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.

 

Should Chick-Fil-A ban Menstruating women?

page: 17
15
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


reading thru your posts it seems like you have your Catholicism and Protestantism all rolled into one...?

there are many flavors of Christianity, which one are we discussing here?

Islam has quite a few flavors too...




posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


reading thru your posts it seems like you have your Catholicism and Protestantism all rolled into one...?

there are many flavors of Christianity, which one are we discussing here?

Islam has quite a few flavors too...


Making some points on how Christianity, which for the most part was mostly Roman Catholicism based, the Reformation is relatively recent and relies on the same translation from A.D. 382 which was disputed even then and various variations before.

Basically that often those calling themselves Christians are unaware of the actual nature, teaching of and historical evolution of their religion.

I never mentioned Islam, for that matter I have studied various religions though don't wholly subscribe to any. If anything there is esoteric wisdom from most and most are all based on the same concepts which are essentially Sun worship and ancient traditions of fertility predating and including Ancient Egyptian and Sumerian religions.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


well the early settlers of America (the New World) took the best parts from all that way after the events you are referring too.

probably best to dispute your theory to the Pope himself, he's an old world out of date kind of guy...

Protestants rebuke the Catholics though we've learned to stick together thru the ages from all who persecute christians.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by dirkpotters
 


More historical challenges to supposed scriptures.

www.vatileaks.com...


SUMMARY OF THE TRIAL PROCEEDINGS DAY
1. Opening Statements
DAY 1. Jury hears that there are no historical records of Jesus Christ
DAY 2. 'Popes denied the existence of Jesus Christ', jury told
DAY 3. Vatican says Prosecution made 'grave mistake' about the Gospels
DAY 4. Church admits to 'doubtful' narratives in the canonical texts
DAY 5. Prosecutor challenges reality of the crucifixion narratives
DAY 6. Sensational Vatican confession
DAY 7. Council for the Prosecution produces Secret Church Scroll
DAY 8. Papal Defence demands more evidence for stunning claim
DAY 9. Jury hears that there is no archaeological evidence to support the Gospel stories
DAY 10. British involvement in Christian origins revealed in court
DAY 11. Papal Defence admits vital records 'strangely absent' from the Canons
DAY 12. Prosecution reveals Saint Peter never lived
DAY 13. Vatican admits plagiarized concepts found in the Christian Gospels
DAY 14. Prosecutor challenges the validity of the Jerome's Vulgate Bible
DAY 15. Jury hears what St. Jerome thought about biblical writings
DAY 16. Papal Defence unable to produce Jerome's original Vulgate Bible
DAY 17. Jury hears Church has no records prior to 1198
DAY 18. A special Bible was written for Pope Constantine in 715
DAY 19. Jury hears that Pope Sixtus IV 'annulled Council decrees'
DAY 20. Shock revelation: 'Pope wrote a new Catholic Bible'
DAY 21. Major contradictions between two papal Bibles
DAY 22. Jury hears why the British Parliament convened a special Church assembly under Queen Victoria's instructions
DAY 23. Prosecutor asks, 'What is the authority of forged scriptures?'
DAY 24. Prosecutor claims Catholic Encyclopedias are 'clerical falsities'
DAY 25. Vatican denies 'Index of Prohibited Books' was a cover-up conspiracy
DAY 26. Prosecution reveals Pope Pius IV established a censoring department to rewrite Christian history
DAY 27. Jury hears lurid details of centuries of authorized papal forgeries
DAY 28. Closing Statements. The Vatican trial ends, and the jury retires



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


well the early settlers of America (the New World) took the best parts from all that way after the events you are referring too.

probably best to dispute your theory to the Pope himself, he's an old world out of date kind of guy...

Protestants rebuke the Catholics though we've learned to stick together thru the ages from all who persecute christians.


This isn't a ''persecute Christians'', more an 'Educate Christians'.

I believe the fact that a lot of laws and morals in the Western world which stemmed from basic Christian principles are often a good part of humanities evolution. However a lot of the Canon Law and other political practices and premises of power that stemmed from the empirical, exclusivity, greed, corruption and exploitation from early Christianity, (and other such power structure religions) has essentially brought the current difficulties faced by humanity, essentially trying to balance nature and the realities of emotions, families and basic human requirements whilst living in a Patriarchal pyramidal society lacking true morals, insight, and true guidance.
edit on 5-8-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


well the early settlers of America (the New World) took the best parts from all that way after the events you are referring too.

probably best to dispute your theory to the Pope himself, he's an old world out of date kind of guy...

Protestants rebuke the Catholics though we've learned to stick together thru the ages from all who persecute christians.


This isn't a ''persecute Christians'', more an 'Educate Christians'.

educate christians about what? are you a preacher or a theologian? Which blend of christianity are you teaching specifically? regardless of what you believe you are trying to impose your opinions onto others...

you're no different...



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Are you trolling?

Read my replies to you already.

Seeking Truth isn't ''preaching''.

In case you didn't realise, this is a conspiracy site forum and specifically a thread about the literal translations of the bible by society.

The fact that there are untrue words in the bible written by flawed humans and not GOD has relevance and some supposed believers are believing flawed words from a political system.

Do you believe every word of the Bible?



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by theabsolutetruth
 


well the early settlers of America (the New World) took the best parts from all that way after the events you are referring too.



So are you saying you think choosing bits of a bible denotes a Christian?

Which ''best parts'' are you referring to, where do you think they were taken from, and as to the remainder...which parts weren't included and are you referring to some new revised exclusive American bible? Do you have a link to the creation of such an exclusive bible and the ''best parts'' it decided on? Or are you referring the the King James bible, that basically was supposedly a translation of the former rewriting.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Are you trolling?

Read my replies to you already.

Seeking Truth isn't ''preaching''.

In case you didn't realise, this is a conspiracy site forum and specifically a thread about the literal translations of the bible by society.

The fact that there are untrue words in the bible written by flawed humans and not GOD has relevance and some supposed believers are believing flawed words from a political system.

Do you believe every word of the Bible?


I am not trolling and I haven't read the whole bible, it's more or less been imprinted via genetic encoding... it;s something one can not escape.

another little important factor is you seem to have forgotten exactly what I keep repeating and you so easily ignore... different adherents/blends of Christianity interpret the bible differently so lets determine which blend or flavor you are discussing first and readers will have a base to stand on.

the way you are educating is like saying all black people are bad...



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


They need to keep it in the bedroom and the general public needs to keep our children away from gays probing hands...


Everyone should keep these things in the bedroom. They should also be fully dressed. Men dressed as men. Women dressed as women.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Go back and actually READ my posts and replies.

Also read the definition of trolling and do not imply things of my posts.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth


Which ''best parts'' are you referring to


here's how I like my bible... (Genesis - New Testament)

Genesis totally rocks, my favorite part is when God tells Adam "for out of the dust you were taken and to that which you shall return"

kinda blows all the other secrets and mysteries away imo... it comes right from the gift horses mouth.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Go back and actually READ my posts and replies.

Also read the definition of trolling and do not imply things of my posts.


first tell us which version if the Christian faith you are speaking of and teaching the readers about...

see I consider myself a Christian by birthright but I do not agree with Catholicism, I am of the Protestant variety.

Prot·es·tant

1.any Western Christian who is not an adherent of a Catholic, Anglican, or Eastern Church.

2.an adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the Reformation, or of any group descended from them.

3.(originally) any of the German princes who protested against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which had denounced the Reformation.

4.a person who protests.

dictionary.reference.com...
edit on 5-8-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Go back and actually READ my posts and replies.

Also read the definition of trolling and do not imply things of my posts.


first tell us which version if the Christian faith you are speaking of and teaching the readers about...

see I consider myself a Christian by birthright but I do not agree with Catholicism, I am of the Protestant variety.


The basic tenets of Christianity is the Bible, from the translations of the OT and the making of the NT, there are historical reports of these being adulterated either by error or purposeful. These have been disputed since the originals, though the supposed rewriting of the Vulgate in the 4th century either the fact that it possibly wasn't written until the 13th century, or that it was a flawed version, see previous post from the supposed writer of the Vulgate, St Jerome, basically saying it contained many falsities and errors.

Then the bible was banned for all but initiated priests and Popes for 1200 years. The King James bible was written in 1611 and is essentially the basis for Protestant Christianity, the original KJ bible contained Apocrypha Books which were believed to be basically made up or discrediting the rest of the Bible, so they were removed in the further versions from 1885.

These rewritten various versions of supposed scriptures are the basis for Western Christianity, the founders of America being essentially mostly European, were of the Catholic or Reformation based Christianity. The Reformation only happened in the 16th century and before that practically all of Europe was owned by and under the sway of, legally and theologically, by the Roman Catholic Church.

The Reformation brought variations on the second commandment and some other aspects of the Roman Church deemed impure to the original scriptures, though being essentially based on flawed versions of scriptures, whichever 'flavor' could also be deemed flawed. The most part of American Christianity is based on Reformed or Catholic doctrines. The Eastern Orthodox tradition of Christianity essentially only split from the Roman Catholic Church in 1054 and the basis of the doctrines are the same and therefore possible to suffer from the same flaws.

The creation of Christianity at the time was mostly political and about power and control, for many hundreds of years it remained as such, albeit that the congregations were mostly unaware they were being exploited.

en.wikipedia.org...


Worldwide the three largest groups of Christianity are the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox churches, and the various denominations of Protestantism. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox patriarchates split from one another in the East–West Schism of 1054 AD, and Protestantism came into existence during the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century, splitting from the Roman Catholic Church.[9] Christianity began as a Jewish sect in the mid-1st century.[10][11] Originating in the Levant region of the Middle East (modern Israel and Palestine), it quickly spread to Syria, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor and Egypt. It grew in size and influence over a few decades, and by the end of the 4th century had become the official state religion of the Roman Empire, replacing other forms of religion practiced under Roman rule.[12] During the Middle Ages, most of the remainder of Europe was Christianized, with Christians also being a sometimes large religious minority in the Middle East, North Africa, Ethiopia[13] and parts of India.[14] Following the Age of Discovery, through missionary work and colonization, Christianity spread to the Americas, Australasia, sub-Saharan Africa, and the rest of the world.[


Basically Christianity and all religions should be seen in their historical context and knowledge on how they evolved and how the supposed ''truth'' of the information it's followers are supposed to believe got there in the first place and how these scriptures were manipulated by unscrupulous successions of hierarchies.

ETA I went to Christian Church and Sunday School as a child, Jesus was my hero and role model, to my very core I inspired to live my every day and deed to the goodness of Jesus. I treasured my own Bible and Hymn book, I prayed every night and looked forward to future of theology. When I got older and asked questions at Sunday School which were met with ''just because'' answers and ''no Jesus didn't write the Bible'' etc. my complete belief was challenged and I felt it my duty to investigate as to the truths of my hitherto unwavering faith in all I was told and all I read in my Bible. When I realised there are variations and a lot written by humans many years after Jesus and a lot of the dots didn't join to making a flawless doctrine, I investigated further, studying historical versions and the evolution of Christianity, this naturally led to studying religions which influenced Christianity and religion in general. I do not hate religion, there may well be truth to scriptures, there are moral codes to which I agree and comply, however I cannot blindly believe something just because it was ''the way it is''. I see many parallels in many religions and philosophies and truly wish that the future holds the good aspects of these and humanity grows and evolves according to good teachings based on the truth.

edit on 5-8-2012 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


Prot·es·tant

1.any Western Christian who is not an adherent of a Catholic, Anglican, or Eastern Church.

2.an adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the Reformation, or of any group descended from them.

3.(originally) any of the German princes who protested against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which had denounced the Reformation.

4.a person who protests.

dictionary.reference.com...
edit on 5-8-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)


5. A Catholic in denial.

The first step is admitting it.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


I don't think it's ok to have predatory deviants with openly perverted sexual tendencies in our society expressing their preference in the bedroom to the general public. They need to keep it in the bedroom and the general public needs to keep our children away from gays probing hands...


It's the priest's probing hands we need to be focussing on, but I digress...

What does this have to do with gay marriage, anyway, or, in fact, the questions raised in the OP?


Originally posted by SisyphusRidea private business can refuse service to whomever they wish... it is at the discretion of the proprietor.

The man (owner) can do whatever he wants to do, that is what the majority of the whining liberal public seems to have forgot... you didn't build that business (as Obama has said) it is not yours or even the a public institution, it is a private establishment.



Of course Chick-Fil-A can do whatever they like, but I can also call into question the morality of it, yes?



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


They need to keep it in the bedroom and the general public needs to keep our children away from gays probing hands...


Everyone should keep these things in the bedroom. They should also be fully dressed. Men dressed as men. Women dressed as women.


I agree with keeping these things in the bedroom, and I suspect once given equal rights homosexuals will gladly shut up and stop being so vocal about everything.

I also agree with people being dressed, but what, exactly, is wrong with men dressing as women or vice versa? Is a woman in trousers acceptable? Who gets to judge this, you?



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by humphreysjim
reply to post by humphreysjim
 


I also agree with people being dressed, but what, exactly, is wrong with men dressing as women or vice versa?


It is against nature for a man or woman to want to look like the other.


Originally posted by humphreysjim

Is a woman in trousers acceptable?


No. Trousers are men's clothes.


Originally posted by humphreysjim

Who gets to judge this, you?


God judges. It is the ministries place to teach and warn though.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


Women wearing trousers isn't even the issue, 2000 years ago no one was wearing pants, they were all wearing robes or skirts (kilts). Some people, like my native american ancestors were wearing loincloths. You use what you have. There is a difference between women wearing trousers and going Calamity Jane butch style. I do not believe men should be dressing dragqueen, or wearing earings but ultimately it's not our right to dictate who wears what. What each person does is on them, we should leave it and be done with it.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Leave the Pharisees to their washing of pots brother.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join