Is it acceptable to be disrespectful to the Christian faith

[DeletedUser16008]

Oh, I do not have the problem. lol. And I think we are on the same page about the entire generalizing.

Willy wasn't the one who took offense and created this thread. That is because without the context of the interaction between you a willy, the comment actually included everyone not involved in the process so someone outside your interaction took it for face value. It would be like me saying all sheep are black because that is all I saw while riding on a train across the country side or there are some gay people who molest children, but it would be above and beyond if I said, because of that, all gays rape kids.

But like I said to the comment "The point is that the op is offended by statements about religion that are unpleasant, yet true.". Facts within the comment was true, but the comment itself wasn't because of the way it was presented. I think that was your intent of posting it the way you did was to illustrate exactly what I am saying too. That fact that things happened wasn't the part he took offense to, it was the wording that somehow because of his connection to the facts, even if ancillary, he was somehow responsible or involve which is the entire problem with generalizations in the first place.

But keep in mind, I'm not trying to say your comment was out of line in the context it was presented in, just that when comments are presented in that way, people with no connection to them as the target can and sometimes do take offense not at the facts presented, but the way the comment was presented on it's own to create a fact not true. I certainly think this was the issue behind this thread being created.

Same page aye, agreed. Naa i know you don't have the problem and id rather willy didn't either, my intent was to make willy think, nothing more.

I do wince when I hear a quoted scripture or based statement because I know from personal experience what can happen from there. I think Hellstromm just provided the example.

That used to be me, iv'e since stopped being so..... mmm thorough in examples. Rather id just try to make another understand the following and accept no rulebook or way is without its faults.

Those in glass houses should not throw stones.

Hellstromm maybe you don't realise it but the British law court can be overruled by european court of human rights.. and that thing on prisoners extends to all, including murderers, rapists etc the lot certainly its not political as we don't jail many of that genre here.

Referring to Abu Qatada he has a very long story. Either you know it or you don't but to say hes not committed a crime would be very very debatable. Certainly he has no respect for western life or values. By all means ill start another thread on it as its about respect and human rights. We can't just make another law the European court of human rights would still take precedence. The UK effectively set up the human rights court in Europe to avoid persecution in the future but its not and wasn't intended to place people in danger by protecting those that wish others harm. It is being abused and its intention twisted, lawyers are making a fortune on it and a mockery of its intent, like so many things now. Eventually something will happen and the public will become hostile.

Its entirely possible in the future Britain will have to leave The European Convention on Human Rights even though we are effectively its founder. I think it is time to once again look and redraw the lines on rights and how protecting some can endanger or even condone taking another's away, people say if we left it would make the ECHR meaningless, i say it already is since some members signed to it care nothing for rights or take notice of it whatsoever. It has become a parody of what it was ..fine we formed it, its past its sell by date, so break it and start anew I say.

 

[DeletedUser]

When you argued against gay marriage, you posed the Old Testament, or did that little detail slip your mind?


You argued that only the offenders were guilty, but the entire Church establishment was guilty, by association and by cover-up. That was my argument, and it is firm.


Umm, no. You need to research the Catholic Churches association with the Third Reich. It is documented. The Catholic Church was the official clergy for Nazi Germany's military. Archbishops, bishops, and other clergy provided direct sanctioning and blessings to the Nazi military and its leadership.

1) You out a lot of quotes from the old test and yes these laws were harsh, but the times were harsh also. You have to understand the context these things were written in. The Israelite people were slaves of the Egyptians and they agreed to the theocracy and in turn these rules in order to escape a life of slavery. The rules had to be harsh in order to keep them separate from the surrounding nations who at the time worshiped Gods like Molech or Baal, both that required human sacrifice as part of their worship. And then later as they became the Jews, after Jerusalem, they were surrounded by Romans who slaughtered ppl in mass as entertainment.

2) As things like gay marriage go you can read some scriptures written by Paul to the early Christians and see the bible's view point has not changed even though they are not currently enforceable laws as they once were, but to be a true christian you need to meet certain standards.

3) As far as the Catholic religion goes, I stated before that there is a difference between a true Christian than some one who calls them selves Christian. If you need to figure out the difference all you have to do is study the life of Jesus and his disciples and see if they match up with said organization.

4) The Nazi organization was secular regardless of the backing of the Catholic religion. The standard greeting of their party was "Hitler is salvation." (Heil Hitler) The bible teaches only God can offer salvation.

5) What about my other examples... no answer there?


I have heard a lot of ppl say that the bible says all gays must die or something of that sort; however all sin regardless, causes death. To be saved from death one has to repent.

Romans 6:23
New International Version (©1984)
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Luke 13:3
New Living Translation (©2007)
Not at all! And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

Willy please mate your trying to defend a book on Gods will written down by man. There is no excuse for advocating violence against another if ones god is one of love... it shows conditions and a very very HUMAN influence over the chosen words and there is nothing credible nor holy about that.

There is no TRUE anything re being in a faith. This is exactly the thing that invites discord.... to put oneself above all others is a fault of MAN... it is pure VANITY and not worthy of a god, only of mans inherent belief that he is right therefore all others must be wrong.

As for the Nazis ? Hitler and his close associates were masters at using sections of a society to achieve their own ends. Be it Catholicism, Occultism, secularism, fascism, all symbols of power from all ages were used as tools to achieve power and control. They knew they must have support in as many sectors of society as they could recruit. " Heil Hitler " had nothing to do with anything other than a cry to fire the German people to get behind the party that had hijacked the reforms and fortunes of the German economy and also further their plans of genocide and building of an empire,

 

[DeletedUser]

1) You out a lot of quotes from the old test and yes these laws were harsh, but the times were harsh also. You have to understand the context these things were written in. The Israelite people were slaves of the Egyptians and they agreed to the theocracy and in turn these rules in order to escape a life of slavery. The rules had to be harsh in order to keep them separate from the surrounding nations who at the time worshiped Gods like Molech or Baal, both that required human sacrifice as part of their worship. And then later as they became the Jews, after Jerusalem, they were surrounded by Romans who slaughtered ppl in mass as entertainment.

Weak argument:

1. Some of the murder, rape, and otherwise intolerance is posed in the New Testament (and I posed a few examples in the earlier post).
   
   
2. Your alleged God committed, participated in, and/or condoned these rapes, murders of elderly, women and children, etc. You're going to try and argue that He was being persecuted too?
   
   
3. It doesn't matter what context it is presented, what's good for the goose isn't okay for the gander. You argue the Romans slaughtered people en masse', and yet the stories presented in the Abrahamic tomes demonstrate repeated incidents of God' followers slaughtering people en masse'.
   
   
4. Your argument that OTHER god worshippers performed sacrifices, so the Jews had to rise above that --- falls flat:

"Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18)

"At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, "If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."
"So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith – twenty towns – and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter – his only child – ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. "My daughter!" he cried out. "My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back." And she said, "Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin." "You may go," Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah's daughter." (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)

At the LORD's command, a man of God from Judah went to Bethel, and he arrived there just as Jeroboam was approaching the altar to offer a sacrifice. Then at the LORD's command, he shouted, "O altar, altar! This is what the LORD says: A child named Josiah will be born into the dynasty of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests from the pagan shrines who come here to burn incense, and human bones will be burned on you." (1 Kings 13:1-2 NLT)

He [Josiah] executed the priests of the pagan shrines on their own altars, and he burned human bones on the altars to desecrate them. Finally, he returned to Jerusalem. King Josiah then issued this order to all the people: "You must celebrate the Passover to the LORD your God, as it is written in the Book of the Covenant." There had not been a Passover celebration like that since the time when the judges ruled in Israel, throughout all the years of the kings of Israel and Judah. This Passover was celebrated to the LORD in Jerusalem during the eighteenth year of King Josiah's reign. Josiah also exterminated the mediums and psychics, the household gods, and every other kind of idol worship, both in Jerusalem and throughout the land of Judah. He did this in obedience to all the laws written in the scroll that Hilkiah the priest had found in the LORD's Temple. Never before had there been a king like Josiah, who turned to the LORD with all his heart and soul and strength, obeying all the laws of Moses. And there has never been a king like him since. (2 Kings 23:20-25 NLT)

Chastised a little, they shall be greatly blessed, because God tried them and found them worthy of himself. As gold in the furnace, he proved them, and as sacrificial offerings he took them to himself. In the time of their visitation they shall shine, and shall dart about as sparks through stubble; (Wisdom 3:5-7 NAB)

As for you, son of man, prophesy: Thus says the Lord GOD against the Ammonites and their insults: A sword, a sword is drawn for slaughter, burnished to consume and to flash lightning, because you planned with false visions and lying divinations to lay it on the necks of depraved and wicked men whose day has come when their crimes are at an end. Return it to its sheath! In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. I will pour out my indignation upon you, breathing my fiery wrath upon you, I will hand you over to ravaging men, artisans of destruction. You shall be fuel for the fire, your blood shall flow throughout the land. You shall not be remembered, for I, the LORD, have spoken. (Ezekiel 21:33-37 NAB)

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)​

Ample evidence of animal and human sacrifice, ordained by God. Seriously, you want to continue to argue yourself into a corner? As previously stated, it is hard to respect religions (and thus its adherents) advocating murdering of children, rape, slavery and human sacrifice. Go on, keep telling yourself that intolerance is not a precept to the Christian religion and that hypocrisy is not prevalent in its teachings.

2) As things like gay marriage go you can read some scriptures written by Paul to the early Christians and see the bible's view point has not changed even though they are not currently enforceable laws as they once were, but to be a true christian you need to meet certain standards.

You made the claim, you provide the evidence in Paul's writings disallowing gay marriage. Good luck with that, ye of false preaching.

3) As far as the Catholic religion goes, I stated before that there is a difference between a true Christian than some one who calls them selves Christian. If you need to figure out the difference all you have to do is study the life of Jesus and his disciples and see if they match up with said organization.

Logical fallacy - No True Scotsman

The Nazi organization was secular regardless of the backing of the Catholic religion. The standard greeting of their party was "Hitler is salvation." (Heil Hitler) The bible teaches only God can offer salvation.

Now you're simply making false assertions. It didn't mean, "Hitler is salvation," it meant "Hail Hitler."

Hail    [heyl]
verb (used with object)
1. to cheer, salute, or greet; welcome.
2. to acclaim; approve enthusiastically: The crowds hailed the conquerors. They hailed the recent advances in medicine.
3. to call out to in order to stop, attract attention, ask aid, etc.: to hail a cab.​

Btw, I noticed how you initially argued the Third Reich was atheist, and now you're claiming they are secular. A little backpedaling doesn't dismiss your earlier assertions. In short, you're wrong and you demonstrated your ignorance on this issue, so please don't take it personally when I point out that you just don't know what you're talking about here. The Third Reich, Hitler, the Nazi party, had direct associations with the Catholic church. The Archbishop, bishops, provided services, blessings of military units before they went off to war. If you wish to argue this further, please create a different thread and I'll provide ample evidence. As it is, this is a tangent.

5) What about my other examples... no answer there?

What are you rambling about?

I have heard a lot of ppl say that the bible says all gays must die or something of that sort; however all sin regardless, causes death. To be saved from death one has to repent.

You know Willy, there's a big difference between death and murder, so perhaps you would like to elaborate on your silliness. I do note, however, that you confessed knowing a lot of Christians that advocate the murder of homosexuals.

 

[DeletedUser30834]

3. It doesn't matter what context it is presented, what's good for the goose isn't okay for the gander. You argue the Romans slaughtered people en masse', and yet the stories presented in the Abrahamic tomes demonstrate repeated incidents of God' followers slaughtering people en masse'.

4. Your argument that OTHER god worshippers performed sacrifices, so the Jews had to rise above that --- falls flat:

"Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you." (Genesis 22:1-18)

"At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, "If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."
"So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith – twenty towns – and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter – his only child – ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. "My daughter!" he cried out. "My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back." And she said, "Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin." "You may go," Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah's daughter." (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)

At the LORD's command, a man of God from Judah went to Bethel, and he arrived there just as Jeroboam was approaching the altar to offer a sacrifice. Then at the LORD's command, he shouted, "O altar, altar! This is what the LORD says: A child named Josiah will be born into the dynasty of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests from the pagan shrines who come here to burn incense, and human bones will be burned on you." (1 Kings 13:1-2 NLT)

He [Josiah] executed the priests of the pagan shrines on their own altars, and he burned human bones on the altars to desecrate them. Finally, he returned to Jerusalem. King Josiah then issued this order to all the people: "You must celebrate the Passover to the LORD your God, as it is written in the Book of the Covenant." There had not been a Passover celebration like that since the time when the judges ruled in Israel, throughout all the years of the kings of Israel and Judah. This Passover was celebrated to the LORD in Jerusalem during the eighteenth year of King Josiah's reign. Josiah also exterminated the mediums and psychics, the household gods, and every other kind of idol worship, both in Jerusalem and throughout the land of Judah. He did this in obedience to all the laws written in the scroll that Hilkiah the priest had found in the LORD's Temple. Never before had there been a king like Josiah, who turned to the LORD with all his heart and soul and strength, obeying all the laws of Moses. And there has never been a king like him since. (2 Kings 23:20-25 NLT)

Chastised a little, they shall be greatly blessed, because God tried them and found them worthy of himself. As gold in the furnace, he proved them, and as sacrificial offerings he took them to himself. In the time of their visitation they shall shine, and shall dart about as sparks through stubble; (Wisdom 3:5-7 NAB)

As for you, son of man, prophesy: Thus says the Lord GOD against the Ammonites and their insults: A sword, a sword is drawn for slaughter, burnished to consume and to flash lightning, because you planned with false visions and lying divinations to lay it on the necks of depraved and wicked men whose day has come when their crimes are at an end. Return it to its sheath! In the place where you were created, in the land of your origin, I will judge you. I will pour out my indignation upon you, breathing my fiery wrath upon you, I will hand you over to ravaging men, artisans of destruction. You shall be fuel for the fire, your blood shall flow throughout the land. You shall not be remembered, for I, the LORD, have spoken. (Ezekiel 21:33-37 NAB)

"Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)​

Ample evidence of animal and human sacrifice, ordained by God. Seriously, you want to continue to argue yourself into a corner? As previously stated, it is hard to respect religions (and thus its adherents) advocating murdering of children, rape, slavery and human sacrifice. Go on, keep telling yourself that intolerance is not a precept to the Christian religion and that hypocrisy is not prevalent in its teachings.

And this is exactly why it is obvious you have no clue.

first, the Genesis 22:1-18, if you followed the story, you will find that an angel met Abraham at the alter and stopped the sacrifice saying it was a test. Then God made the second or third covenant with the people.

Judges 11:29-40 does not say god said to kill anyone, just that some deranged follower promised something f he won a battle and the guy followed through with it.

1 Kings 13:1-2 Don't care.. God was often harsh with people who worshiped false gods.

2 Kings 23:20-25 continuation from above, nothing new or intuitive here.

Ezekiel 21:33-37 is actually a puzzle to me. Ezekiel 21 only has 28 passages in it.

Wisdom 3:5-7 NAB This book is not even in the Bible unless it is something made up in some new version of the bible. But that is no better then you making it up on the spot. It certainly is not part of the King James version or the derivatives of it which is the version the christian faith is based on. It appears it was something someone made up in his own interpretations of other books which is probably why it isn't included in legitimate versions of the bible. It appears this book it was never included as part of any bible until 1970.

Ezekiel 21:33-37 NAB see above. I find it odd that you are relying on a bible that is younger then me to quote from in order to make your point. All normal bibles only have 32 passages in this chapter

Deuteronomy 13:13-19 I have no problem with this. It says what to do if someone or a town within the borders of the land given to the Israelite attempts to lead them to worshiping false gods. It doesn't say it happened.


I do have to say, I now know why you seem to not know anything about the christian religion. It seems you are studying a revisionist bible and jumping from versions to versions of the regular bible in order to understand what you want to understand about it. Personally, I find it a bit intellectually dishonest but i know how you always have to be right, even when you are wrong. I was really shocked to see that the Catholics followed the Mormons and made stuff up and called it their bible. Non of the Catholics i know knew of this either.

 

[DeletedUser16008]

I think its fair to say that if of a particular faith your not going to or wish to fully understand the scriptures of another, nor really is it right to try to, you'll just automatically get drawn into a debate about interpretation etc.

As long as one dosnt try and lay judgement on everyone else not of that branch for that is not your job but supposedly Gods alone then fine... if they do ? well then you can't complain about the ensuing results.

 

[DeletedUser]

first, the Genesis 22:1-18, if you followed the story, you will find that an angel met Abraham at the alter and stopped the sacrifice saying it was a test. Then God made the second or third covenant with the people.

"Then Abraham looked up and saw a ram caught by its horns in a thicket. So he took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering in place of his son." ~ Genesis 22:13

Indeed it was a test, and although He sent an Angel to interrupt him, a sacrifice was still made. It is also not the only human sacrifice presented in the Bible and advocated by God, as asserted by the other passages I posted. My argument stands, firm.

Judges 11:29-40 does not say god said to kill anyone, just that some deranged follower promised something f he won a battle and the guy followed through with it.

Wow, you completely misunderstood the point on this one. He made a promise to God to win a conflict and, in return, he was tasked to "rape" his daughter.

1 Kings 13:1-2 Don't care.. God was often harsh with people who worshiped false gods.

Doesn't that merely affirm what I am contending? Yes, of course it does... you don't care because it's your God. Your God that directs his followers to molest and kill their children, to murder their wives, to pillage and to rape.

Amen

Ezekiel 21:33-37 is actually a puzzle to me. Ezekiel 21 only has 28 passages in it. <...> I find it odd that you are relying on a bible that is younger then me to quote from in order to make your point. All normal bibles only have 32 passages in this chapter

lol, for someone who claims I'm the one without a clue --- in Hebrew texts, 21:1-32 is numbered 21:6-37, njub.

Wisdom 3:5-7 NAB This book is not even in the Bible unless it is something made up in some new version of the bible. But that is no better then you making it up on the spot. It certainly is not part of the King James version or the derivatives of it which is the version the christian faith is based on. It appears it was something someone made up in his own interpretations of other books which is probably why it isn't included in legitimate versions of the bible. It appears this book it was never included as part of any bible until 1970.

The Book of the Wisdom of Solomon is found in the Common English Bible, the Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition, the Good News Translation, and other versions. It is quite common in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox renditions of the Bible, but not exclusive to those denominations, and is one of the seven Books of Wisdom of the Old Testament. Every version of the Bible is a selected collection of the books. For someone who erroneously claims to know so much about the Bible, I'm not surprised you don't know this.

Deuteronomy 13:13-19 I have no problem with this. It says what to do if someone or a town within the borders of the land given to the Israelite attempts to lead them to worshiping false gods. It doesn't say it happened.

I didn't bother to provide the examples in which it did happen. As I said, not going to spam this thread with pages of evidence. You claim to know the Bible, go read it and find the instances yourself.

Oh, and Victor, this isn't about interpretation, it is about what is written. Interpretation doesn't play into it at this point, on these presented parts. Sumdumass attempted to contest only a handful of what was presented and even then his contests were incorrect. He didn't know about the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon, didn't know about the numerical oddity of the original Hebrew texts, and dismissed the atrocities committed in the name and/or directive of his god. This isn't an issue of exegetical fallacies (interpretations), it is an issue of presenting what is "written" and cannot be disputed, only dismissed (cognitive dissonance).

 

[DeletedUser]

You made the claim, you provide the evidence in Paul's writings disallowing gay marriage. Good luck with that, ye of false preaching.

I don't have enough time to address all you concerns at the moment but as for you calling me false try 1 Corinthians 6.
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]

 

[DeletedUser]

Logical fallacy - No True Scotsman

And you have the audacity to call others hypocrite!
"Whether it's Wikipedia, a blog, or an op-ed, attempting to utilize any of these as credible sources is a logical fallacy (Argumentum ad Verecundiam). If you know better, then you're doing it on purpose to throw off your fellow debaters." -Hellstromm

Edit: I defined the word Christian as some one who follows in the pattern of Christ. I did not say Christian is being Christian as that would be NTS. Using a word to define it's self. Christ is an individual separate from the Faith that was named after him. Its would be like calling yourself a vegetarian even though you eat meat.

Now you're simply making false assertions. It didn't mean, "Hitler is salvation," it meant "Hail Hitler."

Try a German translation.
Heil {n}
salvation
relig. health [dated] [soul's health]
http://www.dict.cc/german-english/heil.html

Btw, I noticed how you initially argued the Third Reich was atheist, and now you're claiming they are secular. A little backpedaling doesn't dismiss your earlier assertions. In short, you're wrong and you demonstrated your ignorance on this issue, so please don't take it personally when I point out that you just don't know what you're talking about here. The Third Reich, Hitler, the Nazi party, had direct associations with the Catholic church. The Archbishop, bishops, provided services, blessings of military units before they went off to war. If you wish to argue this further, please create a different thread and I'll provide ample evidence. As it is, this is a tangent.

Correct they were a secular movement with anti-theistic ideology. Any form of worship under their regime had to preach about said regime in a positive manner. They were fascist.

What are you rambling about?

Originally Posted by WillyPete
"USSR, Nazis, and Mao Zedong are among the perpetrators of violence against religion in the name of atheism" You seem to have a very selective memory.

You know Willy, there's a big difference between death and murder, so perhaps you would like to elaborate on your silliness. I do note, however, that you confessed knowing a lot of Christians that advocate the murder of homosexuals.

Death is the eventuality of all sinners. Murder is the taking of a human life by another. The mosaic law was God's judgment and it served its purpose for the time.

1 Corinthians 6.
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

This says some of those early Christians were Homosexuals among other things. Paul obviously did not kill them. So it would stand to reason the laws in the old test were indeed not applicable. You keep saying how others are ignorant but you ignore whatever does not fit in with you views. I doubt you ever studied the bible. In fact by your posts I think the only time you read a scripture is if its up on an anti-theist website.

PS: There were many copycats of the bible around the same period and were there for the specific purpose of bearing false witness. Some books were written for this purpose or even false scriptures were attempted to be added on.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.cfm#63

 

[DeletedUser]

And you have the audacity to call others hypocrite!
"Whether it's Wikipedia, a blog, or an op-ed, attempting to utilize any of these as credible sources is a logical fallacy (Argumentum ad Verecundiam). If you know better, then you're doing it on purpose to throw off your fellow debaters." -Hellstromm

Lol, my link to: No True Scotsman on wikipedia was not presented as evidence (neither reference, source, nor attribution), it was presented as informative, like a link to an online dictionary as to the explanation of what a "no true scotsman" logical fallacy means/constitutes, in case you didn't know what it meant.

Try a German translation.
Heil {n}
salvation
relig. health [dated] [soul's health]
http://www.dict.cc/german-english/heil.html

Lol, "heil" used in a salutation as, "heil Hitler" or, "seig heil" is not a noun, it is an adjective. The translation was presented there, as "hail," at the top of the link you provided, but you decided to ignore it in favor of a misapplication of the word.

Correct they were a secular movement with anti-theistic ideology. Any form of worship under their regime had to preach about said regime in a positive manner. They were fascist.

As I said, if you wish to debate their religious associations, create a different thread. Do not be disrespectful of the OP and attempt to derail these discussions with an unrelated debate.

"USSR, Nazis, and Mao Zedong are among the perpetrators of violence against religion in the name of atheism" You seem to have a very selective memory.

Ah, I already addressed Nazism. As to U.S.S.R. and Mao Zedong, they were both following a Marxist-Leninist ideology and thus suppression of religion was mandated. Atheism is not a religion, it is a lack thereof. There is "water" and there is "no water." I merely stepped in to correct your assertion about Nazism and didn't bother to correct your assertion about atheism. What these countries and persons committed clearly was not right, nor in any manner acceptable.

Death is the eventuality of all sinners. Murder is the taking of a human life by another. The mosaic law was God's judgment and it served its purpose for the time.

Amazing... so then murder, rape, and pillaging served its purpose for the time... praise the Lord...

This says some of those early Christians were Homosexuals among other things. Paul obviously did not kill them. So it would stand to reason the laws in the old test were indeed not applicable.

Creative interpretation... but it is not what is stated in the New Testament:

"Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them." ~ Romans 1:32

Would you You keep saying how others are ignorant but you ignore whatever does not fit in with you views. I doubt you ever studied the bible. In fact by your posts I think the only time you read a scripture is if its up on an anti-theist website.

Who is ignoring what? I provided two posts with a multitude of passages out of both the Old Testament and the New Testament and you're acting as if they were never posted.

PS: There were many copycats of the bible around the same period and were there for the specific purpose of bearing false witness. Some books were written for this purpose or even false scriptures were attempted to be added on.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.cfm#63

lol, so you're claiming the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon is false scripture? Dude, seriously... give it up.

 

[DeletedUser]

Lol, my link to: No True Scotsman on wikipedia was not presented as evidence (neither reference, source, nor attribution), it was presented as informative, like a link to an online dictionary as to the explanation of what a "no true scotsman" logical fallacy means/constitutes, in case you didn't know what it meant.

You created an entire thread cursing the use of wiki. Then you posted a link to wiki...

Lol, "heil" used in a salutation as, "heil Hitler" or, "seig heil" is not a noun, it is an adjective. The translation was presented there, as "hail," at the top of the link you provided, but you decided to ignore it in favor of a misapplication of the word.

So you are saying the translation is incorrect... did you read the link?

As I said, if you wish to debate their religious associations, create a different thread. Do not be disrespectful of the OP and attempt to derail these discussions with an unrelated debate.

You are the one using someones's religious assertions to say its okay to disrespect religious beliefs...

Ah, I already addressed Nazism. As to U.S.S.R. and Mao Zedong, they were both following a Marxist-Leninist ideology and thus suppression of religion was mandated. Atheism is not a religion, it is a lack thereof. There is "water" and there is "no water." I merely stepped in to correct your assertion about Nazism and didn't bother to correct your assertion about atheism. What these countries and persons committed clearly was not right, nor in any manner acceptable.

Marxist-Leninist ideology was an atheistic ideology...

Amazing... so then murder, rape, and pillaging served its purpose for the time... praise the Lord...

I don't recall any laws to rape and murder... If you are talking about the death penalty is murder then you should "not be disrespectful of the OP and attempt to derail these discussions with an unrelated debate."

Creative interpretation... but it is not what is stated in the New Testament:

"Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them." ~ Romans 1:32

You said it yourself there is a difference between death and murder... you should go back and read your own posts.

Who is ignoring what? I provided two posts with a multitude of passages out of both the Old Testament and the New Testament and you're acting as if they were never posted.

Sum has already address that. Do I have to reiterate what has already been said?

lol, so you're claiming the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon is false scripture? Dude, seriously... give it up.

I'm not argueing that only its not considered cannon. Did you even open the link I posted...?

 

[DeletedUser]

You created an entire thread cursing the use of wiki. Then you posted a link to wiki...

I wasn't cursing the use of wiki, I was pointing out the fallacy of using it as a source. I suggest you reread that post, as it was a positing of a particular fallacy. <click here>

So you are saying the translation is incorrect... did you read the link?

Yes, I did read the link. Did you? Oh, and I should correct myself, it is an interjection.

I don't recall any laws to rape and murder... If you are talking about the death penalty is murder then you should "not be disrespectful of the OP and attempt to derail these discussions with an unrelated debate."

Why don't you review those passages I posted in this thread, save me the time of repeating myself because you're too proud, or foolish, to just step off.

I'm not argueing that only its not considered cannon. Did you even open the link I posted...?

Yes I did, and yes it is canon. It's your religion, the least you could do is learn it.

Sum has already address that. Do I have to reiterate what has already been said?

I presented 44 excerpts from Christian tomes (Bibles). He incorrectly contested three and dismissively accepted 4 others. The remaining 37 he did not respond to. And, as I said, I only posted "some," not all of what I could have presented. As you are riding on his coat-tails on this, you are accepting what I presented and the argument is at an end.

 

[DeletedUser]

I wasn't cursing the use of wiki, I was pointing out the fallacy of using it as a source. I suggest you reread that post, as it was a positing of a particular fallacy. <click here>

Yes, I did read the link. Did you? Oh, and I should correct myself, it is an interjection.


Why don't you review those passages I posted in this thread, save me the time of repeating myself because you're too proud, or foolish, to just step off.


Yes I did, and yes it is canon. It's your religion, the least you could do is learn it.


I presented 44 excerpts from Christian tomes (Bibles). He incorrectly contested three and dismissively accepted 4 others. The remaining 37 he did not respond to. And, as I said, I only posted "some," not all of what I could have presented. As you are riding on his coat-tails on this, you are accepting what I presented and the argument is at an end.

"Wikis are not accepted as references or sources" -Hellstromm
You used the English definition you ignored the German one.
Many of the passiges you linked were of unrelyable sources not considered cannon of THE BIBLE, and many were just part of the old covenant that applied to the government of the Jews. 44 are too many to review, I suggest you revise them if you are capable and represent if you are able.

Due to you already demonstrated ignorance of Bible text I feel no need to continue to review every link you provide as you have already used up any supposed integrity to this issue. You really called me a false teacher about "You made the claim, you provide the evidence in Paul's writings disallowing gay marriage. Good luck with that, ye of false preaching" -hellstromm when "1 Corinthians 6.
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men" clearly stated otherwise and you did not even register you mistake.

 

[DeletedUser]

Once again, provide evidence to support your assertions.

 

[DeletedUser]

Once again, provide evidence to support your assertions.

If you open up any standard bible commonly used today you will not find a "book of wisdom." If you are referring to Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon, I suggest you refer to them as such. Anyways this is going off topic and is becoming a distraction.

If you are adamant about disrespecting others biased solely on their religion, or are prejudiced to religion, you cannot claim any sort of moral high ground.If you are atheist that's your choice and you have your free will to express that choice. Others would greatly appreciate it if you would respect their free will also.

 

[DeletedUser]

wait, you're saying that we have free will, yet we are unable to say what we want?
you accuse us of hypocriticism then indulge in it yourself?
we have every right to insult religion, for the reasons that have repeatedly outlined to you.
despite this you continue a futile argument. why? because arguing with a christian is like playing chess with a pigeon, you could be the best player in the world, but they will still knock over all the pieces, crap on the board and strut around triumphantly.

 

[DeletedUser]

I couldn't resist highlighting this, as I found it so funny:

It certainly is not part of the King James version or the derivatives of it which is the version the christian faith is based on.

It reminded me of the American religious blowhard who said something to the effect - "If the English language was good enough for Jesus Christ, then it's good enough for me". You really could not make this stuff up. Christianity as a religion is less than 400 years old? Seriously, you do not need to carry a firearm against an opponent who only knows how to shoot themself in the foot.

As for the 'respect' issue - I can respect the private belief that a person might have thinking that they have a relationship with a superior being who is both benevolent and powerful, especially if it encourages them to form tolerant and loving relationships with other people. But once they start using those beliefs as an ego-tool for their own hatred and inadequacies to judge, insult and condemn others then my respect evaporates.

 

[DeletedUser28032]

Personally i believe that you should respect all people's (religious)beliefs regardless of whether or not they are the same as your own after all you'd expect them to respect yours. Just so long as they don't ram these beliefs down my throat in order to justify acts of voilence or to run rough shod over my own.

 

[DeletedUser]

If you open up any standard bible commonly used today you will not find a "book of wisdom." If you are referring to Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon, I suggest you refer to them as such. Anyways this is going off topic and is becoming a distraction.

Looks like it's time for me to educate, ugh.

vs.

There were two main English versions of the Bible during the 17th thru 20th century: the King James Version (previously referred to as the Authorized version and adhered to mostly by Anglicans & Protestants), and the Douay–Rheims (utilized by the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Oriental Orthodox Church). Both of these included the Book of Wisdom up until the 19th century.

This was largely due to the Church of England catering to both the Catholic and Reformed (Protestant) denominations <read this summary on the Elizabethan Settlement, or read the Acts directly here and here>. To make peace, the Church of England (or, more aptly, the Queen of England), took the middle ground. However, the Book of Wisdom was not followed by Reformed Christians. In 1644, England's Long Parliament forbade the reading of the Book of Wisdom at the Church in an effort to quell the aftermath and growing civil unrest initiated during the Bishops' Wars. In 1666 (ooo, will you look at that), a version of King James was printed without the Book of Wisdom (resulting in two versions in print, one with and one without the Book of Wisdom). However, contrary to popular belief, it was not excluded simply because of the tensions in the Church. It was mainly due to financial reasons, as printing was expensive. In 1804, the British and Foreign Bible Society was formed and, in their efforts to provide affordable Bibles, they abridged it to death, resulting in a Bible that excluded the Book of Wisdom and much of previous Bibles.

The power struggles of England, the splitting of the Catholic Church, and the exorbitant costs of printing at the time resulted in an abridged "English" Bible, which excluded the Book of Wisdom. The two main Christian denominations in the U.S. are Protestant (approx 51% of the population) and Catholic (approx 24% of the population), thus presenting a strong (majority) leaning in the U.S. for the abridged version of the Bible. But, it should be noted that, in addition to it being included in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox versions, the Book of Wisdom is in almost every "non-English" version of the Bible.

What does this mean? It means the Book of Wisdom of Solomon is canon for the overwhelming majority of Christians in the World.

If you are adamant about disrespecting others biased solely on their religion, or are prejudiced to religion, you cannot claim any sort of moral high ground. If you are atheist that's your choice and you have your free will to express that choice. Others would greatly appreciate it if you would respect their free will also.

Well, it's good that you included the word, "if," as it isn't the case. I don't disrespect people for following particular religions, I only disrespect those who take it as "canon" to disrespect others, as in the case of many Abrahamic denominations that disrespect women, male homosexuals, atheists, and other religions or denominations. In your previous arguments, and even in your arguments on this thread, you have demonstrated disrespect to other religions, other denominations (dissin' the Book of Wisdom and those who pose it as canon), non-believers, and male homosexuals.

In other words, I call it like I see it.

 

[DeletedUser]

What does this mean? It means the Book of Wisdom of Solomon is canon for the overwhelming majority of Christians in the World.


Well, it's good that you included the word, "if," as it isn't the case. I don't disrespect people for following particular religions, I only disrespect those who take it as "canon" to disrespect others, as in the case of many Abrahamic denominations that disrespect women, male homosexuals, atheists, and other religions or denominations. In your previous arguments, and even in your arguments on this thread, you have demonstrated disrespect to other religions, other denominations (dissin' the Book of Wisdom and those who pose it as canon), non-believers, and male homosexuals.

In other words, I call it like I see it.

Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon are all considered cannon; however Sirach is not. Therefore The book of wisdom is as a collection is not considered cannon in its entirety by the majority of Christians.

You speak of disrespect but your understanding is flawed. There is a difference between respect and permissiveness.

re·spect   [ri-spekt] Show IPA
noun

deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy; acknowledgment: respect for a suspect's right to counsel; to show respect for the flag; respect for the elderly.


per·mis·sive   [per-mis-iv] Show IPA
adjective
1.
habitually or characteristically accepting or tolerant of something, as social behavior or linguistic usage, that others might disapprove or forbid.

"In your previous arguments, and even in your arguments on this thread, you have demonstrated disrespect to other religions, other denominations (dissin' the Book of Wisdom and those who pose it as canon), non-believers, and male homosexuals".

Disagreeing or defending one's beliefs is not the same as disrespect. This is an example of disrespect:

hehe...

Divine Intervention (adj)

The irresponsible belief in an event, or events, that we can do whatever the hell we want in this ''middle earth" because some omnipotent diety will come save our asses from our selfish, reckless, and otherwise assinine approach to species survival. Yay...