Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:03 am
From this thread it is easy to see why Stews has more than 9000 posts....
The Introversion Forums
Stewsburntmonkey wrote:Hitler was not much of a Christian and referencing God does not make something religious. Is football or acting religious now simply because participants make an occasional mention of God?
Also lets look at other major bloodletting of the 20th Century. WWII left approximately 55 million dead. About 40 million died in Mao's Communist China. Under Mao's rule religion was effectively banned, so this is 40 million deaths in the near total absence of religion. Then there are the 8-20 million that died in Stalin's Communist Russia (again without religion). If you add in the Chinese and Soviet Civil Wars that figure eclipses the frigures for WWII. So it would seem an absence of religion is a far worse problem than any religion. In fact the conflicts that are actually about religion claim very few lives in comparison to these political conflicts.
Quite untrue. Anti-Jewish feelings existed long before Christ. The most anti-Semitic places are also generally the least Christian.
That is not fighting for their god. . . These are cultural references to God and are not religious. WWII was not about religion, it was about nationalism. This is not simply my opinion, it is the nearly unanimous view of historians as well.
You don't seem to quite understand what Jesus is saying in this passage. He is simply saying not everyone is ready to hear the word of God. He believes people need to be ready to accept the word of God and act on it before they can be "saved". He is not permanently excluding anyone from being "saved", just saying not everyone is ready to be "saved".
This is in reference to the divisions and persecution his teaching will inevitably cause. He is saying following him will cause conflict and may breakup families, but that his message will in the end result in true peace. He is basically saying that superficial peace is cheap when compared to the profound peace he is advocating. This is akin to the question of the US entering into WWII. Was it best to try to negotiate a self-serving peace with Germany and Japan or was it better to join the war in order to bring a greater peace?
You obviously don't know much about the Christian faith, which is a shame. I would invite you to actually take a look and see what Christianity really is, what Jesus really teaches, what the Bible actually says. . .
"He said to them, Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." (Mark 16:15-18 NIV)
He is telling his Disciples to go out and preach his message. I don't see any problem with that.
First the Bible is a creation of man, so it is certainly fallible. Second it was not written by one author. It is a collection of various texts written at different times, by people with differing views of Jesus's teachings.
Yes, there are certainly some contradictions, but that does not diminish the overall message. Hell, scientists contradict each other all the time, should we dismiss all science simply because of that?
You obviously have your own views, but they seem to rooted in a deep ignorance.
Banker wrote:Actually, he was. It's a fact, might want to get some evidence fore you say he wasnt.
Hilter wrote:National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity’s illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things.
Hilter wrote:Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.
Hilter wrote:The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse... the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little... Christianity <is> the liar... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State.
Hilter wrote:The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.
Those idelogy's are almost religions too, they have no base in facts, they build their beliefs on "scripture" (like the Communist manifest), they have something similiar to prophets (Marx, Stalin etc)
Any historic evidence for this?
Nope, and before Christianity came, Judaism was about the only monotheistic religion.
It's using your religion to rally support and "boost moral" by telling people you're fighting for a higher cause, that's what it is.
Really? Don't you know interpretation is a grave sin?
Read it like it says and dont make no bullshit excuses just cause you dont agree with the passage.
As for not understanding, studying religions and Christianity in particular, EVERY DAY, yup.. That brings me a lack of understanding.
Religous studies is a big interest of mine, and its where Im going to work in the future, and its through it Ive learned to hate alot of the religions, most people have no fuckin idea what their religions are about, they only "know" what their local priest spoon feeds them on sundays.
Once again, dont interpretate.. He's saying that ifyou dont hate your family then you are not worthy of him in the following verses,
that's what its about. Simply put he asks you to reject your whole family, and only follow him.
Oh really? Read it again, Ive put it in bold text since you have obvious reading problems. If you believe, those signs will accompany you. PERIOD.
Good that we all can all reject the idea that it is of some kind of divine origin. But now that we have established that it's bullshit and you cant trust it, why do you?
Are you saying contradictions doesnt diminsh an overall message?
Well then, why is it wrong to contradict yourself when debating then?
Im not the one that ignores whole sections of my religious book when it doesnt suit my views.. Exactly HOW am I ignorant, Im pointing out how Christianity is stupid, with FACTS (And your own book, the bible). So just how is that ignorant?
But maybe I should drop this, I can see its your feelings that are doing the talking right now, and not your mind. You were brought up Christian and so you want to find atleast some good things about it.. Well, not uncommon, that's usually what happens with every stupid idelogy you get passed down from your parents, you defend it cause your parents taught it to you.
But truth hurts and the truth is Christianity is a dumb religion.
Stewsburntmonkey wrote:Actually the Egyptians had a monotheistic religion well before the coming of Christ, but whatever. . .
many scholars believe that the Jews (who were in Exodus in Egypt at the time) picked up this monotheism and that is what gave birth to Judaism.
Stewsburntmonkey wrote:I could go on, but I think you get the picture. These are all quotes taken from his personal comments. At times he used Christianity in his public propaganda, but it is clear from his personal statements he was not a Christian and in fact detested the religion.
If you say so. . .
Actually the Egyptians had a monotheistic religion well before the coming of Christ, but whatever. . .
The Romans for example had a long history of anti-Jewish actions before the coming of Christianity.
So? Military leaders also say things like "Just remember your wives and children. We are doing this for them." Does that mean families cause wars? Should we hate families because they are used to motivate soldiers?
Umm. . . No. In fact the entire Protestant Christian movement is built on interpretation.
Even Jesus said interpretation was neccessary:
"When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!" (Mark 4:10-12 NIV)
Right there (in a passage you yourself quote) Jesus says that the teachings he gives hold the secret of the kingdom of God, but only to those who correctly interpret them. To everyone else who just take them literally they hold little meaning. He is talking about you!
I am simply stating how most Christians view those passages.
If you are saying you study Christianity everyday, then I wonder how you can be so incorrect on most of these points. Even simple facts seem to escape you. I'm not sure what you are studying, but it seems obvious it is neither religion nor Christianity.
It would seem you don't have much of an idea either. . .
That is not what the passage says. You are interpreting it as much as I am, if not more so.
I don't see what your point is. . . Those are things his Disciples had or would do to help demonstrate the truth of their God. Some sects (very, very minor ones) do drink poison and handle snakes to prove their faith and the Catholic Church performs exorcisms, but I don't particularly see any problem with any of that.
I don't think I ever said it was "bullshit". . . I simply said it has to be studied with it's origin in mind. If you look at a collection of scientific texts they will not all agree with each other, but that does not mean they are "bullshit". All it means is that you have to do a little work to find the truth.
Because you are contradicting yourself. Contradictions among people are inevitable. Contradictions in the Bible simple mean it cannot be taken as a perfect description of Christianity. It means interpretation and study must be done to resolve the contradictions.
I don't ignore sections of the Bible; I just take them for what they are. So far most of your "facts" have either not been facts (they are opinions) or have simply been incorrect. That is why I say you are profoundly ignorant on this issue.
I don't feel my feelings are significantly affecting my judgment on this matter. I would similarly defend Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. even though I was not raised with any of those beliefs.
This is a rather silly argument as the word "dumb" doesn't really mean anything. It sounds more like you are on a school playground than trying to make a serious point. Perhaps you should argue that Christianity is a contradictory religion, or that it is a dangerous religion. That would at least make your argument sound more intelligent.
Stewsburntmonkey wrote:I only brought up Akhenaten because Banker had said Judaism was pretty much the only monotheistic religion before Christianity. I don't know why he made such a statement as it didn't seem to be related to any arguement he was making, but that is what he said. As a self-professed student of religion, that is a silly statement to make. Any student of religion should know about the cult of Aten. In addition to that cult there is also Zoroastrianism which was a full fledged monotheistic religion well before the time of Christ.
Banker wrote:With his personal comments, I suppose you mean Mein Kampf.. There are no real others "personal comments" from him, and that is the same source that my quote is from.
The romans had a lot of anti-everyone actions too (They occupated quite many countries and people you know) before the coming of Christianity.. The jews werent the only ones or a special case so this argument kinda falls flat.
No, I was just saying that shit like that make it easier to keep your soldiers in check, you can always opress peoples will with a good dose of religion. You can say like; "oh you dont want to follow orders?! Betray your country do you? Then you betray god himself!"
What believing soldier would ever do that if you put it to him like that?
Yes well, I dont like protestants more than Catholics or Orthodox, or any other kind of Christian faiths.
No, take them literally and they hold a simple meaning; "if you dont understand, you're lost, and that was the whole point."
"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37-38 NIV)
It is EXACTLY what the passage says..
My point is this:
1. Do you call yourself a Christian? If yes proceed to 2.
2. Have you ever spoken in tongues, driven out demons, or
drank deadly poison without getting ill? If no proceed to 3.
3. Then you are not a true believer.
Science can be proven in repeated experiments, dont compare religion to science, they have NOTHING in common, religion doesnt even have to be based in common sense.
You mean you must come up with excuses for the contradictions or the whole book will be looked upon as the lies and bullshit it really
is.. That's what Theology is all about, finding excuses for all the errors in your respective religous book.
Akhenaten ruled for only 16 years, and his "religion" was merely a way to rid the priest caste of some of their power.
And this "religion" was never shared by almost anyone, infact alot of people opposed him because of him enforcing it, when he destroyed temples of the old religion. I wouldnt call it a real religion, more like a small insignifact sect, it's suprised me you even brought it up since it's quite far fetched.
As for Zoroastrianism, they have 2 major gods. One "good" (Ahura Mazdah) and one "evil" (Angra Mainyu), so it is not a monotheistic religion, it is dualism (that's the correct english word I think)..
Good one, you just made yourself look like quite the fool thinking you're so educated on this.