalculably small. Spread your message of love to other Christians who are corrupting your reputation, your message, not to us pagans who've been living that message long before scribes ever claimed they were Christ's words.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Wouldn't you expect a Christian to believe that Jesus wasn't lying when He said He was the ONLY way to the Father?


I certainly would believe that, I have heard, and read that tenant many times. Funny that someone wrote that in a women bashing way, speaking only of a Father, and never a Mother. And talk about ego if he really did say that! There are many, many ways back to Source, do not fool yourself into thinking there is one path only, and all the other paths are wrong, sinful, satanic, and demonic.
You all know what I think of the NT. Written by a Roman family at the behest of Constantine. The messages are good, for the most part. And a man can become a God, and a woman a Goddess, in time, with much learning and Spirituality. But there are a great many untruths, and outright lies in there. Don't forget, the whole of Christendom sprang from the Roman Catholic Church.

Intolerance:
Woman with “familiar spirits” must be stoned to death.
(Leviticus 20:27)

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.”
(Exodus 22:18)

You must kill those who worship another god.
(Exodus 22:20)

Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. (Deuteronomy 13:12-16)

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest.
(Deuteronomy 17:12-13)

Kill any false prophets. (Deuteronomy 18:20)

Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Mark 6:11)

Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. (Jude 5)

Prophecies to Identify the Messiah, Which Jesus Does Not Fulfill:

Matthew 1:23 says that Jesus (the messiah) would be called Immanuel, which means "God with us." Yet no one, not even his parents, call him Immanuel at any point in the bible.

The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30). Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.

Isaiah 7:16 seems to say that before Jesus had reached the age of maturity, both of the Jewish countries would be destroyed. Yet there is no mention of this prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament with the coming of Jesus, hence this is another Messiah prophecy not fulfilled.

I simply do not find the Biblical Gods fit for worship. I think it goes with out saying that not only is the bible 2,000 years out dated, but it is also very un-original in it's nature. Any Christian who proposes that the bible is indeed evidence for God’s existence is proposing a double standard. For there are many books which claim to be actual accounts of a higher power. With this in mind, why not believe in Allah from the Koran? Could it be because your faith is what determines your belief and not your so called “factual” book? Who is to judge which Holy Text is the right one?

Ancient Gods of the Bible

What the Bible Says About:

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: GODS ('elohim; theoi):



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


So 1 so far?


Read around this form for awhile. Many of us have been unfairly labelled, and insulted, and called names such as Demon, or Satan.
My two step children went to a "Free Will Baptist" church last Sunday, after staying the night with some new friends. They reported to me that the first half of the sermon was all Jesus this, and Jesus that, and Love, and the second half was Satan and Demons. I was raised in one of these cult like churches, and I suppose that is why I am so down on the establishment official religion Christianity is attempting to be. Like the Christian pastors backing Rick Santorum, no doubt with a few million for his campaign. Preaching politics from the pulpit, and instructing people who to vote for is a violation of Church and State on one hand, and invites an income tax on churches.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by windword
 


I will accept that there are Pagan practices that I am unfamiliar with but I do not agree that Christ was anything less than the son of God.


So am I. So are you. So is everyone on this planet. The Genesis Apocryphon mentions the Nephilim, and makes reference to the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" introduced in Genesis 6. In Genesis 6:1-4 the "sons of God" are captivated by the beauty of the "daughters of men." They subsequently marry them and produce an offspring of giants known as the Nephilim. Genesis goes on to say that these Nephilim were "mighty men" and "men of renown."

"Sons of God"? "Daughters of men"? What sort of beings were these? Were they human or did they belong to an alien species from outer space? It is your Bible, please enlighten us.
This may help you out:
Who Were the Sons of God in Genesis 6?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


Here you go. Corruption was the order of the day, friend. You just have to study.


The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted. The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.
source


The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it (i.e., the bible) into a LIE. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
source

Isaiah 65 & 66 declare Christianity to be a false religion!

Detailed History of Corruption and Pagan Origins of the Bible

Indisputable errors and contradictions in the Crucifixion and Resurrection Accounts



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 



You all know what I think of the NT. Written by a Roman family at the behest of Constantine.


So what NT was Irenaeus quoting from in his NT commentary in 150 AD? Was Constantine sorta like a vampire in that he didn't age whatsoever?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 



So am I. So are you. So is everyone on this planet.


Nope, many are the "seed of the serpent". And yet although in a way we are all sons and daughters of God, on Jesus Christ was His "only begotten" Son. Not even Adam who was a direct creation of God could claim that.

And in Genesis chapter 6, "sons of God" is "bene ha Elohim" in the Hebrew. This term is used specifically for angels. In the Septuagint (LXX) it's translated into Greek as "angels". The fallen ones. "Nephal" "to fall" ".



edit on 17-1-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 




Jesus was not religious

Really? Then why did he insist that the religious law be kept till heaven and earth pass away? Why did he instruct all his followers to direct their prayers towards God???



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 




Jesus was not religious

Really? Then why did he insist that the religious law be kept till heaven and earth pass away?


He didn't.


Why did he instruct all his followers to direct their prayers towards God???


Talking to God isn't "religion" anymore than talking to my dad is.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 




Jesus was not religious

Really? Then why did he insist that the religious law be kept till heaven and earth pass away?

He didn't.


Its right there in the bible.

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. - Matthew 5:18





Why did he instruct all his followers to direct their prayers towards God???

Talking to God isn't "religion" anymore than talking to my dad is.


Well, by the same logic....a muslim/hindu/whatever talking to God as they understand Him, is not religon as well.
So, theres no good reason for a christian to think that what he follows is outside the definition of "religion".



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. - Matthew 5:18



"Until everything is accomplished"...

And what did Jesus say immediately prior to the green quote you linked?

"I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill."

And what did Jesus finally exclaim on the cross?

It is what??

"FINISHED".

He completely fulfilled the righteous demands of the law, and was the only person who could possibly do so.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
It's hilarious when non-believers try and teach Christians what our own Word of God really is supposed to mean.




posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's hilarious when non-believers try and teach Christians what our own Word of God really is supposed to mean.



Most Christians don't understand the Word anyway. They have others read it for them.


ETA: It also depends on what interpretation and denomination you come from. Just like two Christians can't agree on a meaning of a verse; one shouldn't resort to petty insults to try and prove a point.
edit on 17-1-2012 by novastrike81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





"Until everything is accomplished"...
And what did Jesus say immediately prior to the green quote you linked?
"I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill."


Destroy and fulfill WHAT???
Read that passage again. Jesus said...

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill."
-Meaning, he came not to destroy the law... BUT to fulfill it.





He completely fulfilled the righteous demands of the law, and was the only person who could possibly do so.

"only person"?????
Want me to show you a passage in the new testament which proves that people other than Jesus also "kept the law" and were considered "righteous"?

edit on 17-1-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-1-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by novastrike81

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
It's hilarious when non-believers try and teach Christians what our own Word of God really is supposed to mean.



Most Christians don't understand the Word anyway. They have others read it for them.


What? Is this the middle-ages again?


ETA: It also depends on what interpretation and denomination you come from. Just like two Christians can't agree on a meaning of a verse; one shouldn't resort to petty insults to try and prove a point.


Oh we know trust me, Jesus warned of the wolves and the tares scattered among the wheat. We don't think He was joking when He said that.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



-Meaning, he came not to destroy the law... BUT to fulfill it.


Correct, which He did do. He fulfilled the law. Before He died He exclaimed "IT IS FINISHED!"

He did what He came to do, fulfill the law.


Want me to show you a passage in the new testament which proves that people other than Jesus also "kept the law" and were considered "righteous"?


No one other than Jesus kept the law perfectly, in the NT or the OT.


edit on 17-1-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

What? Is this the middle-ages again?


I mean Christians have others interpret it for them because they can't think for themselves. Sarcasm unwanted.



Oh we know trust me, Jesus warned of the wolves and the tares scattered among the wheat. We don't think He was joking when He said that.


How do you know you aren't on the wrong side of the fence looking in?



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



-Meaning, he came not to destroy the law... BUT to fulfill it.

Correct, which He did do. He fulfilled the law. Before He died He exclaimed "IT IS FINISHED!"
He did what He came to do, fulfill the law.

Did Jesus say that before or after he said "father, why have you forsaken me".

And how did you conclude "it is finished" referred to the law. Was Jesus preaching the law while he was being nailed to the cross?
You might notice that Jesus NEVER said that once he "fulfills" the law, its all over.
Any connection you draw between Jesus words on the cross and the law is out of your own imagination.



Want me to show you a passage in the new testament which proves that people other than Jesus also "kept the law" and were considered "righteous"?

No one other than Jesus kept the law perfectly, in the NT or the OT.

Or so you think...

...a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron. Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly.

Its right there in print, buddy. I dont know what you will come up with to sweep this biblical fact under the carpet, but its right there in print. They "observed all the commands and decrees blamelessly". Dont you dare try and discount this.



posted on Jan, 17 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



They "observed all the commands and decrees blamelessly". Dont you dare try and discount this.


Who's discounting anything.

And which two commands did the Lord give for the New Covenant? There were just two the Lord gave compared to the 613 of the Law. He said His burden was "easy" and His yoke was "light". What were His two commands?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join