Is Christianity a Religion of War?

reply to post by SimonPeter


Less condescension please. And maybe you could explain how it is a parable? He directed that unbelievers be killed at his feet. How is that justifiable by any stretch of the imagination?

Originally posted by SimonPeter
I would have reasoned that even an Idiot would have known that Jesus was speaking a parable to his disciples and not in the first person . After all the bible so announced that he spoke a parable and his words highlighted in Red was never broken with a reply from Luke chapter 19 verse thru verse 27 . Goes to show you don't care to know what you are talking about . Oh ye of little understanding !

Yeah.. it's a parable. We have discussed that ad nauseum. (It was even mentioned directly in the OP). You can't merely throw out the ol' "ITS A PARABLE" line without discussing what you interpret the parable to mean.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by SimonPeter

 

Less condescension please. And maybe you could explain how it is a parable? He directed that unbelievers be killed at his feet. How is that justifiable by any stretch of the imagination?

I agree its really not necessary to be nasty about this...

Jesus wasn't saying kill disbelievers at "HIS" feet...

This is what the nobleman in the story said...

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
reply to post by Akragon

 

You are going to have to walk me through what any of what that is supposed to mean within the context of this conversation.

It doesn't belong in this conversation... that was my point

you're using that passage in the wrong context...

It isn't up to you to tell me what belongs in my conversation. If you disagree with the "context" I am presenting the parable in, then explain why you think that. If you are unable or unwilling to do so, I really don't have much more to discuss with you about it.

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by SimonPeter

 

Less condescension please. And maybe you could explain how it is a parable? He directed that unbelievers be killed at his feet. How is that justifiable by any stretch of the imagination?

I agree its really not necessary to be nasty about this...

Jesus wasn't saying kill disbelievers at "HIS" feet...

This is what the nobleman in the story said...

Do you know what a parable is?

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee
reply to post by Akragon

 

You are going to have to walk me through what any of what that is supposed to mean within the context of this conversation.

It doesn't belong in this conversation... that was my point

you're using that passage in the wrong context...

It isn't up to you to tell me what belongs in my conversation. If you disagree with the "context" I am presenting the parable in, then explain why you think that. If you are unable or unwilling to do so, I really don't have much more to discuss with you about it.

I already did... a few times now

Do you know what a parable is?

Do you?

Definitely not true. The Old and New Testament are different in that way. I can't think of anything God is doing in the new testament other than offering salvation. Its only because a person performing good deeds is infuriating to a tyrannical authority structure that fighting ensues; its not the fault of the relligion but of those that hate truth tellers and compassionate deed doers.

Originally posted by boc4boc
Definitely not true. The Old and New Testament are different in that way. I can't think of anything God is doing in the new testament other than offering salvation. Its only because a person performing good deeds is infuriating to a tyrannical authority structure that fighting ensues; its not the fault of the relligion but of those that hate truth tellers and compassionate deed doers.

So what is your take on the scripture that I have posted in the OP that flies in the face of what you are saying about God doing anything other than offering salvation?

reply to post by boc4boc


Offering salvation on one hand, and on the other...? Salvation implies an alternative doom, also courtesy of his truly.

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Ok. I would argue that it is not the intention of Christians to cause war in order to bring about the return. Other religions may want that, but I don't see it that way. The scriptures teach that the return will happen in it's own time, not because man say's it's time. From what I know the return will only happen once the world has totally turned their back on God.

Do you have scripture to back up the claim that Christians shouldn't cause war in order to bring about the return?

No I don't. But I do know He does't need our help in such matters.

Matthew 26:52-54
52 But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels? 54 How then could the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen thus?”

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by vethumanbeing
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Is Christianity a religion of war; anymore than water rights can cause war, or natural resourses can cause war, or potencial enslavement of the weak can cause war, or profligating with another separate gene pool can cause war, or the obtaining of land to enlarge a kingdom can cause war, or the secret knowledge another culture holds including is hoards of gold (understanding gold and its transmutable significance) can cause war,

No Christianity is not a religion of war its one of attrition, not the Roman Conquering style, its the wait and see what happens type of war (we take what crumbs NOW we can get). Christianity under Pope Urban (Knights Templar as his crusading soldiers of God) was most certainly a religion of war but that was the 11th century AD, and a proper Norman Army. Nothing compares to the treachery and betrayal of these fine men fighting for Jesus, so anything after this point in history is so miniscule, slatternly even as not to be mentioned.

edit on 13-7-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)

Do you have some scripture to back up your claims? That would be great. Thanks for the input!

Generally not a 'quotatious' redundant person, as it is not my nature; HOWEVER,

Dueteronomy 20: "when you go to war and see before you, vast numbers of horses and chariots, an army far greater than yours, dont be frightened! The Lord your God is with you--the same God who brought you safely out of Egypt. Before you win the battle, a Priest shall stand before the Israeli army and say, Listen to me, all you men of Isreal, Dont be afraid for the Lord your God is going with you." (go seek your physical death and I shall accompany you in spirit?).

This never happened and what time period it refers to is inconsequencial; this scripture is a thoughtform (of what I can only surmise) one that was composed by a complete MADMAN).

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Many terrible things have been done in the name of God and Jesus . Most of them by the Catholic Church . Would you hold Jesus responsible for someone's own agenda . Like Peter who smote the Sanhedrin soldier who came to arrest Jesus . He just did not understand what Jesus was doing as so many other souls who have acted contrary to what Jesus preached .

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

Many terrible things have been done in the name of God and Jesus . Most of them by the Catholic Church . Would you hold Jesus responsible for someone's own agenda . Like Peter who smote the Sanhedrin soldier who came to arrest Jesus . He just did not understand what Jesus was doing as so many other souls who have acted contrary to what Jesus preached .

I completely concure. I hold nothing regarding the good intentions of Jesus against HIM. I hold the USUARY faction to bear its fate in good grace, because it will be and already has been a very ugly outcome for those souls, and we can start with the Popes.

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker

Originally posted by MichaelPMaccabee

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker
reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee

 

Ok. I would argue that it is not the intention of Christians to cause war in order to bring about the return. Other religions may want that, but I don't see it that way. The scriptures teach that the return will happen in it's own time, not because man say's it's time. From what I know the return will only happen once the world has totally turned their back on God.

Do you have scripture to back up the claim that Christians shouldn't cause war in order to bring about the return?

No I don't. But I do know He does't need our help in such matters.

Matthew 26:52-54
52 But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels? 54 How then could the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen thus?”

This is actually another scripture I thought about adding to evidence the warlike nature of the Christian mindset. The Scriptures need to be fulfilled, Jesus needs to be murdered and then needs to return and destroy the nonbelievers, how could this happen if no one starts the war?

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


Once you can solve the problem of how to have peace without war, then your thread will be answered.

reply to post by RealTruthSeeker


Once we can solve why this place was actually created, and by whom then we can Truly solve it.

But wait, that is actually known to some, and these religious texts are a cover story for something far more complex......

I can't take bible too seriously:

1. The BASTARD shall not enter the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation: DEUTERONOMY 23:2

2. "And a BASTARD shall dwell in Ashdod: ZECHARIAH 9:6

3. "But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then ye are BASTARDS and not sons. " HERREWS 12:8

Word of God? Nope. Word of Satan.

George Bernard Shaw said “THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK ON EARTH “(the Bible), KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY.” Keep the Bible out of your children’s reach.

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


To answer your question.....yes and no lol.

No. The PHILOSOPHY brought/reinstituted by the NAZ was not violent in the least. Problem is, not too long after his body was cold, the majority of that philosophy was also cold.

Yes.

The ACCEPTED "christianity" is an amalgam created by Rome with Rome's best interest at heart. It was created to do much of the same thing as Islam is doing. Conversion at sword tip. The only difference is that its not quite as violent any longer. Most folks wont tolerate it.

reply to post by shirlykent


You are not under the very complicated Old Testament doctrine . You are under the Gospel of Jesus now .

reply to post by ParasuvO


In what manner is it so complex that you don't understand it?