What do you think about Christians?

[ImAsian5]

In a country where religion is becoming more and more taboo, I would like to know what you guys and girls think of Christians. What do you expect of them? Are they hypocrites? Are they good people? etc.....

[Chancetobe]

I think it depends. You can't generalize about all christians. However, I feel like some of the eveangelical views are a bit ridiculous.

[TJ Wells]

I'm a Christian and I still have a negative view of a majority of Christians, so take that for what you will.

[Love As Arson]

Nero had the right; they should be burned at the stake and thrown to lions.

[ImAsian5]

I think it depends. You can't generalize about all christians. However, I feel like some of the eveangelical views are a bit ridiculous.

unpack that statement.

[CrashingHearts]

I read somewhere that Christian/Catholic people like porn that has reverends or priests in it.

The best part is I'm dead serious.

[Love As Arson]

I think it is ridiculous that a religion predicated upon the notion that we are all sinners would be filled with those very same sinners.

[CrashingHearts]

I think it is ridiculous that a religion predicated upon the notion that we are all sinners would be filled with those very same sinners.


that took me about 6 times to read.

[thejetstolehome]

In a country where religion is becoming more and more taboo, I would like to know what you guys and girls think of Christians. What do you expect of them? Are they hypocrites? Are they good people? etc.....

you sure about that?

[ImAsian5]

I think it is ridiculous that a religion predicated upon the notion that we are all sinners would be filled with those very same sinners.

right...

[Jason Tate]

I disagree with the premise. I find religion to be far more "accepted" as well as "hip" and maybe even "trendy" lately ... not taboo at all.

[hailthewarrior]

I'm a Christian, per se, I go by Biblicist... but I think most are fake people who claim it to sound good. I doubt they truly follow what even Christ himself sets down as what as Christian is...

[ImAsian5]

I disagree with the premise. I find religion to be far more "accepted" as well as "hip" and maybe even "trendy" lately ... not taboo at all.

im guessing you havent been to many college campuses lately.

[Slurps]

Fuck religions is what I say.

[TJ Wells]

I disagree with the premise. I find religion to be far more "accepted" as well as "hip" and maybe even "trendy" lately ... not taboo at all.
its hip? trendy? are you kidding me? ill take its pretty "accepted," but saying that right now a religion thats been around for nearly 2000 years and claims 1 of 3 people on earth as members is hip and trendy is a little ignorant.

[Chancetobe]

unpack that statement.

In short, just a few of the things I don't like: I think it's silly that they try to convert others. I've always believed that each person should be free to think as they please. Along those same lines, the treatment/views on homosexuals is just wrong. When many parents disown their homosexual children, the fact that they fight so hard to not allow homosexuals to get married. I see no reason to deny them the rights every other American has. I mean, this is just touching the surface, but...

[Chancetobe]

Unless people are starting to follow Paris Hilton, I highly doubt religion is becoming trendy. It may have been a few years ago, with all the media attention kaballah and scientology were getting, but I don't think it is any longer.

[Jason Tate]

im guessing you havent been to many college campuses lately.
Minus the one I graduated from 2 years ago? Or the one where my best friend lives?

I've been to plenty - but I also don't believe that what's seen on our college campuses is indicative of society as a whole. "Religion" in a college environment makes sense to be seen as "taboo" -- it's a time where people are "finding themselves" - first time alone - first time thinking without parental guidance. That seems logical. However, I don't think it's in anyway representative of the current "Jesus movement" (if you will) seen throughout the rest of our country.

[thejetstolehome]

im guessing you havent been to many college campuses lately.

ever part of culture in this country has some bit of religion weaved into it.

[Jason Tate]

its hip? trendy? are you kidding me? ill take its pretty "accepted," but saying that right now a religion thats been around for nearly 2000 years and claims 1 of 3 people on earth as members is hip and trendy is a little ignorant.
I don't think you're understanding what I mean by "hip" or "trendy." The amount of people belonging to the religion has nothing to do with it. It's how it's perceived, and it's about the "members" of it that do such for status or to be seen as something different. Take politics for example -- it's now 100% mandatory for candidates to make a big deal about their religious affiliations (even if they, beneath the surface, have zero - and are the embodiment of everything their "religion" is not).

The only time, in recent memory, I can remember it being more "in vogue" was when the WWJD bracelets were passed around.

I believe the actual phrase is "Jesus Chic." It has a phrase ... come on ... that's pretty telling.

[TJ Wells]

In short, just a few of the things I don't like: I think it's silly that they try to convert others. I've always believed that each person should be free to think as they please. Along those same lines, the treatment/views on homosexuals is just wrong. When many parents disown their homosexual children, the fact that they fight so hard to not allow homosexuals to get married. I see no reason to deny them the rights every other American has. I mean, this is just touching the surface, but...
On the first statement, I sort of agree; I would never try to convert someone, but I almost always invite new friends to church, and if they say yes cool, if they say no so what?

On the second one i'm completely with you. This is where I have conflicts with my incredibly right-wing family, because I really don't believe homosexuality is wrong nor do I believe they should be denied any rights that heterosexuals get. It just doesn't make sense to say homosexuality was a choice; David Cross did a really good joke about this.

[TJ Wells]

I don't think you're understanding what I mean by "hip" or "trendy." The amount of people belonging to the religion has nothing to do with it. It's how it's perceived. The only time, in recent memory, I can remember it being more "in vogue" was when the WWJD bracelets were passed around.

I believe the actual phrase is "Jesus Chic." It has a phrase ... come on ... that's pretty telling.
Oh man WWJD. That proves your point like 100%. I see what you're saying now. My bad.

EDIT: I reread what I just wrote and it sounded kind of sarcastic, and I just wanted to point out its not.

[splitsecond]

I think it is ridiculous that a religion predicated upon the notion that we are all sinners would be filled with those very same sinners.

Well if we are all sinners, of course the religion is going to be filled with sinners. however, what many Christians fail to realize is that their own sin is no different than any others', and instead go on to pass judgment on people, when that is CLEARLY not the example that Christ set in his time on earth. Essentially, many Christians aren't really Christians at all.

I disagree with the premise. I find religion to be far more "accepted" as well as "hip" and maybe even "trendy" lately ... not taboo at all.

agreed

In short, just a few of the things I don't like: I think it's silly that they try to convert others. I've always believed that each person should be free to think as they please. Along those same lines, the treatment/views on homosexuals is just wrong. When many parents disown their homosexual children, the fact that they fight so hard to not allow homosexuals to get married. I see no reason to deny them the rights every other American has. I mean, this is just touching the surface, but...


Keep in mind that all Christians do not share the same views on homosexuality. You are welcome to believe any of their views are wrong, but don't be offended when they claim any of your views are wrong. Also, there is nothing wrong with teaching people your faith, in an attempt to convert them. Certain methods are clearly ineffective and inappropriate, but if you believe that you have found salvation in something, to me the biggest injustice you could do to others is not share that gift with them.

[walking_person]

I'm a Christian and I still have a negative view of a majority of Christians, so take that for what you will.
I understand that.

[TxRepresent]

Cue lunchforthesky.....

[I am all talk]

I don't really have an opinion on Christians.

But boy do I hate those Asians.

[Jason Tate]

Oh man WWJD. That proves your point like 100%. I see what you're saying now. My bad.

EDIT: I reread what I just wrote and it sounded kind of sarcastic, and I just wanted to point out its not.
Gotcha. Sorry for not being more clear in my original post.

[ImAsian5]

In short, just a few of the things I don't like: I think it's silly that they try to convert others. I've always believed that each person should be free to think as they please. Along those same lines, the treatment/views on homosexuals is just wrong. When many parents disown their homosexual children, the fact that they fight so hard to not allow homosexuals to get married. I see no reason to deny them the rights every other American has. I mean, this is just touching the surface, but...

Jesus was never a political figure in his ministry, and those who impose characteristics of christians in law are doing wrong.

[hailthewarrior]

Cue lunchforthesky.....

hahaha.

[Jason Tate]

Well if we are all sinners, of course the religion is going to be filled with sinners. however, what many Christians fail to realize is that their own sin is no different than any others', and instead go on to pass judgment on people, when that is CLEARLY not the example that Christ set in his time on earth. Essentially, many Christians aren't really Christians at all.



agreed




Keep in mind that all Christians do not share the same views on homosexuality. You are welcome to believe any of their views are wrong, but don't be offended when they claim any of your views are wrong. Also, there is nothing wrong with teaching people your faith, in an attempt to convert them. Certain methods are clearly ineffective and inappropriate, but if you believe that you have found salvation in something, to me the biggest injustice you could do to others is not share that gift with them.
I still find "discrimination" (if you will) offensive. Just a personality trait I've been unable to look beyond. I understand the "everyone sees things differently" - but for me - that's the one issue I have a very difficult time being "accepting" toward. Most everything else I can force myself to look at both sides.

[Take Heart]

Devoutly religious people absolutely terrify me. Most everything I would have said has already been covered by Dom and/or Jason, but I felt it necessary to include this picture in the thread.

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w124/tylergreen9/ScienceVs.jpg

[Chancetobe]

On the first statement, I sort of agree; I would never try to convert someone, but I almost always invite new friends to church, and if they say yes cool, if they say no so what?

On the second one i'm completely with you. This is where I have conflicts with my incredibly right-wing family, because I really don't believe homosexuality is wrong nor do I believe they should be denied any rights that heterosexuals get. It just doesn't make sense to say homosexuality was a choice; David Cross did a really good joke about this.
Inviting friends to church is one thing. Trying to convert them is quite another. The other day my friend asked me to go to church with her, i felt a bit awkward about it (I'm jewish), but i obliged. I figured it would be interesting to see what going to church is like, and see how it differs from attending a shabbat service. But, if my friend had attacked me, and told me that my views were just wrong, and I will die if i don't convert, then that is just wrong. I don't think that anyone should be able to tell others how to live their lives.

Even if it were wrong (which, I don't belive it is, since I also think it's something you are born with) you simply shouldn't mistreat someone because you don't like how they are living their lives. You arn't helping anything. Even if it were a lifestyle choice, it just isn't right.
Keep in mind that all Christians do not share the same views on homosexuality. You are welcome to believe any of their views are wrong, but don't be offended when they claim any of your views are wrong. Also, there is nothing wrong with teaching people your faith, in an attempt to convert them. Certain methods are clearly ineffective and inappropriate, but if you believe that you have found salvation in something, to me the biggest injustice you could do to others is not share that gift with them.
Sharing one's religion and forcing it upon someone are two differnt things. The first is a great way to start a stimulating conversation. The second is rude, and usually ineffectual.

[TxRepresent]

But seriously, I dont have a problem with Christians as long as they're not shoving their beliefs down my throat I could careless what anyone believes. I hate it when atheists/agnostics shove their beliefs down other peoples throats as well. Religion is definitely a powerful thing though, whether you believe in it or not.

[Chancetobe]

Jesus was never a political figure in his ministry, and those who impose characteristics of christians in law are doing wrong.

I agree. And nothing, angers me so much as when christians try to integrate their religion into politics. Not only is it wrong, but in America, it is against the constitution and hence illegal. Yet so many politicians get away with it every day with the support of the christain right.

[thejetstolehome]

But seriously, I dont have a problem with Christians as long as they're not shoving their beliefs down my throat I could careless what anyone believes. I hate it when atheists/agnostics shove their beliefs down other peoples throats as well. Religion is definitely a powerful thing though, whether you believe in it or not.

:clap:

[Jason Tate]

I agree. And nothing, angers me so much as when christians try to integrate their religion into politics. Not only is it wrong, but in America, it is against the constitution and hence illegal. Yet so many politicians get away with it every day with the support of the christain right.
Eh .. not technically illegal (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall reading anything about that in the Constitution) ... simply unwise (both the religious and non religious should agree with this).

[hailthewarrior]

Eh .. not technically illegal (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall reading anything about that in the Constitution) ... simply unwise.

It's in a letter from I think Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist convention telling them he wasn't going to make a different denomination the "church of America." So, yeah, not technically illegal.

[Jason Tate]

It's in a letter from I think Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist convention telling them he wasn't going to make a different denomination the "church of America." So, yeah, not technically illegal.
Yeah .. that's what I thought.

[James Johnson]

Nero had the right; they should be burned at the stake and thrown to lions.

Well played, I came in to mention romans and lions.

[Chancetobe]

Eh .. not technically illegal (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall reading anything about that in the Constitution) ... simply unwise (both the religious and non religious should agree with this).

The Separation of Church and State? The first amendment?
... no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

To me, this implys that basing any legal decision soley on one's religion is illegal, because it is in essence forcing another to adhere to your religion.

[sputniksignals]

If being a christian was "trendy" or "hip", we would have the regular slaying of the Jesus-bands that occurs on here way more often

[Chancetobe]

It's in a letter from I think Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist convention telling them he wasn't going to make a different denomination the "church of America." So, yeah, not technically illegal.

It's not in the first Amendment?

[walking_person]

But seriously, I dont have a problem with Christians as long as they're not shoving their beliefs down my throat I could careless what anyone believes. I hate it when atheists/agnostics shove their beliefs down other peoples throats as well. Religion is definitely a powerful thing though, whether you believe in it or not.
Same here. I don't like people trying to tell me their veiws are better than mine and such. It started in school when we were all 7 or so. It's anyone really, it doesn't matter what your views are, I just don't like people trying to change my views.

[hailthewarrior]

It's not in the first Amendment?

I don't believe so. It's not in any of the amendments in my Pocket Constitution I got last year during the college semester American History day...

[Chancetobe]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, I guess Separation of Church and state is more-so alluded to in the First Amendment instead of actually stated. Sorry, I could have sworn it was actually included.

[thejetstolehome]

it all depends on how you interpert that clause.

[ImAsian5]

I agree. And nothing, angers me so much as when christians try to integrate their religion into politics. Not only is it wrong, but in America, it is against the constitution and hence illegal. Yet so many politicians get away with it every day with the support of the christain right.

It makes me really sad too, but you should remember to take into consideration that this country was built upon the morals and characteristics of chrisitianity, and the US is by far the most successful country in the world, or at least has gone through almost of an entire century in being the most. that doesnt give politicians the right to lure the republicans with the bible,,, because when it comes down to it, christians desire to have a christian country, and they are able to fight for one, yet they dont understand they are imposing christian characteristics on those who are not, which is selfish.

[Jason Tate]

So, I guess Separation of Church and state is more-so alluded to in the First Amendment instead of actually stated. Sorry, I could have sworn it was actually included.
Correct.

A good website on the topic: http://www.au.org/

[TxRepresent]

:clap:

:bow:

Same here. I don't like people trying to tell me their veiws are better than mine and such. It started in school when we were all 7 or so. It's anyone really, it doesn't matter what your views are, I just don't like people trying to change my views.

Yep.

[James Johnson]

I was pretty frightened by the strength of the Christian movement in the United States when over there. Things like graphic anti abortion advertising and the high visibility of christian influence really blew my mind.

[*crying stars*]

Everything should be taken into moderation, and as others have said, forcing Christianity down someone's throat is no way to change a person's opinion of it.

This country was founded on the basis of religion, so I think there is never going to be a true separation of church and state; one influences the other quite a bit.

I think to totally reject science based on your beliefs is going too far, and vice versa; I'm a believer in mixing the two trains of thought, haha.

[Chancetobe]

It makes me really sad too, but you should remember to take into consideration that this country was built upon the morals and characteristics of chrisitianity, and the US is by far the most successful country in the world, or at least has gone through almost of an entire century in being the most. that doesnt give politicians the right to lure the republicans with the bible,,, because when it comes down to it, christians desire to have a christian country, and they are able to fight for one, yet they dont understand they are imposing christian characteristics on those who are not, which is selfish.
Quite honestly, i don't think any one religion could determine the sucess of a country. If anything, this country is what it is, because we have so many different types of people here, and in general, they are all able to think as they please. Also, we're sucessful i'd say it's because we practice capitalism. And... I think that many christains do know that they are imposing on others, but simply don't care, because to them the ends is greater than the means.
Correct.

A good website on the topic: http://www.au.org/
I really hope that these people accomplish their goals. If ever something needed to be added to the Constitution, I think it's the separation of church and state.

[Love As Arson]

Well if we are all sinners, of course the religion is going to be filled with sinners. however, what many Christians fail to realize is that their own sin is no different than any others', and instead go on to pass judgment on people, when that is CLEARLY not the example that Christ set in his time on earth. Essentially, many Christians aren't really Christians at all.
I was being sarcastic. I am a Christian, though of a different variety than the mainstream. The point is, we're all hypocrites, which is why we seek out Christ to be redeemed, so it strikes me as moronic to use, "Well, the church is filled with hypocrites", as an indictment of Christianity.

[ForeverInADay]

Fuck religions is what I say.

Word, definitely.

[landozma]

I'm more of a philosopher, so I prefer Buddhism. I think religion is something in the world that is needed, because it keeps people in check. Being 100% fundamental on a any end of the spectrum is what ruins religion. It causes people to be closed minded. In Christian America I find it atrocious that we'd elect a homosexual president over an atheist one. Just based on the ideals, I find it silly. I hope religion wasn't that big of an issue in our country but it is. and it ruins our democracy.

[Chancetobe]

I'm more of a philosopher, so I prefer Buddhism. I think religion is something in the world that is needed, because it keeps people in check. Being 100% fundamental on a any end of the spectrum is what ruins religion. It causes people to be closed minded. In Christian America I find it atrocious that we'd elect a homosexual president over an atheist one. Just based on the ideals, I find it silly. I hope religion wasn't that big of an issue in our country but it is. and it ruins our democracy.

It's almost sad that people need religion to keep them in check, and they can't just be good/moral people of their own accord.

[punklet2101]

I'm a Christian and I still have a negative view of a majority of Christians, so take that for what you will.

Yep, same here.

[kickinthemouth]

It's almost sad that people need religion to keep them in check, and they can't just be good/moral people of their own accord.

I agree 100%.

I like to think i'm a nice person, and i am becasue i was brought up to have good morals. I help people because it's nice to make people happy, not becasue i'll burn in hell for eternity if i don't.

Religion, and Christianity especially, has been dreamed up to manipulate people. It's a money spinner, and it keeps people in check. There is no good to come from religion at all.

To be honest, if i meet a new person then find out they are strongly religious i find it such a shame, it's almost like a disability to me, like they have been tainted. I can't respect religious people at all becasue i always think they are only out to help themselves.

And at the end of the day, if i turn out to be wrong, all the cool people will be in hell anyway.

[mcm1610]

I think they're misguided. But not just them, the religious in general.

[Greg]

I agree 100%.

I like to think i'm a nice person, and i am becasue i was brought up to have good morals. I help people because it's nice to make people happy, not becasue i'll burn in hell for eternity if i don't.

Religion, and Christianity especially, has been dreamed up to manipulate people. It's a money spinner, and it keeps people in check. There is no good to come from religion at all.

To be honest, if i meet a new person then find out they are strongly religious i find it such a shame, it's almost like a disability to me, like they have been tainted. I can't respect religious people at all becasue i always think they are only out to help themselves.

And at the end of the day, if i turn out to be wrong, all the cool people will be in hell anyway.


simple question... have you studied the religions or the people who practice it today?

[Chancetobe]

I agree 100%.

I like to think i'm a nice person, and i am becasue i was brought up to have good morals. I help people because it's nice to make people happy, not becasue i'll burn in hell for eternity if i don't.

Religion, and Christianity especially, has been dreamed up to manipulate people. It's a money spinner, and it keeps people in check. There is no good to come from religion at all.

To be honest, if i meet a new person then find out they are strongly religious i find it such a shame, it's almost like a disability to me, like they have been tainted. I can't respect religious people at all becasue i always think they are only out to help themselves.

And at the end of the day, if i turn out to be wrong, all the cool people will be in hell anyway.

To the first part: I agree completely. Although I was raised jewish, it really just means that i'd go to temple for major holidays and had a bat mizvah. But it was in no way used to teach me what morals I should hold. I just go through life doing what i think is right.

I however wouldn't consider being religious a disability - because a lot of them are genuinly great people. But to be quite honest, a lot of times it does turn me off from people.

[thejetstolehome]

I agree 100%.

I like to think i'm a nice person, and i am becasue i was brought up to have good morals. I help people because it's nice to make people happy, not becasue i'll burn in hell for eternity if i don't.

Religion, and Christianity especially, has been dreamed up to manipulate people. It's a money spinner, and it keeps people in check. There is no good to come from religion at all.

To be honest, if i meet a new person then find out they are strongly religious i find it such a shame, it's almost like a disability to me, like they have been tainted. I can't respect religious people at all becasue i always think they are only out to help themselves.

And at the end of the day, if i turn out to be wrong, all the cool people will be in hell anyway.

how very "nice" of you. definitely displays your "good morals." :rolleyes:

[alexamiller]

yeah, some christians straight up suck.
but im a christian and i have alot of christian friends that are great people.
but there are just so many people that are stuck up about their religion and mostly don't know what they're talking about in the first place.
it's lame.

[Love As Arson]

MLK and Malcolm X were certainly in it for themselves.

[slenygoodbi]

im catholic^.^

and proud=D

[thejetstolehome]

MLK and Malcolm X were certainly in it for themselves.

selfish pricks.

[mcm1610]

MLK and Malcolm X were certainly in it for themselves.

Christopher Hitchens goes into a huge thing on MLK in his "god is not Great" book..

Actually, he touches on roughly everything in this thread.. the supposed "morality" of religions, the origins of them, just about everything in here.

[thejetstolehome]

Christopher Hitchens goes into a huge thing on MLK in his "god is not Great" book..

Actually, he touches on roughly everything in this thread.. the supposed "morality" of religions, the origins of them, just about everything in here.

during his debate with Sharpton, i really didn't like that Sharpton equated religion and morality.

[ForeverInADay]

I told a girl I was an athiest, and the first thing she said to me right after was, and I quote:

"Can I ask you something? Don't you find your life to be filled with negativity, loneliness and rather pointless if you have nothing to believe in?"

No, life is what you make of it. You don't need religion to be extremely happy. In my mind, all you need is belief in yourself and you'll amount to whatever you set your mind to. Surround yourself with good people that you love and you'll never be lonesome, angered or depressed.

I can't stand any person who tries to change my beliefs, or shove theirs down my throat.

[thejetstolehome]

I told a girl I was an athiest, and the first thing she said to me right after was, and I quote:

"Can I ask you something? Don't you find your life to be filled with negativity, loneliness and rather pointless if you have nothing to believe in?"

No, life is what you make of it. You don't need religion to be extremely happy. In my mind, all you need is belief in yourself and you'll amount to whatever you set your mind to. Surround yourself with good people that you love and you'll never be lonesome, angered or depressed.

I can't stand any person who tries to change my beliefs, or shove theirs down my throat.

i think i'd either laugh or be too shocked to say anything.

[mcm1610]

during his debate with Sharpton, i really didn't like that Sharpton equated religion and morality.

I just started watching this now becuase I never saw it, and 43 seconds in I can offer Sharpton a rebuttle.

Who decides morality? The society, by shunning those who don't fit the norm. That works with religion present or in the absence of religion.

[Love As Arson]

Christopher Hitchens goes into a huge thing on MLK in his "god is not Great" book..

Actually, he touches on roughly everything in this thread.. the supposed "morality" of religions, the origins of them, just about everything in here.
I am familiar with his argument; that is, that the leftist groups, such as communists and so forth were a large part of the Civil Rights movement as much as the southern church. To this, I would not disagree, however, this does not change the fact that individuals of faith did participate and lead in acts that changed society for the better, and it stands in stark contrast to the individuals that posit Christians are in it for themselves.

[ForeverInADay]

i think i'd either laugh or be too shocked to say anything.

hahaha, I did laugh at how ridiculous her question was, and I tried my best not to sound like an asshole since she's my friends girlfriends best friend.

[mcm1610]

I am familiar with his argument; that is, that the leftist groups, such as communists and so forth were a large part of the Civil Rights movement as much as the southern church. To this, I would not disagree, however, this does not change the fact that individuals of faith did participate and lead in acts that changed society for the better, and it stands in stark contrast to the individuals that posit Christians are in it for themselves.

Oh, I didn't read much of the thread, I didn't realize that's what you were countering.. I'd agree with you there.

There's a lot of arguments for God and religion, though, that would work perfectly well if you removed God, so therefore, why is the religion necessary? Without religion would Malcolm X or MLK have behaved or believed differently?

[slenygoodbi]

No, life is what you make of it. You don't need religion to be extremely happy. In my mind, all you need is belief in yourself and you'll amount to whatever you set your mind to. Surround yourself with good people that you love and you'll never be lonesome, angered or depressed.

more power to you!!!=D

you dont need religion!...but i like it...its homie=D

[thejetstolehome]

I just started watching this now becuase I never saw it, and 43 seconds in I can offer Sharpton a rebuttle.

Who decides morality? The society, by shunning those who don't fit the norm. That works with religion present or in the absence of religion.

agreed.

hahaha, I did laugh at how ridiculous her question was, and I tried my best not to sound like an asshole since she's my friends girlfriends best friend.

yeah questions like that deserve laughter.

[Love As Arson]

I told a girl I was an athiest, and the first thing she said to me right after was, and I quote:

"Can I ask you something? Don't you find your life to be filled with negativity, loneliness and rather pointless if you have nothing to believe in?"
You should have quoted Ecclesiastes back to her:

"All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust."

It is a very nihilistic book.

[thejetstolehome]

You should have quoted Ecclesiastes back to her:

"All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust."

It is a very nihilistic book.

i read from Ecclesiastes at my grandfather's funeral last year.

[Greg]

I told a girl I was an athiest, and the first thing she said to me right after was, and I quote:

"Can I ask you something? Don't you find your life to be filled with negativity, loneliness and rather pointless if you have nothing to believe in?"

No, life is what you make of it. You don't need religion to be extremely happy. In my mind, all you need is belief in yourself and you'll amount to whatever you set your mind to. Surround yourself with good people that you love and you'll never be lonesome, angered or depressed.

I can't stand any person who tries to change my beliefs, or shove theirs down my throat.
yea that is a weird way of reacting to that

cause being an atheist doesnt mean no belief in anything. it means no belief in a God(s). you still have beliefs. you know all this of course. i just felt urged to respond. haha

[Love As Arson]

i read from Ecclesiastes at my grandfather's funeral last year.
Ha. The essential message of the books is not hopeful, rather, it is that all you are going to do is toil and return to nothing, and you'll only achieve immortality through your children.

[mcm1610]

My insanely devout ex-girlfriend asked me something like that once, and added how I could enjoy life without having heaven to look forward to, and I responded "Actually, I find it much easier to enjoy life when I know that this is all I've got and I better get my enjoyment now before I put off my enjoyment for Heaven and don't find it when I die."

[ForeverInADay]

yea that is a weird way of reacting to that

cause being an atheist doesnt mean no belief in anything. it means no belief in a God(s). you still have beliefs. you know all this of course. i just felt urged to respond. haha

I believe in myself and science, ha.

[thejetstolehome]

Ha. The essential message of the books is not hopeful, rather, it is that all you are going to do is toil and return to nothing, and you'll only achieve immortality through your children.

yeah, my sister and i split E. 3: 1-8.

[ImAsian5]

Quite honestly, i don't think any one religion could determine the sucess of a country. If anything, this country is what it is, because we have so many different types of people here, and in general, they are all able to think as they please. Also, we're sucessful i'd say it's because we practice capitalism. And... I think that many christains do know that they are imposing on others, but simply don't care, because to them the ends is greater than the means.

I completely disagree, because it was the generation of those who follow the Christian ethics during WWII who built security and freedom for this country. giving enough freedom for homosexuals to even live freely. it wasn't Buddhist, not Muslim, or any other religion, but many men following Christian ethics that fought evil, that is why we have crosses for their memorial graves, that is why we curse in Jesus' name, that is why just about every president has called themselves a Christian...

[Love As Arson]

There's a lot of arguments for God and religion, though, that would work perfectly well if you removed God, so therefore, why is the religion necessary?
If one is a Christian, then religion is necessary because is represents Truth, and one may hardly deny Truth. To the former point, I do not argue that religion is necessary to achieve any political act, but that many religious individuals have been influenced by their faith to do something good for society. As such, rather than scorn them, we should recognise there are some that are bad i.e. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Benny Hinn ,etc., but they are not representative of faith, they simply get the most press coverage.


Without religion would Malcolm X or MLK have behaved or believed differently?
In both cases, I think the religious structure played a pivotal role in their struggles. The church played a major organizing role. Malcolm X only became political when he encountered the Nation Of Islam. This is me venturing a guess, as we cannot be certain of anything.

[thisdecemberhop]

A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.man, with that definition. people religiously come to this website. people religiously watch football.
so maybe you need to reword your question.

I think Christians are at a point that some of them are completely oblivious to what Jesus wanted from us. and Some of em are hitting that right on the head with a hammer.

But i dont believe in Christianity anyways.

i gave that up a long time ago to follow Jesus.

1) Most christians (at least in america) have this concept of highlighting the bible and really embracing the parts they like. and ignoring the rest.

and then some of the christians actually think maybe Jesus ment what he said.

I go to a christian college. I've seen both of these people. And I'm not ok with that. I'd much rather see the second type of christian.

SO if that made any sense. i hope it did.

i'll sum all of that up

some people think they get it
and some people get it

[Love As Arson]

I completely disagree, because it was the generation of those who follow the Christian ethics during WWII who built security and freedom for this country.
Are you referring to the Christian ethics which turned away Jewish people seeking refuge in the country, used the atomic bomb and, afterwards, participated in murder and the deprivation of human rights in order to establish regimes that were conducive to profit? Are these the very same Christian ethics, which, after World War 2, deprived minorities of the GI funds that built a vibrant middle class?

giving enough freedom for homosexuals to even live freely.
Homosexuals remain without the right to marry.

it wasn't Buddhist, not Muslim, or any other religion,
For one, they are not the predominant religion in the west. Further, individuals of all backgrounds have participated in struggles for freedom.

but many men following Christian ethics that fought evil, that is why we have crosses for their memorial graves, that is why we curse in Jesus' name, that is why just about every president has called themselves a Christian...
They may refer to themselves as such, but they've managed to eviscerate the entirety of the beatitudes.

[Shatter590]

is this some attempt to lure Ben into general? lol

[mcm1610]

If one is a Christian, then religion is necessary because is represents Truth, and one may hardly deny Truth. To the former point, I do not argue that religion is necessary to achieve any political act, but that many religious individuals have been influenced by their faith to do something good for society. As such, rather than scorn them, we should recognise there are some that are bad i.e. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Benny Hinn ,etc., but they are not representative of faith, they simply get the most press coverage.


In both cases, I think the religious structure played a pivotal role in their struggles. The church played a major organizing role. Malcolm X only became political when he encountered the Nation Of Islam. This is me venturing a guess, as we cannot be certain of anything.
I don't like these circular arguments that believing in a religion is it's own justification. You can't use such an argument in any other field. What makes Christianity the Truth? A book written by humans thousands of years ago and generations after the fact? How do they know what really happened? Because God helped them write it? Then why don't the stories line up? And what about the other gospels? Why aren't they part of the Truth? This is barely a drop of water in the ocean of problems with the centerpiece of Christianity, yet millions of people base their lives on it? I don't get it.

[CrenshawPunch]

Eh .. not technically illegal (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall reading anything about that in the Constitution) ... simply unwise (both the religious and non religious should agree with this).


Half of the originals signers of the Declaration of Independence were pastors. Those men were very wise.

[mcm1610]

Are you referring to the Christian ethics which turned away Jewish people seeking refuge in the country, used the atomic bomb and, afterwards, participated in murder and the deprivation of human rights in order to establish regimes that were conducive to profit? Are these the very same Christian ethics, which, after World War 2, deprived minorities of the GI funds that built a vibrant middle class?This helps the anti-religion argument fairly well.


Homosexuals remain without the right to marry.
except in Massachusetts.

[Chancetobe]

I completely disagree, because it was the generation of those who follow the Christian ethics during WWII who built security and freedom for this country. giving enough freedom for homosexuals to even live freely. it wasn't Buddhist, not Muslim, or any other religion, but many men following Christian ethics that fought evil, that is why we have crosses for their memorial graves, that is why we curse in Jesus' name, that is why just about every president has called themselves a Christian...

Just because Christains happen to outnumber other religions in this country, doesn't mean that someone of a different religion couldn't have done the same thing.

[CrenshawPunch]

A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.man, with that definition. people religiously come to this website. people religiously watch football.
so maybe you need to reword your question.

I think Christians are at a point that some of them are completely oblivious to what Jesus wanted from us. and Some of em are hitting that right on the head with a hammer.

But i dont believe in Christianity anyways.

i gave that up a long time ago to follow Jesus.

1) Most christians (at least in america) have this concept of highlighting the bible and really embracing the parts they like. and ignoring the rest.

and then some of the christians actually think maybe Jesus ment what he said.

I go to a christian college. I've seen both of these people. And I'm not ok with that. I'd much rather see the second type of christian.

SO if that made any sense. i hope it did.

i'll sum all of that up

some people think they get it
and some people get it


I understand your argument, but you do know that Christianity means "Christ like" correct?

[CrenshawPunch]

This helps the anti-religion argument fairly well.

except in Massachusetts.

Whats it helps is to show how evil all people can be argument. It actually helps the pro-Christianity argument quite a bit.

[Love As Arson]

I understand your argument, but you do know that Christianity means "Christ like" correct?
I believe he is referring to organized religion.

This helps the anti-religion argument fairly well.

except in Massachusetts.
My point is, if these individuals took Christ's words seriously, then none of those things would have occurred.

[mcm1610]

I understand your argument, but you do know that Christianity means "Christ like" correct?

Jews for Jesus, look 'em up. They say they're not Christians at all.

[CrenshawPunch]

Jews for Jesus, look 'em up. They say they're not Christians at all.


Sure they do. All I was saying was that a follower of Jesus is a Christian, as Christian means "Christ-like". Your post confused me, that's all.

[Greg]

I don't like these circular arguments that believing in a religion is it's own justification. You can't use such an argument in any other field. What makes Christianity the Truth? A book written by humans thousands of years ago and generations after the fact? How do they know what really happened? Because God helped them write it? Then why don't the stories line up? And what about the other gospels? Why aren't they part of the Truth? This is barely a drop of water in the ocean of problems with the centerpiece of Christianity, yet millions of people base their lives on it? I don't get it.

which stories to you don't line up? i personally still havent read the whole bible yet. so i cant say with 100% certainty it never contradicts. but i'd be willing to see which you say contradicts and then check it out myself. i'm still learning.

the other gospels like the ones mentioned in the Da Vinci code were rejected because they were written much longer after when they actually happened than the 4 that are accepted. that time was seen as too much time for exagerations and such that could affect the truth in it.

Dom, please feel free to correct me.

[mcm1610]

Sure they do. All I was saying was that a follower of Jesus is a Christian, as Christian means "Christ-like". Your post confused me, that's all.

My post confused you? There's a group that follows Jesus and his teachings, but says they are Jewish and do not refer to themselves in any way as Christians. "Jews for Jesus". http://www.jewsforjesus.org/

[thisdecemberhop]

I don't like these circular arguments that believing in a religion is it's own justification. You can't use such an argument in any other field. What makes Christianity the Truth? A book written by humans thousands of years ago and generations after the fact? How do they know what really happened? Because God helped them write it? Then why don't the stories line up? And what about the other gospels? Why aren't they part of the Truth? This is barely a drop of water in the ocean of problems with the centerpiece of Christianity, yet millions of people base their lives on it? I don't get it.


um i dont know about you. but the dead sea scrolls, which is about six thousand exact copies of i believe Isaiah? down to the period.

or maybe the fact that Non christian scientists have used the bible to discover lost cities that they couldnt find other wise.

or maybe the laws of physics that prove that the big bang theory couldnt of happened (because order can not come from chaos)

or how about the 154 absolutes of the universe that HAVE to happen in order for everything to exist?

the stories "dont line up" as you like to say because different people wrote them. If you ask 60 different eye witnesses to tell you a story about what happened, you are going to get 60 different stories. mostly the same but some variations.

Does all of this make christianity the truth? absolutely not. But it kind of makes the other options obsolete.

[Shatter590]

which stories to you don't line up? i personally still havent read the whole bible yet. so i cant say with 100% certainty it never contradicts. but i'd be willing to see which you say contradicts and then check it out myself. i'm still learning.

the other gospels like the ones mentioned in the Da Vinci code were rejected because they were written much longer after when they actually happened than the 4 that are accepted. that time was seen as too much time for exagerations and such that could affect the truth in it.

Dom, please feel free to correct me.

to chime in my two cents- several of the other gospels were rejected because they depict Christ as possessing human tendencies, and contradicted the Nicean counsel's decree that Christ was divine.

[thisdecemberhop]

I understand your argument, but you do know that Christianity means "Christ like" correct?


sure thats what the dictionary says.

[mcm1610]

which stories to you don't line up? i personally still havent read the whole bible yet. so i cant say with 100% certainty it never contradicts. but i'd be willing to see which you say contradicts and then check it out myself. i'm still learning.

the other gospels like the ones mentioned in the Da Vinci code were rejected because they were written much longer after when they actually happened than the 4 that are accepted. that time was seen as too much time for exagerations and such that could affect the truth in it.

Dom, please feel free to correct me.

Even the main points of the key aspects of the Gospels don't line up.. including the most important of them all, the Crucifixion.

Where does the line for "too much time for exaggerations" get drawn, as all 4 accepted gospels are 68 or more years behind the times. If in 68 years, nothing was documented about your life, how accurate do you think it will be when someone finally does write it down?

[Love As Arson]

I don't like these circular arguments that believing in a religion is it's own justification. You can't use such an argument in any other field.
I was not suggesting that, because they believe it to be true, it is true; rather, from an objective viewpoint, if one believes something to be true, then it is intrinsically necessary to one's existence.
What makes Christianity the Truth?
I do not believe Christianity is the only way to find Truth.
A book written by humans thousands of years ago and generations after the fact?.
It is fallacious to argue, because something is old, it is wrong.
How do they know what really happened?
The first Gospels were written only three decades after the Christ's death.
Because God helped them write it?
I do not believe in divine dictation.
Then why don't the stories line up?
If you are referring to the Gospels, each one was written to a specific audience.
And what about the other gospels?
Many were forgeries or a combination of Greek mythology and Christianity.
Why aren't they part of the Truth?
I would be willing to accept new books into the canon. Sadly, many Christians do not have the will, nor the attention-span to evaluate new texts.
This is barely a drop of water in the ocean of problems with the centerpiece of Christianity, yet millions of people base their lives on it? I don't get it.
I base my lives upon a lot of philosophies that are quite old, because I find them valuable.

[mcm1610]

The other gospels pick up around the same time, with the Gospel of Peter being placed between 70 and 120 AD. Others fall in the early decades of the second century, too.

[mcm1610]

I was not suggesting that, because they believe it to be true, it is true; rather, from an objective viewpoint, if one believes something to be true, then it is intrinsically necessary to one's existence.

I do not believe Christianity is the only way to find Truth.

It is fallacious to argue, because something is old, it is wrong.

The first Gospels were written only three decades after the Christ's death.

I do not believe in divine dictation.

If you are referring to the Gospels, each one was written to a specific audience.

Many were forgeries or a combination of Greek mythology and Christianity.

I would be willing to accept new books into the canon. Sadly, many Christians do not have the will, nor the attention-span to evaluate new texts.

I base my lives upon a lot of philosophies that are quite old, because I find them valuable.
I wasn't arguing that because it was old, it is wrong. I'm arguing that because it was given time to be spun through word of mouth for at least 30 years, it's going to be a little bit inaccurate, and then through 2000 years of history, its tough to even give credibility to any of these authors.

And how does a different audience warrant a different story? Shouldn't that then weaken their credibility, since they can be altered to have varying effects on different groups of people? So where does the ultimate truth fall?

[Greg]

i'm just gonna let Dom talk ha

[mcm1610]

i'm just gonna let Dom talk ha

Greg, how are you so devout but you can't defend your faith? Or do I remember you much more religious than you are?

[Greg]

Greg, how are you so devout but you can't defend your faith? Or do I remember you much more religious than you are?
like i said before. i'm still learning. i won't claim to know it all or to have all the answers. (although i used to/still do act like it at times). if you expect me to be able to defend everything you throw at me than im sorry to dissapoint you. but im okay with not knowing it all. it's all apart of my journey. ive only really studied the bible seriously for the past 11 months. did that answer your question? or did i just ramble? i can never tell anymore.

and you probably remember correctly. but i have changed a lot in the past year. and Dom knows way more than i do. and thats fine. and even when i know the answers, Dom usually has a better way of putting it.

[Love As Arson]

I wasn't arguing that because it was old, it is wrong. I'm arguing that because it was given time to be spun through word of mouth for at least 30 years, it's going to be a little bit inaccurate, and then through 2000 years of history, its tough to even give credibility to any of these authors.
Is historical accuracy the point of the bible to begin with? The spiritual message within the text is what is important. If, however, the bible were meant to be a historical book, you would certainly be correct. The spiritual message, in my view, is informed by the historical conditions.


And how does a different audience warrant a different story?
For example, Matthew is written to the Jewish audience, so there are strong correlations between Christ and Old Testament figures. In contrast, Luke's gospel is oriented towards cultured gentiles, for whom Christ is depicted as an teacher that has brought salvation to all mankind, in accordance with Paul's message that one is neither Greek, nor Jew, nor male or female in the eyes of god.


Shouldn't that then weaken their credibility, since they can be altered to have varying effects on different groups of people?
No, it is simply providing the story from differing perspectives.


So where does the ultimate truth fall?
I think Truth may be derived from many philosophies and religions.

[senatorlamb]

the thing about Christian religion that really bothers me is how sex is seen as worse than murder. Some atheist made an interseting youtube video and said basically in a nutshell, ask a Christian why it was okay that God murdered in the Old Testment, despite it being against the ten commandments. And that christian would say that God did not sin because his actions are supreme and not judged like a human's is. Than ask if God is allowed to engage in homosexual sex and that person's head will explode. The point is, if God can commit actions considered to be sinful because he is essentially always right and above human comprehension, why can't he engage in homosexuality? And the bottom line is, that to many christians being homosexual is worse than being a mass murderer.

I'm not saying Christianity is bad; Judaism, Islam have their flaws as well. I was just reading an ongoing series in the Jerusalem Post about the 08 presidential candidates and their stances on Israel. Reading the user comments, you would swear that my people truly believe that America is not pro-Israel enough, with any two-state solution being outrageous since they have a god given right to the land. Oh and they basically want to wipe out Iran. It's just depressing really. The world needs to stop drinking the religious cool-aid.

[concernedparent]

You're asian.

[Love As Arson]

the thing about Christian religion that really bothers me is how sex is seen as worse than murder.
Read Song of Songs. Further, the view commonly associated with sexuality is not derived from the bible, but rather St. Augustine, who had converted from paganism after having lived what he considered a decadent lifestyle. As such, the main theme of his writings had to do with how sinful the acts of the flesh were.
Some atheist made an interseting youtube video and said basically in a nutshell, ask a Christian why it was okay that God murdered in the Old Testment, despite it being against the ten commandments. And that christian would say that God did not sin because his actions are supreme and not judged like a human's is. Than ask if God is allowed to engage in homosexual sex and that person's head will explode. The point is, if God can commit actions considered to be sinful because he is essentially always right and above human comprehension, why can't he engage in homosexuality? And the bottom line is, that to many christians being homosexual is worse than being a mass murderer.
God cannot do what is logically impossible.

[thisdecemberhop]

is everyone ignoring me??

the bible is historically accurate.

senator lamb

you do realize.. that the bible is NOT in chronological order right? so God could have killed people way before he put the ten commandments out. right?

and another thing.

You saying God killing people and God having sex. is ridiculous.

God can do whatever he wants. Want to know why? hes GOD.

God doesnt need sex. Why would he want it? Stop trying to personify God. He isnt human, he doesnt have sex.

sorry but the idea that God even NEEDS sex. is ludicrous. seriously. why would GOd need to reproduce? when he can MAKE people.

insanity

[senatorlamb]

Read Song of Songs. Further, the view commonly associated with sexuality is not derived from the bible, but rather St. Augustine, who had converted from paganism after having lived what he considered a decadent lifestyle. As such, the main theme of his writings had to do with how sinful the acts of the flesh were.

God cannot do what is logically impossible.

are you saying it is impossible for God to have homosexual sex? because if he is God, he can really do anything he pleases.

[concernedparent]

I have to read the bible for my summer assignment for AP Lit. I also have to compare the biblie to greek mythology blah blah blah. Irrelevant, but only slightly.

[concernedparent]

are you saying it is impossible for God to have homosexual sex? because if he is God, he can really do anything he pleases.
God doesn't have sex.

[Greg]

I have to read the bible for my summer assignment for AP Lit. I also have to compare the biblie to greek mythology blah blah blah. Irrelevant, but only slightly.
you have to read the entire bible this summer?

[concernedparent]

you have to read the entire bible this summer?
Not the entire thing, I think about half.

[Love As Arson]

are you saying it is impossible for God to have homosexual sex? because if he is God, he can really do anything he pleases.
God is not all-powerful, rather, he may do all that is logically possible. It is logically impossible for god to sin, that is, if one believes homosexuality to be sinful.

[nfggc10]

is everyone ignoring me??

the bible is historically accurate.

senator lamb

you do realize.. that the bible is NOT in chronological order right? so God could have killed people way before he put the ten commandments out. right?

and another thing.

You saying God killing people and God having sex. is ridiculous.

God can do whatever he wants. Want to know why? hes GOD.

God doesnt need sex. Why would he want it? Stop trying to personify God. He isnt human, he doesnt have sex.

sorry but the idea that God even NEEDS sex. is ludicrous. seriously. why would GOd need to reproduce? when he can MAKE people.

insanityYou do know that by referring to god as "he" you're doing just that right?

[Greg]

Not the entire thing, I think about half.
it's really odd to me that this is a high school assignment.

[myantiyou]

You do know that by referring to god as "he" you're doing just that right?

lol, ow

[concernedparent]

it's really odd to me that this is a high school assignment.
The whole purpose is comparing it to Greek myths and poetry. But yeah, I imagine there'll probably be some controversy.

[myantiyou]

I'm Christian but I believe a lot of the religious traditions and messages are ridiculous.

[thisdecemberhop]

You do know that by referring to god as "he" you're doing just that right?

actually. i totally never realized that. You have made a good point. I'll restrain from doing that from now on.

[Greg]

actually. i totally never realized that. You have made a good point. I'll restrain from doing that from now on.
from now on just use YHWH

[senatorlamb]

is everyone ignoring me??

the bible is historically accurate.

senator lamb

you do realize.. that the bible is NOT in chronological order right? so God could have killed people way before he put the ten commandments out. right?

woa woa woa. If God is the alpha and omega, has always existed, even before time and space, and PERFECT without flaw, then why would he change his stance on murder after the ten commandments? If God evolves on an issue and changes his mind, then he is not all knowing and perfect! Huge huge flaw in the premise of God then. God cannot flip flop, he cannot change, because he always was. If God changes his mind he is then essentially imperfect because he is admitting that his original morality needed improvement . Get it? Plus, he murders after the ten commandments either by commanding the israelities to attack neighboring tribes, or by ordering various hebrew prophets to kill idol worshippers.


You saying God killing people and God having sex. is ridiculous.

God can do whatever he wants. Want to know why? hes GOD.

God doesnt need sex. Why would he want it? Stop trying to personify God. He isnt human, he doesnt have sex.

sorry but the idea that God even NEEDS sex. is ludicrous. seriously. why would GOd need to reproduce? when he can MAKE people.

insanity

You answered the question yourself. he can do whatever he wants. If he wants to take actions that are considered to be sinful for humans, he can, because he is god. By you saying, "why would he,?" and "why would he need to?" then your essentially beliving yourself to be able to comprehend God and understand the meaning behind his actions. You are the one personifying God because you are putting your own human (and thus imperfect) limitations of thought into the reasons behind God does what he does. If God can do whatever he wants, why do persume to know what he should or shouldn't do?

[Greg]

woa woa woa. If God is the alpha and omega, has always existed, even before time and space, and PERFECT without flaw, then why would he change his stance on murder after the ten commandments? If God evolves on an issue and changes his mind, then he is not all knowing and perfect! Huge huge flaw in the premise of God then. God cannot flip flop, he cannot change, because he always was. If God changes his mind he is then essentially imperfect because he is admitting that his original morality needed improvement . Get it? Plus, he murders after the ten commandments either by commanding the israelities to attack neighboring tribes, or by ordering various hebrew prophets to kill idol worshippers.




You answered the question yourself. he can do whatever he wants. If he wants to take actions that are considered to be sinful for humans, he can, because he is god. By you saying, "why would he,?" "why would you need to?" then your essentially beliving yourself to be able to comprehend God and understand the meaning behind his actions. You are the one personifying God because you are putting your human limitations of thought into the reasons behind what he does. If God can do whatever he wants, why do persume to know what he should or shouldn't do?
i could be wrong. i havent read about this lately. like ive been saying... im still learning.

but anyways.... i believe the commandments were for God's people, not God.

?

[nfggc10]

"trendy" and "hip?" hardly. rather, it's quite trendy and hip to bash and criticize Christians.I'd hardly refer to something that's been going on for thousands of years "trendy and hip"

[Love As Arson]

the bible is historically accurate.
No, it is not. For example, Matthew claims that Herod, upon hearing the messiah was born, had the first born males in Jerusalem murdered. Mary and Joseph managed to escape to Egypt, however. Contemporary historians, such as Josephus, have accounts of no such event.

senator lamb

you do realize.. that the bible is NOT in chronological order right? so God could have killed people way before he put the ten commandments out. right?
In the era of the Judges, which was after the Israelites found the promised land, god is said to have contributed greatly to the military victories of the Israelites. In one story, Samson is overcome by the Holy Spirit and slaughters a thousand men.

God can do whatever he wants. Want to know why? hes GOD.
Well, no he cannot, as he is constrained by the conditions I mentioned earlier. To use an example, god cannot create a god stronger than itself.

God doesnt need sex. Why would he want it? Stop trying to personify God. He isnt human, he doesnt have sex.

sorry but the idea that God even NEEDS sex. is ludicrous. seriously. why would GOd need to reproduce? when he can MAKE people.

insanity
Sex isn't solely reserved for procreation.

[senatorlamb]

i could be wrong. i havent read about this lately. like ive been saying... im still learning.

but anyways.... i believe the commandments were for God's people, not God.

?

you are correct, but thisdecemerhop was making the point that God changed his mind on murder after the Ten Commandments. So first, why would that affect God's judgement to begin with on the morality of murder? Second, if God did decide to change his ways, wouldn't it then show that God cannot be perfect?

I think it is abolutely hilarious that someone can tell you that God can do whatever he wants simply because he is God, and then that same person in the same breath will try to rationalize and comprehend why God would indulge in sex. If God does things because he is God and above our inherently flawed thought process, then why the hell would you immediately persume what God needs or doesn't need to do?

[Love As Arson]

woa woa woa. If God is the alpha and omega, has always existed, even before time and space, and PERFECT without flaw, then why would he change his stance on murder after the ten commandments? If God evolves on an issue and changes his mind, then he is not all knowing and perfect! Huge huge flaw in the premise of God then. God cannot flip flop, he cannot change, because he always was. If God changes his mind he is then essentially imperfect because he is admitting that his original morality needed improvement . Get it? Plus, he murders after the ten commandments either by commanding the israelities to attack neighboring tribes, or by ordering various hebrew prophets to kill idol worshippers.
It depends on how one reads the sixth commandment, as there is subtle distinction between killing and murdering.

[senatorlamb]

It depends on how one reads the sixth commandment, as there is subtle distinction between killing and murdering.

True. But when God sent a plague to kill the first born of every Egyptian, that's kinda murdering.

[thisdecemberhop]

woa woa woa. If God is the alpha and omega, has always existed, even before time and space, and PERFECT without flaw, then why would he change his stance on murder after the ten commandments? If God evolves on an issue and changes his mind, then he is not all knowing and perfect! Huge huge flaw in the premise of God then. God cannot flip flop, he cannot change, because he always was. If God changes his mind he is then essentially imperfect because he is admitting that his original morality needed improvement . Get it? Plus, he murders after the ten commandments either by commanding the israelities to attack neighboring tribes, or by ordering various hebrew prophets to kill idol worshippers.

first off. God didnt give the ten commandments to himself. they were for the humans. correct?

wait.

WHo are you to tell God what God can do with His creation? i mean .. we're Gods. God can do whatever God wants with us.





You answered the question yourself. he can do whatever he wants. If he wants to take actions that are considered to be sinful for humans, he can, because he is god. By you saying, "why would he,?" "why would you need to?" then your essentially beliving yourself to be able to comprehend God and understand the meaning behind his actions. You are the one personifying God because you are putting your human limitations of thought into the reasons behind what he does. If God can do whatever he wants, why do persume to know what he should or shouldn't do?

man, im sorry if i sound like i have all the answers. i dont. i cant comprehend God.

my point was. The fact that GOD doesnt need sex, because God made us . without reproduction.
i dont proclaim to know everything, but i do know that God made us from the dirt of the land and breathed life into us. It says that the bible.

you're trying to tell me that i'm personifying God, but i'm not. all i am saying is GOd doesnt need sex to reproduce us. and thats the ONLY thing sex is designed for. So If God doesnt need sex. why would God protake in it. Sure maybe saying that GOd wouldnt protake it in is personifying God. but i'm saying why would God do it? that doesnt make sense.

all i know is there is a God out there that loves every single one of us. and i'm fallen madly in love with God. I don't have all the answers. but i dont need em. I have God. and thats enough.

[konstantine94]

WWJD bracelets. My friend made fun of me when I was 10 because I didn't know what it stood for. I'm not Christian, so why would I know what it stood for when I was a kid?

[thisdecemberhop]

True. But when God sent a plague to kill the first born of every Egyptian, that's kinda murdering.

it was punishment

not murder

[nfggc10]

first off. God didnt give the ten commandments to himself. they were for the humans. correct?

wait.

WHo are you to tell God what God can do with His creation? i mean .. we're Gods. God can do whatever God wants with us.





man, im sorry if i sound like i have all the answers. i dont. i cant comprehend God.

my point was. The fact that GOD doesnt need sex, because God made us . without reproduction.
i dont proclaim to know everything, but i do know that God made us from the dirt of the land and breathed life into us. It says that the bible.

you're trying to tell me that i'm personifying God, but i'm not. all i am saying is GOd doesnt need sex to reproduce us. and thats the ONLY thing sex is designed for. So If God doesnt need sex. why would God protake in it. Sure maybe saying that GOd wouldnt protake it in is personifying God. but i'm saying why would God do it? that doesnt make sense.

all i know is there is a God out there that loves every single one of us. and i'm fallen madly in love with God. I don't have all the answers. but i dont need em. I have God. and thats enough.You can't say you don't understand something and then follow it by making absolute proclamations about the subject. And that's just one of the first contradictory things in your post.

[thisdecemberhop]

You can't say you don't understand something and then follow it by making absolute proclamations about the subject. And that's just one of the first contradictory things in your post.


hahaha

man, you're making me sound like i'm trying to comprehend God. I'm not.

But it's alot easier to comprehend what i know about the bible.

and thats all i'm doing. comprehending what i have learned

so whatever man, you can believe what you want. i can believe what i want. Thats why its called free will. you're making me sound like an idiot. which i probably do. because i cant really type a whole conversation out. which is what i would have to do. i'm sorry if i have come off hostile or mad or anything like that. i'm completely calm and have been the whole time.

I dont want to argue about this, because it would just go around in circles .

I do know that i love you, no matter what you believe, what country you are in, what skin color you have. what religion you proclaim. i dont care what you have done, what you think about god. or me. or what i believe. i love you.

and i hope you realize that.

ps. i'm not admiting defeat, i'm just exiting the conversation.

[Love As Arson]

True. But when God sent a plague to kill the first born of every Egyptian, that's kinda murdering.
This is the Midrash's interpretation of the event:

When Moses went to Pharaoh to demand of him that he let the people go, the whole event is happening in front of Pharaoh's first born son who teases and mocks his father for allowing the Hebrew shepherd to humiliate him. Enraged by the insult and mad with pride, Pharaoh resolved to have revenge for the plagues, and told Moses that he shall deal with the Hebrews in such a manner that a great cry will be heard in Egypt, such that has never been heard before. This was an allusion to the crimes of his father, who ordered the drowning of the male children of the Hebrews. Therefore, Pharaoh brought this harsh punishment upon his own people. His cruel plan was turned back upon him, so that what Pharaoh wanted to do to the Hebrews, God made to happen to him.

Under Mosaic law, an eye for an eye was perfectly moral.

[senatorlamb]

first off. God didnt give the ten commandments to himself. they were for the humans. correct?

wait.

WHo are you to tell God what God can do with His creation? i mean .. we're Gods. God can do whatever God wants with us.

Right, but your the one who said God may have killed before the ten commandment, thus infering a link between the two.





man, im sorry if i sound like i have all the answers. i dont. i cant comprehend God.

my point was. The fact that GOD doesnt need sex, because God made us . without reproduction.
i dont proclaim to know everything, but i do know that God made us from the dirt of the land and breathed life into us. It says that the bible.

you're trying to tell me that i'm personifying God, but i'm not. all i am saying is GOd doesnt need sex to reproduce us. and thats the ONLY thing sex is designed for. So If God doesnt need sex. why would God protake in it. Sure maybe saying that GOd wouldnt protake it in is personifying God. but i'm saying why would God do it? that doesnt make sense.

all i know is there is a God out there that loves every single one of us. and i'm fallen madly in love with God. I don't have all the answers. but i dont need em. I have God. and thats enough.

Why would you, as an imperfect human being, try to comprehend why a supreme, all knowing God would need sex for? Wy would you put human restrictions of only having sex for reproduction, on a God who can do things because he is simply God? If God can do because he is God, he can also engage in activities that aren't clear to the imperfect, flawed human creation. You say God can act how ever he wants to regarding his creation. Well why can't he have sex with his creation? Why do you attempt to comprehend what by your own logic is natrually incomprehensible? Why can you label God's ending life of Egyption first born to be punishment not murder, and then in the same thought process, say that God having sex can't be something entirely different to the human definition of what sex it?

[nfggc10]

hahaha

man, you're making me sound like i'm trying to comprehend God. I'm not.

But it's alot easier to comprehend what i know about the bible.

and thats all i'm doing. comprehending what i have learned

so whatever man, you can believe what you want. i can believe what i want. Thats why its called free will. you're making me sound like an idiot. which i probably do. because i cant really type a whole conversation out. which is what i would have to do. i'm sorry if i have come off hostile or mad or anything like that. i'm completely calm and have been the whole time.

I dont want to argue about this, because it would just go around in circles .

I do know that i love you, no matter what you believe, what country you are in, what skin color you have. what religion you proclaim. i dont care what you have done, what you think about god. or me. or what i believe. i love you.

and i hope you realize that.

ps. i'm not admiting defeat, i'm just exiting the conversation.Well when you don't have any facts to back up your side of the discussion then I suppose it's best you exit the discussion.

[nfggc10]

Right, but your the one who said God may have killed before the ten commandment, thus infering a link between the two.







Why would you, as an imperfect human being, try to comprehend why a supreme, all knowing God would need sex for? Wy would you put human restrictions of only having sex for reproduction, on a God who can do things because he is simply God? If God can do because he is God, he can also engage in activities that aren't clear to the imperfect, flawed human creation. You say God can act how ever he wants to regarding his creation. Well why can't he have sex with his creation? Why do you attempt to comprehend what by your own logic is natrually incomprehensible? Why can you label God's ending life of Egyption first born to be punishment not murder, and then in the same thought process, say that God having sex is something entirely different to the human definition of what sex it?I think we're wasting our time even responding to this guy. As we can all see by his last post, he's completely brainwashed so any chance of him participating in a rational discussion based on facts is gone.

[TxRepresent]

lunchforthesky is going to nut himself when he gets on and sees this thread.

[nfggc10]

lunchforthesky is going to nut himself when he gets on and sees this thread.
Haha that's what I've been thinking.

[senatorlamb]

I still would like my question answered. If God cannot be judged because he is God, and even commit actions considered to be human sin, why would a Christian then attempt to comprehend why God would or wouldn't have sex? Why would you hold God to the same morality of sex as you would a human?

[thisdecemberhop]

Right, but your the one who said God may have killed before the ten commandment, thus infering a link between the two.







Why would you, as an imperfect human being, try to comprehend why a supreme, all knowing God would need sex for? Wy would you put human restrictions of only having sex for reproduction, on a God who can do things because he is simply God? If God can do because he is God, he can also engage in activities that aren't clear to the imperfect, flawed human creation. You say God can act how ever he wants to regarding his creation. Well why can't he have sex with his creation? Why do you attempt to comprehend what by your own logic is natrually incomprehensible? Why can you label God's ending life of Egyption first born to be punishment not murder, and then in the same thought process, say that God having sex can't be something entirely different to the human definition of what sex it?


your not listening to me man, you're missing my point completely. if God is alpha and omega, and is all perfect and junk why would he engage in an act he clearly doesnt need to engage in. yes i am talking about sex, and yes i am saying that sex is strictly for reproduction.

For God to engage in something that he doesnt need to engage into is Lusting, is for self forfillment, and i think that is the exact opposite of what the bible teaches (the bible teaches selflessness..incase you were wondering what i was talking about )

sex is for human reproduction. thats is.

God doesnt need to engage in human reproduction.

thats why he designed us. to reproduce the lands. and to worship him in all aspects of our lives.

anyways i exited this. but i couldnt just let this go. i had to give my two cents. im logging off now. i dont want to go around in circles because thats exactly what we are doing. i hope you believe me when i tell you i love you. and thats the only reason i joined this conversation.

[nfggc10]

God doesnt need to engage in human reproduction.He doesn't need to do something that is a humanistic act? By saying he doesn't need to you are admitting that he is capable of it. And by saying he is capable of it you are admitting that "God" is a human which contradicts your belief system. You're the one going in circles here because you really don't have a rational/factual foundation for any of your comments.

[senatorlamb]

God doesnt need to engage in human reproduction.

WHo are you to tell God what God can do with His creation? i mean .. we're Gods. God can do whatever God wants with us.

That's a hole your gonna need to work on patching up. Best of luck to you my friend. God Bless you.

[SundayWhiskey]

Fat Christians are hypocrites, in fact I'd say 99% of Christians are hypocrites and still believe that they are better than everyone else. Those are my opinions coming from 8 years of schooling at a Lutheran Elementary school as well as attending church at that same place.

[thisdecemberhop]

\That's a hole your gonna need to work on patching up. Best of luck to you my friend. God Bless you.


am i blind.

God does not need sex. there for God would not and doesnt protake in it.

God can do what God wants with us yes. God doesnt do whatever God wants with us.

theres no patch i need to fill up. you're trying to tell me that God can do whatever God wants so techinically he could

i am not denying that. God could get laid if he wanted to.

My question is WHY WOULD GOD Want to. God doesnt need self forfillment. or reproduction by sex.

God can speak us into existance. WHy would God need sex? Thats my point now. Its obviously not for reproduction. ANd anything other reason would be of a lustful thing and God does not lust.

i'm out.

bye

yes

[Love As Arson]

Fat Christians are hypocrites, in fact I'd say 99% of Christians are hypocrites and still believe that they are better than everyone else. Those are my opinions coming from 8 years of schooling at a Lutheran Elementary school as well as attending church at that same place.
Well, yes, being a hypocrite and sinful is the reason people seek out redemption in Christ. Evangelical Christians, however, are to blame for this sort of sentiment, as they placed themselves upon a moral that distinguished them from other sinners as somehow more holy.

[nfggc10]

\


am i blind.

God does not need sex. there for God would not and doesnt protake in it.

God can do what God wants with us yes. God doesnt do whatever God wants with us.

theres no patch i need to fill up. you're trying to tell me that God can do whatever God wants so techinically he could

i am not denying that. God could get laid if he wanted to.

My question is WHY WOULD GOD Want to. God doesnt need self forfillment. or reproduction by sex.

God can speak us into existance. WHy would God need sex? Thats my point now. Its obviously not for reproduction. ANd anything other reason would be of a lustful thing and God does not lust.

i'm out.

bye

yesHow is that you're not realizing you're contradicting yourself in every post you make.

[Love As Arson]

Well, god was able to impregnate marry without any contact. Perhaps that is his way of having sex. Ha.

[nfggc10]

Well, god was able to impregnate marry without any contact. Perhaps that is his way of having sex. Ha.Haha.

[senatorlamb]

\


am i blind.

God does not need sex. there for God would not and doesnt protake in it.

God can do what God wants with us yes. God doesnt do whatever God wants with us.

theres no patch i need to fill up. you're trying to tell me that God can do whatever God wants so techinically he could

i am not denying that. God could get laid if he wanted to.

My question is WHY WOULD GOD Want to. God doesnt need self forfillment. or reproduction by sex.

God can speak us into existance. WHy would God need sex? Thats my point now. Its obviously not for reproduction. ANd anything other reason would be of a lustful thing and God does not lust.

i'm out.

bye

yes

Couple of things here. I'll start by saying goodbye for the third or fourth time already. Now I'll greet you with a "hello" because your obviously going to read this right after I post. Also, I want you to know that I'm not trying to get you to abandon your faith. I am not here to bash religion. I personally believe that there is a God, but that we still do not know all that is to know about it. What I am questioning is christianity's obsessive nature with emphasing the sinfulness of sex over other actions such as murder, stealing, etc...What I tried to do was through a back and forth dialogue attempt to understand why we can read the Old Testament with a God who admits to being jealous and who takes human life, and yet we justify that with a simple "he can say and do those things because he is god." And yet the thought of God acting in the realm of sex is outrageous. You say that God taking life numerous times in the Old Testament is punishment, yet you fail to consider that God taking part in sex can be apart of some supreme, master plan beyond our comprehension. You put the limitations of why theoretically humans should and shouldn't take part in sex on a being who by your logic is not constrained by human laws, even by the one's he dictates to us.

While I agree, that just because God can, doesn't mean he would, is a good point, you still fail to even fathom the notion that you as an imperfect human are trying to rationalize a being who by your views, acts beyond the smallness of the human mind. While God will not act simply because he can, it's the matter that you are personally setting the limitations of what he should or shouldn't do with all that he can. What we conclude is that your defining God and what he could, would, shouldn't do within the contraints of your own personal morality. And that my friend, is why we end up with people who see an oval office blowjob as more anti-religous values than a war that kills over 600,000 people.

I'd also like to say for the record that I am not some sex addict, this was just a debate point. In fact, I live a very moral life. Too moral maybe...

[Jason Tate]

"trendy" and "hip?" hardly. rather, it's quite trendy and hip to bash and criticize Christians.

Yawn. We already had this discussion. You're just as wrong as the last guy.

[Jason Tate]

cute yawn. anyway, no - you are wrong.

The evidence already submitted in this thread, that you've ignored, says otherwise.

Respond to that ... then we'll continue. Keep living up to your username. It's working out for you.

[Broken Parachute]

I hate religious debates because while enlightening, they are also quite frustrating. People believe different things. Nothing in this world is certain. There may be a God, there may not be a God. It's just part of the human nature to have a difference of opinion. I believe one thing, the next person might not believe it but that's okay.

[senatorlamb]

I hate religious debates because while enlightening, they are also quite frustrating. People believe different things. Nothing in this world is certain. There may be a God, there may not be a God. It's just part of the human nature to have a difference of opinion. I believe one thing, the next person might not believe it but that's okay.

I agree. I rarely engage in the religous debate threads in the politics forum. In fact, I even posted a few times saying I was sick of people debating something that is from the heart and soul becaue ultimately no one will be convinced regardless of facts and reason. But I chose to participate in this thread not to attack religion or Christianity itself but merely to try and understand the moral priorities it's believers have. Basically, I was just curious about some inconsistencies. I made it clear to the person I was debating that I had no issue with their faith and believe in God myself.

[ImAsian5]

Well, being the one starting this thread, I haven't really come to a conclusion but it certainly seems the majority have horrible feelings towards Christians. However I am reassured that this is the way it is supposed to be. From scripture even Jesus says in Matthew 15:18-19 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but i have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you."

[WhenPianosFall]

I agree with Jason's statement about Christianity currently being a "trend" or "fad" and in sincerity find it's quite a tragic situation. While we have churches today furthering their personal ideologies for means of financial gain or "growth" related to promoting various (introverted) visions in relation to numbers many have forgotten basis of being a follower of Christ.

It would seem as though many kids (between the ages of 13 and 20) today are accepting the terms of Christianity due to influence as opposed to affliction. Many look up to various bands (such as those on Tooth and Nail or Solidstate) who have an outspoken ministry focus (such as Underoath) and therefore take upon themselves to "become" another label on a "conveyor-belt" system without the follow-through of "taking up one's cross" and "denying one's self daily".

In retrospect, instead of being taught "how" to think for ourselves (as Christians or even as one interested in the principles of Christianity) we're being taught "what" to think and that's the travesty.

I haven't posted much on AP.Net but I'd suggest a pretty interested book by Donald Miller entitled "Blue Like Jazz". It's actually rather thought provoking.

[senatorlamb]

Well, being the one starting this thread, I haven't really come to a conclusion but it certainly seems the majority have horrible feelings towards Christians. However I am reassured that this is the way it is supposed to be. From scripture even Jesus says in Matthew 15:18-19 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but i have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you."

I won't deny it, that is a really good passage. In fact, I think it goes beyond religion. All great people in history have started out hated and misunderstood by society. Most people who've made a positive difference always had to fight against the conventional wisdom of the masses. We can flip it around and even use Galileo as an example. He was persecuted by the Catholic Church because he tried to help us understand God's true setup of the solar system. Socrates, Ghandi?

[open mind]

christianity itself is good, but like any other large group has it's share of good people and assholes.

[Jason Tate]

i would have expected you to have been able to debate without resorting to childish personal attacks (or, username attacks? haha)

Nah, I don't debate the same topic 4 times. Especially when someone says the same thing I already responded to earlier. If I have to do that - I just assume the person can't read - and is therefore stupid. I apologize if you are in fact, not stupid, I just get tired of having the same discussions over and over again in the same thread.

anyway, the only "evidence" that i have seen you provide in support for your belief that religion is now "hip" and "trendy" was you drawing a correlation to candidates running for the presidency and the importance based on their religious affiliations. religious affiliation has seemingly always been important, as every U.S. president has been a Christian.

Well, might as well not check "facts" -- because not every US president has been a Christian (http://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html). Beyond that I brought up other examples .... WWJD being one of them.

[Jason Tate]

Sorry, I know this is not my debate -- but I have to point something out:

your not listening to me man, you're missing my point completely. if God is alpha and omega, and is all perfect and junk why would he engage in an act he clearly doesnt need to engage in.

This is a paradox. If he truly is the "alpha and the omega" he doesn't need to engage in any activity - you've either rendered him all powerful or incapable of action.

[Jason Tate]

Well, being the one starting this thread, I haven't really come to a conclusion but it certainly seems the majority have horrible feelings towards Christians. However I am reassured that this is the way it is supposed to be. From scripture even Jesus says in Matthew 15:18-19 "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but i have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you."
I keep getting the feeling that Christians WANT to be "persecuted" -- I don't think many are hated at all (yeah, some are ... blame Fred Phelps) -- but I get the inclination that many create a self-imposed persecution (and self-fulfilling prophesy) more than any present outside source. It's easy to create a (closed?) mindset when you believe everyone "hates" you or is "out to get you" ... you know what I mean?

:shrug:

Just an observation I've had from conversations in these forums, in real life, and with members of various religious denominations.

[followtheformat]

"In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point."
-Friedrich Nietzsche

[captainhampton]

The exact opposite of this. Christianity and any organised religion almost always leads to negative consequences, not necessarily because of any inherent factor in that specific religion but as a general rule organised religion leads to a very large portion of the world's problems. However that said plenty of members of these religions do nothing but good but as a whole it isn't worth it. The message of these religions is completely irrelevant as in practice so much intolerance and suffering comes from it. Especially in the more devout sectors of the world as opposed to secularised Europe and to a lesser extent America.

I would liken it to Marxism, in principle it could lead to great things (although of course i dislike theoracy on a factual level) but in practice it rarely does and the world is better without it. As shown by the high living standards and generally progressive and humanist societies that the world's most secular nations enjoy.

took you awhile to join in. where were you, church?

[ImAsian5]

I keep getting the feeling that Christians WANT to be "persecuted" -- I don't think many are hated at all (yeah, some are ... blame Fred Phelps) -- but I get the inclination that many create a self-imposed persecution (and self-fulfilling prophesy) more than any present outside source. It's easy to create a (closed?) mindset when you believe everyone "hates" you or is "out to get you" ... you know what I mean?

:shrug:

Just an observation I've had from conversations in these forums, in real life, and with members of various religious denominations.


ill agree with you on that one. There are those who do create hatred for themselves in attempt to feel righteous.

[ImAsian5]

"In Christianity neither morality nor religion come into contact with reality at any point."
-Friedrich Nietzsche


lol

[nonamesleft]

What do I think about Christians?
I think I used to go to church when I was younger, but I started playing competetive hockey, so I stopped going.
That's what I think.

[Love As Arson]

I keep getting the feeling that Christians WANT to be "persecuted" -- I don't think many are hated at all (yeah, some are ... blame Fred Phelps) -- but I get the inclination that many create a self-imposed persecution (and self-fulfilling prophesy) more than any present outside source. It's easy to create a (closed?) mindset when you believe everyone "hates" you or is "out to get you" ... you know what I mean?

:shrug:

Just an observation I've had from conversations in these forums, in real life, and with members of various religious denominations.
Ha. It is true. However, I do not think it is specific to Christianity, but rather it is a natural response of any dominant group when their special place in society is threatened by pluralism. One notices the same sentiments when affirmative action, for example, is spoken about.

[Jason Tate]

Ha. It is true. However, I do not think it is specific to Christianity, but rather it is a natural response of any dominant group when their special place in society is threatened by pluralism. One notices the same sentiments when affirmative action, for example, is spoken about.
I think I can agree with that.

[thejetstolehome]

Where exactly do you get the idea that Christianity is under attack America?

http://ken_ashford.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/waronchristmascard1.jpg

[ImAsian5]

Organised Religion is pretty much the worst thing to have ever plagued mankind.

Where exactly do you get the idea that Christianity is under attack America?

those two consecutive posts answer your question.

[ImAsian5]

"we wish you a merry x mas", i think that X also directly explains what is happening.

[ImAsian5]

You realise it has been abbreviated that way since the 11th century?


my bad, you're right, i guess what i was trying to get at was holidays, there was a car commercial saying we wish you a happy holidays, and a happy new year....

[Love As Arson]

You see, Ben, the secular progressives are attacking Christians by making stores use "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas". We're a Christian country, why do we need consideration for the other holidays around this time of year?

[Love As Arson]

i checked your "facts" - so which presidents were not Christian?
Lincoln, Jefferson, Madison and Washington were deists.

[saving jonathan]

i am a christian. i hate when i get generalized into a group. every person is an individual, and you cannot put judgement on a "group" due to the actions of a few.
i do not force my beliefs on others, but i do think that this world is a lot less meaningful if you don't believe in some higher power. if there is no light at the end of the tunnel, i don't see how this life has much meaning at all.

and i do believe that religion is accepting you sin, and knowing that you're not alone in doing it. it's how you choose to deal with sin that sets religion apart. if you try to lead a better life and ask for forgiveness, it is given to you. that's religion.

[Love As Arson]

according to his own source, Lincoln was ambiguous in this respect, but during his presidency portrayed many Christian characteristics, such as "extensively citing from the Bible" and regularly attending a Presbyterian Church in Washington. Jefferson was a Protestant, Madison was an Episcopalian, and Washington was an Episcopalian.
His source is not the best, I admit. Those presidents, however, were not Christian. They believed in a creator that gave man inalienable rights, but they believed the Christian god to be irrational and, therefore, had no reason to believe in him.

[Jason Tate]

i never saw you really debate it at all. i also guess i expected a little better support than citing presidents' religious affiliations and the fact that there are Jesus bracelets. but, okay.
i checked your "facts" - so which presidents were not Christian?
Uh .... I just provided a link. Click it.

I don't accept "I wanted better support" as a reasoning for ignoring the support in the first place. You don't get to decide what I use as support. You can either respond to it or not -- that's your prerogative. But to simply say it's not good and try and pass that off as a retort, is foolish.

[Jason Tate]

according to his own source, Lincoln was ambiguous in this respect, but during his presidency portrayed many Christian characteristics, such as "extensively citing from the Bible" and regularly attending a Presbyterian Church in Washington. Jefferson was a Protestant, Madison was an Episcopalian, and Washington was an Episcopalian.
We're going to start playing it really loose with the definition of Christianity are we? It's interesting how one stretches definitions when it fits their argument -- yet will shrink them the moment they need to exclude someone they don't agree with.

[Love As Arson]

Jefferson believed in the existence of a Supreme Being who was the creator and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate ground of being, but this was not the triune deity of orthodox Christianity. He also rejected the idea of the divinity of Christ, but as he writes to William Short on October 31, 1819, he was convinced that the fragmentary teachings of Jesus constituted the "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." In correspondence, he sometimes expressed confidence that the whole country would be Unitarian, but he recognized the novelty of his own religious beliefs. On June 25, 1819, he wrote to Ezra Stiles, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."

http://www.monticello.org/reports/interests/religion.html

[nfggc10]

and i do believe that religion is accepting you sin, and knowing that you're not alone in doing it.Um, do you really need a religion to know that others in this world make mistakes too?

if you try to lead a better life and ask for forgiveness, it is given to you. that's religion.That's not religion, that's called having family and/or friends who care about you.

[Jason Tate]

no need to stretch any definitions at all. i will cut and paste from your source so that my opinion has no influence.

"President George Washington was an Episcopalian. He was a member of the Episcopal Church, the American province of the Anglican Communion, which is a branch of Christianity, and which is usually classified as Protestant."

"James Madison was an Episcopalian."

"Considerable uncertainty arises... when Lincoln's own religion is examined... it is obvious that Christianity exerted a profound influence on his life. His father was a member of Regular Baptist churches in Kentucky and Indiana. Lincoln himself read the Bible throughout his life, quoted from it extensively... during his years as president he did regularly attend the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington. On the other hand, Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of standard Christian beliefs... Lincoln's friend Jesse Fell [suggested that Lincoln's views on Christian theology] were not orthodox... "

"President Thomas Jefferson was a Protestant."

http://www.adherents.com/adh_presidents.html
Not sure why you're focusing on those Presidents/Religions. Maybe you're getting me confused with Dom. I can see why, we're both deadly sexy.

Anyway, I was more referring to the "Catholic" and "Jehovah's Witness" and "Quaker" religions. Under current cannon - I would not call any of those three strictly "Christian" (in reference to your original post (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?p=6987866#post698786 6)).

Furthermore, your third "quote" contradicts your original statement. In reference to Lincoln: "nor ever made a clear profession of standard Christian beliefs" flies in direct contradiction to "every US President has been Christian" (your original post (http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?p=6987866#post698786 6)).

[tambam]

9/10 of the Christians I've met have been pushy, preachy, narrow-minded, and just plain annoying. So I don't exactly have the best impression of them in my head. Personally, I'm not a big fan of any religion.

[tambam]

i am a christian. i hate when i get generalized into a group. every person is an individual, and you cannot put judgement on a "group" due to the actions of a few.
i do not force my beliefs on others, but i do think that this world is a lot less meaningful if you don't believe in some higher power. if there is no light at the end of the tunnel, i don't see how this life has much meaning at all.

and i do believe that religion is accepting you sin, and knowing that you're not alone in doing it. it's how you choose to deal with sin that sets religion apart. if you try to lead a better life and ask for forgiveness, it is given to you. that's religion.

That's why people like you need religion to lean on, you're not strong enough without it. Us agnostics/atheists can stand on our own. We realize that friends, family, pets, etc. provide meaning and that's what makes us happy. If you learn to think like that and realize that life without religion is in fact meaningful, you'll have a different perspective.

[atticus1492]

I hate them all. They can all just die.

Except me, of course.

[thejetstolehome]

i am a christian. i hate when i get generalized into a group. every person is an individual, and you cannot put judgement on a "group" due to the actions of a few.
i do not force my beliefs on others, but i do think that this world is a lot less meaningful if you don't believe in some higher power. if there is no light at the end of the tunnel, i don't see how this life has much meaning at all.

and i do believe that religion is accepting you sin, and knowing that you're not alone in doing it. it's how you choose to deal with sin that sets religion apart. if you try to lead a better life and ask for forgiveness, it is given to you. that's religion.

....

you're joking, right?

[pick_it_up99]

I have friends hwo are christians, but they are to good type of christians, they don;t take the entire bible as law.
they are very open-minded, and a rare breed of christian. someone who actually cares.

other than that, i think most christians are disgusting.
also, i hate any religion that is forced down peoples throats like how it is in africa.
its like oh hey, sure we'll help you poor black people, but first, let me tell you about this dead guy form 2000 years ago.....

its like wtf, stop it. these people didn't ask to be converted, what are you trying to do? "save" them?
save them from what?
never hearing about this guy?
so since these people were unaware that this guy was oging around doing these htings, since no-one ever told them, they will burn in hell?
no, see, even if i did believe, i wouldn't believe that a god would do that tpye of thing.

[Nevuk]

I disagree. Life is meaningless on a cosmic level, it doesn't mean you can't enjoy it but there is no purpose to my existence other than the pro-create i guess.
being Apolaustic > Hedonism

[open mind]

The exact opposite of this. Christianity and any organised religion almost always leads to negative consequences, not necessarily because of any inherent factor in that specific religion but as a general rule organised religion leads to a very large portion of the world's problems. However that said plenty of members of these religions do nothing but good but as a whole it isn't worth it. The message of these religions is completely irrelevant as in practice so much intolerance and suffering comes from it. Especially in the more devout sectors of the world as opposed to secularised Europe and to a lesser extent America.

I would liken it to Marxism, in principle it could lead to great things (although of course i dislike theoracy on a factual level) but in practice it rarely does and the world is better without it. As shown by the high living standards and generally progressive and humanist societies that the world's most secular nations enjoy.

any organized group causes problems, for a group as large as christianity is there has been remarkably little negative effects when compared to other large movements that haven't been around nearly as long............i'd list some positive things christianity has done but i know you'll either ignore it or deny that christianity had anything to do with it so there's no point.

[tambam]

I disagree. Life is meaningless on a cosmic level, it doesn't mean you can't enjoy it but there is no purpose to my existence other than the pro-create i guess.

I don't see my life in that way at all, but I guess it's all subjective.

[tambam]

What meaning is there to your life then?

Well, like I said, my friends and family. They give my life meaning. I also feel that my purpose is to leave the world in better shape than it was when I entered it, and to help people with the line of career I want to take. I do happen to be agnostic, though, and I do believe in something after death due to some experiences I've had.

[Love As Arson]

Us agnostics/atheists can stand on our own.
Religious or not, there are plenty of pathetic people on this planet that use corporeal things to justify their existence.

[tambam]

Religious or not, there are plenty of pathetic people on this planet that use corporeal things to justify their existence.

I definitely agree.

[rikfrommf]

Nero had the right; they should be burned at the stake and thrown to lions.

cause murders cool and all...

[Love As Arson]

cause murders cool and all...
Sarcasm.

[tambam]

That is personal not a cosmic purpose.

Thing is, I feel fulfilled enough on this level that I don't even worry about the cosmic level. And I'm sure Christians consider religion to be on their personal level as well. Without something to believe in, a lot of them would feel that they have no meaning on the personal level.

[rikfrommf]

I have friends hwo are christians, but they are to good type of christians, they don;t take the entire bible as law.
they are very open-minded, and a rare breed of christian. someone who actually cares.

other than that, i think most christians are disgusting.
also, i hate any religion that is forced down peoples throats like how it is in africa.
its like oh hey, sure we'll help you poor black people, but first, let me tell you about this dead guy form 2000 years ago.....

its like wtf, stop it. these people didn't ask to be converted, what are you trying to do? "save" them?
save them from what?
never hearing about this guy?
so since these people were unaware that this guy was oging around doing these htings, since no-one ever told them, they will burn in hell?
no, see, even if i did believe, i wouldn't believe that a god would do that tpye of thing.

you are 15 and it shows. Ever gone on a mission trip? or know anything about Christianity?
Also the bible never says anything about going to Hell if you don't believe... "the only way to the father is through me" is what you are referring to, and it doesn't say what happens if you don't believe. Also most Africans don't associate with a religion (if they aren't Christian) sooo they aren't being "converted". Also, you don't have to be Christian to receive aid from Christian organizations. Giving you a bible and saying "Here, I enjoy this, check it out" is not pushing Jesus down their throats. Thats like me saying "Hey I read the new Harry Potter and liked it you should read it too, you might enjoy it." Of course, Jesus does "save" but Harry is cool too.

edit: Bible as law. Only some books of the Bible are considered to be "law" the others are examples of good Christian values and behaviors. The only "laws" or "commandments" given in the new testament are to love the Lord your God and love your neighbor.

[Nevuk]

That is personal not a cosmic purpose.
Is there really a difference, though?

[open mind]

I saw someone on another board come up with the figure 50 million from some website, seems a reasonable figure for the number of people who have been killed by Christianity as an organised religion.

considering stalin oversaw the deaths of that many people in his lifetime and christianity has been around for 2,000 years that isn't so bad..............but like i've pointed out before lumping together all of christianity together doesn't make sense.
i'd like to see those figures broken down though.

[deadstar]

Even if it is "pushing Jesus down their throats", there are many far worse things that can go along with giving aid to people and teaching them the ideas of Jesus.

[Nevuk]

Yes. Although hard to define i'd say it's the difference between the purpose you set yourself and the purpose that is either inherent in humankind or set by a higher being.
That seems a very contradictory statement. The only purpose is inherent in human beings is fucking, and most people do that(Of course, I mean reproduction and survival, but I prefer this way of saying it). Are you suggesting that is the meaning of life?
The other probably wouldn't apply in this case as we are applying it to an agnostic.

[pick_it_up99]

you are 15 and it shows. Ever gone on a mission trip? or know anything about Christianity?
Also the bible never says anything about going to Hell if you don't believe... "the only way to the father is through me" is what you are referring to, and it doesn't say what happens if you don't believe. Also most Africans don't associate with a religion (if they aren't Christian) sooo they aren't being "converted". Also, you don't have to be Christian to receive aid from Christian organizations. Giving you a bible and saying "Here, I enjoy this, check it out" is not pushing Jesus down their throats. Thats like me saying "Hey I read the new Harry Potter and liked it you should read it too, you might enjoy it." Of course, Jesus does "save" but Harry is cool too.

edit: Bible as law. Only some books of the Bible are considered to be "law" the others are examples of good Christian values and behaviors. The only "laws" or "commandments" given in the new testament are to love the Lord your God and love your neighbor.


i've been raised catholic, bub, and trust me, those bitches are fucked up.
i've been on missions trips my entire life, they're dicks, all of them.
Did i say they won' help them if they don't believe? no, i justy said that they hsove their religions down their throats while trying to help them in ways they should.
whats worng with you believeing what you believe, giving these poor bastards some food and shelter as they humanly deserve, and leave it at that?
and last itme i checked, missionaries don't even help out the people, they go there with thier cokes, and they build their houses, and then go over to the settlements, give them jack shit, oh a basketball, yeah they dont need a fucking basketball dicks, they need fucking proper food and education. Stop wasting your money on luxuries for yourself, if you're going to africa to help the less fortunate, at least help the less fortunate.
I may be fifteen, but I've seen more fucked up shit that christians do than you ever have.

[open mind]

I've lost the site, which is a shame as it was interesting. I'm sure you will agree it's a fair sum though. Also Stalin didn't oversee anywhere near that many. Unless you are counting Russian war casualties which seems mighty unfair and even then i doubt it was 50 million.

i'm counting russians he had purposely killed.
i don't believe it's a fair sum as it lumps all of christianity together.........during the crusades alot of christians were killed by christians for instance.

[rikfrommf]

Attacking someones age is always a sign that your argument itself lacks substance.
misconstruing a statement of fact with an attack is a sign of ignorance.



There are two places hell and heaven. The only way to heaven is Jesus so it's safe to assume everyone else goes to hell.

Over simplifying a situation ie stating there are only 2 choices when there are more is a fallacy of logic.


Of course they are all conversion is, is from being a non christian to a christian.

Conversion - n. - change from one religion, political belief, viewpoint, etc., to another.
From one to another. Lack of one isn't one.




While true they are preferencial to Christians and encourage you to be Christians. It's a "take this bread and water and oh would you like a Bible with that?" kind of deal.

You wanna back that up with some proof for me please? like a major organizations website that says "We give preferential treatment to starving children who love the Lord. If you find something, its not Christian.



What would be pushing it down their throats?
Believe this or die.



You are comapring a literary book with a book which tells should how to live you life. That was an awful comparison.

All story type books are an example of one way to live a life. You don't think kids take or learn anything from Harry Potter? about friendship, compassion, and loyalty.

[thejetstolehome]

i've been raised catholic, bub, and trust me, those bitches are fucked up.
i've been on missions trips my entire life, they're dicks, all of them.
Did i say they won' help them if they don't believe? no, i justy said that they hsove their religions down their throats while trying to help them in ways they should.
whats worng with you believeing what you believe, giving these poor bastards some food and shelter as they humanly deserve, and leave it at that?
and last itme i checked, missionaries don't even help out the people, they go there with thier cokes, and they build their houses, and then go over to the settlements, give them jack shit, oh a basketball, yeah they dont need a fucking basketball dicks, they need fucking proper food and education. Stop wasting your money on luxuries for yourself, if you're going to africa to help the less fortunate, at least help the less fortunate.
I may be fifteen, but I've seen more fucked up shit that christians do than you ever have.


http://slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/air_up_there1.jpg

[pick_it_up99]

Welcome to the site, it seems we share a common ground. A word of advice, do not bring unsuuportable personal evidence into an intellectual discussion. It is logical fallacy and does not prove anything as it works on a generalising basis. if your case is worth fighting you should be able to use logic, reason and facts instead of personal experience.


hey, yeah i wanted to thank you for helping me out, i'm not very smart, i know that as a fact, and i always admit it up front cause it is truth, but thats why i debate, i hope that somehow it can help me be a bit smarter, thanks for the tips too, unfortunatly, alot of thigns i know is all i've lived, and i'm still learning =/

[open mind]

There's no way he reached 50 million then. Even the Nazis only managed seven and they had a conveyor belt going.

I'd say it is fair to lump it together in a sense but a perspective of individuals and variants must be maintained.

i've seen stats that suggest 50 million is not out of the question..........i'm talking about his entire life, not just during wwII.
if you could find a breakdown of the numbers christianity has killed i'd appreciate it just the same

[pick_it_up99]

http://slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/air_up_there1.jpg


lmfao

omgwtfbbq?

[Love As Arson]

I do not view what some missionaries do as particularly different from sharing a personal philosophy with someone.

[nfggc10]

I do not view what some missionaries do as particularly different from sharing a personal philosophy with someone.True, but there's a big difference between having a genuine philosophical discussion and one whose only goal is to change other people's opinions and cause them to doubt their own lives and beliefs or lack thereof.

[rikfrommf]

i've been raised catholic, bub, and trust me, those bitches are fucked up.
i've been on missions trips my entire life, they're dicks, all of them.
Did i say they won' help them if they don't believe? no, i justy said that they hsove their religions down their throats while trying to help them in ways they should.
whats worng with you believeing what you believe, giving these poor bastards some food and shelter as they humanly deserve, and leave it at that?
and last itme i checked, missionaries don't even help out the people, they go there with thier cokes, and they build their houses, and then go over to the settlements, give them jack shit, oh a basketball, yeah they dont need a fucking basketball dicks, they need fucking proper food and education. Stop wasting your money on luxuries for yourself, if you're going to africa to help the less fortunate, at least help the less fortunate.
I may be fifteen, but I've seen more fucked up shit that christians do than you ever have.

sigh.

Your experience can't be used to represent the whole. Its fallacy.
your language is indicative of a catholic upbringing. Thats a personal attack and sarcasm. I thought it was funny.

Catholic and Christian are two separate things. Catholics are a sub group of Christians. You really can't equate the two.

If you have been on mission trips your "entire life" where did you go? (this is pure interest)

not helping people out, yeah they build houses and that doesn't help. You contradicted yourself. A basketball helps more than food. It builds trust and a relationship. Missionaries as you call them aren't there to just feed people, that helps no one in the long run, they are there to teach. Are you telling me to stop wasting money on luxuries? If it upsets you this much, sign off line, pawn all your possessions and jump on the first plane to any African nation and help. You aren't doing it, but hey! some people are, lets tear THEM down, cause you look like complete crap when compared to them...

[rikfrommf]

I do not view what some missionaries do as particularly different from sharing a personal philosophy with someone.

Thats because thats what it is. But someone mentions the name "Jesus" and heck, whatever they are talking about MUST be inherently evil.

[Nevuk]

Yes that is exactly it. The only genuine purpose of our existence is to pass on our genes. Isn't that the purpose of all other animals?
I view it more as improving the gene pool haha. But regardless, you basically are calling this the only cosmic meaning to life?

[pick_it_up99]

I do not view what some missionaries do as particularly different from sharing a personal philosophy with someone.


true, but do they want it? no, they odn't its different if they asked for it.

[deadstar]

Its hard to have intelligent philosophical debates with people who laregly arent educated. This is why its hard to not "impose beliefs" on people in Affrica.

[nfggc10]

Thats because thats what it is. But someone mentions the name "Jesus" and heck, whatever they are talking about MUST be inherently evil.No it's not, in some cases anyway. One is an open discussion and a sharing of ideas and the other is a one-sided rant with a motive behind it.

[thejetstolehome]

http://www.dogma-movie.com/pics/church/images/buddychrist1sm.jpg

[nfggc10]

http://www.dogma-movie.com/pics/church/images/buddychrist1sm.jpg
best argument ever

[rikfrommf]

true, but do they want it? no, they odn't its different if they asked for it.

I tell you what, since you are already pawning off your stuff to fly over and help, ask them if they mind it. Don't speak for people you don't really know.

[thejetstolehome]

Why would you have these debates if not to force your beliefs? Couldn't you teach them reading, writing and arithmatic first? Also Africa isn't all tribes and barbarians you know?

math = devil.

[pick_it_up99]

sigh.

Your experience can't be used to represent the whole. Its fallacy.
your language is indicative of a catholic upbringing. Thats a personal attack and sarcasm. I thought it was funny.

Catholic and Christian are two separate things. Catholics are a sub group of Christians. You really can't equate the two.

If you have been on mission trips your "entire life" where did you go? (this is pure interest)

not helping people out, yeah they build houses and that doesn't help. You contradicted yourself. A basketball helps more than food. It builds trust and a relationship. Missionaries as you call them aren't there to just feed people, that helps no one in the long run, they are there to teach. Are you telling me to stop wasting money on luxuries? If it upsets you this much, sign off line, pawn all your possessions and jump on the first plane to any African nation and help. You aren't doing it, but hey! some people are, lets tear THEM down, cause you look like complete crap when compared to them...


did you guys read that?
yes, cause a starving black kid would rather play basketball than eat some fucking food!
holy shit. you gotta be kidding me.
and yeah, all my life, i've been going to a catholic schhol, and every year we go on "retreats" and we've also had a bucnh of people go to hati and shit.
i've never gone there cause my parents are creepy and i'd rather not get into that, but we also go aorund the neighbourhood, doing bullshit. i hate it from day one cause i think its jumping in on peoples lives, that they dont need.
fuck i suck at grammar.
they don't need it.
and when i said they build hoses? they dont build houses for the people, i should've made myself clear, they go there, make their own air conditioned buldings, away from the settlements.

[Nevuk]

Yes.
I agree with you on this, but I'm failing to see the difference between a personal meaning to life and a cosmic one... after all, plenty of people choose not to have children, does that mean they should be punished?

[deadstar]

Why would you have these debates if not to force your beliefs? Couldn't you teach them reading, writing and arithmatic first? Also Africa isn't all tribes and barbarians you know?
I have a feeling most do, but of course there is a lot of religious undertones to them.

Also, I clearly didnt mean all of africa is tribes and barbarians.

[thejetstolehome]

best argument ever

:irule:

[Love As Arson]

true, but do they want it? no, they odn't its different if they asked for it.
How do you know what it is they want? If one is being charitable, and they are doing so because of a specific philosophy, is there any harm in sharing why it is they act as they do?

True, but there's a big difference between having a genuine philosophical discussion and one whose only goal is to change other people's opinions and cause them to doubt their own lives and beliefs or lack thereof.
That isn't the reason missionaries share their faith. Let us use me as an example: I tend to be on the left. As such, my views when discussing poverty and speaking about solutions are going to reflect that position on the spectrum. Is this any different from spiritual beliefs?

[Nevuk]

Oh, and as far as personal experiences being fallacies - that they are. But they are also useful for emphasizing a point, elaborating your argument with an example, and tilting the argument in a different direction - After all, most arguments arise from a personal experience. Yes, in a strict debate sense, you should avoid them, but those are remarkably rare and this isn't one of them.

Edit: They should still be sparingly used and only when relevant. You can't base your argument on one, but you can expound upon it with one.

[rikfrommf]

It implied his (less sophisticated, in your opinion) argument was a result of his age. That is an attack in any ones books.



Where else is there to go but heaven and hell?



Almost everyone in Africa believes in a God just cause it aint one of the big six doesn't make it any less of a religion.



The majority of Aid groups are evangelical groups. Therefore they are out to save souls as it were.



So only the threat of death can ever constitute shoving something down someones throat?



That isn't the intention of Harry Potter, you are being facetious to cover up for your silly analogy.

I'm done with you. Every single thread we both post on simply annoys me. When I asked for evidence I specifically said websites, not generalizations. "almost everyone" support that. the threat of death was a specific example. what is the intention of Harry Potter? You're a brit, call him up and ask. assumptions are false logic, I don't have to provide alternatives, but Limbo is one that Catholics developed.

[pick_it_up99]

How do you know what it is they want? If one is being charitable, and they are doing so because of a specific philosophy, is there any harm in sharing why it is they act as they do?


you're right i don't know rexactly what they want.
but answer me this: how many people actually want osmeone to be all up in their face aobut how great jesus was? really? you're living your life when all of a sudden some white guy shows up with a basketball and a bible and starts talking aobut a guy from 2000 years ago, you're starving, want food, do you really give a shit aobut that?
i think not.

[nfggc10]

That isn't the reason missionaries share their faith. Let us use me as an example: I tend to be on the left. As such, my views when discussing poverty and speaking about solutions are going to reflect that position on the spectrum. Is this any different from spiritual beliefs?Yes it is. How often have you gone on a mission to impose your political views? There is a huge difference between a discussion, which is what you're referring to, and one whose only purpose is to impose one's belief on another person.

[deadstar]

I shudder to imagine. It reminds me if the Nazi german maths questions.

If a disabled man costs the fatherland 30,000 marks a year then how many german workers could that feed?
The ideas of Nazis are quite different from Christians.

[rikfrommf]

did you guys read that?
yes, cause a starving black kid would rather play basketball than eat some fucking food!
holy shit. you gotta be kidding me.
and yeah, all my life, i've been going to a catholic schhol, and every year we go on "retreats" and we've also had a bucnh of people go to hati and shit.
i've never gone there cause my parents are creepy and i'd rather not get into that, but we also go aorund the neighbourhood, doing bullshit. i hate it from day one cause i think its jumping in on peoples lives, that they dont need.
fuck i suck at grammar.
they don't need it.
and when i said they build hoses? they dont build houses for the people, i should've made myself clear, they go there, make their own air conditioned buldings, away from the settlements.

would you rather have one meal, or a friend?
it is impossible for missions to bring enough food for entire families, let alone villages and cities. going around the neighborhood and doing ... what exactly? Also, my friend, how do you build a house with air conditioning in a desert without power?

[pick_it_up99]

The ideas of Nazis are quite different from Christians.


http://ccc.per.sg/collect/badges/d01a_nazi_ironX-CL2.jpg

[rikfrommf]

You are acting selflessly they just wanna get into heaven?

you don't have to be good to get into heaven... you just have to believe.

[pick_it_up99]

would you rather have one meal, or a friend?
it is impossible for missions to bring enough food for entire families, let alone villages and cities. going around the neighborhood and doing ... what exactly? Also, my friend, how do you build a house with air conditioning in a desert without power?


me being lcose to anorexic, that's a bad question, but if i were a starving kid, yeah, i'd rather have fucking food, how ridiculous of a question is that. like...i cant even express my outrage on such a stupid, stupid thing to say.

uhh, and ever heard of portable generators me droog?

[deadstar]

And religion helps these people. I just dont see the problem with teaching these people religion if so much good goes along with the religion.

[rikfrommf]

you're right i don't know rexactly what they want.
but answer me this: how many people actually want osmeone to be all up in their face aobut how great jesus was? really? you're living your life when all of a sudden some white guy shows up with a basketball and a bible and starts talking aobut a guy from 2000 years ago, you're starving, want food, do you really give a shit aobut that?
i think not.

"all up in their face" or simply handing them a bible and offering to read it to them if they need help. Since you haven't gone, Im guessing you don't really know first hand.

Not only white people go on Mission Trips. that statement is so horribly racist I can't even describe it.

You're right they don't care thats why Africans don't let missionaries come in anymore... oh wait... yeah they do...

[nfggc10]

you don't have to be good to get into heaven... you just have to believe.Which defeats the entire purpose of striving to live a life full of good morals/deeds.

[rikfrommf]

Limbo was abolished didn't you see the thread?

simply an example. Yes I saw the thread.

[rikfrommf]

Which defeats the entire purpose of striving to live a life full of good morals/deeds.

I don't do that to get into Heaven. I do it because I know it to be right. I love creation and care for it.

[deadstar]

I think we can all agree that what people in poverty need is clothing, shelter, education and food.

Way, way down that list is religion.
So if religion comes along with the food, shelter, water, you would be opposed to giving them any of it?

[pick_it_up99]

"all up in their face" or simply handing them a bible and offering to read it to them if they need help. Since you haven't gone, Im guessing you don't really know first hand.

Not only white people go on Mission Trips. that statement is so horribly racist I can't even describe it.

You're right they don't care thats why Africans don't let missionaries come in anymore... oh wait... yeah they do...


oh yes excuse me for bieng racist towards the large white population of christians.
i'm white, and i really wouldn't want any color person comign into my town preaching about jesus cause i don't need it.

and also, why haven't the iraqis kicked out the us forces? they certainly aren't wanted there. your point is moot.

[Love As Arson]

You are acting selflessly they just wanna get into heaven?
The bible doesn't require one to spread the word to get into heaven. Generally, their acts are inspired by Christ's message of social justice.

how many people actually want osmeone to be all up in their face aobut how great jesus was? really?
How many missionaries have you met that force their beliefs on people in other countries?
you're living your life when all of a sudden some white guy shows up with a basketball and a bible and starts talking aobut a guy from 2000 years ago, you're starving, want food, do you really give a shit aobut that?
i think not.
If their beliefs inspire them, then I would not mind looking into those beliefs.

Yes it is. How often have you gone on a mission to impose your political views? There is a huge difference between a discussion, which is what you're referring to, and one whose only purpose is to impose one's belief on another person.
I make my beliefs known when I am participating in a specific act. In any case, is it forcing your beliefs on them if you discuss the bible with them? You are generalizing all missionaries as fifteenth century Europeans who are giving them the ultimatum to convert or die.

[rikfrommf]

But it doesn't exist, so what are these alternatives because you are yet to provide any. We still have heaven and hell.

Again. I will state. Reallllllly Slowly. Assuming. is. fallacy. always. Your view is that nothing happens. you go to the ground. theres a possibility. Some view Hell like Dante. There's 8 more places you can go. Some say you are reincarnated. You come here... again... then there is that possibility that we don't know what happens. which is why, say it with me, Assumptions are fallacy.

[nfggc10]

I don't do that to get into Heaven. I do it because I know it to be right. I love creation and care for it.I wasn't talking about you but just people in general who share your beliefs. There's no incentive to live a life like I stated in my previous post. If, regardless of whether you're a good person or a serial killer, every one who believes will go to heaven then what's the difference between those two people?

[rikfrommf]

oh yes excuse me for bieng racist towards the large white population of christians.
i'm white, and i really wouldn't want any color person comign into my town preaching about jesus cause i don't need it.

and also, why haven't the iraqis kicked out the us forces? they certainly aren't wanted there. your point is moot.

totally irrelevant comparison. Us is occupying with military force. missionaries are unarmed.

Blacks aren't Christian? why dont you log on and read the Census results about race and religion.