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.

 

Misconceptions about Christianity ;+)

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko
No Riley, you're wrong.
He actually did have a life without sin.
Getting mad is not a sin per se. God got mad as well.
What weird doctrines you have heard about really doesn't make that much of a difference here.

HOW am I wrong? If I did the same thing it would be counted as a sin. His sin was pride and then physical assault. I don't find that sort of behaviour very admirable.. but otherwise he seems like he was consistantly a nice guy with.. a bit of a temper.


[edit on 11-11-2004 by riley]




posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko

Originally posted by riley
Not true.. there's aside actual doctrine that says he went around smiting people when he was a kid and playing with his powers [he resurected them later]. I can't quote it as it was apparently edited out of the new testimant a while ago. I do remember a story however about him having a tantrume in the market place because it was a temple. He forgot to turn the other cheek and wnet a whippin. Thats okay. Everyone human and is entitled to make mistakes.


No Riley, you're wrong.
He actually did have a life without sin.
Getting mad is not a sin per se. God got mad as well.
What weird doctrines you have heard about really doesn't make that much of a difference here.


heh....

Jakko...

yeah...

You have some further learning to do. What was the purpose of this thread? What are you trying to gain? Knowledge? Or self-affirmation...
You said this thread was about the misconceptions of Christianity. Yet every time someone differs from your opinion you either insult them, or flat out tell them they are wrong, without providing anything to back it up...




[edit on 103030p://11u35 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Christianity should not be frowned upon or debased in anyway. Just because there are so many people who distort the umbrella religion to suit their own goals does not make Christianity a terrible ideology to follow. If you read the teachings of Christ (not that great work of fiction the Bible) you will only ever see good reason and goodness. Jesus taught the same principles as Ghandi, MLK and many other great men. If Christianity was based purely on the words and teachings of Jesus it would be more credible. But alas like any ideology, from communism, to Islam, to capitalism it is distorted and stretched to aid the user. George Bush is corrupt in the sense he is using Christianity to support his conservative views, OBL is corrupt for doing the same to Islam. No faith is wrong, all ideologies based on peace, love and understanding of fellow humans is always right. Just show me a church that teaches this though.



posted on Nov, 11 2004 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Teller
Christianity should not be frowned upon or debased in anyway. Just because there are so many people who distort the umbrella religion to suit their own goals does not make Christianity a terrible ideology to follow. If you read the teachings of Christ (not that great work of fiction the Bible) you will only ever see good reason and goodness. Jesus taught the same principles as Ghandi, MLK and many other great men. If Christianity was based purely on the words and teachings of Jesus it would be more credible. But alas like any ideology, from communism, to Islam, to capitalism it is distorted and stretched to aid the user. George Bush is corrupt in the sense he is using Christianity to support his conservative views, OBL is corrupt for doing the same to Islam. No faith is wrong, all ideologies based on peace, love and understanding of fellow humans is always right. Just show me a church that teaches this though.


Well said my friend.

That's definitely what I was getting at.

The original ideology of Christianity was good. It was indeed the same teachings of peace and love that Ghandi and other great sages tought. It has been distorted over the years. It is no longer purely based on the teachings of Jesus. It's no longer purely about his path...
It's about the Christian Bible.

Drop the Bible. It's just a collection of words...meaningless words in the grand scheme of things. Jesus laid out a path for us to follow...to live. That means personal experience, and not some book of laws. Do you really think you can contain God in a book? Live the life Jesus has laid out for you, then, and only then, should you even consider answering that question.



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Teller
Christianity should not be frowned upon or debased in anyway. Just because there are so many people who distort the umbrella religion to suit their own goals does not make Christianity a terrible ideology to follow. If you read the teachings of Christ (not that great work of fiction the Bible) you will only ever see good reason and goodness. Jesus taught the same principles as Ghandi, MLK and many other great men. If Christianity was based purely on the words and teachings of Jesus it would be more credible. But alas like any ideology, from communism, to Islam, to capitalism it is distorted and stretched to aid the user. George Bush is corrupt in the sense he is using Christianity to support his conservative views, OBL is corrupt for doing the same to Islam. No faith is wrong, all ideologies based on peace, love and understanding of fellow humans is always right. Just show me a church that teaches this though.


Sure, but hippies were also good, and had a very peaceful way of living, and look how that went. They were probably the most "Christ-like" people to ever live in America, and they were persecuted ruthlessly, even by so called christians. Their entire philosophy was peace and love, and caring for their fellow humans. Why was that shot down so violently? Because they were too open minded?



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Why was that shot down so violently? Because they were too open minded?


So what is your point? Let's all be closed minded and conservative in case we are persecuted. Tell that the blacks under apartheid tell it to the blacks in 60's America tell it to anyone oppressed.
The whole hippie/Christ comparison is highly weak. The only comparison between a hippie and Christ is that they both wore beards, kaftans and spoke of peace.
Think of this: dismiss all the world has advanced in ideology or society and lets all live by the Ten Commandments say. I know, I know it is pie in the sky, but what if every single person of the six billion on the planet lived that way. No murder, no war, no starvation, no hate no bigotrys none follows of Christs teachings are the real destroyers of this world. I was raised a Christian and still believe in the teachings of Christ but have no religion and practice no religious affiliation to any church. But the argument is there. Take religion from Christ and the world would be a better place. In fact Jesus himself knew the dangers of creating religion and church. A rock is my church and those that gather at it are my congregation. That is what he said and what he wanted, as soon as he died the bandwagon led by Peter rolled into town, the Bible commissioned and the world destroyed from the image he envisage.
ed.



posted on Nov, 12 2004 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Actually, the only Person we need to relate to as Teacher is God Himself, telepathically in what is called "prayer."

Everybody else is just everybody else.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Emily_Cragg
Actually, the only Person we need to relate to as Teacher is God Himself, telepathically in what is called "prayer."

Everybody else is just everybody else.


...and everybody else is a part of God.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I wish that were true.

But, since God is a "Person," He does not willingly "contain" individuals who contradict and operate to overthrow His Will.

His Will is that Life should Abide In Peace.

But that's not what's going on, is it?

So, there are a lot of people running around right now, engaged in doing something other than Peace, who are NOT a "part" of God.



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
...and everybody else is a part of God.


Just read your own posts ok?
Jesus smiting people when he was young and resurrecting them after that...
How can we even start to take you serious?



posted on Nov, 13 2004 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
...and everybody else is a part of God.


Just read your own posts ok?
Jesus smiting people when he was young and resurrecting them after that...
How can we even start to take you serious?


I got the information off a documenty that explored scipture and the entire history of the new testimant.. it compared what had been revised and looked at what had been excluded over the centuries.. so I thought it was relevant enough to mention.. but you cut down differing opinions when they clash with your own preconcieved ideal. These were actual scholars that said this but it's not exactly something I can grab from your local fundie shop and I can't even remember the name of the doco but I'll keep seaching for at least something to validate what I've said. I also offered another example of Jesus sinning that was in the bible but you cut that down without explanation as well. "But that didn't count!!"


And I personally have no problem with other people adding their own opinions.. it's a public discussion board not a private U2U.

[edit on 13-11-2004 by riley]



posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I am okay with explaining myself, and making anything you do not yet understand clear, but your posts are getting increasingly ignorant.
I did not say "that does not count" I said Jesus did not sin, and I also explained why getting mad is not sinning.

What you saw once in a documentary where "scholars" spout the most hilarious interpretations of Jesus' history really does not matter to me, unless you have some proof, ANY proof to back something up.

Maybe you can explain how your rambling can be considered an "opinion" to begin with.
You said Jesus did sin, and gave me flawed examples and a hilarious theory that you once saw something about on TV.
That's not really an opinion, that's just a way to undermine my previous statements in a pretty weak way.



posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
...and everybody else is a part of God.


Just read your own posts ok?
Jesus smiting people when he was young and resurrecting them after that...
How can we even start to take you serious?


Lol! umm dude you have me mistaken for another member. Which posts of mine talks about Jesus smiting people when he was young?

It's clear you don't pay attention to anything, how can I take you seriously.



posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Ah yes my bad, my apologees Lucid, it was directed at riley.
If you say you will stop taking me serious because of this, does it mean you will stop replying to me?
Cause that could be great, thanks!



posted on Nov, 14 2004 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakko
I did not say "that does not count" I said Jesus did not sin, and I also explained why getting mad is not sinning.

Okay.. people were utilizing a place of worchip to trade currency.. and he got mad. I agree being mad isn't a sin .. but you never actually explained to me why someone getting their whip out and assaulting people isn't a sin. Please enlighten me.

unless you have some proof, ANY proof to back something up.

Disregard it then.. I did try and find some evidence to back it up but I'm not about to write to the vatican and ask for it.
I have already given you a credible example of him sinning.. and you justified it with "God gets mad too." If I were to do the same thing and assault people without real provataction.. I would be classed as a sinner wouldn't I?

[edit on 14-11-2004 by riley]



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Teller
So what is your point?

The whole hippie/Christ comparison is highly weak. The only comparison between a hippie and Christ is that they both wore beards, kaftans and spoke of peace.

You obviously know little about the hippy revolution. Don't feel bad. Most people have no idea what it was about, expecially if you weren't alive then.



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damned
You obviously know little about the hippy revolution. Don't feel bad. Most people have no idea what it was about, expecially if you weren't alive then.

A: I was alive then and B: the non-comparison was that hippies were about dropping out from the norm of scoiety.About experimenting with new forms of experience and expression.It was about a cultral sea change from a youth perspective. It was many things but it was NOT about spreading the word of God and the teachings of Christ. And to call it a hippe "revolution" is a joke. Tell me what excatly did the hippies change in this so called revolt. Oh yeah people were now allowed to wear their hair long and walk about in really embarrising clothes they would feel ashamed about in photos when they were older.
Whooo look at me I'm a hippie I take drugs, practice free love and get stoned listening to the Grateful Dead man, I'm changing the world. Right on brother.

[edit on 15-11-2004 by The Teller]



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Actually. I often wonder if some of the best commercials on the TV, ya know the ones that make you crack up laughing, are the result of someone's '___' trip or something....

IS this just one of the remains of the hippie revolution as you put it.



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Teller
A: I was alive then and B: the non-comparison was that hippies were about dropping out from the norm of scoiety.About experimenting with new forms of experience and expression.It was about a cultral sea change from a youth perspective. It was many things but it was NOT about spreading the word of God and the teachings of Christ. And to call it a hippe "revolution" is a joke. Tell me what excatly did the hippies change in this so called revolt. Oh yeah people were now allowed to wear their hair long and walk about in really embarrising clothes they would feel ashamed about in photos when they were older.
Whooo look at me I'm a hippie I take drugs, practice free love and get stoned listening to the Grateful Dead man, I'm changing the world. Right on brother.

No, it sure wasn't about spreading the word of god, but it was about unconditional peace and love, which is what Jesus was all about. That's actually the main aspect of his philosophy, is it not?
Nevermind. It's clear from your sarcasm that you have absolutely no clue what it was about.
You have a very shallow understanding, which actually just shows your ignorance on the subject.

[edit on 15-11-2004 by Damned]



posted on Nov, 15 2004 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Hey Teller have you ever heard of a Creative Artistic Conservative Fundamentalist? Let me guess - NO! That is because Creativity (I hope that you understand that it is a basic Human Need to be able to Express Ones-Self. If that is Denied then the Repression can drive one Insane) requires total Freedom in all Matters - especially Intellectually & Religiously. One cannot be locked into a "Sheep" Mentality & be Creative. This was the Revolution of the 60's. MANY people Realized - as they are now Realizing today - that the Old Book was designed for "Absolute Control".

[edit on 15-11-2004 by Seraphim_Serpente]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join