 |
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:17
|
|
Quick Sirot! Edit your damn post!
Kaak too!
Ah ****it.
LR,
quote: For example the Nazis of WW2. The US didn't have enough time to judge each Nazi and each possible "Interpretation" of Mein Kampf before we had to decide whether Nazis as a group were bad. |
So your assertion is that because the Nazis were treated unfairly in some cases, Christians should be too?
quote: Atheism means "without" belief in a God. Not "there is no God", though I'd adop the latter in reference to Christianity. This is derived from breaking the word down, a-meaning without. Theism-belief in God. Atheism is thus, without or lack of belief in God.
It promotes nothing. It promotes a certain viewpoint no more then A-elfism or non-belief in faries promotes a certain viewpoint. |
So then, you are not pushing the viewpoint that there is no God and Christianity is bollocks? 
Because it sure sounds like it to me.
Throw away all of your debate semantics and just look at some of the **** you say.
quote: 2) Can you? You still are genralizing on the basis of a negative, which is far too vague and unrelated a trait. Stalin and Mao were a specific kind of atheist with a specific kind of ideology: Marxism. Now you can perhaps criticize Marxism,(certainly Maoism and Stalinism) on the basis of such examples, But to criticize atheists as a whole is ridiculous. |
OK, I see - so there can be specific types of atheists, but not specific types of Christians? Or, to take it further, there can be atheists who happen to be extremists, but all Christians are extremists?
So therefore there are no good Christians? Therefore I'm not a good person because I'm a Christian, on the basis of a belief?? Be really careful, you're going down a road you don't want to go down.
I would call that a violation of the whole common sense thing
quote: The Bible also gave the Pope authority to do as he deemed in accordance with the Lord's will. Hence the Crusades were justified in that sense according to Xianity. |
Bullshit. The Pope was never mentioned in the Bible.
quote: Why not? If this was extremely rare, I could understand it. But it's not. |
Actually violent crimes committed by Christians IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY are extremely rare.
quote: Where in the New Testament does it condemn or take back OT law? A lot of people say it does, but I am yet to find a single shred of evidence to support that assertion. |
Not that I can quote passages, nor can I be arsed to go look it up, but Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law, which in any case, again, NEVER applied to anyone except the Jews.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ecowiz Returns
|
 |
Portugal
Aug 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Logical Realist
The Bible also gave the Pope authority to do as he deemed in accordance with the Lord's will. Hence the Crusades were justified in that sense according to Xianity.
|
Be carefull my friend.
You don't find any direct reference to the Pope in the Bible.
The Pope, actually only has Apostolic authority, i.e. derived from the Apostles with some particular strenght has the Catholic Church calls upon the Pope the "statute" of the successor of Peter.
quote: Originally posted by Logical Realist
Where in the New Testament does it condemn or take back OT law? A lot of people say it does, but I am yet to find a single shred of evidence to support that assertion.
That is an obvious case of switching the Burdn of Proof. I think it is up to you to show that the NT somehow makes the OT outdated.
|
How can you read the Gospels and than say you don't find a single shred of evidence of this, is something that keeps puzzling me. Maybe you should read the Gospels before starting all this "cruzade" of yours.
quote: Originally posted by Logical Realist
Keep in mind this: The Bible is supposed to be(and the Torah) the word of God. You aren't supposed to pick and choose what scriptures you obey.
|
Allow me to correct you with a slight nuance you are not aware of.
According to Catholic Doctrine, which is the one I know, the Word of God is in the Bible which is diferent of saying that the Bible is Word of God (we say it because it is easier and some people does not understand the difference).
We know that the Bible was writen by men and believe it was inspired by God. That being said, we do not assume that the Bible was dictated by God (that's why we have four versions of the same events, i.e. the Gospels). So the question about picking what to obey or not... let's say a Christian does not have to know the Mosaic Law by heart: two commanments are just as good (and just as though for us): Love God and Love the Other (to know who is the other read the Good Samaritan Parabole).
edited:
I should also read the other posts too before posting myself.
Seems like there are many telling you the same things LR!
Wouldn't you think it would be advised to read the Gospels (at least) before criticizing what Christians believe in?
Last edited by Ecowiz Returns on 26-02-2002 at 23:18
|
|
|  |
 |
|
devilmunchkin
|
|
first circle of the inferno
Jul 2001 time: 05:17
|
|
yes, even though i'm an athiest, my dear, i VERY much disagree with you. SOme of the people i love most are christians...my BEST FRIEND right now is christian and she has shown me more unconditional LOVE than anyone else EVER has in my entire LIFE. On the other hand, my stepdad is an evil christian *******. He destroyed my life and mentally abused me and made me feel like i was worthless. They're both christians...is it fair to generalize the whole? absolutely not.
quote: 1) Generlaizations can be accurate. I think history shows that mine is. |
perhaps about smaller groups of people, but you're talking abouta religion that dominates the globe, spreading into all sorts of cultures. It's like saying all schizo's are murderous nuts. They may be nuts, but not all are murderous. Therefore, i'm not about to judge a few billion people based on
1) history..because as we know, we learn from history. at one time christians themselves were persecuted..by the ROmans. Like you say: we change. we're always changing. we evolve.
2) my personal and limited experience.
quote: Likewise rationalists today do not have all the resources to judge each Christian individually before making criticisms and taking actions. |
why do we need to JUDGE every christian. Are you the absolute discerner of truth?? no! (you certainly LOOOOOOOOOOOVE to argue...even with a dictionary! ) You told me that the purpose of life was to maintain values. Well, i don't see how any christian at the moment is impeding on your values.....and therefore you shouldn't impede upon them. (it violates constitutional rights...right to free religion [or lack thereof] and right to happiness). let them have their hope.
quote: Stalin and Mao were a specific kind of atheist with a specific kind of ideology: Marxism. |
just like john wesley was a specific type of xian..methodist! our atheism links us together much as the way xian belief in a god links them together. after that, there tends to be, as i've found out, a spreading out because their bible can be interpreted in many ways.
quote: The Bible also gave the Pope authority to do as he deemed in accordance with the Lord's will. Hence the Crusades were justified in that sense according to Xianity. |
ugh..no he didn't. that was an inferred assumption..called apostolic succession. and only catholics adhere to it.
quote: Where in the New Testament does it condemn or take back OT law? |
it does and it doesn't. Jesus, we know, was a Jew...but he blatantly did not carry out certain portions of jewish ritual/religion..like the sabath. Before him, the jewish community was utterly focused on the Law..jesus came and perhaps diminished it's importance so that religion was restored rather than using the laws merely as a set of rules. but the OT is still important if it is carried out with faith.
quote: The Bible is supposed to be(and the Torah) the word of God. You aren't supposed to pick and choose what scriptures you obey. |
i would agree with this...but...most xians don't.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
SecularTheocrat
|
|
heres my proposition:
you are neither king, nor lost, nor kaak. You are all figments of my imagination and as such i order you slaves of rice beans to consume the feces of your departed loved ones upon arrival at my door step. You all (with the exception of logical realist) are full of delusions that you have the greatest rear end in all of france. Well im here to tell you that the soylent green you eat is neither soylent nor green. I suggest you all shut yer big traps before i scrap you along wit da aliens. Do not taunt the happy fun ball. If you ever cross dress again i will have you commited for violating my inherant civil rights of not having to see ugly people cross dress. Heil Hilter!! (yes thats hilter you freaks.....god, whats wrong with you??)
The Hermaphrodite of Communistic Fascism,
Bob the three toed mongoose
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
SecularTheocrat
|
|
and dont forget to kiss my anal butt. heh heh heh.............damn heretics...........I CONDEMN YOU TA HELL!!!
Taking this off topic, off topic.....or am i being to literal......wouldnt want that.........tee hee........EAT POOP AND DIE!!! Dar har har har har!!!!!
Last edited by SecularTheocrat on 27-02-2002 at 17:13
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Logical Realist
|
|
California
Jan 2002 time: 21:17
|
|
I'm going to apologize for what my friend Andre said. Not that he's a bad guy. It's kinda my fault that this happened because I did show him the board and suggest that he post.(I didn't know he'd go that far though) He is a lot more intelligent then you would assume by reading iwhat he wrote. I'll ask him not to post again though.Please don't bad mouth him or I will get defensive because he is my friend. Again I'm sorry for what he said, and if anyone is to blame for this; its me, for asking him to post(to my shame). In fact I think it best if I do not comment on this topic again. As it seems to have gotten out of hand and only seems to promote hostilities. I will not look at the responses.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:17
|
|
LR, I don't understand.
Are you attacking my claim that some Nazis were treated unfairly, or are you attacking my suggestion that you use more common sense and less debate?
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17. Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|