NationStates Jolt Archive

Six weeks ago, a young man sat down next to an older woman waiting for him and stated grimly, "I don't care. That's it. He can say what he wants. As for me, I'm ready to die".
Referring several times to nearby CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network), he laid a Bible on the table at the Norfolk coffee shop where I was writing a book proposal. I felt badly for him; he seemed to have an incurable disease. The woman mumbled something.

He quickly retorted, "I don't care what he said. I won't work with him." His voice was clipped as he emphasized his refusal to negotiate with a particular coworker.

The older woman sat holding her coffee, rarely even sipping it, with a hopeless-looking expression on her face. She showed no sympathy, looking at him as if she knew what he was about to say. Now I doubted that he was dying of a terminal illness.

The slender dark-haired 20-something, looked straight ahead without touching his coffee. The older lady asked quietly, "Don't you think that maybe-"

He cut her off: "Look, the end is coming. I know that and you know that. You've seen the signs. I just don't care about this guy, I don't care what he says. The end is coming very soon. None of this is going to matter." For the first time showing emotion, he added angrily, "I'm ready to die-I'm ready to go today, right now!"

I immediately recognized this as rapture talk. This young man does have an incurable disease, but it's spiritual, not physical: It's called fundamentalism (aka "millennialism"), the kind of Christianity to which Bush and his "conservative" advisers ascribe.

Early last year, I overheard another conversation that made me tremble for this nation under Bush and his Dobsonian advisers. This one, however, brought back tragicomic memories of a childhood spent in fundamentalist churches.

No longer hearing that depressing conversation, images of a scary old barn flooded my mind. I was 14, and was riding with our youth group to a dark field out in the middle of nowhere. It was summer but dark, so it must have been 8:30 p.m. or later.

As we got out of our cars, we were taken to a huge barn--to this day I don't know what kind of barn, because it had no farm equipment in it--and seated in folding chairs facing a large pull-down screen. We giggled as usual, flirting and complaining about missing our favorite TV shows as the adults fiddled with the film projector. But we knew the score: when the film started, we were to be absolutely quiet and "reverent".

After a few words of prayer and a reading from Revelations, the youth director started the film. I remember vividly the opening scene: a boy of about 13 ("the age of accountability") is walking home from school. As he enters the house, he finds it empty.

"Mom? Mom!", the boy calls, but she doesn't answer. He shrugs and goes to the kitchen to get his own snack, looking annoyed. Then the music shifts to an ominous minor key, horror-movie style, and he begins to search the house. Holding a sandwich, he races through the house calling desperately, "Mom! Mom! Where are you?!"

Then the narrator explains--Mom has been raptured up into the heavens to be with God, leaving the boy bereft to regret his sinful ways, then burn in hell for all eternity.

Conservative Christianity's Legalistic Loopholes: Repent then Die

There were other scenes, like the one where an elderly couple is carrying groceries in the house when the man cries out, grabs his chest, and falls on the sidewalk. His wife rushes inside to call the ambulance. The EMTs put him on the stretcher and start for the door.

But before they can take him to the hospital, the man's saintly wife delays them in order to pray with him, urging him to repent now while there's still time. She convinces him to repent of his drinking, cussing and sinful lifestyle, urging him to accept Jesus as his personal savior and repeat John 3:16. He does so, then dies. As they take his body away she's kind of sad, but smiles gratefully towards the ceiling: He's on his way to heaven.

The message was clear: You can rape, murder, torture prisoners, bomb civilians, order executions, cut social programs for the poor, persecute gays, feminists, or any racial group you choose, and do anything you please for 75 years or more, then simply whisper a few magic words for a first-class seat in heaven, right next to Mother Teresa.

I rejected this as contrary to Jesus' teachings, seeing through the scare tactics used by eternally sweating preachers who wiped their sweaty foreheads, weary night after weary night, with the obligatory handkerchief. Without exception, the revivalists pounded the longsuffering wooden pulpit, demanding, "Are you ready to die right now?"

The "good folks" would nod and answer, "Amen!" but certain recalcitrant husbands and teenagers refused to do so. As punishment for their defiance, the evangelists would walk down the aisle and stand right next to the offending party, staring and slapping an open Bible while describing in lurid detail how it feels to be "licked with the flames of hell".

Not every teen was immune to rapture threats. Some kids took them seriously and developed the kind of nihilism--the "readiness for death" masking despair borne of terror-displayed by the young man who "didn't care" because "the end is coming". One boy developed such intense fears of being left behind in the coming rapture that he stopped playing with neighborhood friends (they could lead him to sin) and stayed safely in his bedroom, rocking and reading the Bible for hours every day after school.

This boy and the other more "obedient" kids prayed constantly, growing increasingly paranoid about committing even the most minor "sins", e.g., not reading the scriptures before and after school, inadvertently leaving someone out of bedtime prayers, failing to ask a classmate if Jesus was his or her personal savior, etc. These kids worried that some day they'd come home to find their parents gone. GONE. Forever.

Fighting for Purity

For a child raised in fundamentalist "conservative" churches, there is no safe haven. Everyone is a potential threat, not just of contamination of oneself--to burn for all eternity--but of causing the child to suffer the more tangible threat of losing his or her parents, siblings, and grandparents.

The rapture film and others like it strike at the very core of normal childhood needs for security and parental love. Those who succumbed to the rapture threats grew up to be legalistic Christians, paranoid and ever on the watch for sinful people. Contamination by Christians of other denominations was to be avoided at all costs. Imagine, then, how much greater the fear of Catholics (considered "a cult", not "Christian" by many fundamentalists), Jews, Muslims, and other "sinful" citizens. In Purity We Trust.

Google "purity" with names of Bush's conservative advisers and "think tank" writers: Notice how they promote this fearsome concept. Hitler knew the power of "purity", and so do today's fundamentalists: Avoid contamination by whatever means necessary.

To make a pure nation you have to break a few heads. Sure, people will die: the enemy, "our troops", maybe you, too. But it will have been worth it if even one soul is saved. Anyway, your choice is stark: Die today (be sure to repent first) or burn for all eternity. Be "ready to die" at every moment-because the end is coming. As Freddy Mercury sang so sadly, "nothing really matters anymore".

In our brave new fundamentalist nation, it really doesn't matter anymore how many people you kill, or how much of the earth's environment you destroy. What matters is this and only this: If you don't want to come home one day to an empty house and suffer in the lake of fire for all eternity, you'd better hate all the right people, bomb all the right countries, and back your rapture-ready president in whatever hare-brained scheme he comes up with next.

Life itself is a snare, a temptation of the flesh. Your safest bet is to repent and then die young, before you're Left Behind.

I can't find fundamentalist christianity in your post. Care to elaborate?

I can't find fundamentalist christianity in your post. Care to elaborate?
ROFFLE

You're the fear monger.. Fear the christians ? Yeah they might feed you, or give donations that house you!!! Oh how horrible of them!!!

Seriously, I am a christian and I agree that you shouldn't worry about the rapture or "the end times" or any of that stuff. You should just live your life, be kind, be generous, and be loving. I also think that 99% of good christians are getting a bad rap because of a few whackos.

Hooray!
Somebody didnt lump all Christians into a single catagory whilst screaming about them doing the same!

I hereby declare Revionia to be a Grade 2 Non-Troll.
Congratulations, you can get your badge and free sticker sheet in the office.

What i think about fundamentlists christians. I think we need more lions.

You also equated Dubya with hitler!! Shows your true colors. honestly I think you're the extremist here. You may not like him, you may disagree, thats all fine but the slandering and insults are just rediculous. What makes you think the pres is some sort of extremist anyway? I dont agree with everything he does but come on' he's a good hearted guy, not a ruthless demonic sadist genocidal killer. Get a grip pal...

i have only three word for you LIONS AND TIGERS

What i think about fundamentlists christians. I think we need more lions.
MODS!!! I dont think recommending forced bestiality animal rape and murder is a very good way to have a balanced conversation. This is despicable and should be grounds for dismissal from this forum. I've had enough of this kind of talk in here!! Please help...

Lets build a gaint staduim filled with vicious half starved man eating annimals so we can slaughter and percecute theses bastards for their radical beliefs.

MODS!!! I dont think recommending forced bestiality animal rape and murder is a very good way to have a balanced conversation. This is despicable and should be grounds for dismissal from this forum. I've had enough of this kind of talk in here!! Please help...

You see thats where your wrong im not sugesting we let them rape lions im sugesting we let the lions rape them

The scary thing is im not joking

Lets build a gaint staduim filled with vicious half starved man eating annimals so we can slaughter and percecute theses bastards for their radical beliefs.

Dude. Roman-style.

Dude. Roman-style.

You know WHAT really ticks me off about these bastards its that THEY WONT WORSHIP MY gods i mean if they dont worship the gods they whole empire could COLLLAPSE i tell you COLLAPSE.

You know WHAT really ticks me off about these bastards its that THEY WONT WORSHIP MY gods i mean if they dont worship the gods they whole empire could COLLLAPSE i tell you COLLAPSE.
actually, the romans would usualy let people keep on worshipping their old gods, as long as they 'paid tribute' to romes gods...
...
Ill leave now :P

EDIT:
Damn stupid Jolt sizing system...

Doesn't Revelations say that the Antichrist would use Scriptures against us and twist the truth to serve him? Hmmm...if ever there were an example of the message of love and hope and tolerance being twisted to create fear and obedience, this sort of fundamentalism is probably it.

Doesn't Revelations say that the Antichrist would use Scriptures against us and twist the truth to serve him? Hmmm...if ever there were an example of the message of love and hope and tolerance being twisted to create fear and obedience, this sort of fundamentalism is probably it.

Yes, but the Antichrist will also be a 'great speaker' who can convience most everybody to see his way.
Hence, Bush is clearly not the Antichrist, since lots of people dont seem to like him.

You're the fear monger.. Fear the christians ? Yeah they might feed you, or give donations that house you!!! Oh how horrible of them!!!

Seriously, I am a christian and I agree that you shouldn't worry about the rapture or "the end times" or any of that stuff. You should just live your life, be kind, be generous, and be loving. I also think that 99% of good christians are getting a bad rap because of a few whackos.

the trouble is, the wackos SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF, and nobody corrects them about the fact that not every christian believes what they believe. every christian i've ever met is a pleasant, reasonable person who i get along with and enjoy the company of. every christian i've ever seen on the news, in magazine, on tv hosting a prayer telethon or being interviewed is a raving loon. if christians want their image to improve, perhaps they could try putting the more reasonable face of christianity forward once and awhile?

You also equated Dubya with hitler!! Shows your true colors. honestly I think you're the extremist here. You may not like him, you may disagree, thats all fine but the slandering and insults are just rediculous. What makes you think the pres is some sort of extremist anyway? I dont agree with everything he does but come on' he's a good hearted guy, not a ruthless demonic sadist genocidal killer. Get a grip pal...
I disagree with equating Dubya with Hitler for different reasons. Hitler was an insane extremist, but he was also intelligent and a good leader. Dubya's just a moron.

the trouble is, the wackos SPEAK ON YOUR BEHALF, and nobody corrects them about the fact that not every christian believes what they believe. every christian i've ever met is a pleasant, reasonable person who i get along with and enjoy the company of. every christian i've ever seen on the news, in magazine, on tv hosting a prayer telethon or being interviewed is a raving loon. if christians want their image to improve, perhaps they could try putting the more reasonable face of christianity forward once and awhile?
That's why I'm speaking out now.

I group will always be defined by its wildest members. That does not mean that is the group. So, I would say that if there is a cult type church out there, not like christanity byt certain inner groups, let them live, but away from us, do an ommish (sp?) thing.

Rapturist are funny. If they are all so worked up about it, you could suggest that they enter a self imposed exile where they spend the rest of their life in their homes praying. Eventually, they will run out of food and starve to death. By coming out of the homes to get food or work for the money to purchase it, they prove that they are not ready to die.

If you tape all this up, you can laugh at them later.

Or on a side note, they may end up starting a suicide cult or something. Either way, humanity as a whole wins. Natural selection at its finest with the creation of a self filtering mechanism.

I was unaware that there were still that many "God-fearing" fundamentalist out there. It has been my interpretaion, at least in America, that most Christians are friend of a "loving God." It is these people that treat the Bible as a code to a blissful life, not a book of rules and laws. I guess that there still are some people stuck in the realms of fundamentalism, but i refuse to think that there truely are as many as you believe, especially in high governemnt offices.

A lot of people misuse the term "god fearing" because they dont understand it's true purpose. To me a self professed god fearing christian (although not the type you are alluding to) it represents the smallness of man in general and a reminder never to be too self important. There are consequences to actions, it shouldn't be a controlling mechanism for anyone. And it dose not mean god is not loving, quite the opposite.

Mmmm. This conversation intrigues me. Why is it that people are so quick to jump on the "Dubya's a Moron" bandwagon, the "we shouldn't be killing babies in Iraq" bandwagon, and the "All Christians Hate Me" bandwagon so easily?

I honestly don't understand a few things here. I'll explain my ideas, and then mayhaps you folks can elaborate for me:

1. EVERY organization has wackos. (This has been stated, and I wholeheartedly agree.) Most Wiccans I know are kind-hearted, benevolent folks. But they still get tagged in along with all the other Witches and Cultists, mostly thanks to a few "fringies."

2. The "Christian Church" was not designed to be a pleasant country club, where you go to see your friends and family once a week. It was not designed to be a happy-go-lucky, "why can't we all get along" organization. It was, at its heart, firmly set against everything the Roman Government of the day stood for. Not because it was anti-Roman, mind you, but because the belief system these people adhered to was very strict, and it very clearly delineated a separation from those who did not follow that Way. Bottom line is this: The Christian Church Is Not Meant To Be Tolerant. Neither is Islam. Neither are most religions when you look at them. I grew up in Church, am still active in Church, and I will say this: 75% (or better) of Church-Goers today aren't Christians. They can't be. Or rather, they WON'T be. Because being a Christian means realizing that nothing on Earth matters, because your treasures are in Heaven. So my Business I built from the ground up, and this house that's been in the family for three generations and my iPod and my Honda Civic and my band and my XBOX and my new portrait I'm working on and and and and..... don't matter. That's too much for most people. SO they take what they want, build a Morality Code, and go on. But Jesus didn't preach Morality. Zoroaster preached Morality. Jesus preached that He was the ONLY way to Heaven, and that ONLY through Him would you see it. Mohammed said "This is the way." So did Buddah. So does Hindu. So does Comet Chasing. Jesus said, "Here. I am that Way." This is what makes Christianity fundamentally, and functionally different from any other world religion.

3.Based on the strictest laws of Religion (ANY religion) a person who does not follow the tenets or code of a religion cannot be called a follower of that Way.

i.e. - Don't tell me you're Vegan, you just snapped into a Slim Jim.

4."Non-practicing" anything is essentially a pile of crap designed to soothe your conscience while you go do what you want.

5.All that aside, most Christians, while not (by my definition, mind you. I'm a bit cynical. God probably has a much better perspective on things than me.) strictly following the tenets of their code to the letter, generally mean well.

I've never met a person whose goal in life was to ruin people. The fact is this: if you want to be offended, or if you want a REASON to be offended, then you'll find one. Really, the Church is a great place to start. Because "Fundamentalism" stands against most everything Hollywood and modern society has to offer. It's an interesting "full-circle" phenomenon. So if you love the world around you, you can bet you'll hate us.

6. Why does "everyone" hate Dubya? While I disagree with some of his choices, I couldn't have done any better, and I'm not sure you'll find anyone who'd want to try. Really, you have two choices: Do nothing, let the Twin Towers fall with no retaliation whatsoever. Once they realize we'll never react, thousands more die. Not thousands of men and women who have CHOSEN to serve our country in whatever way is necessary. "Innocent" (by which I mean non-military targets) people, men women and children. Or we fight back. Thousands of people still die. But make no mistake. They weren't forced into this. There's no draft. Any man or woman over there knew what they were in for when they signed up. That's WHY they signed up. To protect you and me and my cat. Probably your mom too, but I can't really verify that.

As for the claims that millions of innocent Iraqi and Afghani people are dying every day.... picking up a gun relieves you of your innocence. If you point it at one of our boys, they're quite liable to shoot you. It's their thing... it's what they do. Also, blowing up a car relieves you of a lot of the claims of innocence as well.

7. Wow, that was a long rant. Sorry about that. Had to get that off my chest. Feel free to pick this apart and misquote me as best you can. Everyone does anyway. That's what makes these forums such a joy to read.

Daemonhunter']6. Why does "everyone" hate Dubya? While I disagree with some of his choices, I couldn't have done any better, and I'm not sure you'll find anyone who'd want to try. Really, you have two choices: Do nothing, let the Twin Towers fall with no retaliation whatsoever. Once they realize we'll never react, thousands more die. Not thousands of men and women who have CHOSEN to serve our country in whatever way is necessary. "Innocent" (by which I mean non-military targets) people, men women and children. Or we fight back. Thousands of people still die. But make no mistake. They weren't forced into this. There's no draft. Any man or woman over there knew what they were in for when they signed up. That's WHY they signed up. To protect you and me and my cat. Probably your mom too, but I can't really verify that.

Heh... Ironically, I think I'll take you up on the whole "picking apart" offer. But, to save me time, I'll only pick apart the bits that are relative to what I believe and thus have some degree of knowledge of. Seem fair?

Besides, I agree with points 1 and 5 anyway. 6, on the other hand, is a wholly different kettle of fish.

Defiance to you means violence. There are ways to retaliate other than blowing things up in revenge, and there are ways to fight evil that don't involve taking out thousands of innocents in the crossfire. To say that you either had a choice between nothing and engaging in a vicious and angry but ultimately indirectable war is, quite simply, the biggest load of complete bullshit I have ever heard.

Be very honoured. I don't say that very often.

But it's typical of you Bipartisianists. There is a right thing to do and a wrong thing to do, all the time. There is a right party and a wrong party. There is that which is ultimately good and that which is ultimately evil.

Wake up. This world is littered with self-interest on every side, including (possibly especially) those who claim to be "good", and the rest of us have managed to at least discover the concept of moderation.

So, what should you have done? Read the 9/11 attacks for what they really were; a statement of exasperation at circumstance. Terrorists arise because they have been persuaded to do so by some higher authority. The reason for their sucception to this persuasion is what you should tackle: Do you realise just how much more the western world has than the rest of it?

Tony Blair once said that we should be "Tough on terrorism, tough on the causes of terrorism". Well, guess what? The causes of terrorism are ultimately discontent with their economic and political environment and... that someone has managed to appeal to the self interests of these people by saying that they will be rewarded for their actions in the next world.

In that respect, they and Fundamentalist Christianity share a lot more in common than either of them could stand accepting. Why do people turn to such beliefs? It's a dissatisfaction for the way the world is at the minute and the hope that things will get better for them in the next world if they follow the guidelines set for them by the people who tell them so.

I hate it. Self-serving, cowardly and naive suck-ups who take their life, their world, comfort and well-being and the company of their friends and family for granted, and who, rather than striving to make an effort to either relieve their circumstances or help others in need, try to hide it all under a banner of "if I stay here, it will all go away in death".

Fundamentalist Christianity is immature escapism. You can understand why people turn to such beliefs in the middle east, when their circumstances are poor, the world stage teaches them that self-interest is the way to succeed and the movement is popular among those in similar situations. But to do the same in the west is ultimately a gross act of disrespect.

Now non-fundamentalist Christians, on the other hand, stick with the policy of "Be in the world but not of it". They enjoy the world for what it is, do what it can as an organisation to help the impoverished, act as the moderate voice of reason in global affairs, as a consoler of people in difficulty and a place where people are free to commune and share different ideas without pressure. And that, in my view, is what Christianity is ultimately about. You are God's representatives on the planet; not his screaming, hyper groupies or that lower member of staff that's constantly trying to lick his shoes for promotion. You have a job to do, so take your underlying self-servitude and the expectation of reward out of it and Get on with it.

Or, to summarise, live your life as though there is a God but no heaven. He who performs the will of his Lord even understanding that there will most likely be no reward is he who is most deserving of it.

While I agree that it's way too extreme to believe the next minute is the Rapture, I think that a little bit of fear will keep the pressure up and so we don't slack off in our lives. For example, if you believe that today is going to be last day every day, you will learn to treasure it. I think that's one important lesson I have to learn, because I am allowing my days to melt into one another without a purpose. That is one of the worst ways to spend any day.

Yes, but the Antichrist will also be a 'great speaker' who can convience most everybody to see his way.
Hence, Bush is clearly not the Antichrist, since lots of people dont seem to like him.Of course Bush isn't the Anti-Christ. Prince Charles is (or William or Harry).:p
Shocking Evidence (http://www.clydelewis.com/dis/prince/prince.html)

If the rapture does come, I will only worry if it doesnt take me.

If the rapture does come, I'll be pleased for those who get what they deserved. Ultimately, though, my sense of morality would have me stay with those suffering the pain of loss. Eternal damnation is worth bearing if I can bring some sense of peaceful purpose and friendly community to those left behind.

Lets build a gaint staduim filled with vicious half starved man eating annimals so we can slaughter and percecute theses bastards for their radical beliefs.
Your attempts at satire and humor fail at both. Be careful that you do not cross the line into flamebaiting and trolling.
MODS!!! I dont think recommending forced bestiality animal rape and murder is a very good way to have a balanced conversation. This is despicable and should be grounds for dismissal from this forum. I've had enough of this kind of talk in here!! Please help...
Your overreaction towards a post that disagrees with you does not constitute grounds for dismissal. This is a discussion forum. Argue your points or report them unemotionally. Screaming at him in-thread doesn't help anyone.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

If the rapture does come, I will only worry if it doesnt take me.
Wow what a good christian :rolleyes:

what if the rapture has already been and we missed the boat so to speak?

there was a big movement sometime in the late 1800's based on biblical dating that put the second coming at some specific year (i dont remember which one and there have been so many). lots of people stopped paying their bills because there was no sense to worry about non religious things.

life on earth is supposed to continue after the rapture. how can we be sure that the select 144,000 arent already gone? we may not have even had a chance.

what if the rapture has already been and we missed the boat so to speak?

Heh. Yeah. The rapture came once already and only took one person. That's a hilarious idea :D

what if the rapture has already been and we missed the boat so to speak?

there was a big movement sometime in the late 1800's based on biblical dating that put the second coming at some specific year (i dont remember which one and there have been so many). lots of people stopped paying their bills because there was no sense to worry about non religious things.

life on earth is supposed to continue after the rapture. how can we be sure that the select 144,000 arent already gone? we may not have even had a chance.Um the 144,000 first of all are jewish. Second there is still hope for the left behind.

I must say that I am not to keen on Christianity, if only for the fact that I am such a close follower of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. He was adamantly against any form of religion and believed that religion led to focus on the afterlife, thereby breeding nihilistic tendencies towards this one. I think that when we put too much focus on religion and not enough focus on the world that is right in front of us it tends to create problems.

Um the 144,000 first of all are jewish. Second there is still hope for the left behind.
i hadnt realized that jewish part. what qualifications do theyhave to have to get chosen

I must say that I am not to keen on Christianity, if only for the fact that I am such a close follower of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. He was adamantly against any form of religion and believed that religion led to focus on the afterlife, thereby breeding nihilistic tendencies towards this one. I think that when we put too much focus on religion and not enough focus on the world that is right in front of us it tends to create problems.
so true when you think about it. Except religions like Hinduism focus on achieving personal good, not spreading the religion or killing non-believers, so that doesn't fit the logic as good as the three main religions, but I still agree with John Lennon:

"[Imagine] no religion too.
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace."

Now, the question is, are you referring to fundamental Christians, or the Fundamentalists? There is a rather key distinction between the two. Fundamentalists began to appear in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, namely from the Protestant church revivals. This is an extremist sect of Christianity, taking (their) "values" of the scripture and forcing others to bow down to them. Christians who hold fundamental values, however, are those who merely believe in God's Word, and hold that Word to be inerrant. They walk their life in the Word, but also understand that we're not God's police to the world.

I'd like to think that I'm of the latter. I believe that the Bible is God's word to me. It's God's word to others. It's not God's word to all. We're not to force Christianity upon others, and even recognize that Christ Himself was against that. It's the Holy Spirit's job to convert, not ours. We're to tell of the Word only when asked (or as a good pastor once said "Only when the time is right for both parties"), and, contrary to popular belief, don't smash Bibles across "heathen" foreheads.

The Bible is gods word to all. The Bible is God's love letter to the Human race. However, we were given a chiopce to believe and follow it. Christ came to save those who are lost, in that sense you are not a follower of Christ if you do not try to do the same. I'm not saying that we are to foce Christianity upon the world, but rather we, as Christians and followers of Christ are to enighten people and spead the Joy that was brought to us through His crucifixtion and resuection. Jesus saved us all in his death, believers, non-believer, mnuderes, rapist, thieves, christians, muslim etc. What you do on this Earth is completely and uterly meaningless. We as Christians through evangelism are trying to simply so those that cannot see the Joy of God, Jesus, and heaven.

The Bible is gods word to all. The Bible is God's love letter to the Human race. However, we were given a chiopce to believe and follow it. Christ came to save those who are lost, in that sense you are not a follower of Christ if you do not try to do the same. I'm not saying that we are to foce Christianity upon the world, but rather we, as Christians and followers of Christ are to enighten people and spead the Joy that was brought to us through His crucifixtion and resuection. Jesus saved us all in his death, believers, non-believer, mnuderes, rapist, thieves, christians, muslim etc. What you do on this Earth is completely and uterly meaningless. We as Christians through evangelism are trying to simply so those that cannot see the Joy of God, Jesus, and heaven.

... I wonder, really, what pain the world has inflicted upon you to make you feel that it is utterly without value. I mean, seriously... I say this out of genuine concern as opposed to incredulity... Has our existence created such a negative scarring that, even with another one following it, you would feel it a waste of time?

Could we have done anything to help make you feel that this place might at least be some sort of nice little place to take a pause before you go into the party?

I don't hate life at all. My philosopy on life is comparable to that of a litle kid going to disneyland. Heaven is our disneyland, and life is the ride there. What happens on the ride doesn't really matter beacuse what we are trying to get to is more important, more enjoyable. I guess you could say that my motto to life is "Are we there Yet?" Now thats not to say that we can't enjoy our time here, but the knowlege in the back of my mind is still that there are much bigger, better things awaiting me after i leave.

I don't hate life at all. My philosopy on life is comparable to that of a litle kid going to disneyland. Heaven is our disneyland, and life is the ride there. What happens on the ride doesn't really matter beacuse what we are trying to get to is more important, more enjoyable. I guess you could say that my motto to life is "Are we there Yet?" Now thats not to say that we can't enjoy our time here, but the knowlege in the back of my mind is still that there are much bigger, better things awaiting me after i leave.

I find that sad. You're missing out, you know; in your rush to get to Disneyland, you both miss the thrill of what is your first ride and you miss out on the view. And, believe me, that view is stunning if you can appreciate it.

I'm not saying you can't look forward to what's to come, but Earth is part of the miracle of creation too. I really think you should go out, have a look around and learn to appreciate what is around you rather than always be in a rush to get to the reward. The Journey is a rewarding experience in itself, I feel, especially if you make it with a group of like-minded travellers who you can relate to and share the wonder with.

So... yeah. While you're on that train, be sure to take a look out the window. You're closer than you might think to the place you want to get to.

I find that sad. You're missing out, you know; in your rush to get to Disneyland, you both miss the thrill of what is your first ride and you miss out on the view. And, believe me, that view is stunning if you can appreciate it.

I'm not saying you can't look forward to what's to come, but Earth is part of the miracle of creation too. I really think you should go out, have a look around and learn to appreciate what is around you rather than always be in a rush to get to the reward. The Journey is a rewarding experience in itself, I feel, especially if you make it with a group of like-minded travellers who you can relate to and share the wonder with.

So... yeah. While you're on that train, be sure to take a look out the window. You're closer than you might think to the place you want to get to.

I cannot speak for every Christian, or even fundamental Christians, but many who hold to the creationism account along with the fall of man believe that the world is not in the state of perfection it was created as. In fact, sin has plagued it, corrupting it into a state of decay and imperfection. Some believe that because it's no longer perfect, it no longer is deserving of our attention.

While I agree that it's no longer perfect, I couldn't disagree more on that last statement. The world is still God's creation, and we are still endowed by God its responsibility. While we may not have the authority we once had, we can still be seen as its caretakers. This doesn't apply to just nature and the animals, however. We must take care of ourselves as well. After all, how can we tend to the world if we cannot tend to ourselves?

I can still see God in His creation. I can just step outside and watch the sun set, its light still clinging to the clouds. I can look at the mountains and their ageless majesty. Or I can just notice the gentle rustle of leaves in the breeze. God's genius is still here. We just have to but look outside and experience it.

ever since someone explained the whole rapture-thing to me, ive been looking forward to it.


ill get my post-apocalyptic earth to wander, without all the annoying radiation and decomposing human bodies that normally accompany such post-apocalyptic scenarios :D

I compleatly agree with "Romanore," the presence os the creation is still here, but it is not in its true form. Instead of feeling God's work continuously, we have to look for it, look through Human destruction to find God's work.

"Now non-fundamentalist Christians, on the other hand, stick with the policy of "Be in the world but not of it". They enjoy the world for what it is, do what it can as an organisation to help the impoverished, act as the moderate voice of reason in global affairs, as a consoler of people in difficulty and a place where people are free to commune and share different ideas without pressure. And that, in my view, is what Christianity is ultimately about. You are God's representatives on the planet; not his screaming, hyper groupies or that lower member of staff that's constantly trying to lick his shoes for promotion. You have a job to do, so take your underlying self-servitude and the expectation of reward out of it and Get on with it."

-- Kamsaki

Funny because i completly agree with you here and i truely believe that this is the true church. They are spreading the joy that is the gospel so that people may live a better life while here. however, the life we have here still does not matter, where we are going is greater that we can imagine. Jesus saved all those who were lost (everyone) so that our sins on this earth didn't matter. I can't wait until the end, until i can finally look at Him and see my Father for the first time. but until that happens i will live my life by the Bible, for as i said before, it is not a book of laws but rather a guide to e blissful life.

Doesn't Revelations say that the Antichrist would use Scriptures against us and twist the truth to serve him? Hmmm...if ever there were an example of the message of love and hope and tolerance being twisted to create fear and obedience, this sort of fundamentalism is probably it.



Or the other way around, teaching that we don't need to adhere to a strict moral code and we need not fear God, since we can sin all we want and Christ's grace will still cover us :rolleyes:

Daemonhunter']Mmmm. This conversation intrigues me. Why is it that people are so quick to jump on the "Dubya's a Moron" bandwagon, the "we shouldn't be killing babies in Iraq" bandwagon, and the "All Christians Hate Me" bandwagon so easily?

I honestly don't understand a few things here. I'll explain my ideas, and then mayhaps you folks can elaborate for me:

1. EVERY organization has wackos. (This has been stated, and I wholeheartedly agree.) Most Wiccans I know are kind-hearted, benevolent folks. But they still get tagged in along with all the other Witches and Cultists, mostly thanks to a few "fringies."

2. The "Christian Church" was not designed to be a pleasant country club, where you go to see your friends and family once a week. It was not designed to be a happy-go-lucky, "why can't we all get along" organization. It was, at its heart, firmly set against everything the Roman Government of the day stood for. Not because it was anti-Roman, mind you, but because the belief system these people adhered to was very strict, and it very clearly delineated a separation from those who did not follow that Way. Bottom line is this: The Christian Church Is Not Meant To Be Tolerant. Neither is Islam. Neither are most religions when you look at them. I grew up in Church, am still active in Church, and I will say this: 75% (or better) of Church-Goers today aren't Christians. They can't be. Or rather, they WON'T be. Because being a Christian means realizing that nothing on Earth matters, because your treasures are in Heaven. So my Business I built from the ground up, and this house that's been in the family for three generations and my iPod and my Honda Civic and my band and my XBOX and my new portrait I'm working on and and and and..... don't matter. That's too much for most people. SO they take what they want, build a Morality Code, and go on. But Jesus didn't preach Morality. Zoroaster preached Morality. Jesus preached that He was the ONLY way to Heaven, and that ONLY through Him would you see it. Mohammed said "This is the way." So did Buddah. So does Hindu. So does Comet Chasing. Jesus said, "Here. I am that Way." This is what makes Christianity fundamentally, and functionally different from any other world religion.

3.Based on the strictest laws of Religion (ANY religion) a person who does not follow the tenets or code of a religion cannot be called a follower of that Way.

i.e. - Don't tell me you're Vegan, you just snapped into a Slim Jim.

4."Non-practicing" anything is essentially a pile of crap designed to soothe your conscience while you go do what you want.

5.All that aside, most Christians, while not (by my definition, mind you. I'm a bit cynical. God probably has a much better perspective on things than me.) strictly following the tenets of their code to the letter, generally mean well.

I've never met a person whose goal in life was to ruin people. The fact is this: if you want to be offended, or if you want a REASON to be offended, then you'll find one. Really, the Church is a great place to start. Because "Fundamentalism" stands against most everything Hollywood and modern society has to offer. It's an interesting "full-circle" phenomenon. So if you love the world around you, you can bet you'll hate us.

6. Why does "everyone" hate Dubya? While I disagree with some of his choices, I couldn't have done any better, and I'm not sure you'll find anyone who'd want to try. Really, you have two choices: Do nothing, let the Twin Towers fall with no retaliation whatsoever. Once they realize we'll never react, thousands more die. Not thousands of men and women who have CHOSEN to serve our country in whatever way is necessary. "Innocent" (by which I mean non-military targets) people, men women and children. Or we fight back. Thousands of people still die. But make no mistake. They weren't forced into this. There's no draft. Any man or woman over there knew what they were in for when they signed up. That's WHY they signed up. To protect you and me and my cat. Probably your mom too, but I can't really verify that.

As for the claims that millions of innocent Iraqi and Afghani people are dying every day.... picking up a gun relieves you of your innocence. If you point it at one of our boys, they're quite liable to shoot you. It's their thing... it's what they do. Also, blowing up a car relieves you of a lot of the claims of innocence as well.

7. Wow, that was a long rant. Sorry about that. Had to get that off my chest. Feel free to pick this apart and misquote me as best you can. Everyone does anyway. That's what makes these forums such a joy to read.




/clap

We are not to fear God, he loves us. And his grace is not a cover for you to do whatever you wish. He is our Father and we are his children, in that sense, Jesus saved us from the wrath of God. we were to little kid that broke daddy's prised possession and Christ took the blame for us by Dying on the cross. Christ took the punishment for us, but we are not to abuse that. God is still our Father and we should do everything to please him, however, in those times that we slip up and sin, Jesus is there to catch us and take the Blame for us. Christ is our buffer walking behind us everystep of the way on our journey twards God, however, Jesus will not force us to walk in that direction, should we repetedly run the oposite way he will let us run, but he will be there inc ase we should decide to turn back.

Of course Bush isn't the Anti-Christ. Prince Charles is (or William or Harry).:p
Shocking Evidence (http://www.clydelewis.com/dis/prince/prince.html)

Did anyone read this? It is absolute madness and shows just how bad some of these people are .

You also equated Dubya with hitler!! Shows your true colors. honestly I think you're the extremist here. You may not like him, you may disagree, thats all fine but the slandering and insults are just rediculous. What makes you think the pres is some sort of extremist anyway? I dont agree with everything he does but come on' he's a good hearted guy, not a ruthless demonic sadist genocidal killer. Get a grip pal...
you think that hitler was as bad as bush? bush is letting you wakkos in america do anything. hitler tried to make the people physically evolve(could have succeded too), he united the country to spread that ideology. even though i don't agree with his ideologies and everything, it's quite admirable how he did it. although he was christian, which was bad, he still was quite an honourable fellow. what you people need in the u.s. is more order. there's other things, too, but that's the main thing.

you think that hitler was as bad as bush? bush is letting you wakkos in america do anything. hitler tried to make the people physically evolve(could have succeded too), he united the country to spread that ideology. even though i don't agree with his ideologies and everything, it's quite admirable how he did it. although he was christian, which was bad, he still was quite an honourable fellow. what you people need in the u.s. is more order. there's other things, too, but that's the main thing.


What is admirable, that he treated Jews like animals and murdered them mercilessly and with the cruellest methods possible? Or what about the children experimented on for his eugenics program?

Honorable? Yes, the man who was responsible for violating treaties, dividing up countries without their agreement, subjecting most of Europe to near slavery, violating nonagression pacts, and starting a war that claimed tens of millions of lives is honorable!?

Hitler was a murderer and an affront to the principles of Christianity. The model picture of the Antichrist.

you think that hitler was as bad as bush? bush is letting you wakkos in america do anything. hitler tried to make the people physically evolve(could have succeded too), he united the country to spread that ideology. even though i don't agree with his ideologies and everything, it's quite admirable how he did it. although he was christian, which was bad, he still was quite an honourable fellow. what you people need in the u.s. is more order. there's other things, too, but that's the main thing.
mymymy you do have a bad opinion of president bush. or perhaps you dont have enough knowlege of hitler. there are a few worse things than "letting wakkos in american do anything".

mymymy you do have a bad opinion of president bush. or perhaps you dont have enough knowlege of hitler. there are a few worse things than "letting wakkos in american do anything".

Yes, like mostly everything Hitler did.

Vetalia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yupaenu

Hitler was a murderer and an affront to the principles of Christianity. The model picture of the Antichrist.


then why hasn't the world ended yet?

Did anyone read this? It is absolute madness and shows just how bad some of these people are .
i thought it was a hoot. not that i read the whole thing. was the author british?

according to a piece i saw on 60minutes (american tv newsish show) there is a huge contingency of these "left behinders". they are inspired by a series of books called the left behind series that tell what will happen after the rapture. it seems that some people takes these novels as seriously as they do the bible.

i always thought there was something "off" about prince charles....

then why hasn't the world ended yet?

Perhaps it takes longer than we think it would?

then why hasn't the world ended yet?

Maybe it already has?

Yes, like mostly everything Hitler did.
yeah

as much as i dislike george bush he is no where near the evil of hitler.

maybe Yupaenu was just trying to close the thread with a "godwin" ?

Perhaps it takes longer than we think it would?

It's been how many years since hitler died? I think it would have happened by now if he was the antichrist.

What is admirable, that he treated Jews like animals and murdered them mercilessly and with the cruellest methods possible? Or what about the children experimented on for his eugenics program?

Honorable? Yes, the man who was responsible for violating treaties, dividing up countries without their agreement, subjecting most of Europe to near slavery, violating nonagression pacts, and starting a war that claimed tens of millions of lives is honorable!?

Hitler was a murderer and an affront to the principles of Christianity. The model picture of the Antichrist.
the reason and means is more important that the action. do you even know why he did it? for the good of his country. the single individual doesn't matter in comparison to the whole.
for the dividing up countries there is a quote from stalin that describes that quite well;
"A man enforces his ideals as far as his armies can reach."

also, you think that any of the things bush has done was good? look at what happeneds in america! there's drugs everywhere, people die for bad reasons(hitlers reasons they were able to back up atleast), they've demolished a well running government in the middle east, he's also violated treaties(i agree, that isn't good. even though i'm for an isolationist country, i think that keeping one's word is important, and no exceptions! not even government officials)

It's been how many years since hitler died? I think it would have happened by now if he was the antichrist.

Well, it could be possible that he was an Antichrist, but not necessarily the Antichrist that John talks about.

mymymy you do have a bad opinion of president bush. or perhaps you dont have enough knowlege of hitler. there are a few worse things than "letting wakkos in american do anything".
not many things, but such things include, allowing christianity to continue.

the reason and means is more important that the action. do you even know why he did it? for the good of his country. the single individual doesn't matter in comparison to the whole.
for the dividing up countries there is a quote from stalin that describes that quite well;
"A man enforces his ideals as far as his armies can reach."

also, you think that any of the things bush has done was good? look at what happeneds in america! there's drugs everywhere, people die for bad reasons(hitlers reasons they were able to back up atleast), they've demolished a well running government in the middle east, he's also violated treaties(i agree, that isn't good. even though i'm for an isolationist country, i think that keeping one's word is important, and no exceptions! not even government officials)

*Picks jaw up from floor*

The road to hell is paved by good intentions.

yeah

as much as i dislike george bush he is no where near the evil of hitler.

maybe Yupaenu was just trying to close the thread with a "godwin" ?
...no, why do you say that, as that is what i think, if you're saying i'm joking? what is a "godwin"?

the reason and means is more important that the action. do you even know why he did it? for the good of his country. the single individual doesn't matter in comparison to the whole.
for the dividing up countries there is a quote from stalin that describes that quite well;
"A man enforces his ideals as far as his armies can reach."

also, you think that any of the things bush has done was good? look at what happeneds in america! there's drugs everywhere, people die for bad reasons(hitlers reasons they were able to back up atleast), they've demolished a well running government in the middle east, he's also violated treaties(i agree, that isn't good. even though i'm for an isolationist country, i think that keeping one's word is important, and no exceptions! not even government officials)

"For the good of the country" doesn't make it right. Murder is murder whatever its outcome.

The single individual makes up the whole, and if you disregard the rights of the individual eventually the system will collapse.

Conquest is wrong because it violates the rights of the conquered to self determination. Stalin was a real winner too, with 30,000,000+ people killed or murdered by his powerlust.

The crimes in America are wrong, I agree but genocide is never excusable to help ensure stability.

Hitler never kept his word. He lied to the world, to his nation, even to the Red Cross. He violated treaties more than Bush ever could, because the people couldn't restrain his desires; to compare themas equal is little more than the False Analogy fallacy.

not many things, but such things include, allowing christianity to continue.
the continuance of christianity is not up to george bush. the president of the united states has no control whatsoever on religion

"godwins law" states that when the debate turns to comparisons with hitler or nazis, the debate must end then and there with the person who invoked hitler summarily losing.

what is a "godwin"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

"For the good of the country" doesn't make it right. Murder is murder whatever its outcome.

The single individual makes up the whole, and if you disregard the rights of the individual eventually the system will collapse.

Conquest is wrong because it violates the rights of the conquered to self determination. Stalin was a real winner too, with 30,000,000+ people killed or murdered by his powerlust.

The crimes in America are wrong, I agree but genocide is never excusable to help ensure stability.

Hitler never kept his word. He lied to the world, to his nation, even to the Red Cross. He violated treaties more than Bush ever could, because the people couldn't restrain his desires; to compare themas equal is little more than the False Analogy fallacy.
1.murder may still be murder, but it can be for a correct reason or for a wronge reason.
2.then you don't believe that a country should be weeded of the weak?
3.i don't understand you're point there? i was agreeing that conquest wasn't right(in that situation. mongolia had good conquest, though, very succesful.)
4.once the genocide ends, and the country is purged, it can remain in a good state.
5.i know, i was saying that was one of his major faults. i had said before, i didn't agree with everything that he had done, just that he was better than bush.(actually, i typically dispise the national socialists)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law
:p heheheh. that must be a joke. also, if you notice, i wasn't the one to bring up hitler, i quoted someone else who had brought up hitler.

1.murder may still be murder, but it can be for a correct reason or for a wronge reason.
2.then you don't believe that a country should be weeded of the weak?
3.i don't understand you're point there? i was agreeing that conquest wasn't right(in that situation. mongolia had good conquest, though, very succesful.)
4.once the genocide ends, and the country is purged, it can remain in a good state.
5.i know, i was saying that was one of his major faults. i had said before, i didn't agree with everything that he had done, just that he was better than bush.(actually, i typically dispise the national socialists)

1.No
2.No
3.Dont care
4.No
5.No
:headbang:

the continuance of christianity is not up to george bush. the president of the united states has no control whatsoever on religion

"godwins law" states that when the debate turns to comparisons with hitler or nazis, the debate must end then and there with the person who invoked hitler summarily losing.
he's not much of a leader then, is he?

read my post just before this one for the responce to your second thing there.

1.murder may still be murder, but it can be for a correct reason or for a wronge reason.
2.then you don't believe that a country should be weeded of the weak?
3.i don't understand you're point there? i was agreeing that conquest wasn't right(in that situation. mongolia had good conquest, though, very succesful.)
4.once the genocide ends, and the country is purged, it can remain in a good state.
5.i know, i was saying that was one of his major faults. i had said before, i didn't agree with everything that he had done, just that he was better than bush.(actually, i typically dispise the national socialists)

1.No. Taking an innocent life is always wrong. There is nowhere that this would be justifiable.
2. No. The weak should be cared for and helped to help integrate them in to society. They are still human, and still have value.
3. Conquering a nation is wrong because it is an aggressive act against innocent people without justification other than desire for land. You are stealing from them.
4. No. The genocide will never end until everyone is dead. It goes on as long as the people tolerate it.
5. Hitler was not better than Bush. He was nothing more than a sociopathic murderer consumed by his own hatred, which Bush is not.

1.No
2.No
3.Dont care
4.No
5.No
:headbang:
you're not backing up any of your arguements.
also, by saying "no" to that last one, you are saying that it wasn't one of hitler's faults that he didn't keep his word? heheheh.

he's not much of a leader then, is he?


he is not the leader of christianity ... he is the leader of a government
Why SHOULD he have religious control?

you're not backing up any of your arguements.
also, by saying "no" to that last one, you are saying that it wasn't one of hitler's faults that he didn't keep his word? heheheh.

I'm sorry I thought it was common sense that genocide is wrong and that Hitler is incredibly evil no matter what he did.

I'm sorry I thought it was common sense that genocide is wrong and that Hitler is incredibly evil no matter what he did.

Wait.....isn't common sense dead or something???

1.No. Taking an innocent life is always wrong. There is nowhere that this would be justifiable.
2. No. The weak should be cared for and helped to help integrate them in to society. They are still human, and still have value.
3. Conquering a nation is wrong because it is an aggressive act against innocent people without justification other than desire for land. You are stealing from them.
4. No. The genocide will never end until everyone is dead. It goes on as long as the people tolerate it.
5. Hitler was not better than Bush. He was nothing more than a sociopathic murderer consumed by his own hatred, which Bush is not.
1. they aren't inocent. they stand in the way of the progress of the country.
2. what about in cases of inheritable desease? they may have value, but only for work. they are of no value after they are dead, where as other people can be. (i'm not shure if your definition and my definition of weak are the same, mine's "one who physically and mentaly not help the government in some form, or one who refuses to help the government", and that's what i'm argueing that point over.)
3. ? that's not what i was confused over, what i was confused over is why you are arguing that, since i'm for an isolationalist country. means i don't want conquering and i don't care much what happends outside of the country, so long as the country is good.
4. genocide only targets specific people, like christians for instance. it leaves the better people unaffected.
5. he wasn't consumed by hatred. he was trying to make his country into a pure form, unfortunantly he was stopped. bush is greedy, all he is for is getting more money and status or position for himself and friends and family. he doesn't care what people do. it is a problem with most americans.

1. they aren't inocent. they stand in the way of the progress of the country.
2. what about in cases of inheritable desease? they may have value, but only for work. they are of no value after they are dead, where as other people can be. (i'm not shure if your definition and my definition of weak are the same, mine's "one who physically and mentaly not help the government in some form, or one who refuses to help the government", and that's what i'm argueing that point over.)
3. ? that's not what i was confused over, what i was confused over is why you are arguing that, since i'm for an isolationalist country. means i don't want conquering and i don't care much what happends outside of the country, so long as the country is good.
4. genocide only targets specific people, like christians for instance. it leaves the better people unaffected.
5. he wasn't consumed by hatred. he was trying to make his country into a pure form, unfortunantly he was stopped. bush is greedy, all he is for is getting more money and status or position for himself and friends and family. he doesn't care what people do. it is a problem with most americans.


Stop trolling please.

1. they aren't inocent. they stand in the way of the progress of the country.
2. what about in cases of inheritable desease? they may have value, but only for work. they are of no value after they are dead, where as other people can be. (i'm not shure if your definition and my definition of weak are the same, mine's "one who physically and mentaly not help the government in some form, or one who refuses to help the government", and that's what i'm argueing that point over.)
3. ? that's not what i was confused over, what i was confused over is why you are arguing that, since i'm for an isolationalist country. means i don't want conquering and i don't care much what happends outside of the country, so long as the country is good.
4. genocide only targets specific people, like christians for instance. it leaves the better people unaffected.
5. he wasn't consumed by hatred. he was trying to make his country into a pure form, unfortunantly he was stopped. bush is greedy, all he is for is getting more money and status or position for himself and friends and family. he doesn't care what people do. it is a problem with most americans.

Which bridge did you crawl out from again?

he is not the leader of christianity ... he is the leader of a government
Why SHOULD he have religious control?
the government IS religion pretty much. a good government always tells people the good things to believe for the common good(i don't mean those crazy ones like in theocracies that tell people to believe what the leader wants them to. only the ones that plan out what the people should be taught for best good of the country as a whole. such as many of hitler's programs attempted to do).

Stop trolling please.
i'm not trolling! this is what i believe, i'm standing up for what is right.

the government IS religion pretty much. a good government always tells people the good things to believe for the common good(i don't mean those crazy ones like in theocracies that tell people to believe what the leader wants them to. only the ones that plan out what the people should be taught for best good of the country as a whole. such as many of hitler's programs attempted to do).
Wrong catholocism already has a leader ... the name is the pope

The Office of the president has no busniess telling people what to believe

i'm not trolling! this is what i believe, i'm standing up for what is right.
What you think is right... not what we do

1. they aren't inocent. they stand in the way of the progress of the country.
2. what about in cases of inheritable desease? they may have value, but only for work. they are of no value after they are dead, where as other people can be. (i'm not shure if your definition and my definition of weak are the same, mine's "one who physically and mentaly not help the government in some form, or one who refuses to help the government", and that's what i'm argueing that point over.)
3. ? that's not what i was confused over, what i was confused over is why you are arguing that, since i'm for an isolationalist country. means i don't want conquering and i don't care much what happends outside of the country, so long as the country is good.
4. genocide only targets specific people, like christians for instance. it leaves the better people unaffected.
5. he wasn't consumed by hatred. he was trying to make his country into a pure form, unfortunantly he was stopped. bush is greedy, all he is for is getting more money and status or position for himself and friends and family. he doesn't care what people do. it is a problem with most americans.

1. What is progress? Eradicating whole populations for their beliefs, ethnicity or sexuality, or perhaps being born with genetic diseases? If "progress" means killing those who have done no wrong for simply being different or handicapped, it truly is a shameful day for humanity. I would hope there is a God to wipe us out once and for all. That is nothing but barbarism.

2. A person's worth is not measured by their benefit to the government. It is measured by their humanity and treatment of others. Secondly, inheritable disease is uncontrollable, because the sources of it can occur at any time in any person. Only one mutation is required.

3. Never mind then.

4. No, because someday some of the better people become the new target, and the killing never stops until the regime is. It is a machine fueled by hatred, the only other one that is inexaustible besides its opposite.

5. No. He justified his "betterment" by hatred. The Jews were no different than ordinary Germans, and contributed to society equally. He needed a scapegoat to fuel his power, and Jews were the best target.

i'm not trolling! this is what i believe, i'm standing up for what is right.

What you mean saying hitler was good? I havent heard that one since well the Nazis were in charge of germany.... :rolleyes:

1. What is progress? Eradicating whole populations for their beliefs, ethnicity or sexuality, or perhaps being born with genetic diseases? If "progress" means killing those who have done no wrong for simply being different or handicapped, it truly is a shameful day for humanity. I would hope there is a God to wipe us out once and for all. That is nothing but barbarism.

2. A person's worth is not measured by their benefit to the government. It is measured by their humanity and treatment of others. Secondly, inheritable disease is uncontrollable, because the sources of it can occur at any time in any person. Only one mutation is required.

3. Never mind then.

4. No, because someday some of the better people become the new target, and the killing never stops until the regime is. It is a machine fueled by hatred, the only other one that is inexaustible besides its opposite.

5. No. He justified his "betterment" by hatred. The Jews were no different than ordinary Germans, and contributed to society equally. He needed a scapegoat to fuel his power, and Jews were the best target.
1. that is evolution. it's already happening. it is just selected evolution, well, then it's not really evolution, is it? well, then it'd be called eugenics.
2. people aren't equal, if that's what you're trying to say. one mutation could have bad effects for the country, and that one individual doens't matter so long as the country would continue to proliferate or be better off by the killing of them. i'm not saying that people should be randomly killed. only when it is nesicary.
4. u.s.s.r., it didn't do that. afganistan, not the same as what we're talking about, but similiar. it didn't do that. as soon as they removed the troubled people the only killing was done in other situations. the genocide stoped(within the country.).
5. but they have other problems than that. you have made a point to me though. i now agree with you, that they shouldn't have been killed. but i still stand by my point that their beliefs should not be allowed to continue. i concede on this arguement(only #5). good debate. for the rest of the arguements(1,2,4), however, i do not concede.

What you mean saying hitler was good? I havent heard that one since well the Nazis were in charge of germany.... :rolleyes:
i'm assuming you are from the u.s.? i have a strong feeling that's just u.s. propaganda to justify their actions, though i'm not shure.

EDIT: also, i'm not saying he's particularly good, just better than bush.

i'm assuming you are from the u.s.? i have a strong feeling that's just u.s. propaganda to justify their actions, though i'm not shure.

EDIT: also, i'm not saying he's particularly good, just better than bush.

So how exactly were the Jews holding back progress now?

i'm assuming you are from the u.s.? i have a strong feeling that's just u.s. propaganda to justify their actions, though i'm not shure.

EDIT: also, i'm not saying he's particularly good, just better than bush.
So you are saying hitler is better then bush?

Now I am not a fan of bush but that one got a chuckle out of me (man who perpetrated genocide vs an idiot that makes horrible decisions ) I think genocide wins for worst man

This guy is a troll plain and simple so lets just ignore his posts period.

i'm assuming you are from the u.s.? i have a strong feeling that's just u.s. propaganda to justify their actions, though i'm not shure.

EDIT: also, i'm not saying he's particularly good, just better than bush.



This is proof that one can rationalize ANYTHING if s/he tries reeeeeally hard.

This is proof that one can rationalize ANYTHING if s/he tries reeeeeally hard.
I am just wondering if he is trying to troll

This guy is a troll plain and simple so lets just ignore his posts period.
i could say the same about yourself, for advocating self destructive acts.
though, why do you call me a troll, for i am stating what i actually believe in, not something purposely offensive. i don't mind if you ignore me as it doesn't really matter much anyways, for i'm not trying to cause an arguement or anything(although every once and a while i find a debate good, but nothing that escalates to flame war or anything)

i could say the same about yourself, for advocating self destructive acts.
though, why do you call me a troll, for i am stating what i actually believe in, not something purposely offensive. i don't mind if you ignore me as it doesn't really matter much anyways, for i'm not trying to cause an arguement or anything(although every once and a while i find a debate good, but nothing that escalates to flame war or anything)

I am only going to say this once. SAYING HITLER IS GOOD IS SOMETHING PURPOSELY OFFENSIVE.

i could say the same about yourself, for advocating self destructive acts.
though, why do you call me a troll, for i am stating what i actually believe in, not something purposely offensive. i don't mind if you ignore me as it doesn't really matter much anyways, for i'm not trying to cause an arguement or anything(although every once and a while i find a debate good, but nothing that escalates to flame war or anything)

Cause I'm sure saying what Hitler was doing was a good thing isn't going to you know offend anyone. :rolleyes:

I am only going to say this once. SAYING HITLER IS GOOD IS SOMETHING PURPOSELY OFFENSIVE.
calm down, i didn't say he was good, only better than bush, and even that was only ment to be a reply to something someone else had written, not just in randomly said. it's not to offend people, just to state my opinion,after all, that's what everyone does on this forum, and i'm pretty shure that's what the forum is for, to share and discuss opinions and things with other people. or just to state random things like "CHEESE!", that's always fun.

calm down, i didn't say he was good, only better than bush, and even that was only ment to be a reply to something someone else had written, not just in randomly said. it's not to offend people, just to state my opinion,after all, that's what everyone does on this forum, and i'm pretty shure that's what the forum is for, to share and discuss opinions and things with other people. or just to state random things like "CHEESE!", that's
always fun.

I don't know, I'm pretty sure Bush hasn't gone for the destruction of entire cultures yet, unless I missed it somehow.

Cause I'm sure saying what Hitler was doing was a good thing isn't going to you know offend anyone. :rolleyes:
and you think that you people going around and saying things such as, people should be allowed to do what they want cause it makes them happy(about things that would cause degration of the country) doesn't offend me? it happends all the time in this forum to me, i guess that you are just used to agreeing with most of the people here(it sounds kind of sarcastic to me, but i'm not shure of a better way to put it, so i'll just put a note here saying that it isn't ment to be sarcastic). and again, i repeat what i have said, i didn't say it was nesicarily good, only better than bush. and i didn't say bush was the worst leader there ever was, either.

calm down, i didn't say he was good, only better than bush, and even that was only ment to be a reply to something someone else had written, not just in randomly said. it's not to offend people, just to state my opinion,after all, that's what everyone does on this forum, and i'm pretty shure that's what the forum is for, to share and discuss opinions and things with other people. or just to state random things like "CHEESE!", that's always fun.

Well here is the problem Yup. Even if you didnt say he was good you made certain statements that allude to what he was doing not being a bad thing. Now even though you consider the statement not to be offensive doesnt mean that others wont be offended by it. If I ran around saying the pope had made horrible decisions and caused a great deal of pain people would find that offensive even if I didnt think it was. Also when did bush systematically eradicate 6 million people. No. Did Bush take away the rights of citizens in his country and then use them as slave labor? No. You give no proof of how bush is worse then hitler.

and you think that you people going around and saying things such as, people should be allowed to do what they want cause it makes them happy(about things that would cause degration of the country) doesn't offend me? it happends all the time in this forum to me, i guess that you are just used to agreeing with most of the people here(it sounds kind of sarcastic to me, but i'm not shure of a better way to put it, so i'll just put a note here saying that it isn't ment to be sarcastic). and again, i repeat what i have said, i didn't say it was nesicarily good, only better than bush. and i didn't say bush was the worst leader there ever was, either.

Just gonna ask how is Hitler better then Bush?? I personally can't say that I put both of them that highly in my views, but I don't see how Hitler > Bush.

Now, Yupaenu, I do have a question for you. Just out of mere curiosity 'n' all. Why do you believe that Christians, Jews, and anyone else with a religion I'm presuming, deserve to be the victims of genocide? They're detriments to human progression? They deserve it for one heinous act or another that they've committed sometime in the past? Or do you just flat out don't like 'em?

Really. I'm curious.

Well here is the problem Yup. Even if you didnt say he was good you made certain statements that allude to what he was doing not being a bad thing. Now even though you consider the statement not to be offensive doesnt mean that others wont be offended by it. If I ran around saying the pope had made horrible decisions and caused a great deal of pain people would find that offensive even if I didnt think it was.

Everyone is offended by something nowadays, doncha think? ;) What a world we live in.

Naw, but seriously. I agree with you.

Well here is the problem Yup. Even if you didnt say he was good you made certain statements that allude to what he was doing not being a bad thing. Now even though you consider the statement not to be offensive doesnt mean that others wont be offended by it. If I ran around saying the pope had made horrible decisions and caused a great deal of pain people would find that offensive even if I didnt think it was. Also when did bush systematically eradicate 6 million people. No. Did Bush take away the rights of citizens in his country and then use them as slave labor? No. You give no proof of how bush is worse then hitler.
well, what other people regularly say in these forums is offensive to me, even if they don't regard it as offensive.
and for you're second point, that's because of two things, do to the circumstances i don't believe those to be bad events(the way you word them makes them sound bad though, and read the last post i made in responce to the person whose name began with v(sorry, forgot your name :( ).) and because people have been questioning why i don't think those ideas are bad, and i've been trying to defend those. also, i have given proof, but i don't think you regard what i was saying as bad, by the way you've been responding.

Now, Yupaenu, I do have a question for you. Just out of mere curiosity 'n' all. Why do you believe that Christians, Jews, and anyone else with a religion I'm presuming, deserve to be the victims of genocide? They're detriments to human progression? They deserve it for one heinous act or another that they've committed sometime in the past? Or do you just flat out don't like 'em?

Really. I'm curious.
well, i no longer agree to that they should be killed, only that their beliefs should be prohibited from spreading, just as inheritable deseases should be prohibited from spreading, and i used to believe the most effective way of removing it would be to kill them, but vetalia convinced me otherwise.

well, i no longer agree to that they should be killed, only that their beliefs should be prohibited from spreading, just as inheritable deseases should be prohibited from spreading, and i used to believe the most effective way of removing it would be to kill them, but vetalia convinced me otherwise.

I'll grant you your change in belief and commend you for it. However, you've compared religion to inheritable diseases. Why's that? Do you hold this view about all religion or just specifics?

well, i no longer agree to that they should be killed, only that their beliefs should be prohibited from spreading, just as inheritable deseases should be prohibited from spreading, and i used to believe the most effective way of removing it would be to kill them, but vetalia convinced me otherwise.



So what, now that's......3(?) people that want me dead?

i'm assuming you are from the u.s.? i have a strong
EDIT: also, i'm not saying he's particularly good, just better than bush.

IMHO you need to reorganise your values if you honestly believe that.

MODS!!! I dont think recommending forced bestiality animal rape and murder is a very good way to have a balanced conversation. This is despicable and should be grounds for dismissal from this forum. I've had enough of this kind of talk in here!! Please help...

Hmm... funny how you want the Bible read in school (free speech), but if someone says something you do not like, you call in the censors.

Hmm... funny how you want the Bible read in school (free speech), but if someone says something you do not like, you call in the censors.

Naaah, they only want free speech when it comes to themselves. Everyone else had better tow the line or else. They'll call it anti-christian bigotry or something like that if someone says something they don't like. Not new. Not new at all.

Many would say that religion is just a way to explain the unexplainable and a method to help us strive through hard times and give us a sense of happiness or belonging. So if it gives one person so much happiness that person may naturally want to spread it on to others. But just because it makes one person happy doesn't mean it would work in every case.

To each his own as they say.

Naaah, they only want free speech when it comes to themselves. Everyone else had better tow the line or else. They'll call it anti-christian bigotry or something like that if someone says something they don't like. Not new. Not new at all.

No, I think it's just he, as well as others, would prefer if someone didn't insinuate that they'd get much glee from watching others of a different belief get mauled by wild beasts. ;)

No, I think it's just he, as well as others, would prefer if someone didn't insinuate that they'd get much glee from watching others of a different belief get mauled by wild beasts. ;)

Isn't that what the bible is about?

Isn't that what the bible is about?

You mean the insinuating glee or the mauling? :confused: Sorry, I'll answer you once my confusion level drops... which, is admittingly high most of the time. :p

If the rapture does come, I will only worry if it doesnt take me.
I find the whole idea of rapture offensive and unchristian. But then it is not something I have to worry about because it is an American protestant invention and I'm a European catholic.

Therefore: See you all in Purgatory ;)

brainless bable
You have no clue and you are a troll.

I find the whole idea of rapture offensive and unchristian. But then it is not something I have to worry about because it is an American protestant invention and I'm a European catholic.

Therefore: See you all in Purgatory ;)

I'm still wondering why catholics believe in a purgatory?,there is no biblical basis for it.

I'm still wondering why catholics believe in a purgatory?,there is no biblical basis for it.

I think it was nixed in Vatican 2

I'm still wondering why catholics believe in a purgatory?,there is no biblical basis for it.

1 Corinthians 3:10-15

"12 If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. 14 If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. 15 If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames."

This is metaphorical, with the foundation being Jesus and the building from the man his life and works.

Revelation 21:27

"27Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life."

Passages which discuss "penitent mourning or concern for safe passage of the dead" are: Genesis 50:10; Numbers 20:29; Deuteronomy 34:8; 2 Maccabees 12:44-45; 1 Corinthians 15:29; 2 Timothy 1:16-18; 2 Timothy 4:19. This justifies the idea that we must pray for the souls in Purgatory.

Daniel 12:10

"Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand."

Matthew 12:36

"36 But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken."

You're the fear monger.. Fear the christians ? Yeah they might feed you, or give donations that house you!!! Oh how horrible of them!!!

Seriously, I am a christian and I agree that you shouldn't worry about the rapture or "the end times" or any of that stuff. You should just live your life, be kind, be generous, and be loving. I also think that 99% of good christians are getting a bad rap because of a few whackos.

A very good point; while the Pre-tribulational Pre-millenialists (which the thread author called "millenialists"); or, otherwise known as "Dispensationalists" or "Fundamentalists (though not directly; as Fundamentalists are inherantly Dispensational; though not all Dispensationalists are Fundamentalists); make up a relatively small minority of the christian churches as a whole.

Roman Catholics : Amillenial
Eastern Orthodox : Amillenial
Lutherans : Amillenial
Anglicans : Amillenial
Episcopalians : Amillenial
Methodist : Amillenial
Anabaptists (Amish and Mennonite): Amillenial
"Church of Christ" : Amillenial
Adventist : Amillenial Dominionist
Presbyterians : Amillenial or Postmillenial
Reformed Baptists : Postmillenial or Preterist

Who makes up the Dispensationals?
Northern and Souther Baptists
Pentacostals
Many "Independent" Chrurches...

Certainly, the most prevalent eschatological (end-times, or prophetic view) is Amillenialism... A belief that the "millenium" is an illusion to present happenings (of the church); and that the "tribulation" is seen as a past/present event (mostly occuring during the great persecutions of the 1st to 3rd centuries); Christ return occurs at some furture unknown point; and it's a single return in judgement.... As opposed to the Dispensationalist multiple return theory...

While the Fundamentalist/Dispensationalists may be the most vocal; they are nowhere close to being an actual majority... And in no way represent the core, and most accepted view across of the Globe of "Christian" eschatology...Indeed, dispensationalism, as invented by notibles such as Irving and Moody in the mid to late 1800's... Has been considered an anathema by most of Christendom for quite some time...

1. they aren't inocent. they stand in the way of the progress of the country.
2. what about in cases of inheritable desease? they may have value, but only for work. they are of no value after they are dead, where as other people can be. (i'm not shure if your definition and my definition of weak are the same, mine's "one who physically and mentaly not help the government in some form, or one who refuses to help the government", and that's what i'm argueing that point over.)
3. ? that's not what i was confused over, what i was confused over is why you are arguing that, since i'm for an isolationalist country. means i don't want conquering and i don't care much what happends outside of the country, so long as the country is good.
4. genocide only targets specific people, like christians for instance. it leaves the better people unaffected.
5. he wasn't consumed by hatred. he was trying to make his country into a pure form, unfortunantly he was stopped. bush is greedy, all he is for is getting more money and status or position for himself and friends and family. he doesn't care what people do. it is a problem with most americans.

LOL... YOU are a disease... you are messing up this forum man!

A very good point; while the Pre-tribulational Pre-millenialists (which the thread author called "millenialists"); or, otherwise known as "Dispensationalists" or "Fundamentalists (though not directly; as Fundamentalists are inherantly Dispensational; though not all Dispensationalists are Fundamentalists); make up a relatively small minority of the christian churches as a whole.

Roman Catholics : Amillenial
Eastern Orthodox : Amillenial
Lutherans : Amillenial
Anglicans : Amillenial
Episcopalians : Amillenial
Methodist : Amillenial
Anabaptists (Amish and Mennonite): Amillenial
"Church of Christ" : Amillenial
Adventist : Amillenial Dominionist
Presbyterians : Amillenial or Postmillenial
Reformed Baptists : Postmillenial or Preterist

Who makes up the Dispensationals?
Northern and Souther Baptists
Pentacostals
Many "Independent" Chrurches...

Certainly, the most prevalent eschatological (end-times, or prophetic view) is Amillenialism... A belief that the "millenium" is an illusion to present happenings (of the church); and that the "tribulation" is seen as a past/present event (mostly occuring during the great persecutions of the 1st to 3rd centuries); Christ return occurs at some furture unknown point; and it's a single return in judgement.... As opposed to the Dispensationalist multiple return theory...

While the Fundamentalist/Dispensationalists may be the most vocal; they are nowhere close to being an actual majority... And in no way represent the core, and most accepted view across of the Globe of "Christian" eschatology...Indeed, dispensationalism, as invented by notibles such as Irving and Moody in the mid to late 1800's... Has been considered an anathema by most of Christendom for quite some time...



Now now, as an amillinialist who adheres to the fundamental tenets of Christianity, don't I exemplify the possibility of an amillenial fundamentalist?

Now now, as an amillinialist who adheres to the fundamental tenets of Christianity, don't I exemplify the possibility of an amillenial fundamentalist?

"fundamentalist" and "Fundamentalist" are two seperate words.

"fundamentalism" was the initial movement. Which was ecumenical; adhering and progressing a particular set of core-doctrines, to unify the church.... Being particularly "Christ" centered; and in possession of principles of faith/belief and repentance.... At it's core; a most nobel movement...

"Fundamentalist" as the modern movement; is a religio-political movement, which is particularly Dispensational Dominionist; though closely related to Covenanential Dominionism found in minority schismatics of Reformed circles. Whereby the goal of the movement is to change the Church into a political organization whose goal is to "subdue" all secular power under the power of Church government and law. Luckily the Dominionist/Fundamentalist movement is divided upon itself over certain small issues (namely baptism and Eschstological doctrines) to make the movement less effective; even while being extremely vocal.... While being "fundamentalist" (in the historic sense of the movement) is what I would use as a label for myself; the bastardization by certain sects into its present system of political concern and dominionist tactics; has led me to an adversity to use such as a discriptor of my core beliefs; and instead rely backwards upon my adherance to God, the Scriptures; as set out in the Westminster Confession; which is used as the systematic list of doctrinal principles, subordinate to the Scriptures, of most Presbyterian Christians... In order of Supremecy; I am a Christian, I am Reformed, and I am a Presbyterian...

I'm all for it!

I'm all for it!

More than a millenium of history (which I use as a guide for my own future determinations) says I am against it...

Instituting Thocratic Government, is akin to suicide...

More than a millenium of history (which I use as a guide for my own future determinations) says I am against it...

Instituting Thocratic Government, is akin to suicide...
Agreed history has proven theocracy is like playing Russian roulette but with six trigger pulls … its all a matter of when not if you get the bullet to the head as a society