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.

 

Christianity in one word: Anti-homosexual

page: 40
38
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I'll have to disagree with you on that.

Unless you were there and heard it, you cannot claim it to be truth. In fact, you cannot even claim to understand it. Parables is not code for "Literal".




posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm just wondering how a form of Christianity can present itself as "healthy" when it's the obvious ideology behind carpet bombing and murdering babies and children?

Everything from Islam to Scientology has a supposed solution to "gay problems".
Christianity is sadly sinking at the bottom of religious justifications for profit.

But fundamentalist Christianity lent itself to military invasion, and it has civilian deaths on its bloody hands.

The world looks at America as a horrifying and scandalous rendition of Christianity.

So fundamentalist groups want death sentences for gay people in Uganda.

Children are growing up in countries with nightmares about the "Satanic" American Christians.
In many countries Christians are bogeymen and not good people.

All the ruined and ripped apart infants and towns.

All the inequality and virtual slave labor in the colonized world to send money back to the centers of power.

To many, American Christians are child butchers.

How can US Christianity still justify itself?
How can they sleep at night?

How can they talk like they have a right to judge, when clearly they have no moral justification whatsoever, and their references to Jesus are stone cold.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23

a·the·ism/ˈāTHēˌizəm/
Noun:
The theory or belief that God does not exist.



That definition is incorrect..period.

I suspect whomever edited that definition either didn't know what atheism is, or has an agenda.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by halfoldman
 


That's the entire problem.

One: the Bible was not written for modern use, as is obvious by the superstitions displayed within the text.

Two: the Bible is WAAYYYYY too open to interpretation, which is dangerous in any culture.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
Two: the Bible is WAAYYYYY too open to interpretation, which is dangerous in any culture.


That right there..what you said.
The bible is meant to be infallable. The fact that there is many interpretations to it proves that claim false. I don't understand why people believe it is infallable and clear, yet don't question why there are soo many various subsects of the religions to begin with...if it was infallable, if it was clear...there would only be a single religion out...

the answer is, well, the bible is clear, its the people whom are fallable here...

The bible was created for people though...we didn't steal it from angels or something..it was written by man, for man in the language man understands...if they screwed that up, then they are not perfect, which goes against the concept the bible teaches (a perfect creator cannot create imperfection...else its not a perfect creator.)



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 

Yes sorry, I know those are horrible things to say.
But it's a fact.
I'd like it to change.
Maybe the next generation can make it better.

At least I'd agree with the OP that "Christianity" is in moral trouble in much of the world.
People will say much for money, but money can't buy you love.
It's also become very superficial.

It's a good faith that was run by some very bad people.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I'll have to disagree with you on that.

Unless you were there and heard it, you cannot claim it to be truth. In fact, you cannot even claim to understand it. Parables is not code for "Literal".


Which part? The part about karma? The part about Jesus and the Father?


John 10:30

King James Version (KJV)

30 I and my Father are one.



www.biblegateway.com...

Of course, my belief in karma is my belief. I have been steeped in Hindu philosophy and I have no problem integrating it into my Christian beliefs. It is the only thing that makes everything make sense.

Hints of teaching on karma and reincarnation are in the bilbe, you just have to look for it, as the priests do not actively teach it.
Origen was anathematized for his teaching on the pre-existence of the soul, so it is not like early Christians weren't aware of the concept.

My belief is just as valid as any the atheists and humanists can come up with, if not moreso.
edit on 20-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I disagree on anything that uses itself to explain itself and justify itself.

That's called circular logic, and it makes no more sense than an upside down pig drawn with invisible crayons.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by Starchild23
 

Yes sorry, I know those are horrible things to say.
But it's a fact.
I'd like it to change.
Maybe the next generation can make it better.

At least I'd agree with the OP that "Christianity" is in moral trouble in much of the world.
People will say much for money, but money can't buy you love.
It's also become very superficial.

It's a good faith that was run by some very bad people.



We were warned that false christs and false prophets would come. People may mistake the words of a false prophet or a false teacher and think that is the teaching of the Church and thus they have their ammunition to discredit the Church.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX



Christianity in one word: Anti-homosexual


That's TWO words.
and it didn't start with nor is it limited to the Christian faith.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


I love people who come in late and rehash old topics...



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by SaturnFX



Christianity in one word: Anti-homosexual


That's TWO words.
and it didn't start with nor is it limited to the Christian faith.


Its one word. Anti is not a word in and of itself, in the same way un is not a word (undo, unintentional) Anti is a prefix
How Words Work

I mostly ignored the (incorrect) grammar nazi's earlier mostly due to not caring to educate them and instead focus on the thread verses their misunderstanding...but its late thread. enjoy.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by halfoldman
reply to post by Starchild23
 

Yes sorry, I know those are horrible things to say.
But it's a fact.
I'd like it to change.
Maybe the next generation can make it better.

At least I'd agree with the OP that "Christianity" is in moral trouble in much of the world.
People will say much for money, but money can't buy you love.
It's also become very superficial.

It's a good faith that was run by some very bad people.



We were warned that false christs and false prophets would come.


Entertain for a moment that Paul is a false prophet.

What would change about the church if that was found out to be the case...



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


The entire thing would come crashing down, since Paul was supposed to carry on the Church.

Funny thing, really: from what I understand, Mary Magdelene was intended to be the voice of the Church, until she and Jesus both mysteriously disappeared after his crucifixion.

Then there's the matter of Sarah...



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


The entire thing would come crashing down, since Paul was supposed to carry on the Church.

Funny thing, really: from what I understand, Mary Magdelene was intended to be the voice of the Church, until she and Jesus both mysteriously disappeared after his crucifixion.

Then there's the matter of Sarah...


All that would be left for the christians is the words and actions of Christ.

What a lovely religion that would have been. Pity.

Sarah Conner?



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


St. Sarah, daughter of Jesus.

Supposedly raised in France after the scandal which ended in the "death" of Jesus. There's supposed to be a hidden tomb in the mountains of France, where all of her recorded life (and therefore all proof of royal lineage) is locked away.

Should someone find and access the tomb, the world will forever be changed. That is, assuming whoever finds it isn't assassinated and the discovery buried (excuse the pun) in order to avert mass chaos and calamity.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


St. Sarah, daughter of Jesus.

Supposedly raised in France after the scandal which ended in the "death" of Jesus. There's supposed to be a hidden tomb in the mountains of France, where all of her recorded life (and therefore all proof of royal lineage) is locked away.

Should someone find and access the tomb, the world will forever be changed. That is, assuming whoever finds it isn't assassinated and the discovery buried (excuse the pun) in order to avert mass chaos and calamity.


Never heard of it..or might have heard of it in passing and dismissed it as just some bookwriting fantasy..

Only sarah I know of offhand however was the wife of Abraham...and that was a bit before Christs time.



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by SaturnFX



Christianity in one word: Anti-homosexual


That's TWO words.
and it didn't start with nor is it limited to the Christian faith.


Its one word. Anti is not a word in and of itself, in the same way un is not a word (undo, unintentional) Anti is a prefix
How Words Work

I mostly ignored the (incorrect) grammar nazi's earlier mostly due to not caring to educate them and instead focus on the thread verses their misunderstanding...but its late thread. enjoy.



Actually it is a word. And I fully replied to the topic too. I said anti-homosexuality is not limited to just Christians.


As a word on its own anti is an adjective or preposition describing a person or thing that is against someone or something else. In a casual sense anti is sometimes used as a noun for a person who is against something — if you’re not on the pro side, you’re an anti.


www.vocabulary.com...

Cheers



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I disagree on anything that uses itself to explain itself and justify itself.

That's called circular logic, and it makes no more sense than an upside down pig drawn with invisible crayons.


What is circular logic my dear? That I suggest that God uses His laws to teach us and that we have a responsibility to fulfil that law or learn by the returning energy? You are free of course to believe as you like.
If you like, we could go into a theological discussion of free will and God's presence in His Creation? It is not like I am the first person to think about it.


The Catholic Church holds to the teaching that "by free will, (the human person) is capable of directing himself toward his true good … man is endowed with freedom, an outstanding manifestation of the divine image'."[49] Man has free will either to accept or reject the grace of God, so that for salvation "there is a kind of interplay, or synergy, between human freedom and divine grace".[50] "Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom. On man's part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent: 'When God touches man's heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without God's grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in God's sight' (Council of Trent)."[51]





In Rabbinic literature, there is much discussion as to the apparent contradiction between God's omniscience and free will. The representative view is that "Everything is foreseen; yet free will is given" (Rabbi Akiva, Pirkei Avoth 3:15). Based on this understanding, the problem is formally described as a paradox, beyond our understanding.
The Holy One, Blessed Be He, knows everything that will happen before it has happened. So does He know whether a particular person will be righteous or wicked, or not? If He does know, then it will be impossible for that person not to be righteous. If He knows that he will be righteous but that it is possible for him to be wicked, then He does not know everything that He has created. ...[T]he Holy One, Blessed Be He, does not have any temperaments and is outside such realms, unlike people, whose selves and temperaments are two separate things. God and His temperaments are one, and God's existence is beyond the comprehension of Man… [Thus] we do not have the capabilities to comprehend how the Holy One, Blessed Be He, knows all creations and events. [Nevertheless] know without doubt that people do what they want without the Holy One, Blessed Be He, forcing or decreeing upon them to do so... It has been said because of this that a man is judged according to all his actions. (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Teshuva 5:5 [79])



en.wikipedia.org...

Here is more theological discussion of whether God created the Universe out of Nothing. The discussion is called Creatio ex Nihilo, an entire theological concept

www.earlychurch.org.uk...


Is the traditional Christian belief in creatio ex nihilo, God's creation of the universe out of nothing, one that is inherent to biblical doctrine or one that is simply compatible with it? Is creatio ex nihilo nothing more than a defensive theological reaction to Gnosticism? Moreover, does the well-accepted Big Bang theory confirm the allegedly biblical doctrine of creation out of nothing? Is it solely up to science rather than Scripture to point us toward the nature of God's creation - whether it is finite or eternal?




Translated into the contemporary physicist's terms, the spatio-temporal world was created by God's word at the Big Bang, the beginning event and initial cosmic singularity (which has been dubbed t=0 or to). Astronomers John Barrow and Joseph Silk state that science points to "the traditional metaphysical picture of creation out of nothing, for it predicts a definite beginning to events in time, indeed a definite beginning to time itself."11 "Before" this initial singularity, space, time, matter, and motion did not exist. There was simply nothing (the simpler term for "infinite density").12 It must be added that when we speak of nothing, we must not imagine "nothing" as empty space or "an area of non-existence alongside of or over against the existence of God which would thereby be reduced to an existence with limitations."13 Nothingness

edit on 20-5-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 



if you’re not on the pro side, you’re an anti.


If I'm not on the pro side, it's very possible that I ran out of f***s to give.

Guess I better go to the store and get some more...just not today.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in

join