1 2 18 19 20 22 24 25 26 37 38
Topic: Atheism Weak or Strong
no photo
Mon 01/26/09 06:58 AM


And Now.....in conclusion...

the Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been told to you now.

You have all heard.


Whether you receive it now....

or reject it now...is left up to you now.


All has been said...that needed to be said.

There's no need to say anymore.

What You do with it, , is entirely up to you now.

Be Blessed Everyone...Take Care Now.

:heart::heart::heart:


no photo
Mon 01/26/09 07:08 AM
That's what happens with faith everybody thinks their way is the right way, Hitler thought his was the right way because of how he understood the writings written by other people.

Who is to say that what we see and understand of the writings is good or bad. You can take a paragraph and give to a thousand people and you will have a lot of different opinion on what it might mean and then you have the ones that do not even try to understand what it means but just believe what others will say it means.

I think that when you want something to mean a certain thing you will always find a reason and a way to explain it to your own satisfaction so to justify what you believe.

Krimsa's photo
Mon 01/26/09 07:12 AM


I edited the post in case you did not notice. I will also continue to use Hitler as yet another example of how Christianity has been used to justify and condone atrocities committed in the name of "god." The god himself as sanctified and demanded the murder of heathen and nonbelievers throughout the Old Testament.

These should serve as bitter reminders.

It is also a firm argument made by many (if not all) Atheists.




YOU WROTE ABOVE:

HOW CHRISTIANITY HAS BEEN USED!!!!!

YES!!!!

USED !!!!!

EXACTLY !!!

USED BY EVIL MEN!!!

AND TWISTED!!!

WHICH THEREFORE MEANS.....

THAT WHAT HITLER DID

IN THE NAME OF CHRISTIANITY....


WAS NOT A TRUE REPRESENTATION

OF WHAT CHRISTIANITY WAS TRULY ALL

ABOUT.... AT ALL !!!!!

IS THIS FINALLY CLEAR NOW?



And as stated before, try explaining that in the wake of 11 million dead. Okay I have another example for you.

Have you seen the Rwanda movie? Do you know that a substantial number of priests, nuns and even Bishops were indicted and a great many were convicted (by war crimes tribunals) for being directly responsible for the senseless slaughter of thousands of innocent Tutsis? Many clergy turned over those who had taken shelter in their churches to the machetes of the Hutu militia. The hatred and division between the Hutus and Tutsis was propagated by the missionaries as favorable for their objectives of conversion to Christianity.

One priest even burned down his own church to kill hundreds of Tutsis who had taken sanctuary there. Two priests were sentenced to death in 1998 for their roles in this genocide and two Benedictine nuns who supplied gasoline for the burning of Tutsi civilians sheltered in their church fled to Belgium where they were later convicted of complicity to murder.

“Sister Maria Kisito, who received 12 years, and her Mother Superior, Sister Gertrude, who received 15 years, were convicted of aiding in the slaughter of some 7,000 people who sought refuge at their convent in southern Rwanda. Prosecutors argued that they called in Hutu militiamen to drive people out of the convent knowing they would be killed, and later provided gasoline that militiamen used to set fire to a garage in which about 500 Tutsis had taken refuge.” (Washington Post, June 9, 2001)

Of course the Catholic Church has claimed their clergy were acting independently of the church, even though much of the most notable genocide occurred in churches and it is well known that the church's policy has been for centuries to divide and convert, to sew dissention between ethnic groups and then move in and take advantage of the chaos to offer Christian solace and conversion.

In the end nearly one million civilians were butchered.

Okay so were they "Fake Christians" Morning Song? Where does it end? When do Christians take some responsibility for these atrocities past or present?






Krimsa's photo
Mon 01/26/09 07:38 AM
Edited by Krimsa on Mon 01/26/09 08:36 AM

That's what happens with faith everybody thinks their way is the right way, Hitler thought his was the right way because of how he understood the writings written by other people.

Who is to say that what we see and understand of the writings is good or bad. You can take a paragraph and give to a thousand people and you will have a lot of different opinion on what it might mean and then you have the ones that do not even try to understand what it means but just believe what others will say it means.

I think that when you want something to mean a certain thing you will always find a reason and a way to explain it to your own satisfaction so to justify what you believe.


I agree with you there and that point has been made a few times now. I could take 12 Christians from these forums right now and stick them in a room together and show them passages from the bible and ask them to tell me what those versus mean to them.

I will bet you $100 that they will argue and disagree on the interpretation of identical passages taken from scripture.

So that’s why I find this "Hitler was a fake Christian" argument just silly in all honesty.

If you accept that then you would need to also accuse the entire German Christian population of being idiots because they surely could not tell that Hitler was merely playing at being a Catholic. It’s absurd.

Eljay's photo
Mon 01/26/09 11:51 PM



If Hitler was a christian - wouldn't you think he should pass the biblical test for it? Read the first two chapters of Second Peter and hold Hitler to the test. An examiniation of the book of James and Jude should further lay claim to where Hitler is on the "christain" spectrum.

Use those three books to show Hitler was a christain, and you'll convince me.


If Hitler should be "given" a test, to prove he was a christian, then Every Christian should have to take a test to prove it.

Personally, if Hitler was christian, like the quotes from Krimsa point to, who are you to say he is any less of a christian then you?
Now, I'm sure that you will cook up some "logic" with how I am wrong, but isn't judging and condemning other a sin?


If someone claims to be a christian - then it should be evidenced by their actions and their words. How difficult is that acknowledge?

If you believe that Hitlers actions and instructions to his subordinates demonstrated his deep christian conviction, than I'll ask you what I asked Krimsa - what do you think a christain is, and what are you basing your understanding of this on?


That is a NO TRUE SCOTSMAN fallacy. Cant you see it! grumble


It's not analogous.

Eljay's photo
Mon 01/26/09 11:53 PM

Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?

Krimsa's photo
Mon 01/26/09 11:57 PM
Edited by Krimsa on Tue 01/27/09 12:09 AM
Eljay said:

It's not analogous.


A blind deaf/mute could see the analogy present.

Eljay's photo
Mon 01/26/09 11:57 PM




Darwin had no clue how truly complex the living cell is.


But theologians do? They just say that poof, we magically appeared.


I believe the Christian is in a good position to follow the evidence wherever it leads. The atheist has no other choice, He must find a way to explain how life could arise from purely naturalistic processes.


You mean like all the evidence we have that completely disproves the bibles version of how old the earth is?


And what exactly is that "evidence"?

Krimsa's photo
Mon 01/26/09 11:59 PM


Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Do you agree that these Catholics in Rwanda were responsible for the murder of these innocent Tutsis? Or on every single example I site are you going to claim they are ":not true Christians."? Thats where it becomes ridiculous. Do you not see this?

no photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:02 AM


Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Just curious.
How can a Catholic not be a Christian?


Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:05 AM

A "Christian" is anyone who buys into the story in the New Testament and hails Jesus as the son of God and the Messiah.

You do not have to be "born again" to be a "Christian"


Actually - you do. At least acording to Jesus you do.


There are Christians and there are "Born again Christians."


Only in the secular perception. In biblical terms there is no difference between the terms.


I am very sorry to say this, but there is a certain stigma attached to the phrase "born again Christian" I have to be honest here, that stigma is:

"NUTS!"

Like vacuum cleaner salesmen, Mary Kay freaks, Moonies, Jehovah's witnesses, when someone says that someone is a "born again" Christian, people tend to run the other way because it means that this person is insane, in perpetual rapture, hyped up, hypnotized, brainwashed and programed or seeming on some sort of drug.

That is the hard core truth, from the High Priestess of the Universal Life Church of Brutal truth and honesty.

I wish I could save you Morningsong, but you are a lost cause where clear thinking is concerned. You can only save yourself at this point. Come back to reality. I think you might be a nice person if you could return to reality.



It matters not what the perception of "born again" conjures up - the fact of the matter is, if someone claims to be a christain, they are one because they are born again. Else - they are not a christain.

Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:06 AM

Eljay said:

It's not analogous.


A deaf/mute could see the analogy present.


It's not analogous.

Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:07 AM
Edited by Eljay on Tue 01/27/09 12:08 AM



Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Do you agree that these Catholics in Rwanda were responsible for the murder of these innocent Tutsis? Or on every single example I site are you going to claim they are ":not true Christians."? Thats where it becomes ridiculous. Do you not see this?


Just answer the question. Can't you respond to a question without asking questions which don't relate?

Krimsa's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:10 AM


Eljay said:

It's not analogous.


A deaf/mute could see the analogy present.


It's not analogous.


How is it non analogous?

Krimsa's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:11 AM




Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Do you agree that these Catholics in Rwanda were responsible for the murder of these innocent Tutsis? Or on every single example I site are you going to claim they are ":not true Christians."? Thats where it becomes ridiculous. Do you not see this?


Just answer the question. Can't you respond to a question without asking questions which don't relate?


A catholic believes in Jesus and the god of the bible. In my mind, they are merely a separate denomination of Christianity. Now answer my question.

Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:12 AM



Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christains - but not all Catholics are christains.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Just curious.
How can a Catholic not be a Christian?




Just being born a Catholic does not make one a christian. For example - Hitler was a Catholic.
He was not a christain.

Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:14 AM



Eljay said:

It's not analogous.


A deaf/mute could see the analogy present.


It's not analogous.


How is it non analogous?



Because you are either born a Scotsman or you're not.

You make a decision to become a christain.

The two terms are not related. It's called the fallacy of the shifting middle to assume your analogy is correct. It's not.

no photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:14 AM
Edited by Jeanniebean on Tue 01/27/09 12:21 AM


A "Christian" is anyone who buys into the story in the New Testament and hails Jesus as the son of God and the Messiah.

You do not have to be "born again" to be a "Christian"


Actually - you do. At least according to Jesus you do.


There are Christians and there are "Born again Christians."


Only in the secular perception. In biblical terms there is no difference between the terms.


I am very sorry to say this, but there is a certain stigma attached to the phrase "born again Christian" I have to be honest here, that stigma is:

"NUTS!"

Like vacuum cleaner salesmen, Mary Kay freaks, Moonies, Jehovah's witnesses, when someone says that someone is a "born again" Christian, people tend to run the other way because it means that this person is insane, in perpetual rapture, hyped up, hypnotized, brainwashed and programed or seeming on some sort of drug.

That is the hard core truth, from the High Priestess of the Universal Life Church of Brutal truth and honesty.

I wish I could save you Morningsong, but you are a lost cause where clear thinking is concerned. You can only save yourself at this point. Come back to reality. I think you might be a nice person if you could return to reality.



It matters not what the perception of "born again" conjures up - the fact of the matter is, if someone claims to be a christain, they are one because they are born again. Else - they are not a christain.



This is according to you and other "Born again" Christians who like to distinguish themselves from others and wash your hands of the dirty deeds and bloody foundations of the church that calls itself Christianity.

If you want separation from the church and "religiosity" then you should think of some other name besides "Christian."

Just follow the teachings of Love as Jesus taught and stop fighting battles for the multitudes of fake Christians.






Krimsa's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:15 AM
Hitler was a Catholic. To me, and I suspect many people, that would make him a Christian.

Eljay's photo
Tue 01/27/09 12:16 AM
Edited by Eljay on Tue 01/27/09 12:17 AM





Eljay say I posted an article taken from the early 1990s in which Catholics were accused of murdering people in Africa? Would you say the same thing? They aren’t true believers in god? Where does it end? Just curious? What accountability will Christians ever take for anything?


Let's approach the problem this way:

There are Catholics who are christians - but not all Catholics are christians.

Not all Christains are Catholics.

Do you agree with these premises?


Do you agree that these Catholics in Rwanda were responsible for the murder of these innocent Tutsis? Or on every single example I site are you going to claim they are ":not true Christians."? Thats where it becomes ridiculous. Do you not see this?


Just answer the question. Can't you respond to a question without asking questions which don't relate?


A catholic believes in Jesus and the god of the bible. In my mind, they are merely a separate denomination of Christianity. Now answer my question.


Just "believing in Jesus" is not what makes one a christain.

So what you are telling me is that all Catholics are christians - according to you.

If so - what is it that makes them a christian - because they were born into a Catholic family?

1 2 18 19 20 22 24 25 26 37 38