NationStates Jolt Archive

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

1) They think they're right (ahem, know they're right), so they're going to tell you that you're wrong, wrong, wrong. But we Christians cannot have our own opinion whatsoever.

2) Science > Religion, duh :rolleyes:

3) Most "Christians" are jerks and make the real believers look bad

4) We live in a "Post-Christian Era". A definite sign of something, isn't it?

It makes them feel like a real man!
'Cause there is nothing more ego stroking for nerds than a smug sense of superiority.

3) Most "Christians" are jerks and make the real believers look bad
I wouldn't say "most"... but I'll agree that there are a number of "Christians" out there (bad apples) that make the rest of us look bad. But to latch onto those and call the rest of us "bad" (as so many are wont to do) is the height of stereotyping and bigotry...which is something they constantly accuse us of.

'Cause there is nothing more ego stroking for nerds than a smug sense of superiority.

It make my heart sing when people use the insult 'nerd' on a MMOG board. Oh, you manly jock, you.

I wouldn't say "most"... but I'll agree that there are a number of "Christians" out there (bad apples) that make the rest of us look bad. But to latch onto those and call the rest of us "bad" (as so many are wont to do) is the height of stereotyping and bigotry...which is something they constantly accuse us of.

Which demeans their attitudes to that of a 4 year old.

"But he's mean to me!"

1) They think they're right (ahem, know they're right), so they're going to tell you that you're wrong, wrong, wrong. But we Christians cannot have our own opinion whatsoever.

2) Science > Religion, duh :rolleyes:

3) Most "Christians" are jerks and make the real believers look bad

4) We live in a "Post-Christian Era". A definite sign of something, isn't it?


1. Most Christians should not identify their opinions as "Christian opinions" since most Christians don't share one universal opinion.

2. Many Christians have reconciled modern scientific beliefs with their own faith, just as there are many Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and people of other faiths still living in the stone age.

3. A handfull of Christians are jerks, just as a handfull of Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists... etc are jerks and they make everyone else look bad.

4. Christianity has undergone many reformation periods. Perhaps this is simply another.

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

This wouldn't have anything to do with me would it? And I started that thread to get me that one step closer to conversion. I don't feel the need to deride and insult Christians. In fact, I'm tyring my best to become one.

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

I don't hat all Christians/Theists, believe it or not. I mock your faith because I find it humorous and often laughable, I mock your double standards because you refuse to see that they exist. No doubt you laugh at me in return for the same reasons (if you don't, that is quite sad. You deserve to, its your right!). The reason I feel the need to push arguments against it and force a defense is because I treat it like science - adapt and mold your beliefs of a higher power, don't stay stubbornly attached to an ancient metaphor but rather let the faith breathe and grow. Challange it whenever possible, so that it may be refined and modified to better fit the truth. We cannot possibly comprhend a higher power perfectly; we must change our definitions to fit the most recent truth as best we can.

Honestly, I could care less what religion a person is as long as it doesnt involve thinking that their religion is the "one true religion" or threatening other people with the consequences of not converting (ie."You're gonna burn in hell.) I'm an athiest and I am prepared to defend my standpoint when pressured. But I'm not trying to prove I'm better than anyone or convert them through fear. Athiesm is a personal choice just like Christianity or Buddhism or Islam or Judaeism. There is no "one true religion" and as long as people don't believe that they are superior to someone else because of their religion, there's no problem.

I don't hat all Christians/Theists, believe it or not. I mock your faith because I find it humorous and often laughable, I mock your double standards because you refuse to see that they exist. No doubt you laugh at me in return for the same reasons (if you don't, that is quite sad. You deserve to, its your right!). The reason I feel the need to push arguments against it and force a defense is because I treat it like science - adapt and mold your beliefs of a higher power, don't stay stubbornly attached to an ancient metaphor but rather let the faith breathe and grow. Challange it whenever possible, so that it may be refined and modified to better fit the truth. We cannot possibly comprhend a higher power perfectly; we must change our definitions to fit the most recent truth as best we can.


I would mock you but I don't have the time to read through your ramblings.

Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion?

'Because this is a debate forum,' perhaps?

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

Because christianity is false.

My stock response is of course:

Fundementalist religion (the most prominent form of which is christianity, in the US) leads to (again, in the US' case) science denying.

Science-deniers prove themselves to have no standards of critical reasoning and no regard to truth. For this reason, they cannot be trusted.

Also, certain attitudes held by "rapture" nihilists are almost treasonous outright, as they actively disregard the national interest on the grounds that the world is going to end.

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?


I return the question. Why do certain wannabe Christians want to push their religion on everyone and claim it is the only right religion (like many of this weird bunch are doing it around here)? As long as they don't come with their pitiful propaganda I have no problems with them, but once that crap starts, well... then they get the bill. Period.

*laughs to self*

See? They're right, we're wrong. *shrug* We can't say they're false, but man oh man, can they negate us.

Funny how they have no possible way to prove us wrong. Can't see God? Well, I can't see your thoughts! So obviously, they're not REAL!

I was going to reply... but Al Araam basically said what I was going to say.

Furthermore, I was going to tell you to answer your own question... but... Greater Yubari already did that.

Since all of my grand ideas have been smot, I'll just ... post.. anyways.

*laughs to self*

See? They're right, we're wrong. *shrug* We can't say they're false, but man oh man, can they negate us.

Funny how they have no possible way to prove us wrong. Can't see God? Well, I can't see your thoughts! So obviously, they're not REAL!

They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed).

They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed).

No, I believe in special and general revelation.

I'll be honest. I've a lot of problems with the Christians belief systems, specifically the Bible..BUT..I do not go around bashing them, or, at the least, do my best to refrain. I won't state what those problems I have with them are, as I don't wish to spark a debate, or place anyone on the defensive.I did for a brief time do so, but realized it was not only immature, but extremely hypocritical. While I may disagree strongly with a lot of it, I do my best to respect that they believe they are doing what they feel is best. I've taken the time to read their debates, their religious texts, and learn about the various denominations, as best as I can, to make an informed decision.

1) They think they're right (ahem, know they're right), so they're going to tell you that you're wrong, wrong, wrong. But we Christians cannot have our own opinion whatsoever.

2) Science > Religion, duh :rolleyes:

3) Most "Christians" are jerks and make the real believers look bad

4) We live in a "Post-Christian Era". A definite sign of something, isn't it?

Coming from an Agnost(Very basically something along the lines of Atheist, but a bit more long-winded)

1.Not all, thought what you say is true for the most part. Those who truly think that Christianity is about love are almost completely "brainwashed". The bulk of Christians are ruled out of fear. Fear that they go to hell, fear of punishment, just plain fear. Officials use this fear to "brainwash"(Basic terms here, not truly accurate, but best paraphrase word) people into believing without questioning. If you believe without question, you do not believe for yourself. You allow yourself to believe what you are told to believe. Only through questioning your faith can you truly find it. Now, if you come back to Christianity, there ya go. More power to ya. But don't follow blindly, you may fall off a cliff.

2.No. Not at all, actually. Now, I am an advocate of Science, however the best scientists will accept one fact: Everything we know to be true now is subject to ridicule and change. Science is not static. New discoveries are made in which entire lines of thought are completely destroyed, reshaped, or reworked. The best scientists also do not completely denounce the possibility of religion and god. One of the cardinal rules of Science is that anything is possible.

3. "Most" is a bit of an overstatement. There are some, but I have met many who are not. However, the FEW who do, do give the rest a bad name. HOWEVER, to all the Christians out there: Do realize that the Atheist/Agnostic jerks out there do not speak for the rest of us. The VAST majority of Atheists/Agnosts are not conceded no-it-alls. Many are perfectly willing to discuss and learn. The few who are jerks are not representative of the entirety.

4. We do not live in a "Post-Chritian" era. Most of the United States is some form of Christian, (WE ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN NATION, however) and roughly 1 billion of the world(I think, at least) is Christian. To say that we live in a "Post-Christian" world is to be completely ignorant of the world. However, Christianity has changed GREATLY over the years, and I would not doubt if the Christianity when I die is wholy and completely different from now.

Basically, your arguments do not hold up, even under an Agnostic Telescope.

I'll be honest. I've a lot of problems with the Christians belief systems, specifically the Bible..BUT..I do not go around bashing them, or, at the least, do my best to refrain. I won't state what those problems I have with them are, as I don't wish to spark a debate, or place anyone on the defensive.I did for a brief time do so, but realized it was not only immature, but extremely hypocritical. While I may disagree strongly with a lot of it, I do my best to respect that they believe they are doing what they feel is best. I've taken the time to read their debates, their religious texts, and learn about the various denominations, as best as I can, to make an informed decision.

:headbang: Why can't more people be like you?

They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed).

People tell their children to believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Television networks broadcast cartoons propagating such beliefs. There are parades and kids lining up in shopping malls, waiting to sit on some strange man's lap because they want to believe in something greater than themselves. Now no one in their right mind would put up as much a fuss, trying to prove that Santa is fake. So why is it that there are people who feel they need to put down Christianity?

I'm not anti-christian, I'm anti-religion. I don't care what religion you are, I find all of them to be quite silly and illogical.

Some "Christians" are really not "Christians". They say they are, but it is obvious from their actions and their rituals they are not. But overall these "Christians" damage the reputation of the proper Christians.

*laughs to self*

See? They're right, we're wrong. *shrug* We can't say they're false, but man oh man, can they negate us.

Funny how they have no possible way to prove us wrong. Can't see God? Well, I can't see your thoughts! So obviously, they're not REAL!
Exactly! They go on and on and on about moral and cultural relativity to defend everything under the sun...but when it comes to Christianity, there is no defense, in their minds. We are merely "wrong".

Bigots.

Coming from an Agnost(Very basically something along the lines of Atheist, but a bit more long-winded)

*snip*

What is the difference between an agnostic and an atheist? Curious because I've heard different sides (i.e., an agnostic believes nothing until he/she sees it, but still leaves room to be proved wrong).

:headbang: Why can't more people be like you?
I concur wholeheartedly.

People tell their children to believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Television networks broadcast cartoons propagating such beliefs. There are parades and kids lining up in shopping malls, waiting to sit on some strange man's lap because they want to believe in something greater than themselves. Now no one in their right mind would put up as much a fuss, trying to prove that Santa is fake. So why is it that there are people who feel they need to put down Christianity?
Because no sane adult actually believes in that, they are just children's stories. So, the parallel does not hold.

It make my heart sing when people use the insult 'nerd' on a MMOG board. Oh, you manly jock, you.
Hey, I'm nerd to the core! Just having a bit of fun...

"SO MANLY! JA!" (Arnold S. Accent.)

But seriously, I'm thinking people get off on the Christophobia. Why else would they start thread after thread attacking us?

Funny how they have no possible way to prove us wrong. Can't see God? Well, I can't see your thoughts! So obviously, they're not REAL!

<ahem>

From a logical perspective, it is not so much that [God cannot be seen] [therefore] [God does not exist] as [God is impossible to predict or measure] [therefore] [There is no useful purpose to the hypothesis that he / she / it / they exist(s)].

The fact that something cannot be demonstrated to exist does not necessarily mean it does not; however, if it's existence does not perform any function in helping us understand the universe, it serves no real purpose in helping us understand things. The fact that it cannot be disproven doesn't make it a useful or rational theory; you can't prove that you're not Papa Smurf, but it isn't rational to say that therefore you ARE Papa Smurf.

Because christianity is false.

Prove it.

We live in a "Post-Christian Era".

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

I'm not anti-christian, I'm anti-religion. I don't care what religion you are, I find all of them to be quite silly and illogical.

Do you find dancing, music, poetry, movies, and the enjoyment of other such activities silly and illogical as well?

People tell their children to believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Television networks broadcast cartoons propagating such beliefs. There are parades and kids lining up in shopping malls, waiting to sit on some strange man's lap because they want to believe in something greater than themselves. Now no one in their right mind would put up as much a fuss, trying to prove that Santa is fake. So why is it that there are people who feel they need to put down Christianity?

Because people who still believe in Santa after they hit puberty are locked up in the insane asylum.

While people who still believe in Jehovah become presidents.

Think about that.

Because no sane adult actually believes in that, they are just children's stories. So, the parallel does not hold.

So are you saying that there are sane people who believe in dragons?

Because people who still believe in Santa after they hit puberty are locked up in the insane asylum.

While people who still believe in Jehovah become presidents.

Think about that.

I have thought about that and when George Bush calls himself a Christian, I call him a liar.

Do you find dancing, music, poetry, movies, and the enjoyment of other such activities silly and illogical as well?

No because they serve a purpose that I can see benefits me and other people. Except dancing, I don't dance. These things are capable of keeping human beings in good mental health because they can provide laughter, stress relief, and it can take your mind off the troubles in your life. If your mental health is bad it can manifest physically which is why I find these things particularly important.

:headbang: Why can't more people be like you?
I concur wholeheartedly.

Thank you, both. I consider those high compliments.

The reason most people aren't is that they simply don't care. They're stuck in their ways, they don't care to listen to others. They don't debate, they argue, they flame. They fear the unknown, and they stay away from it..perpetuating their own ignorance through choice. I've found this true of ALL religions, not just one or two. I go out of my way to face what I don't know, to learn everything I can, and to make an informed decision. I don't simply attack the beliefs of others, if they attack mine..I try to educate. If they have something to say, I'll listen. If I'm wrong about something I've learned, or thought I learned which instead was an assumption..I ask to be corrected. In the witchcraft thread that's been going on, I've defended my beliefs, to an extent, and those of the others, but applied the principles I've listed. However, at the same time, other people have simply insulted these beliefs, instead of LEARNING. I truly believe that you must learn all you can about ANY subject, before you can pass a valid judgement upon it. Knowledge is knowledge...and it truly is a powerful thing to possess it. Why make it more difficult to learn, by attacking others?

But seriously, I'm thinking people get off on the Christophobia. Why else would they start thread after thread attacking us?

Probably because of the more extreme forms of Christianity in the world trying to outlaw the teaching of evolution in secular schools, have the state enforce a Christian definition of marriage and family, and suchlike.

George Bush's infamous quote 'No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.' comes to mind. 'S lashing out, is all.

So are you saying that there are sane people who believe in dragons?
Nope. And that's the point - that no sane person believes in dragons just because the read about them, so why beleive in one specific explanation of God just because you read it?

So this is, what, the 80,000th thread about this? Honest to fucking God, it's entirely based on your personal bias, champ. If you're more Christian, you notice the anti-Christianity more than the anti-other stuff.

The atheists complain about the anti-Atheist bent, the Muslims complain about anti-Muslim bigotry, and you complain about anti-Christian posters.

The liberals say this forum is hardcore conservative, and the conservatives say this forum is bluer than the Blue Man Group.

It's a debate forum. People come here to debate. It would be very, very boring if everyone here agreed on everything. If you see an "anti-Christian bigot" in a thread, debate them. Argue the facts. Don't piss and moan like a baby with statements like: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians? as if they're all irrational lunatics just because they don't like your particular brand of imaginary man-in-the-sky fairy tales.

There isn't any larger a number of "anti-Christians" as there is anti anyone else. Your blinders simply make it seem that way.

What is the difference between an agnostic and an atheist? Curious because I've heard different sides (i.e., an agnostic believes nothing until he/she sees it, but still leaves room to be proved wrong).

An Atheist outright denounces religion.

Agnosts believe that "proof" of religion is impossible. All religions are just as plausible as others, and all religions have strengths and weakness. Basically the belief that there is no way to prove or disprove a certain religion, and adhering to none because of this.

So this is, what, the 80,000th thread about this? Honest to fucking God, it's entirely based on your personal bias, champ. If you're more Christian, you notice the anti-Christianity more than the anti-other stuff.

The atheists complain about the anti-Atheist bent, the Muslims complain about anti-Muslim bigotry, and you complain about anti-Christian posters.

The liberals say this forum is hardcore conservative, and the conservatives say this forum is bluer than the Blue Man Group.

It's a debate forum. People come here to debate. It would be very, very boring if everyone here agreed on everything. If you see an "anti-Christian bigot" in a thread, debate them. Argue the facts. Don't piss and moan like a baby with statements like: as if they're all irrational lunatics just because they don't like your particular brand of imaginary man-in-the-sky fairy tales.

There isn't any larger a number of "anti-Christians" as there is anti anyone else. Your blinders simply make it seem that way.


That was refreshing.

No, seriously.


An Atheist outright denounces religion.

Agnosts believe that "proof" of religion is impossible. All religions are just as plausible as others, and all religions have strengths and weakness. Basically the belief that there is no way to prove or disprove a certain religion, and adhering to none because of this.

Gotcha. Thank you.

Probably because of the more extreme forms of Christianity in the world trying to outlaw the teaching of evolution in secular schools, have the state enforce a Christian definition of marriage and family, and suchlike.

George Bush's infamous quote 'No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.' comes to mind. 'S lashing out, is all.

True. The difference between secularism and religion is fine, and really dangerous to define clearly. I think we should take religion into a more personal level than usurp the human apparatus in one go. Once we are all Christians, or completely secular, those problems will be solved automatically. The key to religion is personal salvation. National salvation sounds something close to fascism and communism.

Probably because of the more extreme forms of Christianity in the world trying to outlaw the teaching of evolution in secular schools, have the state enforce a Christian definition of marriage and family, and suchlike.

George Bush's infamous quote 'No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.' comes to mind. 'S lashing out, is all.
The anti-evolutionists are a foolish minority, and the state definition of marriage has been based on religious principals for thousands of years.

And Bush Sr.'s quote was at a time in the Cold War, so while not very tolerant, it was not as bad as it seemed. It was mainly aimed at the high levels of leftist sentiment amongst atheists, which was equated with unpatriotic behavior.

I have thought about that and when George Bush calls himself a Christian, I call him a liar.

Mn hmn.

People who believe in Santa after puberty: Go to the insane asylum.

People who believe in the other supernatural man: Vote.

People tell their children to believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny. Television networks broadcast cartoons propagating such beliefs. There are parades and kids lining up in shopping malls, waiting to sit on some strange man's lap because they want to believe in something greater than themselves. Now no one in their right mind would put up as much a fuss, trying to prove that Santa is fake. So why is it that there are people who feel they need to put down Christianity?

Because nobody's blocking the doors to abortion clinics in the name of Santa Claus. Because nobody's moving to marginalize homosexuals and criminalize their couplings because the Easter Bunny Book said it was wrong. Because Santa's believers don't knock on our door, telling us if we don't believe in Santa in a certain way, we're going to hell.

No because they serve a purpose that I can see benefits me and other people. Except dancing, I don't dance. These things are capable of keeping human beings in good mental health because they can provide laughter, stress relief, and it can take your mind off the troubles in your life. If your mental health is bad it can manifest physically which is why I find these things particularly important.

The same can be said of religion. Unfortunately those who like to argue against organised religions tend to focus on the negative aspects. It is true that a fervent belief in Christianity led to the Crusades, which were disasterous for everyone involved. But it has also provided many communities with solidarity. It offers many people a source of comfort. It creates a sense of charity towards the poor and gives many people something to aspire to. Does this sound silly to you?

An Atheist outright denounces religion.

Agnosts believe that "proof" of religion is impossible. All religions are just as plausible as others, and all religions have strengths and weakness. Basically the belief that there is no way to prove or disprove a certain religion, and adhering to none because of this.

Actually, people will call themselves atheists that fit either of those, given that neither actually believes actively in a God or Gods. People who identify themselves as agnostics generally just don't want to be identified with the more extreme RAWR forms of atheism.

Prove it.

Prove that aliens arent partying with rick james on alpha centauri.

Mn hmn.

People who believe in Santa after puberty: Go to the insane asylum.

People who believe in the other supernatural man: Vote.

That's because those other people believe in the correct supernatural man.

Prove that aliens arent partying with rick james on alpha centauri.

That reminded me of Dave Chapelle. :p

Actually, people will call themselves atheists that fit either of those, given that neither actually believes actively in a God or Gods. People who identify themselves as agnostics generally just don't want to be identified with the more extreme RAWR forms of atheism.

Actually, atheists are just someone who has no theist belief, though many people falsely call themselves such. Antitheist is a much more fitting term.

The anti-evolutionists are a foolish minority

A foolish but very loud minority with a lot of lawyers and money, unfortunately.

And Bush Sr.'s quote was at a time in the Cold War, so while not very tolerant, it was not as bad as it seemed. It was mainly aimed at the high levels of leftist sentiment amongst atheists, which was equated with unpatriotic behavior.

1987 was hardly the height of the Cold War.

So are you saying that there are sane people who believe in dragons?

Oh, dragons did exist and do infact exist today. Don't believe me? Go to Pelopanesia and get chased by an eight foot long dragon which sets your skin on fire with it's mouth. It's called a Komodo Dragon. It has a bite which will infect you with deadly bacteria, causing a severe burning sensation, and ultimately death.

And what of the dragon of before? ALL dragons have real-world basis. The Chinese Dragon more than likely is derived from the Oarfish, an extremely rare and elusive animal which fits the Chinese dragon to a "T". It is 30 feet long, with "whiskers" on it's head. Only once has a live one been photographed.

What of Medival Dragons? Look at the bones of the past. If you were a person who happened upon a four-foot Therapod(Convention meat eating dinosaur), what would you think? Find a fossil of a Pteradon, and you now have a dragon. Mix this with stories of serpents breathing fire(Venomous Snakes), and you have yourself a dragon.

In south america, the serpent-like dragons were likely based off of Boas.

Basically all dragons are real in the sense that they are based off of real depiction.

Nope. And that's the point - that no sane person believes in dragons just because the read about them, so why beleive in one specific explanation of God just because you read it?

Before we go on, I should make clear, that while I consider myself a Christian, I am not a Christian in the traditional sense and there are a lot of other Christians who don't necessarily agree with what I'm about to say. But when you are talking about Jesus, you are talking about a historical figure that all people recognise. Now if he was the son of God can be debated, just as the existence of God can be debated. The reason it can be debated is because it can be neither proved or disproved. Now you can argue that the same thing can be said of dragons, that they once existed. But do they continue to exist? If so, where are they? Because of the spiritual nature of God there is no scientific way to prove or disprove his existence.

Don't piss and moan like a baby with statements like:
I'm not pissing and moaning. I'm trying to understand why people feel the need to deride Christians and Christianity. To understand why they must make themselves out to be superior to us.

Kinda like the leftists saying we need to "understand" the terrorists. ;)
as if they're all irrational lunatics
You said it... I didn't. :p

(and don't start whining and calling me a hypocrite...it's just a lame attempt at humor. :p)

Before we go on, I should make clear, that while I consider myself a Christian, I am not a Christian in the traditional sense and there are a lot of other Christians who don't necessarily agree with what I'm about to say. But when you are talking about Jesus, you are talking about a historical figure that all people recognise. Now if he was the son of God can be debated, just as the existence of God can be debated. The reason it can be debated is because it can be neither proved or disproved. Now you can argue that the same thing can be said of dragons, that they once existed. But do they continue to exist? If so, where are they? Because of the spiritual nature of God there is no scientific way to prove or disprove his existence.

Wow. Unless I'm missing something, you just totally failed to say anything at all.

Before we go on, I should make clear, that while I consider myself a Christian, I am not a Christian in the traditional sense and there are a lot of other Christians who don't necessarily agree with what I'm about to say. But when you are talking about Jesus, you are talking about a historical figure that all people recognise. Now if he was the son of God can be debated, just as the existence of God can be debated. The reason it can be debated is because it can be neither proved or disproved. Now you can argue that the same thing can be said of dragons, that they once existed. But do they continue to exist? If so, where are they? Because of the spiritual nature of God there is no scientific way to prove or disprove his existence.
Oh, I'm not one of the nutters who thinks Jesus didn't exist, I just say he wasn't divine. But one could easily claim that dragons exist spiritually as much as God, and just don't show themselves much any more, like God doesn't show up too often.

Oh, dragons did exist and do infact exist today. Don't believe me? Go to Pelopanesia and get chased by an eight foot long dragon which sets your skin on fire with it's mouth. It's called a Komodo Dragon. It has a bite which will infect you with deadly bacteria, causing a severe burning sensation, and ultimately death.

And what of the dragon of before? ALL dragons have real-world basis. The Chinese Dragon more than likely is derived from the Oarfish, an extremely rare and elusive animal which fits the Chinese dragon to a "T". It is 30 feet long, with "whiskers" on it's head. Only once has a live one been photographed.

What of Medival Dragons? Look at the bones of the past. If you were a person who happened upon a four-foot Therapod(Convention meat eating dinosaur), what would you think? Find a fossil of a Pteradon, and you now have a dragon. Mix this with stories of serpents breathing fire(Venomous Snakes), and you have yourself a dragon.

In south america, the serpent-like dragons were likely based off of Boas.

Basically all dragons are real in the sense that they are based off of real depiction.


Semantics at best. What of books about aliens, or zombies, or magicians? Books about life currently on mars? Hell, what about all the other religions? There are just as much proof for each one pretty much.

Wow. Unless I'm missing something, you just totally failed to say anything at all.

What I got out of it was:

The poster is his own personal denomination of Christianity. Himism.

Jesus was a real person, but not necessarily divine.

Dragons may or may not have existed.

God is above being tested scientifically.

The same can be said of religion. Unfortunately those who like to argue against organised religions tend to focus on the negative aspects. It is true that a fervent belief in Christianity led to the Crusades, which were disasterous for everyone involved. But it has also provided many communities with solidarity. It offers many people a source of comfort. It creates a sense of charity towards the poor and gives many people something to aspire to. Does this sound silly to you?

Yes it does because the major examples of religion that I have seen in my life are death, destruction, hatred. Some of the most vile acts in history have been caused by religious beliefs. I already have a sense of charity towards people in need, you have to be one stupid or plain evil person to not have a good grasp on human decency and morality. I do the right thing because it's right and I care, most religious people do the right thing because it'll get them into heaven.

Before we go on, I should make clear, that while I consider myself a Christian, I am not a Christian in the traditional sense and there are a lot of other Christians who don't necessarily agree with what I'm about to say. But when you are talking about Jesus, you are talking about a historical figure that all people recognise. Now if he was the son of God can be debated, just as the existence of God can be debated. The reason it can be debated is because it can be neither proved or disproved. Now you can argue that the same thing can be said of dragons, that they once existed. But do they continue to exist? If so, where are they? Because of the spiritual nature of God there is no scientific way to prove or disprove his existence.

So because a book references a few real places and people, it can be taken to have evidence for something much more abstract? No court would ever consider that sufficient evidence for conviction.

Mn hmn.

People who believe in Santa after puberty: Go to the insane asylum.

People who believe in the other supernatural man: Vote.

Because as adults we learn that Santa Clause is a creation of man. You can argue that God is also a creation of man, but Christ was an actual historical figure. To believe in what he preached is no crazier than believing in Plato or Gandhi or any other wise man. Now with regards to those who believe in God being allowed to vote, I'm curious to know if there are any countries were the majority of the population does not believe in God.

Oh, dragons did exist and do infact exist today. Don't believe me? Go to Pelopanesia and get chased by an eight foot long dragon which sets your skin on fire with it's mouth. It's called a Komodo Dragon. It has a bite which will infect you with deadly bacteria, causing a severe burning sensation, and ultimately death.

And what of the dragon of before? ALL dragons have real-world basis. The Chinese Dragon more than likely is derived from the Oarfish, an extremely rare and elusive animal which fits the Chinese dragon to a "T". It is 30 feet long, with "whiskers" on it's head. Only once has a live one been photographed.

What of Medival Dragons? Look at the bones of the past. If you were a person who happened upon a four-foot Therapod(Convention meat eating dinosaur), what would you think? Find a fossil of a Pteradon, and you now have a dragon. Mix this with stories of serpents breathing fire(Venomous Snakes), and you have yourself a dragon.

In south america, the serpent-like dragons were likely based off of Boas.

Basically all dragons are real in the sense that they are based off of real depiction.
Very good point.
And, like the "dragons", I'm happy to accept that "God" or "Jesus" existed.
I just don't think that God or Jesus did, word for word, what happened in the Bible.
I think the Bible is as different from any historical incidents as Dragonheart is from a komodo dragon.

And that's why I get very frustrated with religion sometimes. If someone says "This is what we have of religion. It might not be all right, but it's got a good message, and is probably based on something pretty cool" I'll be all for it. Probably even convert.

As it is, when someone says "Oh, no, it happened exactly like this" and quotes two specific lines from the bible that can be interpreted in a certain way to prove some point or other, that's when I have a problem. I can't help but think of the dragons.

Dragons were real. Over time the stories have changed, but that doesn't make them less valid. It just means we can't take them as 100% literal truth anymore, instead we should focus on the story.

heh. Of course, the die-hard christians will just dismiss this opinion, saying that the Bible is holy, and flawless.

BTW: I like how this is the fourth page of the thread and the question hasn't been explicitly answered. Many have danced around the question like Mohammad Ali in the middle of a prize fight, though, some have proven my point for me with the tone and content of their comments.

This thread is like being a wallflower at a party. I just *love* people-watching. It says so much more about a person than what actually comes out of their mouths. :)

Kinda like the leftists saying we need to "understand" the terrorists. ;)



Actually, that is good advice. If we understand what terrorists think, than we can fight them more effectively. By going in all gung-ho, Bush has actually HELPED many terrorist organizations. He is a bigger recruitment tool than a thousand Osama-Bin-Blownthehellupbutsomehowstilllives could every even hope to be. By understanding terrorists, we may be able to have fewer :mp5:, and more efficient :sniper: .

Because nobody's blocking the doors to abortion clinics in the name of Santa Claus. Because nobody's moving to marginalize homosexuals and criminalize their couplings because the Easter Bunny Book said it was wrong. Because Santa's believers don't knock on our door, telling us if we don't believe in Santa in a certain way, we're going to hell.

So should the fact that 19 Muslims hijacked four planes, mean that all Muslims are guilty of the September 11 attacks?

What I got out of it was:

The poster is his own personal denomination of Christianity. Himism.

Jesus was a real person, but not necessarily divine.

Dragons may or may not have existed.

God is above being tested scientifically.

I got: 'I do not represent all Christians.'

'Since Jesus was a real person it's unreasonable to equate the existence of dragons with the existence of God, even though we can't prove Jesus was God.'

Utterly superfluous evidence +1. Holy shit, we can't prove God exists, let's not make any conclusion or argument based on this.

To believe in what he preached is no crazier than believing in Plato or Gandhi or any other wise man.
Yeah, but nobody is calling for equal time for Plato or Gandhi.

And nobody says "Plato was divinely inspired, so his beliefs are 100% correct and cannot be challenged".
Nobody said "Gandhi's way was the only way".

Believing in christianity isn't the problem. Believing in *anything* in such an unquestioning way that you can't reexamine your beliefs, and worse still for some, pushing those unquestionable beliefs on others, that's where the problem is.

And I'm certainly NOT accusing all christians of pushing their beliefs on others. Or being unable to question their beliefs.

Prove that aliens arent partying with rick james on alpha centauri.

Rick James is standing right next to me, and he thinks you're a jack ass ;)

I got: 'I do not represent all Christians.'

'Since Jesus was a real person it's unreasonable to equate the existence of dragons with the existence of God, even though we can't prove Jesus was God.'

Utterly superfluous evidence +1. Holy shit, we can't prove God exists, let's not make any conclusion or argument based on this.

As I read it, the post made the standard "Jesus was a real man, therefore the Bible is true/God is beyond man's scientific method for testing" argument, with dragons thrown for lord-knows-why.

BTW: I like how this is the fourth page of the thread and the question hasn't been explicitly answered. Many have danced around the question like Mohammad Ali in the middle of a prize fight, though, some have proven my point for me with the tone and content of their comments.

This thread is like being a wallflower at a party. I just *love* people-watching. It says so much more about a person than what actually comes out of their mouths. :)
I thought I addressed all three questions. Was there something in my post that required more clarification, or did I avoid the true issues uinintentionally?

So because a book references a few real places and people, it can be taken to have evidence for something much more abstract? No court would ever consider that sufficient evidence for conviction.
You nailed the biggest problem right on the head and basically proved my point.

Why does nearly every Christianity-related thread on NS sound like someone is trying to convict Christians of something? It's as if we're being put on trial simply because we are Christians.

Hence my use of the term "bigotry".

As I read it, the post made the standard "Jesus was a real man, therefore the Bible is true/God is beyond man's scientific method for testing" argument, with dragons thrown for lord-knows-why.

That's a standard? Fuck it, let's destroy the human race and start again with catgirls.

I don't hat all Christians/Theists, believe it or not. I mock your faith because I find it humorous and often laughable, I mock your double standards because you refuse to see that they exist. No doubt you laugh at me in return for the same reasons (if you don't, that is quite sad. You deserve to, its your right!). The reason I feel the need to push arguments against it and force a defense is because I treat it like science - adapt and mold your beliefs of a higher power, don't stay stubbornly attached to an ancient metaphor but rather let the faith breathe and grow. Challange it whenever possible, so that it may be refined and modified to better fit the truth. We cannot possibly comprhend a higher power perfectly; we must change our definitions to fit the most recent truth as best we can.

thats one of the most intelligent things i've ever heard. i'm glad that there are actually smart people out there who see both sides of the argument. i wish i was smart... :(

*snip* and the state definition of marriage has been based on religious principals for thousands of years.
Thousands of years? Really? News to me. Marriage has been, for most of human history, about avantages, well, there's sex and children too of course. But most marriages have been aranged. and was more a transaction and aliance between families/clans. Religion had very little to do with it.

Actually it still doesn't, all the religious bits of marriage is more asking for God's blessing upon the couple.

That's a standard? Fuck it, let's destroy the human race and start again with catgirls.

You clearly have not been spending much time in General lately. That's a pretty standard argument made by Christians when confronted with the "You can't scientifically prove God's existence" reason for atheists' disbelief. And the Jesus thing is usually an appeasement technique used so that the Christian debater does not seem like one of the irrational "world created in seven days" type.

Yes it does because the major examples of religion that I have seen in my life are death, destruction, hatred. Some of the most vile acts in history have been caused by religious beliefs.
Wrong. Some of the most vile acts in history have been caused by people ignoring or misinterpreting the true beliefs of a religion and/or hijacking a religion as a power platform for themselves.

To say that religion itself is the root cause is misinformed or ignorant at best.

So should the fact that 19 Muslims hijacked four planes, mean that all Muslims are guilty of the September 11 attacks?

Of course not.
That's just silly.

What we CAN say, however, is that as the Muslims hijacked the planes in the name of Allah (if they did. I don't know!) then we accept that Muslims can turn their religion to destructive purposes. No surprise there, most religions can be turned to destructive purposes.

Yes, it's perfectly valid, after the september 11 attacks to talk to Muslims, and say "so, what in your religion allows this?". Many will say "Nothing"

Just like it's valid to say "So, christians, what in your religion allows picketing of abortion clinics?". And some christians will say "Nothing"

equally valid to say "So, atheist, why do you believe in evolution".

Challenging a belief, because of how someone else implemented it, is perfectly valid. If I say "I like star wars" you're perfectly entitled to say "Oh, it's awful. That annoying jar-jar". I never said I liked jar-jar. You can challenge me on it, and I'm free to respond with "Oh, I hated him too", or otherwise defend why it was a good addition to the movie.

You nailed the biggest problem right on the head and basically proved my point.

Why does nearly every Christianity-related thread on NS sound like someone is trying to convict Christians of something? It's as if we're being put on trial simply because we are Christians.

Hence my use of the term "bigotry".

Wow, way to totally take my comment out of context.

I was using an analogy, smart one. My point was that christianity(and every other major religion, and most/all others) have not enough proof to be reasonable enough to believe in. While the mere fact that there is no real proof, despite millions of followers for hundreds(or thousands, depending on religion) of years, is plenty convincing to disbelieve in any religion.

You clearly have not been spending much time in General lately. That's a pretty standard argument made by Christians when confronted with the "You can't scientifically prove God's existence" reason for atheists' disbelief. And the Jesus thing is usually an appeasement technique used so that the Christian debater does not seem like one of the irrational "world created in seven days" type.

Thank you for destroying my faith in humanity for today. I didn't need it anyway.

BTW: I like how this is the fourth page of the thread and the question hasn't been explicitly answered. Many have danced around the question like Mohammad Ali in the middle of a prize fight, though, some have proven my point for me with the tone and content of their comments.

This thread is like being a wallflower at a party. I just *love* people-watching. It says so much more about a person than what actually comes out of their mouths. :)

Hey...I answered it. :p Besides what I posted on page..eh..four..or was it three?..I've no further useful input, so I've just been reading how the thread's progressed.

Edit: My second useful post was page three. *goes back to being a lurker*

Wow. Unless I'm missing something, you just totally failed to say anything at all.

Since the remark was not intended for you, you didn't miss anything. You can go back to being oblivious now.

Thank you for destroying my faith in humanity for today. I didn't need it anyway.

I'm quite surprised you still had that. I believe Snubis took a huge dump on mine way back then before Commando finally lit it on fire and peed the flames out.

Since the remark was not intended for you, you didn't miss anything. You can go back to being oblivious now.

Ah, so your comments are only supposed to make sense to one other person on the entire planet?

*Snip*I'm curious to know if there are any countries were the majority of the population does not believe in God.
Sure, Japan. 78% Buddhist, 78% Shintoist, 78% claiming no religion at all.

Sure, Japan. 78% Buddhist, 78% Shintoist, 78% claiming no religion at all.

234%

Not bad. Go Japan!

Oh, I'm not one of the nutters who thinks Jesus didn't exist, I just say he wasn't divine. But one could easily claim that dragons exist spiritually as much as God, and just don't show themselves much any more, like God doesn't show up too often.

Well then, you've convinced me to be open minded to the possibility that dragons exist in spiritual form, but your arguements have hardly deterred me from believing that God does not exist nor have you refuted the possibility that Jesus was/is divine.

Sure, Japan. 78% Buddhist, 78% Shintoist, 78% claiming no religion at all.

234%...Wow, Japan is so high-tech even their percentages are twice as good as anyone else's.

Very good point.
And, like the "dragons", I'm happy to accept that "God" or "Jesus" existed.
I just don't think that God or Jesus did, word for word, what happened in the Bible.
I think the Bible is as different from any historical incidents as Dragonheart is from a komodo dragon.

And that's why I get very frustrated with religion sometimes. If someone says "This is what we have of religion. It might not be all right, but it's got a good message, and is probably based on something pretty cool" I'll be all for it. Probably even convert.

As it is, when someone says "Oh, no, it happened exactly like this" and quotes two specific lines from the bible that can be interpreted in a certain way to prove some point or other, that's when I have a problem. I can't help but think of the dragons.

Dragons were real. Over time the stories have changed, but that doesn't make them less valid. It just means we can't take them as 100% literal truth anymore, instead we should focus on the story.

heh. Of course, the die-hard christians will just dismiss this opinion, saying that the Bible is holy, and flawless.

Biblical Scholars(Many of whom are christian) are actually finding out that much of what is in the traditional English Bible(King James Bible, I do believe) is misquoted or mistranslated from earlier texts.

1.Jesus more than likely was not born at an inn. Bethlahem was Joseph's Ancestral home. You have to remember that 2000 years ago, values were VERY different from now. If you were in a town where you had family, even distant family, you stayed with them, not matter what. If you didn't, it would be the most disrespectful thing you could do to them, and would bring a great deal of shame upon them and you. Also, Mary was with child. If you have a young women giving birth, for the first time no less, you will be around family, trying to make the woman as comfortable and SAFE as possible. Joseph would not be so stupid as to go to an inn.

Also, the homes of Bethlehem were not anything like what we consider homes. A household was set up into to seperate parts. The first was the main living quarters, where the people stayed. The second part was the MANGER, which was in a lower area, about a 5-foot deep dug out hole. All of this was in one room, but in two levels: The upper level being for people, the lower for animals.

Now then, the bible says Inn, doesn't it? Well, it didn't. The original hebrew word for "inn" is close to the word use for the main area of the house. The Upper room. And misread word would cause the "No room in the inn" to replace "No room upstairs".

The Household was likely crowded due to a woman with child. This would mean very little to no room in the UPPER ROOM, and thus the child would be kept in the MANGER.

2.The oldest version of the New Testament was found recently. The Devil's number is not 666. It is apparently 616.

3.Judas did not betray Jesus. The original texts do not mention the word "betray" AT ALL. The word used means "to hand over", which is completely different from betray. It is likely that Jesus had Judas hand him over to roman officials because Judas had the best connections to the the roman officials. Also, Jesus wanted to be caught to cause an uproar. Everything he did was done for a purpose.

4.Dispell the myth that Jesus was a calm and loving person. The Bible is very clear on this. He was a very tempermental person, especially concerning things involving corruption. He was also hardly the "help other people" kind of person. Instead, he was "Teach others to help themselves". Very rarely did he give a hand out, miracle or otherwise.

Well then, you've convinced me to be open minded to the possibility that dragons exist in spiritual form, but your arguements have hardly deterred me from believing that God does not exist nor have you refuted the possibility that Jesus was/is divine.

You believe Jesus was divine but God doesn't exist? Wow, that is a special form of Christianity.

Hey...I answered it. :p Besides what I posted on page..eh..four..or was it three?..I've no further useful input, so I've just been reading how the thread's progressed.
Okay. Okay. My bad. :) A *few* have answered the questions well. Most of the others have been tap-dancing like mofos, though.

Wrong. Some of the most vile acts in history have been caused by people ignoring or misinterpreting the true beliefs of a religion and/or hijacking a religion as a power platform for themselves.

To say that religion itself is the root cause is misinformed or ignorant at best.

Exactly my point. If religion did not exist at all there would be nothing to misinterpret or manipulate, therefore religion IS the cause of the problem because it can be so easily misunderstood and be used incorrectly. My view on religion is quite the opposite of ignorant or misinformed. I actually was religious at one point in my life but then I started actually paying attention to the bible and noticed how things didn't quite add up.

I've probably read the bible 10 times over, each time desperately trying to believe what was contained within. I then went on to study other religions because at the time people made me feel like I HAD to have a religion. I then came up with how I feel about religions in general after I had amassed this knoweledge.

The bottom line: There wouldn't be as much bullshit in the world if religion did not exist.

What I got out of it was:

The poster is his own personal denomination of Christianity. Himism.

Jesus was a real person, but not necessarily divine.

Dragons may or may not have existed.

God is above being tested scientifically.

Three out of four. Pretty good. The Himism was the only one you missed.

Yes it does because the major examples of religion that I have seen in my life are death, destruction, hatred. Some of the most vile acts in history have been caused by religious beliefs. I already have a sense of charity towards people in need, you have to be one stupid or plain evil person to not have a good grasp on human decency and morality. I do the right thing because it's right and I care, most religious people do the right thing because it'll get them into heaven.

So you believe that decency is something innate? And only hatred is taught?

Exactly my point. If religion did not exist at all there would be nothing to misinterpret or manipulate, therefore religion IS the cause of the problem because it can be so easily misunderstood and be used incorrectly.
That's like saying that if guns didn't exist, people wouldn't kill people.

*shakes head and walks off*

So because a book references a few real places and people, it can be taken to have evidence for something much more abstract? No court would ever consider that sufficient evidence for conviction.

Read history there are quite a number of courts that have.

The bottom line: There wouldn't be as much bullshit in the world if religion did not exist.

I beg to differ. The vast majority of the human race are idiots. Idiots tend to give off completely bull, and tend to do this by secreting it from a whole in the their face, not completely unlike the anus. What comes from the anus is often referred to as "shit", and thus most people give off bullshit.

Frankly, if religion did not exist, it would not change much. Bullshit, as you put, would still exist, just in different forms.

Read history there are quite a number of courts that have.

Way to totally miss the point there, champ.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/GMCMA/Other%20stuff/20050320133126Cerebellumed_Cheerleader.png

Exactly my point. If religion did not exist at all there would be nothing to misinterpret or manipulate, therefore religion IS the cause of the problem because it can be so easily misunderstood and be used incorrectly.

...

The bottom line: There wouldn't be as much bullshit in the world if religion did not exist.
Pshaw. Humans will find something to fight over. You really think athists are any better?
Heck, there was even an incident with two groups of scientists at a conference discussing how to classify animals, which turned into a fist-fight over the correct classifications. I wish I knew the exact details, heart about it from a university biology class.

Heck, Hitler even managed the whole Aryan thing without needing God's support for that.

Tell one group that their people, or beliefs are better than the other, and you get the same effect. Even if it's not called religion.

Try this experiment. Go on a linux message board and post the "why windows is so great" topic. Or vice versa. You'll find they're all long bored of that discussion.

As I read it, the post made the standard "Jesus was a real man, therefore the Bible is true/God is beyond man's scientific method for testing" argument, with dragons thrown for lord-knows-why.

Way off... You read my postings the way a member of Al-Quaeda reads the Quran.

Way off... You read my postings the way a member of Al-Quaeda reads the Quran.

And yet you can't tell us what you actually were trying to say, can you?

Aye. Humans are humans. Humans are idiotic nutjobs.

The big issue with religion is that it makes it that much easier, because it suggests things like "You will live forever after you die" and "This isn't the only world we have."

It takes away some of the most important factors that keeping people from being COMPLETELY stupid.

That's like saying that if guns didn't exist, people wouldn't kill people.

*shakes head and walks off*

It's not anything like that. If you take away guns people will still have something to fight about like, RELIGION perhaps? They'll just stab each other instead.

Take away religion and people will certainly have other things to fight about, but at least the amount of things to fight about will dramatically be reduced thus preserving more human lives.

If religion didn't exist in India or Pakistan would they be brutal enemies? Hell no, they wouldn't be threatening to launch missles at each other and all that crap. If religion didn't exist would the terrorists have boarded that plane and sacrificed their lives along with everyone on the plane and in the towers to get to some place they we aren't even sure exists and most likely(in my opinion) does not? HELL no!

Now these threads are getting old.

I am beginning to think that a portion of the Christians on NS are masochists with the amount of threads that bait abuse.

They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed).

They wrote about Dragons in the apocrypha.

Protestants don't(GENERALLY) believe in the Apocrypha, except as somewhat historical and somewhat legendary.

Again, please, re-check your 'facts.'

Okay. Okay. My bad. :) A *few* have answered the questions well. Most of the others have been tap-dancing like mofos, though.

*laughs*Thanks. And..for the record..I can't dance,at all. I...gracefully sidestep. The thing to remember is that it seems to be hard to get people who are willing to post intellectually sound, on topic posts as of late...or is that just me?

Read history there are quite a number of courts that have.

Amazing that you could answer that, when I didnt even say what the conviction would be about. Again, it was a god damn analogy.

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?
Well, gee George, if ya hold up a lightning rod in a thunderstorm, what do you expect to happen? In all honesty, the most blatant anti-Christian sentiments that I've seen have been posted in threads like this, where the original poster was more or less fishing for these types of posts. In threads that have been actual debates between Christians and others, where Christians have NOT been trying to shove their viewpoints down other throats, the debates were civil and people showed actual respect for each other, and each other’s beliefs.

I almost have to agree with an historian I once read (the original author is, alas, lost to memory). But the conclusion this gentleman reached was the Christianity is too successful for a particular segment of its believers. For a religion based upon acts of sacrifice and martryism, the fact that since Christianity now dominates the globe as the world's biggest religion, and indeed influences powerful nations, has caused problems for its believers who feel that they must have to emulate Christ. Since no one is being tossed to lions anymore, these Christians then create situations to struggle against to 'prove' their faith and create martyrs to hold up.

In many ways it reminds me of radical Islam and their quests for martyrsism as well, even though mainstream Islam and Islamic scholars will tell you their beliefs and need for struggle is false.

As a Christian myself though I ask you, why do you care? Faith is Faith. This truth is Truth. Who cares what they say? He, Himself said faith the size of a mustard seed can move a mountain. He also said blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe. So why on earth do you care what these people state? Is faith so easily shaken because of name calling?

My Truth is my Truth and it cannot be taken from me. I don't have to prove it to anyone by myself, and I have long since examined it (and keep doing so) and found it to BE that Rock that was promised.

So why do you keep twapping the beehive?

They wrote about Dragons in the apocrypha.

Protestants don't(GENERALLY) believe in the Apocrypha, except as somewhat historical and somewhat legendary.

Again, please, re-check your 'facts.'

What 'facts' did I mention?

I never talked about protestants believing in Dragons, or the Apocrypha. I didnt say the world Apocrypha, Protestant, or fact. I was using dragons as a hypothetical thing that one might believe in despite no real proof in them(and I wasnt talking about komodo dragons, or anything such).

Of course not.
That's just silly.

What we CAN say, however, is that as the Muslims hijacked the planes in the name of Allah (if they did. I don't know!) then we accept that Muslims can turn their religion to destructive purposes. No surprise there, most religions can be turned to destructive purposes.

Yes, it's perfectly valid, after the september 11 attacks to talk to Muslims, and say "so, what in your religion allows this?". Many will say "Nothing"

Just like it's valid to say "So, christians, what in your religion allows picketing of abortion clinics?". And some christians will say "Nothing"

equally valid to say "So, atheist, why do you believe in evolution".

Challenging a belief, because of how someone else implemented it, is perfectly valid. If I say "I like star wars" you're perfectly entitled to say "Oh, it's awful. That annoying jar-jar". I never said I liked jar-jar. You can challenge me on it, and I'm free to respond with "Oh, I hated him too", or otherwise defend why it was a good addition to the movie.

As WW 1 and 2 proved, nationalism can be used for destructive purposes, should we abolish nations? What about knives? Knives can be used for killing? Should we round up all the knives? You have the right to criticise the actions of some Christians, but to make me accountable for their actions is called bigotry.

Ah, so your comments are only supposed to make sense to one other person on the entire planet?

No. But since they weren't intended for you don't I don't see why you should complain when you don't understand.

"They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed)."

Apologies, Chellis-A misunderstanding.

I thought you meant the books of the Apocrypha-a major dissention between Cath. and Prot. is the Apocrypha, a series of later books 'added' to the bible.

When you said books, I thought you meant books of the bible-And the majority of Christianity is(by denomination and power, not number) is Protestant. So I was..Well, you understand.

I assumed you were saying something you weren't.

Sorry.

I should be more polite.

Well, gee George, if ya hold up a lightning rod in a thunderstorm, what do you expect to happen? In all honesty, the most blatant anti-Christian sentiments that I've seen have been posted in threads like this, where the original poster was more or less fishing for these types of posts.

-snip-

So why do you keep twapping the beehive?
Actually, it was more of a test to see if some who seem to have the worst problems with Christianity could do so rationally and without being hateful about it.

I've learned that most can't.

So, call it a "public experiment". ;)

EDIT: I should have said "elitest" instead of "hateful". Poor choice of words spilling from a jumbled brain on my part. :)

If religion didn't exist would the terrorists have boarded that plane and sacrificed their lives along with everyone on the plane and in the towers to get to some place they we aren't even sure exists and most likely(in my opinion) does not? HELL no!

The main reasons behind the attacks werent religious, just the motivations. Take a little time to understand the reasons why the terrorists do what they do, you will find it isnt all religious.

As WW 1 and 2 proved, nationalism can be used for destructive purposes, should we abolish nations? What about knives? Knives can be used for killing? Should we round up all the knives? You have the right to criticise the actions of some Christians, but to make me accountable for their actions is called bigotry.

Do you even read the posts you're quoting? You seem to be copy-pasting generic whining about persecution from a pre-made list. Why does questioning the actions of people equate to abolishing their religion? Where was making others accountable for the crimes of bad members of their faith even mentioned in the post you quoted?

No. But since they weren't intended for you don't I don't see why you should complain when you don't understand.

Because you're posting on a public debate board. If you're admitting your debating technique makes no sense, fine by me.

You believe Jesus was divine but God doesn't exist? Wow, that is a special form of Christianity.

Learn to read.

The main reasons behind the attacks werent religious, just the motivations. Take a little time to understand the reasons why the terrorists do what they do, you will find it isnt all religious.

I surely have, I even saw this program on the history channel detailing the events which took place onboard the planes. They had manuals encouraging and instructing them on what to do and it was SATURATED with religious references. I don't think they would have been as willing to die if they didn't think there were virgins and stuff waiting for them in heaven.

"They wrote about dragons in books. And imps. Do you believe in them? I mean, if you believe only writing and thoughts(and thoughts are a reproducable effect which can be noticed)."

Apologies, Chellis-A misunderstanding.

I thought you meant the books of the Apocrypha-a major dissention between Cath. and Prot. is the Apocrypha, a series of later books 'added' to the bible.

When you said books, I thought you meant books of the bible-And the majority of Christianity is(by denomination and power, not number) is Protestant. So I was..Well, you understand.

I assumed you were saying something you weren't.

Sorry.

I should be more polite.

Ahh. By they, i just meant people in general. Like "They say atkins is bad for you" or "They say an apple a day keeps the doctor away".

And yet you can't tell us what you actually were trying to say, can you?

What is it that you don't understand?

I surely have, I even saw this program on the history channel detailing the events which took place onboard the planes. They had manuals encouraging and instructing them on what to do and it was SATURATED with religious references. I don't think they would have been as willing to die if they didn't think there were virgins and stuff waiting for them in heaven.

Other than the fact that the history channel has a notorious reputation for facts, what you said is motivation. Thats what motivates many of the people, especially the lower-level people, to do what they do. Im talking reasons, such as western intrusion into the middle east, etc etc.

234%...Wow, Japan is so high-tech even their percentages are twice as good as anyone else's.

234%

Not bad. Go Japan!
That's the bit about Japan and the Japanese that I really like. Religion to most of the popultion is very casual and ingrained within their culture. It's actually very hard to get one to say what religion they are as the question makes no sence to them. You go to a Shinto shine when you need something and for a baby, and you go to a Buddhist temple when you die. Right now, many Japanese go to a Christian church to get married because it's popular, not becuse they all have decided to convert. Other times they don't think about religion at all.

And they see nothing wrong or weird with these blendings. It's very refreshing actually.

But the question was is there a country that the majority does not believe in God, and yes, Japan does not.

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

LOL.

If I attack X's stupid or hateful ideas, I don't give a flip whether X is a Christian, Buddhist, or Zoroastrian.

But Christians like yourself seem to think your ideas are special. If I point out that your homophobia is irrational, vile, and undemocratic, I'm an "anti-Christian bigot."

I guess idealizing matyrdom is built right into your thinking.

(BTW, you may want to look up "bigot." In the context you are using it, it is not necessarily a perjorative.)

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis?

I don't.

I deride and insult some heinous thinking. Some of which is by Christians.

Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion?

It is a debate forum. Do you want a free pass?

"Oh, you're a Christian? Then you must be right, sir. Can't question your logic or irrational hatreds, sir. Thank you for your venomous spew, sir."

If you don't want to defend your opinions, then don't.

If you don't want people to challenge your opinions, don't post 'em.

But don't cry "foul" every time someone questions your opinion just because you are a Christian.

Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are?

Are you of the opinion you are wrong? That your belief in God is a supertious sham? A veneer for your irrational fears and hatreds?

No.

Well, how dare you feel you are more right than those that disagree? How dare you?

Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I'm not the one that claims a omnipotent and omniscient being has a special love for me and whispers divine truths in my ear.

Nor did I recently declare that gays should get over their sexuality and stop "defining themselves" by it.

Good thing you are never arrogant or condescending like that.

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

But some of my best friends are Christians ....

Come down from that cross and get real.

Few here hate all Christians. But for just about every group you'll find some here that hate them.

Some of us refuse to genuflect whenever you whip out your Bible card. Get over it.

(Btw, what happened in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards lawyers? I don't see many signatures declaring that Christians should be buggered with jackhammers. )

Other than the fact that the history channel has a notorious reputation for facts, what you said is motivation. Thats what motivates many of the people, especially the lower-level people, to do what they do. Im talking reasons, such as western intrusion into the middle east, etc etc.

What I'm saying is, if they didn't have religious motivation for it nobody would want to sacrifice themselves, they would have most likely tried to find another way to attack their targets which would have been MUCH harder to accomplish.

Amazing that you could answer that, when I didnt even say what the conviction would be about. Again, it was a god damn analogy.

If you are a Christian you shouldn't use God's name in vain. If you are an atheist how can God damn something if he doesn't exist?

Now these threads are getting old.

I am beginning to think that a portion of the Christians on NS are masochists with the amount of threads that bait abuse.

It's a matyr complex. :D

Learn to read.

Learn to debate. Lessee...

but your arguements have hardly deterred me from believing that God does not exist nor have you refuted the possibility that Jesus was/is divine.

You stated you do not believe that God exists, but stated that the poster had 'not refuted Jesus was / is divine,' indicating you believe this needs to be refuted, indicating you belive in Jesus' divinity.

Frankly, if you can't explain why my reading of that is wrong, don't bother answering.

What is it that you don't understand?

As I read it, the post made the standard "Jesus was a real man, therefore the Bible is true/God is beyond man's scientific method for testing" argument, with dragons thrown for lord-knows-why.

Way off... You read my postings the way a member of Al-Quaeda reads the Quran.

You stated Sdaeriji had misread your post without explaining what you actually meant, instead resorting to comparing him to a member of Al-Quaeda [the ad hominem fallacy]. Insulting someone instead of addressing their argument might seem a fantastically effective debating tactic, but it's not.

*laughs*Thanks. And..for the record..I can't dance,at all. I...gracefully sidestep. The thing to remember is that it seems to be hard to get people who are willing to post intellectually sound, on topic posts as of late...or is that just me?
Honestly, I think it's just an outward showing of most people's close-mindedness. They refuse to examine their own beliefs, so getting them to do any "navel contemplating" around here is like squeezing blood from a turnip: it ain't gonna happen.

I'm just glad to see that there are a few here that I can have an intelligent conversation with...when I wish...and when I'm not being a contrary ass. ;)

What I'm saying is, if they didn't have religious motivation for it nobody would want to sacrifice themselves, they would have most likely tried to find another way to attack their targets which would have been MUCH harder to accomplish.

I realize, and if you go through my posts, you see I'm militantly antitheistic. I was just pointing out the main reasons for terrorism isnt religion.

I realize, and if you go through my posts, you see I'm militantly antitheistic. I was just pointing out the main reasons for terrorism isnt religion.

Right on man(woman?) I see what you are sayin.

If you are a Christian you shouldn't use God's name in vain. If you are an atheist how can God damn something if he doesn't exist?

Semantics. I say God damn because its nomenclature, and everyone understands what I mean by it. Seriously, if this is the only argument you can default to, I pity you.

Right on man(woman?) I see what you are sayin.

Man.

Actually, it was more of a test to see if some who seem to have the worst problems with Christianity could do so rationally and without being hateful about it.

I've learned that most can't.

So, call it a "public experiment". ;)

EDIT: I should have said "elitest" instead of "hateful". Poor choice of words spilling from a jumbled brain on my part. :)

Actually, that isn't close to what you asked.

If you want to know why some people disagree with Christianity, ask. But you didn't.

Of course, if we give you a list, you and others on here will cry that we're picking on Christians.

Learn to debate. Lessee...



You stated you do not believe that God exists, but stated that the poster had 'not refuted Jesus was / is divine,' indicating you believe this needs to be refuted, indicating you belive in Jesus' divinity.

Frankly, if you can't explain why my reading of that is wrong, don't bother answering.







You stated Sdaeriji had misread your post without explaining what you actually meant, instead resorting to comparing him to a member of Al-Quaeda [the ad hominem fallacy]. Insulting someone instead of addressing their argument might seem a fantastically effective debating tactic, but it's not.

And yet you use it so often.

Honestly, I think it's just an outward showing of most people's close-mindedness. They refuse to examine their own beliefs, so getting them to do any "navel contemplating" around here is like squeezing blood from a turnip: it ain't gonna happen.

I'm just glad to see that there are a few here that I can have an intelligent conversation with...when I wish...and when I'm not being a contrary ass. ;)

Says the one complaining about people critisizing(sp?) his religion.

Honestly, I think it's just an outward showing of most people's close-mindedness. They refuse to examine their own beliefs, so getting them to do any "navel contemplating" around here is like squeezing blood from a turnip: it ain't gonna happen.*snip*

LOL.

Pot. Meet kettle.

Honestly, I think it's just an outward showing of most people's close-mindedness. They refuse to examine their own beliefs, so getting them to do any "navel contemplating" around here is like squeezing blood from a turnip: it ain't gonna happen.

I'm just glad to see that there are a few here that I can have an intelligent conversation with...when I wish...and when I'm not being a contrary ass. ;)

*nods*Precisely what I said a few pages back. I've problems with some of my fellow Pagans, as well. They're certaintly in the minority, but they're there.They will 1) Act uninformed. 2) Act like other religions are false. 3)Act as if Christians are the enemy, and to be hated/shunned, etc at all costs. I treat them exactly the same as I would anyone else who acts like that. Other religions do this, as well, but I notice a polarization between some specific belief systems, which I believe can and SHOULD be rectified by a mutual "cultural exchange", so to speak.

And yet you use it so often.

Got quotes? And maybe an actual reply?

LOL.

Pot. Meet kettle.

Damn straight.

Semantics. I say God damn because its nomenclature, and everyone understands what I mean by it. Seriously, if this is the only argument you can default to, I pity you.

More than semantics, it represents a cultural ideology. In French the word "tabernac" is considered a curse. Why don't North americans say Allah damn or Buddha damn?

More than semantics, it represents a cultural ideology. In French the word "tabernac" is considered a curse. Why don't North americans say Allah damn or Buddha damn?

Hands up everyone who thinks EL JARDIN is a robot?

More than semantics, it represents a cultural ideology. In French the word "tabernac" is considered a curse. Why don't North americans say Allah damn or Buddha damn?

Because its not nomenclature. If you said Allah damn in a room, nobody would understand you. Saying god damn, and they understand. Just because I use a phrase god in a sentence, it doesnt automatically make me secretly believe in him. You are grasping at straws.

Got quotes? And maybe an actual reply?

I'll reply to whatever questions you have.

It's a matyr complex. :D

A 2000 year recurring theme. They at least are trying to be like Jesus.

I'll reply to whatever questions you have.

...With one sentence which doesn't address them? I reiterate:

You stated you do not believe that God exists, but stated that the poster had 'not refuted Jesus was / is divine,' indicating you believe this needs to be refuted, indicating you belive in Jesus' divinity.

Frankly, if you can't explain why my reading of that is wrong, don't bother answering.

Can you explain how else it is possible to read that statement, rather just making vague claims that I'm not reading it correctly?

Says the one complaining about people critisizing(sp?) his religion.
I've already questioned and contemplated my religion and did so for years...along with quite a number of alternate belief systems. I've finally come to terms with my belief. It works for me.

Hands up everyone who thinks EL JARDIN is a robot?

Interesting question. Do robots believe in God?

1) They think they're right (ahem, know they're right), so they're going to tell you that you're wrong, wrong, wrong.

Are you saying you don't think you are right?

That you agree with everyone else here all the time? Or do you think some people are sometimes wrong?

But we Christians cannot have our own opinion whatsoever.

Who said you cannot have an opinion?

And others are free to criticize it.

Why do I find myself explaining this to Christians so often? Your right to an opinion doesn't make your opinion right.

2) Science > Religion, duh :rolleyes:

Most people -- including most religious people -- find no contradiction between science and religion.

If you are one of the ignorant unwashed that can't accept science, I pity you.

3) Most "Christians" are jerks and make the real believers look bad

Some Christians are jerks.

I wouldn't say most. I thought us non-Christians were the anti-Christian bigots.

4) We live in a "Post-Christian Era". A definite sign of something, isn't it?

We do?

Sweet. Perhaps we can stop with the matyr complexes and live in an age of reason instead of superstition.

But seriously, I'm thinking people get off on the Christophobia. Why else would they start thread after thread attacking us?

Ok, I haven't read all of the posts yet, just 3 pages of them, but I will go back. I just felt I had to comment on this.

What about the Pagan-phobia that seems prevalent lately. And the witchcraft hysteria? One or two posts cropped up asking peoples opinions on witchcraft and it was like a scrum at the door people trying to post screaming "Satan...Devil...Lucifer...EVIL!"

I mean, come on! I don't hate Christians, and I accept their right to believe how they want...but honestly, how can you expect me to respect you and your beliefs if you're constantly telling me that mine are going to land me in Hell to burn for eternity? Double standard, much? Much too much.

Remember, respect must be earned. You want mine? You better start showing me some, and that begins when you accept that my beliefs are just as valid as yours.

Interesting question. Do robots believe in God?

Do you, having said already that you don't?

but your arguements have hardly deterred me from believing that God does not exist nor have you refuted the possibility that Jesus was/is divine.

Because its not nomenclature. If you said Allah damn in a room, nobody would understand you. Saying god damn, and they understand. Just because I use a phrase god in a sentence, it doesnt automatically make me secretly believe in him. You are grasping at straws.

What I meant to illustrate by raising this issue was that you fail to be convincing with your arguments because you inadvertantly acknowledged his existence. But now that you mention this secret belief in him...

I've already questioned and contemplated my religion and did so for years...along with quite a number of alternate belief systems. I've finally come to terms with my belief. It works for me.

And so have many of the rest of us.

Just because we didn't reach the same conclusions you have doesn't mean we didn't put more time or thought into it.

Did you say something earlier about someone being arrogant and condescending?

Interesting question. Do robots believe in God?

The answer would be no. That's a term people mix up frequently. A robot is a device that is controlled directly by humans in every aspect of its operation. The correct term would be an android. An android is a device which is pre-programmed to make decisons based on pre-set peramaters of it's operations. The answer is no because a device even as complex as an android doesn't have and real "awareness", its actions are completely relaint on code which are basically switches in certain circumstances that turn on and off to adapt to the current situation.

*nods*Precisely what I said a few pages back. I've problems with some of my fellow Pagans, as well. They're certaintly in the minority, but they're there.They will 1) Act uninformed. 2) Act like other religions are false. 3)Act as if Christians are the enemy, and to be hated/shunned, etc at all costs. I treat them exactly the same as I would anyone else who acts like that. Other religions do this, as well, but I notice a polarization between some specific belief systems, which I believe can and SHOULD be rectified by a mutual "cultural exchange", so to speak.
Same here. I have enough problems with sects of Christianity: fundamentalists, snake handlers, Phelps and his group of (what I believe to be) false christians...it's almost neverending. Also, they tend to behave in the same manner as you described. It's infinitely frustrating.

What's really sad is that I don't see much cultural exchange happening. Many feel that they're right and everyone else is wrong and either they'll fight about it or ignore everyone else. Again, frustrating.

I've already questioned and contemplated my religion and did so for years...along with quite a number of alternate belief systems. I've finally come to terms with my belief. It works for me.

Aka closemindedness. You've made a decision, and dont want to hear anymore information on it. Your reasons for being closedminded are irrelevant.

Heres a solution for you. If you dont like reading anti-christian stuff, dont go to places where people can and will talk about it. Simple.

The answer would be no. That's a term people mix up frequently. A robot is a device that is controlled directly by humans in every aspect of its operation. The correct term would be an android. An android is a device which is pre-programmed to make decisons based on pre-set peramaters of it's operations. The answer is no because a device even as complex as an android doesn't have and real "awareness", its actions are completely relaint on code which are basically switches in certain circumstances that turn on and off to adapt to the current situation.

I was being sarcastic.

That's like saying that if guns didn't exist, people wouldn't kill people.

*shakes head and walks off*

Um. Close, sport.

It is rather like saying that if guns didn't exist, people wouldn't kill people by firing bullets into them.

*shakes head and walks off laughing*

I was being sarcastic.

I know, but it gave me an oppertunity to address peoples common mistakes! :D

What I meant to illustrate by raising this issue was that you fail to be convincing with your arguments because you inadvertantly acknowledged his existence. But now that you mention this secret belief in him...

I never inadvertantly acknowledged his existance. You are indeed foolish if you think saying the word god = acknowledgement that he exists.

I know, but it gave me an oppertunity to address peoples common mistakes! :D

I was going to use the term android, I swear I really was, but some idiot called me a robot.

What I meant to illustrate by raising this issue was that you fail to be convincing with your arguments because you inadvertantly acknowledged his existence. But now that you mention this secret belief in him...

So if I hit my thumb with a hammer and say 'Jesus Christ!' then I'm not using an epithet, I'm acknowleding the existence of Christ? That's the most ludicrous argument I've heard in a while. Does if follow that if I said 'fuck' instead I must be having sex, despite that all my senses and all the available evidence says I'm fully clothed and hammering a nail into a wall?

I never inadvertantly acknowledged his existance. You are indeed foolish if you think saying the word god = acknowledgement that he exists.

Saying God alone doesn't but claiming that He has damned something does.

Saying God alone doesn't but claiming that He has damned something does.

I've never claimed that he has damned. God damned is just a phrase used in the US to express a sort of anger, or at least around here it is. Some people may find a deeper meaning in it. I dont.

Same here. I have enough problems with sects of Christianity: fundamentalists, snake handlers, Phelps and his group of (what I believe to be) false christians...it's almost neverending. Also, they tend to behave in the same manner as you described. It's infinitely frustrating.

What's really sad is that I don't see much cultural exchange happening. Many feel that they're right and everyone else is wrong and either they'll fight about it or ignore everyone else. Again, frustrating.

And the solution is to declare some beliefs beyond challenge?

I beg to differ:

"Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power and want a certain result with all your heart you naturally express your wishes in law and sweep away all opposition.... But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas -- that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out. "
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Abrams v. U.S. (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=250&page=616), 250 US 616, 1919.

Allah damn

You believe in Allah?

I've never claimed that he has damned. God damned is just a phrase used in the US to express a sort of anger, or at least around here it is. Some people may find a deeper meaning in it. I dont.

Then why use the expression?

Same here. I have enough problems with sects of Christianity: fundamentalists, snake handlers, Phelps and his group of (what I believe to be) false christians...it's almost neverending. Also, they tend to behave in the same manner as you described. It's infinitely frustrating.

What's really sad is that I don't see much cultural exchange happening. Many feel that they're right and everyone else is wrong and either they'll fight about it or ignore everyone else. Again, frustrating.

There are a lot of false Christians, imo. However, one of my good friends happens to be her own brand of Christian, but still very much a Christian. I've learned a few things from her that I didn't know. The cultural exchange IS happening, to a degree, I think, but Stella Parvis made a good point in the previous page (page 10,I believe.). Bigotry can and does go both ways. Both sides have to make gestures of willingness,before anything can happen.

Then why use the expression?

Because it conveys what I mean. Why use any expression?

You believe in Allah?

I don't know enough about Islam to say yes. However I don't dismiss the possibility that He exists.

I don't know enough about Islam to say yes. However I don't dismiss the possibility that He exists.

But you said Allah damn, which means you acknowledge he exists.

Some "Christians" are really not "Christians". They say they are, but it is obvious from their actions and their rituals they are not. But overall these "Christians" damage the reputation of the proper Christians.

Perhaps you should take away their membership cards.

At the very least, they shouldn't get the discount at the bake sale.

Because it conveys what I mean. Why use any expression?

What the expression "God damn analogy" conveys is that you believe the analogy has been damned by God.

Then why use the expression?

Because it upsets some pinheads.

And because more appropriate language isn't allowed on these forums.

What the expression "God damn analogy" conveys is that you believe the analogy has been damned by God.

No, only if you're a pedantic idiot trying to prove someone believes in God in spite of everything they've said on the subject.

But you said Allah damn, which means you acknowledge he exists.

I wrote Allah damn to illustrate a point. Which I believe you understand.

What the expression "God damn analogy" conveys is that you believe the analogy has been damned by God.

Peter Pan damn it.

Bast damn it.

Santa damn it.

Do you think I believe in Peter Pan, Bast, and Santa?

Mind you, I DO actually say "Bastdammit"

What the expression "God damn analogy" conveys is that you believe the analogy has been damned by God.

No, it means that I am angry because the person could not understand that it was an analogy.

-snip-

Bigotry can and does go both ways. Both sides have to make gestures of willingness,before anything can happen.
I absolutely agree.

In lieu of that, a simple "live and let live" approach would be nice...as opposed to the "*boot to the nuts* - you're WRONG!" approach that is so prevalent.

I wrote Allah damn to illustrate a point. Which I believe you understand.

Double standard. I said God damn to illustrate my frustration that the person did not understand it was an analogy. Which I believe you understand, but since you have no real arguments, you have to continue along this line in defense of your stance.

Because it upsets some pinheads.

And because more appropriate language isn't allowed on these forums.

I'm sure someone as bright as yourself could think of some clever substitutes.

I'm sure someone as bright as yourself could think of some clever substitutes.

Why take the time, when you can use a phrase everyone understands already?

Hey, I'm nerd to the core! Just having a bit of fun...

"SO MANLY! JA!" (Arnold S. Accent.)

But seriously, I'm thinking people get off on the Christophobia. Why else would they start thread after thread attacking us?

"Christophobia" isn't a word, bright eyes.

But I notice that your Christian friends that were hyperventilating about the "incorrect" (but actually correct) use of homophobia have no complaint about you making words up.

I absolutely agree.

In lieu of that, a simple "live and let live" approach would be nice...as opposed to the "*boot to the nuts* - you're WRONG!" approach that is so prevalent.

It's too hard for people to pass up an opportunity to try to prove themselves superior to someone else, in some way. I think a lot of people act as if religion is some sort of competition...instead of philosophy, a way of life.

I return the question. Why do certain wannabe Christians want to push their religion on everyone and claim it is the only right religion (like many of this weird bunch are doing it around here)? As long as they don't come with their pitiful propaganda I have no problems with them, but once that crap starts, well... then they get the bill. Period.

Christians aren't the only ones who do that.

In lieu of that, a simple "live and let live" approach would be nice...as opposed to the "*boot to the nuts* - you're WRONG!" approach that is so prevalent.

Yes, that would be the best approach I believe, however there are too many "instigators"/trolls on all sides that constantly spark conflict between everyone for their own personal amusement or misquided belief.

I'm sure someone as bright as yourself could think of some clever substitutes.

Why should I?

The current options serve me fine: they vent my feelings and bother tight-asses. Double-score!

Why take the time, when you can use a phrase everyone understands already?

If you find this arguement of semantics tiresome I'll be glad to put it to rest and discuss atheism, agnosticism or organised religion in detail. I just found it ironic that some one would use the expression God damn in the middle of a debate regarding the hypocrisies of anti-Christian bigotry.

There are a lot of false Christians, imo. However, one of my good friends happens to be her own brand of Christian, but still very much a Christian. I've learned a few things from her that I didn't know. The cultural exchange IS happening, to a degree, I think, but Stella Parvis made a good point in the previous page (page 10,I believe.). Bigotry can and does go both ways. Both sides have to make gestures of willingness,before anything can happen.

Thank you, Lord, and I must say I would love to meet you. You do seem wonderfully intelligent and seem to hold beliefs so closely resembling that of me and my husband.

I have Christian friends. They accept that I am Pagan and don't try to convert me. I accept that they are Christian and don't try proving them wrong. I accept that Jesus probably did live and did try to teach people to love each other and accept each other (after all, he was a Rabbi, albeit a radical one).

My biggest issue with Christianity is the fundementalist "this-is-what-the-bible-says-so-it-is-absolutely-100%-true" types. The types that don't believe anything is up to interpretation. Hello! If I've said it once...I've said it one hundred times! Jesus spoke in parables....RIDDLES! You HAVE to interpret what he really meant.

The point of fact is, if there is a God, and I'm not saying there is or isn't, then we are ALL children of him/her/it...whatever. Jesus says he's a son of God...well....if he believes there is a God, then yes, naturally in some way he is God's son...as are we all in that respect.

At this stage in humanity, religion can't be proven. Yes, there are so called relics, but there is such controversy surrounding them....Science has proved this is fake...This happened which may have altered the chemical makeup...yadda yadda yadda. No one has proof of anything regarding the existance of any Supreme Being. That leaves us with faith. Faith that there is something out there. Faith that we aren't on this planet for one small moment in the vastness of time. Faith that we aren't alone.

If you don't have faith in a God, that's fine. If you do, good on ya. If you believe your faith in your God is going to lead you to salvation, I'm more than happy for you. But please...PLEASE...don't tell me that you're right and I'm wrong and I'm going to burn in Hell for all time if I don't come around to your way of belief. All that is going to do is foster animosity and keep the religious bashing going. I don't want one world religion....I want world religious cooperation. Accept me for who I am and what I believe because I've already accepted you and yours.

(Long and I'm sorry, but having been involved in most of the witchcraft debates lately, these religious topics just doesn't seem to be getting any better.)

Why should I?

The current options serve me fine: they vent my feelings and bother tight-asses. Double-score!

I was under the impression that you're debasing, I mean debating skills might be limited since you stated that "more appropriate language isn't allowed on these forums."

If you find this arguement of semantics tiresome I'll be glad to put it to rest and discuss atheism, agnosticism or organised religion in detail.

You mean like you've being avoiding doing throughout this entire thread?

If you find this arguement of semantics tiresome I'll be glad to put it to rest and discuss atheism, agnosticism or organised religion in detail. I just found it ironic that some one would use the expression God damn in the middle of a debate regarding the hypocrisies of anti-Christian bigotry.

And I found it ironic that someone who doesnt specifically believe in the belief of allah to say allah damn, while saying that "(input word) damn" implies belief of the input word.

I absolutely agree.

In lieu of that, a simple "live and let live" approach would be nice...as opposed to the "*boot to the nuts* - you're WRONG!" approach that is so prevalent.

Like the "live and let live" "don't say anything is wrong" approach you take towards homosexuality?

Sorry, if I think you are wrong, I'll say so. That is the purpose of a debate forum.

Perhaps you should run an experiment:
1) Have someone tell you that you are wrong.
2) Have someone kick you in the nuts
3) Repeat until you can tell which is worse and won't use stupid analogies.

It's too hard for people to pass up an opportunity to try to prove themselves superior to someone else, in some way. I think a lot of people act as if religion is some sort of competition...instead of philosophy, a way of life.
On that note: I have a grand, capitalistic idea to make some money off such asshats.

Bumper stickers that would say something akin to "my religion is better than your religion".

Wait.... that wouldn't be very Christian of me. ;) :D

On a serious note: that's exactly what I mean...and it's not reserved just for religious-types. Athiests seem to be even more fanatical about trying to prove themselves superior to anyone professing a belief that isn't "scientifically falsifiable". That may not be the case, but that's how it seems.

I was under the impression that you're debasing, I mean debating skills might be limited since you stated that "more appropriate language isn't allowed on these forums."

You are debating?

Looks a lot more like mental masturbation.

But if you think you hurt my wittle feelings, good for you. Very Christian of ya.

On that note: I have a grand, capitalistic idea to make some money off such asshats.

Bumper stickers that would say something akin to "my religion is better than your religion".

Wait.... that wouldn't be very Christian of me. ;) :D

On a serious note: that's exactly what I mean...and it's not reserved just for religious-types. Athiests seem to be even more fanatical about trying to prove themselves superior to anyone professing a belief that isn't "scientifically falsifiable". That may not be the case, but that's how it seems.

Theres a difference between scientifically falsifiable and being reasonable, or between scientifically falsifiable and having some succinct evidence.

And I found it ironic that someone who doesnt specifically believe in the belief of allah to say allah damn, while saying that "(input word) damn" implies belief of the input word.

LOL

On that note: I have a grand, capitalistic idea to make some money off such asshats.

Bumper stickers that would say something akin to "my religion is better than your religion".


How about "Your religion is just as good as mine." :p

or maybe the ever popular Pagan "My Goddess gave birth to your God" converted to...

"My Goddess gave birth to your God, so let's have a family reunion!" :cool:

On a serious note: that's exactly what I mean...and it's not reserved just for religious-types. Athiests seem to be even more fanatical about trying to prove themselves superior to anyone professing a belief that isn't "scientifically falsifiable". That may not be the case, but that's how it seems.

ZOMG! SWEEPING GENERALISATION! I'm powerless to not behave in an enormously stereotypical way because someone's doing exactly what he complained about!

You mean like you've being avoiding doing throughout this entire thread?

When you finish playing the fly I'll answer your questions.

My biggest issue with Christianity is the fundementalist "this-is-what-the-bible-says-so-it-is-absolutely-100%-true" types. The types that don't believe anything is up to interpretation. Hello! If I've said it once...I've said it one hundred times! Jesus spoke in parables....RIDDLES! You HAVE to interpret what he really meant.
That's a point I constantly have to make with some fundamentalist Christian friends of mine.

I mean... seriously... does anyone truly believe that "locusts with the faces of men" will be a scourge upon the Earth during the end-times?

The Bible, to me, is largely metaphorical. Also, to me, that doesn't make it any less relevant...just more interesting to read. :)

When you finish playing the fly I'll answer your questions.

You're smart. Go be smart somewhere else for a day.

ZOMG! SWEEPING GENERALISATION! I'm powerless to not behave in an enormously stereotypical way because someone's doing exactly what he complained about!

I found it hard to resist too. :(

How about "Your religion is just as good as mine." :p

or maybe the ever popular Pagan "My Goddess gave birth to your God" converted to...

"My Goddess gave birth to your God, so let's have a family reunion!" :cool:
/me falls over laughing

Good one! :D

If you don't have faith in a God, that's fine. If you do, good on ya. If you believe your faith in your God is going to lead you to salvation, I'm more than happy for you. But please...PLEASE...don't tell me that you're right and I'm wrong and I'm going to burn in Hell for all time if I don't come around to your way of belief. All that is going to do is foster animosity and keep the religious bashing going. I don't want one world religion....I want world religious cooperation. Accept me for who I am and what I believe because I've already accepted you and yours.
*snippity do dah snippity day*

You're welcome and feel free to TG me if you want.

Hermeticists (and I'm not challenging anyone's beliefs with the following statement, mind) believe that Jesus wasn't who or what was portrayed in the Bible, but that there WAS a guy similar to him, who was misunderstood in his teachings, who spoke in parables as you said. While I personally don't believe in the Christian God or Jesus (or a man like him), I believe that to be the satisfactory explaination for ME in regards to his existance, however, I do agree that the Bible is a parable. If it doesn't suit others, that's fine. They're more than welcome to believe what they want.

To me, religion helps explain the world around you. It gives comfort to those that need/want it, but it is not something to hide behind, and use it to judge people by. I firmly believe that no religion is a shield.

On that note: I have a grand, capitalistic idea to make some money off such asshats.

Bumper stickers that would say something akin to "my religion is better than your religion".

Wait.... that wouldn't be very Christian of me. ;) :D

On a serious note: that's exactly what I mean...and it's not reserved just for religious-types. Athiests seem to be even more fanatical about trying to prove themselves superior to anyone professing a belief that isn't "scientifically falsifiable". That may not be the case, but that's how it seems.

I've already seen those. :p

I don't know about them being any more fantatical than any other belief system (and atheism IS a belief system). I've heard of Christians forging evidence to prove the Bible, and/or disprove the theory of Evolution. I'm sure this applies to other groups, as well, though I've yet to hear it.

That's a point I constantly have to make with some fundamentalist Christian friends of mine.

I mean... seriously... does anyone truly believe that "locusts with the faces of men" will be a scourge upon the Earth during the end-times?

The Bible, to me, is largely metaphorical. Also, to me, that doesn't make it any less relevant...just more interesting to read. :)

There you go bashing Christians again.

Why? Why do you feel the need to try to make fundamentalist Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

That's a point I constantly have to make with some fundamentalist Christian friends of mine.

I mean... seriously... does anyone truly believe that "locusts with the faces of men" will be a scourge upon the Earth during the end-times?

The Bible, to me, is largely metaphorical. Also, to me, that doesn't make it any less relevant...just more interesting to read. :)

I won't deny that the man said some decent things. Unfortuately, he also said some maybe not too smart things...like saying that the Jews were "children of the Devil" (John 8:44) Eh, what do you want? He was human. My husband constantly tells other Pagan friends of ours to not hate the Bible...but look at it as a record...a record of a family through a period of time. No, it's not 100% accurate...these days, after all the interpretations...I don't know if I'd give it 50%, but the teachings of love are sound. Too bad many professing to be true Christians don't follow them.

There you go bashing Christians again.

Why? Why do you feel the need to try to make fundamentalist Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

/\ This post wins 2 internets.

There you go bashing Christians again.

Why? Why do you feel the need to try to make fundamentalist Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

Um, actually...if I'm not mistaken...Tex has stated that he (? I'm guessing) is a Christian.

Um, actually...if I'm not mistaken...Tex has stated that he (? I'm guessing) is a Christian.

Um, actually ... if quoted most of Tex's opening post verbatem.

Look up "irony" and "sarcasm"

/\ This post wins 2 internets.

Thank you, thank you. You're a wonderful audience. Thank you, thank you very much. :D

To me, religion helps explain the world around you. It gives comfort to those that need/want it, but it is not something to hide behind, and use it to judge people by. I firmly believe that no religion is a shield.
That is the single greatest problem I have with some who profess to be Christians. What really drives me up the wall is, in plain language, the Bible states "judge not lest ye be judged". Simple.

The Bible lays out pretty much a "live and let live" philosophy through the Golden Rule (which is the new covenant that replaced the 10 Commandments), yet the judging still goes on. Yet again, frustrating.

Also, personally, I do my best to not go out and prostheletyze. My goal is to live a life that makes people go "What's his secret?". If they ask, then I tell them. :)

... prostheletyze.

You spell like Neo Cannon. :mad:

That is the single greatest problem I have with some who profess to be Christians. What really drives me up the wall is, in plain language, the Bible states "judge not lest ye be judged". Simple.

The Bible lays out pretty much a "live and let live" philosophy through the Golden Rule (which is the new covenant that replaced the 10 Commandments), yet the judging still goes on. Yet again, frustrating.

Also, personally, I do my best to not go out and prostheletyze. My goal is to live a life that makes people go "What's his secret?". If they ask, then I tell them. :)

Oh, I've used that Bible statement many times. I've found that alot of the ones I deem false Christians don't like it when you use the Bible as a way to disprove their statements/arguements.

I've heard of Christians forging evidence to prove the Bible, and/or disprove the theory of Evolution.
I haven't heard of anyone forging anything, but I have seen a site that does have a lot of interesting papers on it regarding the disproving of evolution. Though, evolutionists tend to scream bloody murder when people post the link. ;)

Me, personally: I don't know how the universe/Earth/man came about. I wasn't there. To me, the Bible could easily be interpreted to allow for God to use evolution as a mechanism in creation. I just get amused when people take one side or the other in a "vs" contest between evolution and creationism. Nobody knows for sure, so debating it in an "either/or" fashion is rather pointless.

You spell like Neo Cannon. :mad:
That's one of the words I'm never sure on. Sue me. :p

Hi there,
I think one of the main problems in discussing religions (and nont only Christianity) is the problem of defining the words you are using. After all, before speaking of something during 15 pages, it is better to have defined what you are talking about. And that's usually where believers encounter problems when they want to "justify" or at least explain their faith. I dont want to discuss the word GOD because we dont wanna start with the hardest one, but for example, what do u mean by soul? Science can explain all the chemicals reaction in my brain that lead to such or such action or feeling, scientist are everyday more precise in the understanding of our memory (we somehow know where and how "data" is storaged, how to erase it and stuff...), so what Soul is supposed to mean?
And more generally, if u beleive in life after death ( and I think u do I u call yourself a christian) what is the meaning of this sentence? I think (hope) that if you claim "I beleive in this" you must have a precise idea of what you mean by that. I tried to understand this for years and never get a clear answer of what is admitted by most christians (at least what is in the Book). For instance, when u die, do u beleive that your "soul" stays the same forever? That is, I u die as a 2-year old baby, u will stay in this state forever, or , if you suffer from a genetical disease such as trisomy, that makes you intellectually deficient , that means that u will be forever "dumb"?
(Well, that was just some thoughts , sorry if it is a bit messy and unclear , english is not my native language)

... I've heard of Christians forging evidence to prove the Bible, and/or disprove the theory of Evolution...

You need some pretty mad forging skills to forge God's handwriting.

I haven't heard of anyone forging anything, but I have seen a site that does have a lot of interesting papers on it regarding the disproving of evolution. Though, evolutionists tend to scream bloody murder when people post the link. ;)

Me, personally: I don't know how the universe/Earth/man came about. I wasn't there. To me, the Bible could easily be interpreted to allow for God to use evolution as a mechanism in creation. I just get amused when people take one side or the other in a "vs" contest between evolution and creationism. Nobody knows for sure, so debating it in an "either/or" fashion is rather pointless.

If I ever find links to such, I'll post them. People, if memory serves right, have also forged evidence to prove evolution.

What I don't get is why they don't accept that there IS middle ground? Say..God set in motion the Universe, and let life take its own course, maybe? 'Swhat I believed, when I was in my Christian days.

Also...I think you should check out the witchcraft thread. Part of the cultural exchange we talked about. I think you'd be more open to the beliefs expressed within than most.

Oh, I've used that Bible statement many times. I've found that alot of the ones I deem false Christians don't like it when you use the Bible as a way to disprove their statements/arguements.

Yes, or they try to turn it around and say "Oh, it doesn't mean that, it means..." and go on to try and twist the words to suit their purpose. But no...it's not up for translation...that's what it says. :rolleyes: LOL, my husband loves when to hear the "Only God can judge." line thrown out. He counters with "Then why, in Revelations, does it say that man will judge the angels? Does that mean that we will then be "God"?" They don't like that one either.

And Cat....I believe one should be able to call into question others that profess to be of a similar belief system as one's own without it being called bashing. If Tex believes the fundementalist Christians are giving the rest of Christians a bad rap, then that's his perogative. I know many a Muslim that told me "Please don't let what those fundementalist whack jobs did on 9-11 make you believe we are all like that." I didn't accuse them of bashing. But the point is, the fundementalists, while trying to say that their's is the one true way and can not be interpretted seem hell-bent on interpretting what the Bible says to support their claims.

Don't you think there's lots of bigotry from Christians? I mean I notice it's Christians to be the first ones insulting Islam and trying to portray the Prophet Muhammad in an insulting manner while Muslims hold Jesus Christ in high regard.

I agree there are a lot of anti-Christian bigots but pretending Christians are unique to prejudice is a bit absurd.

Um, actually...if I'm not mistaken...Tex has stated that he (? I'm guessing) is a Christian.
Don't bother trying to defend me to CT. He hates my guts and makes a point of letting that known every time I post. Which is why I've come to ignore him or just sit quietly in the corner and snicker whenever he goes off on his long-winded flamebaiting. His post in this thread have been infinitely amusing. :)

Me, personally: I don't know how the universe/Earth/man came about. I wasn't there. To me, the Bible could easily be interpreted to allow for God to use evolution as a mechanism in creation.

Like God causing 'the earth to bring forth' the animals and not creating them himself, the part literal creationists like to ignore.

Nobody knows for sure, so debating it in an "either/or" fashion is rather pointless.

Um, that's a really weird way to establish the truth of a concept. There's no scientific evidence for creation and a lot against, meaning the rational conclusion is evolution occurs. Do you care whether or not you're Papa Smurf, even though your Smurfdom cannot be proven or disproven?

*Snip*

And Cat....I believe one should be able to call into question others that profess to be of a similar belief system as one's own without it being called bashing. If Tex believes the fundementalist Christians are giving the rest of Christians a bad rap, then that's his perogative. I know many a Muslim that told me "Please don't let what those fundementalist whack jobs did on 9-11 make you believe we are all like that." I didn't accuse them of bashing. But the point is, the fundementalists, while trying to say that their's is the one true way and can not be interpretted seem hell-bent on interpretting what the Bible says to support their claims.

I agree. I do the exact same, as I stated near the beginning of this thread, with my Pagan peers. So long as you try to be respectful and polite about it, I don't see the harm in it.

I haven't heard of anyone forging anything, but I have seen a site that does have a lot of interesting papers on it regarding the disproving of evolution. Though, evolutionists tend to scream bloody murder when people post the link. ;)

Me, personally: I don't know how the universe/Earth/man came about. I wasn't there. To me, the Bible could easily be interpreted to allow for God to use evolution as a mechanism in creation. I just get amused when people take one side or the other in a "vs" contest between evolution and creationism. Nobody knows for sure, so debating it in an "either/or" fashion is rather pointless.

<sigh>

Let's try to get this straight;

1. Creationism (in the sense that God created everything) is not contradicted by evolution or vice versa. Only a very dubious special view of creationism based on an ultra-literal reading of Genesis causes a problem here.

2. Evolution is science. Explains and is supported by existing evidence. Testable. It is a second-order question.

3. Creationism is a first-order question. A matter of faith.

4. Creation science is a half-assed attempt to "disprove" evolution and "prove" that special view of creationism. It is contrary to both science and the beliefs of most Christians.

The either/or between evolution and creation science makes perfect sense. One is supported science and one is narrow-minded mysticism with delusions of grandeur.

The either/or between evolution and creationism is artificial and a question of faith.

Clear?

I would mock you but I don't have the time to read through your ramblings.

Ya' know,this all the way back from page 1, but it REALLY bothered me. Anikian had some truly inspired words of wisdom that anyone hoping to expand their knowledge of life in general would hold in high regard, and you completely and immediately dismissed it.

That being said, there are only 2 kinds Christians I dislike: the ones like you, who completely disregard what people say because it doesn't go right along with what you believe. That will make you an incredibly ignorant person. The other kind is the kind that tells me I'm going to Hell every five seconds. I don't need that, and they must get tired of that phrase.

Telling me that they want me to be Christian, but that if I screw up, I'll burn for eternity is a terrible selling point, and will never succeed in converting me.

Outside of those two denominations of "Christians," I tend to like most of them. Good people, lots of times. I just don't adhere to their belief system is all.

Oh, and if you've ever said "What on God's green Earth..." you might reconsider. Saying that CLEARLY (note: sarcasm) indicates your belief that the earth is green, even though a great deal of it is clearly blue. Also check phrases such as "bite the bullet," as a bullet is rarely present when that phrase is used.

*snip*

And Cat....I believe one should be able to call into question others that profess to be of a similar belief system as one's own without it being called bashing. If Tex believes the fundementalist Christians are giving the rest of Christians a bad rap, then that's his perogative. I know many a Muslim that told me "Please don't let what those fundementalist whack jobs did on 9-11 make you believe we are all like that." I didn't accuse them of bashing. But the point is, the fundementalists, while trying to say that their's is the one true way and can not be interpretted seem hell-bent on interpretting what the Bible says to support their claims.

And I believe one should be able to call into question the beliefs of anyone without it being called bashing.

Tex is the one who disagrees. Or did you miss the point of his thread.

Some "Christians" are really not "Christians". They say they are, but it is obvious from their actions and their rituals they are not. But overall these "Christians" damage the reputation of the proper Christians.

Ooh I spot another bigot. "Those silly little high church Christians are spoiling it for every one"

Don't you think there's lots of bigotry from Christians? I mean I notice it's Christians to be the first ones insulting Islam and trying to portray the Prophet Muhammad in an insulting manner while Muslims hold Jesus Christ in high regard.

I agree there are a lot of anti-Christian bigots but pretending Christians are unique to prejudice is a bit absurd.
Read back and you'll notice a long discussion going on in this thread where I talk about the fact that Christians are not to judge people. I never once said we were unique.

Do you care whether or not you're Papa Smurf, even though your Smurfdom cannot be proven or disproven?
In a word: no.

Don't bother trying to defend me to CT. He hates my guts and makes a point of letting that known every time I post. Which is why I've come to ignore him or just sit quietly in the corner and snicker whenever he goes off on his long-winded flamebaiting. His post in this thread have been infinitely amusing. :)

Better check your definition of flamebaiting, sparky.

But, unlike you, I don't assume that anyone that disagrees with me "hates my guts" and is "flamebaiting." (And don't kid yourself. You are not important enough for me to hate.)

Nor do I challenge people to defend a viewpoint and then proclaim I'm going to ignore answers that are inconvenient.

But, then again, I'm not looking for matyrdom.

Now, I'll just go away and cry 'cuz Tex is mean and ignores me. :rolleyes:

In a word: no.

Then you make sure to spend part of your day leading a group of non-existent Smurfs on adventures? After all, you can't shirk your duties as Papa Smurf just because you probably aren't him, can you?

Then you make sure to spend part of your day leading a group of non-existent Smurfs on adventures? After all, you can't shirk your duties as Papa Smurf just because you probably aren't him, can you?
You missed my point. I'll put it in terms that you might be able to comprehend:

I don't give a fuck. Capiche'?







(no, that was not very Christian of me, but inanity pisses me off)

And on that note, I'm hitting the sack. It's nearly 4am here and I need a couple hours sleep. Night all.

What I don't get is why they don't accept that there IS middle ground? Say..God set in motion the Universe, and let life take its own course, maybe? 'Swhat I believed, when I was in my Christian days.

Also...I think you should check out the witchcraft thread. Part of the cultural exchange we talked about. I think you'd be more open to the beliefs expressed within than most.

Had to go find a post I made in the "Why is your religion the 'truth'" thread, or whatever it was called...this is pretty much my take on the universe. Of course I have no proof of it, but it's been my view for many a long year.


Personally, I can't reconcile that we are some big cosmic accident. I think of it as a cosmic science experiment. (Now this is just speculation mind you...my own...ideas.) I think something took what became the beginning of the universe...the first primordial soup mix, if you will, and kind of tossed it into a cosmic petri dish and sat back to watch what would happen.

My stock response is of course:

Fundementalist religion (the most prominent form of which is christianity, in the US) leads to (again, in the US' case) science denying.
I take wholehearted offense to that statement. Fundamentalism is not a cause of this, though often the two are found together. It's like saying genitals lead to STDs.

And I believe one should be able to call into question the beliefs of anyone without it being called bashing.

Tex is the one who disagrees. Or did you miss the point of his thread.

Hmmmm

One thing I've noticed since the start of my posting here on NS is the number of people (quite a large number) that seem to be outright anti-Christian bigots. I guess this post is here to ask you a few questions.

Why? Why do you feel the need to deride and insult Christians on a constant basis? Why do you feel the need to try to make Christians "defend" their religion? Why do you feel you are so much more 'right' than they are? Also, why are you so arrogant and condescending about it?

I guess the main question is: what happened to you in your past to make you so hateful and bigoted towards Christians?

Tex mentions deriding and insulting....I agree, I've seen both since I began posting here. A lot of it childish and petty. Many do seem to want them to "defend" or prove their religion. Why? What's it to you if you don't follow the same? Why do some seem to think they are more "right" than Christians? Why do some seem to think they are more right than anyone for that matter? Where's their proof.

Going out of your way to outright insult someone and call their beliefs false without proof is bashing, and it is petty and childish. They come off as arrogant and high and mightly....I'll even go so far as to say they come off (ironically) "Holier-than-thou".

If that's the way you question others...go find an schoolyard and a sandbox and keep your petty fights there.

You missed my point. I'll put it in terms that you might be able to comprehend:

I don't give a fuck. Capiche'?

Therefore you do not believe yourself to be Papa Smurf. There is no middle ground here, you either are Papa Smurf, in which case your professed indifference means you are failing in your duties through Smurf Denial, or you are not Papa Smurf, in which case you have no such duties.

Since you do not believe you have the duties of Papa Smurf, you clearly believe that it's possible to make a conclusion even though the evidence on the subject is unclear. This is a rather amusing double standard, since your entire argument hinges on the 'we can't know for sure' non-reason.

The claim that you are Papa Smurf is totally unreasonable; you know that, I know that. The fact that it cannot be absolutely disproven does not automatically mean it is a reasonable theory, nor does it mean it is ridiculous to question your Smurfdom; in fact it is through questioning it you have determined it is untrue.

Equally, evolution-denial involves distortion and ignorance of huge volumes of factual data in order to 'prove' a proposition which is incredibly unlikely. Again, evaluating the two 'theories' by their ability to conform to factual data shows evolution is superior and therefore more likely to be true.

To be honest, if every time we approached a problem we said 'who cares, we can't know for sure' we'd still be sitting in a cave trying to figure out if rocks were edible.

Equally, evolution-denial involves distortion and ignorance of huge volumes of factual data in order to 'prove' a proposition which is incredibly unlikely. Again, evaluating the two 'theories' by their ability to conform to factual data shows evolution is superior and therefore more likely to be true.


Why can one not argue for 'created evolution'? The idea that "God", if they choose to believe in one, set the whole thing in motion then sat back to watch the show.

Why can one not argue for 'created evolution'? The idea that "God", if they choose to believe in one, set the whole thing in motion then sat back to watch the show.

Um. That would not be evolution-denial.

So it isn't what GMC is condemning, is it?

And you can argue for whatever you want. Just don't expect it to be unscrutinized or taught in schools.

Why can one not argue for 'created evolution'? The idea that "God", if they choose to believe in one, set the whole thing in motion then sat back to watch the show.

Because it's really just moving 'I don't know' back one step. Science says 'we do not know how this started' [X], that theory says 'God started it' [X=G, where G is unknown].

If you're happy with a theory which is essentially the same thing with a different way of saying 'I don't know' that's fine, but it's not valid as a scientific explaination.

Why can one not argue for 'created evolution'? The idea that "God", if they choose to believe in one, set the whole thing in motion then sat back to watch the show.
Psst.

That would deny them the chance to treat creationists as lunatics. How would they have any fun after that?

;)

(okay...now I'm REALLY going to bed :))

Why can one not argue for 'created evolution'? The idea that "God", if they choose to believe in one, set the whole thing in motion then sat back to watch the show.

Which is what I said a few pages back. You've a TG, btw.

Why does every single theological debate have to drag in the Smurfs. Leave them alone for Cromsakes.

Hmmmm



Tex mentions deriding and insulting....I agree, I've seen both since I began posting here. A lot of it childish and petty. Many do seem to want them to "defend" or prove their religion. Why? What's it to you if you don't follow the same? Why do some seem to think they are more "right" than Christians? Why do some seem to think they are more right than anyone for that matter? Where's their proof.

Going out of your way to outright insult someone and call their beliefs false without proof is bashing, and it is petty and childish. They come off as arrogant and high and mightly....I'll even go so far as to say they come off (ironically) "Holier-than-thou".

If that's the way you question others...go find an schoolyard and a sandbox and keep your petty fights there.


I've seen childish, petty, and insulting attacks on liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, communism, capitalism, Democrats, Republicans, Christians, Athiests, Agnositics, Moslems, Jews, Vegans, etc .... So?

If I think your beliefs are false -- AND YOU BRING THEM UP IN A DEBATE -- I'll say so. I don't care if they come from your religion, the voices in your head, or your mommy. If you want to argue them, then expect to have them questioned.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

I think people who base their life and world view on the writings of some 3,000 year old tribe of desert slaves are backwards, but it's their right to do that. However, when as a minority they try to force this view on others then they deserve to be shown for the fools they are.

Psst.

That would deny them the chance to treat creationists as lunatics. How would they have any fun after that?

;)

(okay...now I'm REALLY going to bed :))

Hehehe.

And no...it's not saying "I don't know." It's saying that "Yes, I believe evolution occurs, but I also believe something started it." It's the best of both worlds.

My first post...


Everyone has a right to believe anything they want. Is Jesus the savior of mankind? How can anyone really know until their body is fully dead? Unfortunately, there is no direct physical link to the living from the spirit world to tell us the real truth. There is only faith...



What makes one faith more valid than the next? An older religion? A thicker book? Martyrdom? Miracles? It's what your family believes?

That probably does it for most people. No matter what your belief. Christian, Muslims, Jew, Buddhists, Hindu, or whatever.



But it always comes down to the sticky point. Who is right, and who is wrong.
It's important, because there are souls on the line. If you believe the wrong thing, God will punish you for it.

People have a natural need to help each other. They don't like the idea of their friends, family, and neighbors going to hell, or just missing out in one form or another.

They pass national laws to help others along the true path, and protect themselves from the excesses of the non believers.



And there is the rub... We're right, your wrong, and we're going to protect you, our nation, and the world against your false belief. Fundamentalism of any religion raises its ugly head.

And Atheists are just as just as guilty of religious bigotry as anybody else...



The only viable solution is religious tolerance. Let everyone believe as they will, and let God or the absence of God take care of the departed. Let "Free will" take it's course and let people decide their own destiny.

But, of course that's hardest to do when a loved ones soul is on the line. You just want to persuade them a little bit...

Well knock it off!!! Give them the option and have faith... Stop trying to do Gods work. That leads to Fundamentalism...! Which leads to wars...! Which leads to death...!



I don't have a problem with Christians, I have a problem with Christian Fundamentalists. Or any Fundamentalist, including Fundamental Atheists.

I don’t like it when religion dictates the laws, and forces me to choose the state religion. I believe in the separation of church and state.



Being an American, I am disturbed by the direction my country is taking in supporting Fundamentalist Christian values. The “values” America was founded on. A return to the American Christian roots of tolerance for anyone, who is a Christian. Because Christians want the U.S. to live by Christian values, and screw anyone else. We’re right and your wrong. You’re either for us, or against us…



That’s what it’s really all about isn’t it?

New Geekistan ;)

Why does every single theological debate have to drag in the Smurfs. Leave them alone for Cromsakes.

I might be able to forgive them for their crimes against Gargamel, but the evil they perpetrated against Azrael: Never forget! Never again!

So?

I've seen childish, petty, and insulting attacks on liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, communism, capitalism, Democrats, Republicans, Christians, Athiests, Agnositics, Moslems, Jews, Vegans, etc ....

If I think your beliefs are false -- AND YOU BRING THEM UP IN A DEBATE -- I'll say so. I don't care if they come from your religion, the voices in your head, or your mommy. If you want to argue them, then expect to have them questioned.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

And if you don't have any proof of why you believe my beliefs are false if I bring them up in a debate, don't expect me to give you any more credence than I would a schoolyard bully.

Hey...I can use cliches too...

If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

And no...it's not saying "I don't know." It's saying that "Yes, I believe evolution occurs, but I also believe something started it." It's the best of both worlds.

Yes, but you can't say what or, more to the point, how. Since it's impossible to explain or test how 'God did it' because God is unpredictable and inscrutable, 'God did it' is missing the qualifier '...But I don't know how.'

Which is the scientist's 'I don't know how it happened' with a few words changed.

First of all I'm not against Christianity as a religion, as I'm a pgan and there fore have my own set of view points and feelings as does everyone else who can walk and chew gum at the same time :D . But what really bothers me the most is that many Christians are of the belief that there religion is the only way to worship and if you beleive othwerwise then you doomed to eternal hellfire and damnation. Religio's point of veiw wether you're atheist, muslim, buhhdist...or whatever you feel deep inside of you isn't bad, it's the people who say that they represent thier relgion and pass judgment on other people. Also one other thought....Christianity has made the effort to be one of the more recognized religious points of view around the world, so there for you open yourself and your relgion to crtiscism, and negative comments from other relgious people when you get the" truth" from t.v evangalists shoved down your throat 24/7 wether you want to hear it or not.

Now for all of the Christians out there I have a question for you. What gives you the right to judge us and to say we are wrong for what we believe in? You don't see any other religions trying to convert people to thier way of thinking. The best thing for people to do is to respect one another, and to let people live in the best way they feel is possible. I know, that would be possible in a perfect world and a perfect time, anda perfect place...but as we all know the world isn;t pereft is it? :rolleyes: