Originally posted by Marauder Now if you knew you could save someone's life by getting them to believe you, wouldn't you at least try? The idea of conversion is very similar. We aren't doing it for ourselves, we are doing it for the person we attempt to convert.
No. Pushing your beliefs on someone whether you think you are "saving" them is still harassment. How would you like it if a Muslim, Buddhist, etc. came to your door pushing their beliefs on you because they thought they were saving you.
I have had people of other religions come to my door and talk to me about religion. I politely state my religion. Sometimes they stay and talk, other times they don't. I would expect any decent human being to not assume someone is harassing him/her when someone else inquires into his/her spiritual well-being. To view someone talking to you about spirituality as harassment is paranoia if not guilt. If someone has actually harassed you about converting, then they were not under the same doctrine I follow, since no one under my same belief would do such a thing.
------------------- 98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from: -Battlefield 2 -Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired) -SWG (Retired) -EQ2 (Retired)
Originally posted by Marauder I have had people of other religions come to my door and talk to me about religion. I politely state my religion. Sometimes they stay and talk, other times they don't. I would expect any decent human being to not assume someone is harassing him/her when someone else inquires into his/her spiritual well-being. To view someone talking to you about spirituality as harassment is paranoia if not guilt. If someone has actually harassed you about converting, then they were not under the same doctrine I follow, since no one under my same belief would do such a thing.
See, if every christian could be like you, things would definitely be better off than what it'd be now.
The problem with all this...Sometimes their so called "spreading idea" goes beyond measures of succeptibilty.
As a mass people can be very stupid, even if not the person. It's known in human history that people as a too large of a group can be very chaotic. Such is the reason why words like chaos, demonstrations, protests, hysteria bla bla go on...exists.
Now I'm not anti-christanity or anything, but you look at most historians and scholars, it's really hard for them to dedicate themselves to one religion. It's like a child's play for them, not that they disrespect any religion.
Toynbee even last gave his reply about what was the greatest arrival in western philosophy, and he said "Buddhism". In no way he favors the religion, because as a historian he would admit himself that it is hard to devote oneself to one religion when your field of study was wholly based upon the study of history.
What I'm trying to point out here? Toynbee meant the ideas of Buddha's teaching was maybe one so simple people blinded themselves to not see it. Or it was just that humanity was incapable of grasping the though.
Christians could go on and spread their kingdom of god to all the peoples of the world. And at times, even if you don't want to admit it, there may be times when some unnecessary procedures may be taken. But that is the consequences of moving as a denomination. You are bound to make mistakes. People grouped together too large enough for themselves to handle become chaotic. (By no means am I saying they go nuts or something...but when there's a mass of people with the same focus, they can become very unreasonable. <--- unreasonable as in, being persistent with their ideals only, and a lack of acceptance of what is unfavorable to them.)
Sometimes the best course of action isn't to go out and take action, but to just be yourself. When you set a "great" example, you are the influence itself, and people will follow you whether you like it or not. Whether you hide yourself in seclusion or not, when you are a great example people will take notice and follow your example.
When you cause no trouble to your surroundings, but do only good...when you can swallow your pride and are capable of abasing yourself even in front of anyone to beg for last scraps...when you have no worldly desires to "want" or "have", you become a calmer person, who has no worries, as value isn't held in posession. If you can do all this. You don't need to go out and spread ideas. You yourself is the ideal that stands firm as an influence and people will respect you. I mean this shit ain't ever going to happen to me, I'm lazy and a stoner, but you gotta give props to the idea.
Now...these shitz you rarely see anymore...since every religion is pretty much corrupt in its own way. They're all publizised material nowadays.
The idea that all answers are within yourself, you can't argue with this. When you pray to your god, your god or jesus(whoever) directs and guides you and gives you answers are no similar to others. Those guidelines and your answers are unqiue to you, and only you. If this is true why do you need to go out and bother trying to convince so many people? They will meet their god, and follow their guidelines. No matter how much you try to put a sphere of influence around someone, their god will never resemble yours. They can have the same verbal name and commonness, but they will never be the same between what you see and feel inside of you and another person.
You don't need to go out screaming to everyone Jesus is the only savior from eternal damnation, when you yourself know within the most profound part of your heart that, some or even alot of those people you tried to convince may never become christians or even look at a bible. Because in the christian mind-set those non-believers are going to burn in eternal flames...Why even go out convincing people when you know what's the fact? When you know you can't save everyone. Having to know that fact and realization that you can't save everyone before you even start...isn't that a let down of your religion's ideal in the first place? As much as you justify yourselves by saying we go out to "enlighten" those unaware, you are admitting to yourselves that you neglect those unwilling to believe.
I've been going to church since a little boy till my mid teen age days, and I can guaratee you most of those people I saw at churches will end up in hell, if everything was according to that bible. Half the people I knew never lived up to what ideal christian lives should be. Their quotidien lives may even be worse than most dysfunctional families. But if the fact that they are christians makes them anymore valid than others to go to a sanctuary and ask for forgiveness whenever...What value of forgiveness is that?
It just maybe me, having gone to a korean community church, where rumors spread like flies, half my life only to be dissapointed in the fact that it is only human nature that people as a group are no better than untamed wild animals.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month? Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools? MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!
There seems to be a lot of confusion over what a Christian believes. I am a Christian, and I believe in the Bible. Meaning if you can show me that something I said is not stated in the Bible, then I will look it up, and change accordingly. Just to avoid confusion and misconceptions about what I believes, I will briefly state my religion. I am from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). In short we believe in the Bible. We have a traditional style of worship. We believe that people are saved through belief that Jesus, the Christ died for our sins. No amount of good actions or living a good life at all helps in getting yourself to heaven. Belief in Christ is brought about through the Holy Spirit. In effect, the believer does not choose for himself to believe, the believer can only refuse. If the person does not refuse, it is simply the act of God. That said, the only way the Holy Spirit works is through the Word and Sacraments. In effect, if you have not heard the Word or been baptized ever, then the Holy Spirit could not have worked in you. The main emphasis is that it is completely God's work when someone believes in God. The only thing we as people do is let the person hear the Word. Therefore harassing a person to believe does nothing.
Therefore, as you stated, we do realize that not everyone will be in heaven. However, that does not keep us from trying. The idea that some people won't be "good enough" for heaven is false though. No one is good enough for heaven. That is why Christ died to take our place. Christ did all the work, we need merely believe it to benefit from it. Though the Bible says that good works have no effect on whether someone gets to heaven, if a person never did anything good, you would have to wonder how strong/existant their faith is. Good works sprout from faith, so to never do anything good would raise question as to whether or not someone believes in God. Also, the idea of forgiveness does not warrant the ability to do anything since you will be forgiven. While every sin is forgiveable, it requires repentance. Repentance requires sorrow for sin, trust that God can/does/will forgive, and an attempt to change ways. Remember also, that God cannot be fooled, so true sorrow and honest attempts to change must occur.
I realize this does not mean anything to most of you. Also, just wanted to point out that, though I state it like it is fact, I merely mean to state it as my system of beliefs in order to clarify differences in religious doctrine. This is just what I believe and you can judge it as you wish.
------------------- 98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from: -Battlefield 2 -Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired) -SWG (Retired) -EQ2 (Retired)
What if the church decides to mandate another crusade and deemed it that if someone will not convert to christianity, they must die. Your argument would deem this moralistic because it was mandated by the church, I would still see it as immoral.
It depends on whose church that is. For someone who used to be Christian, Dekron, you certainly have a hard time of seeing from a Christian perspective. See my previous and first post - the Christianity section - on page three of this thread I think... If you've read it, reread it and then review the above statement you put forward. The Church is a body of believers that is supposed to follow God and his laws - not make up laws for themselves to follow. Now if the pope said that he had a revelation from God that he (for an easy example) was to be worshipped by Christians, then all you would have to do to find out if he was telling the truth is to look at what Christ and God taught.
By the way, Mugengaia and Marauder, good posts. As for Razorback, I think that Christians are to do whatever is necessary to save another human being (effectively making them Christian if you want to label them as belonging to Christ). Doing what is necessary does not necessarily mean forcing people to convert or hounding them to do so. There is a passage in scripture, if my memory proves correct, that states that wives who have unbelieving husbands should patiently endure and hold true to their faith while being an example for their husbands.
If dogging someone is necessary to get them out of hell and into paradise, then do that. If breaking a leg saves a life and the broken leg heals later, then break the leg. But more than likely, Razorback, hounding someone will only make them shun your belief system. Someone who is hounding you day in and day out about your eternal well-being and trying to get you saved (from their perspective) should not be shunned, but rather commended as a loyal friend. Don't you think that it would be easier for the person (Christian or not) to just relax and watch as you pass them by? So whenever someone says that Christians are trying to force their religion on other people, they have a good reason to but they may be using the wrong means to achieve a good end. This does not show a lack of heart, but rather a lack of wisdom.
If a Christian is trying to save as many people as possible to attain favor with God, then they are doing right, but they have the wrong motivation. If a certain preacher tries to save more people than the next preacher to try to get a greater "count", then they are doing wrong with the wrong motives. What is good in this last case works against the ultimate good. So not only to you, Razor or Dekron, but to everyone who is willing to read this: Feel free to correct us if we are wrong, but don't hate us for truly offering love and trying to save someone for simply the reward of saving them.
Now as for my posts, I was not trying to save anyone. I don't believe anyone here is willing to become saved even if they know they may lose everything and gain nothing in their current life. I'm merely trying to get those who are close-minded to see it from both perspectives and to truly consider both possibilities rather than clinging to one and shunning the other. I only argue the side I am on because the other is already argued. If you have read my other posts, then you will know that I may argue one side or the other when either one lacks a voice.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Originally posted by Adreal I'm merely trying to get those who are close-minded to see it from both perspectives and to truly consider both possibilities rather than clinging to one and shunning the other.
I've been on both sides and made my choice and my conclusion. Offense is not meant to anyone, but I truly think that a religion (not just christianity) is just a political ideal to scare people into the organization's belief system to gain power and money. It just seems common sense to me. Why do I think this? Many reasons, but I will give one example.
I already spoke of the crusades, but many do not know how the crusades were financed. The Catholic Church financed it, of course, but they did not have an infinite amount of wealth. The income of the church at the time came from three primary sources:
1) The sale of Bibles (at the time they were handwritten manuscripts and were very expensive) 2) Donations 3) Letters of Indulgence
For those who do not know, Letters of Indulgence were written by the Pope to remit the sins of a person or remove their status of a heretic. There was one condition to recieve a Letter of Indulgence; a hefty donation to the church.
As corrupt as this may sound, it does get worse. Many people who were labeled heretics merely translated the Bible into a vernacular language (the Bible was only allowed to be written in Latin). The penalty for such an action ranged from excommunication to being burned at the stake. This kept the church in power because most people at the time could not read/speak/write Latin.
The Gutenberg printing press was invented around 1452. This allowed for the church to print more and more Letters of Indulgence. This is what financed the crusades. So, in short, the church used scare tactics to finance their crusades which in turn was used to convert people to Christianity or kill them.
It is research such as this that led me away from religion. I've also studied the Bible and found many contradictions (what I believe to be contradictions). I've also read the Gnositc scriptures which the chruch decided to leave out of the bible because of contradictory teachings. It's reasons like this why I believe what I do, not because of bad things that have happened to me, etc.
When I did go to church, all I did was what most people do; follow the pastor's lesson plan, listen to his sermon (when I wasn't sleeping) or go to sunday school and learn all the happy-happy stories from the Bible. Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady. It was when these things seemed to not "make sense" to me and not fit when I started questioning what is truth and what is not. Now, I am not saying that Jesus did not exist, he may have, but history tends to glorify a person (did columbus discover the americas? NO! But it is still taught in grade school that he did). Jesus may have existed, but he wasn't the man the bible claimed. There is as much evidence that Hercules existed as Jesus did. Does this mean he was truly a demi-god? No, of course not. He may have existed and he may have been just a really strong person. Jesus may have existed and healed some people by some other means than what people were used to and this glorified him.
If time travel were possible, someone from present time could go back with this era's technology and people would think that they were some kind of god, witch, etc. (far fetched, I know)
To end, that is why I believe what I do. Not because I am closed-minded, but because I have explored both avenues. I have seen more proof that God doesn't exist compared to proof he does. I'm not attempting to sway anyone to my beliefs as I respect others opinions and I just ask all others to do the same.
Dekron out, and by the way, good post Adreal (as usual).
Originally posted by dekron I've been on both sides and made my choice and my conclusion. Offense is not meant to anyone, but I truly think that a religion (not just christianity) is just a political ideal to scare people into the organization's belief system to gain power and money. It just seems common sense to me. Why do I think this? Many reasons, but I will give one example.
Well, in early days of human history...(current homo sapiens) religion didn't have to be a political ideal to scare people into organizations. Looking at the earliest days of every religlion and its very essence, they were all very pure, simple, and small. They've just gotten too big nowadays with a lack of humbleness. When things become to large to handle, they become corrupt. Also the reason why you see most of backstabbings and betrayals in politics, religion, and business.
Like I mentioned in other replies, it was just a matter of consoling the clueless human mind, that at times had to lay responsibility on a supernatural figure, as humanity was not able to explain certain phenomenons.
Kind of like how the japanese shintoism works. They don't worship, but give thanks and pray to "nature" not necessarily a GOD resembling human charactersitics. Back in the days, when technology and human mind wasn't as well aware of natural consequences, saw catastrohies such as Tsunamis as fury of the Gods or mother nature. Alot of African cultures as well have traditions where they pray for better harvests and etc. not necessarily towards a GODly figure but more in accordance to mother nature.
The thing is. Out of all this, those fewer clever people were "cunning" enough to use religion against the moral ideas behind it. Normally most religions don't favor denominations. But as time progressed, humanity learned to build set standards in a social system, and this in the end helped those to use religion as the center of infrastructure in politics, because realistically religion was the most innovative tool in human history that tends to gather people with the same focus.
Like you said, it really is just common sense. And as much as I'd not want to admit it. Religion is a tool for politics and an automatic leeway towards gaining power and money. Though religion was never meant to be, but nature of religion allows this easier than any other.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month? Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools? MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!
"The great mass of the people will fall for a big lie, much easier then they will fall for a small lie"
Adolf Hitler
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Not because I am closed-minded, but because I have explored both avenues.
Well, it helps to know that you believe you were stating it as opinion and not as fact. On those occasions I try to put *I think* or *I believe* or *IMO*, etc. in close proximity to statements that I hold as opinion and uncertain truths. I don't do it all the time though...
It is research such as this that led me away from religion.
I know of all these things and I'm still a Christian. As I've said before, if you can't make a case against Christ, you can't make a case against Christianity. Aside from being rounded up and slapped with the label of a close-minded sheep among other things, Christianity is really quite refreshing and I see no point in leaving it.
I've also studied the Bible and found many contradictions (what I believe to be contradictions).
Alient mentioned one a long time ago that I find to be interesting. I still haven't found an answer yet to it that I would deem as sound and trustworthy. On the other hand, I have been able to find some answers to other supposed conflicting passages that seem to be contradictions to the unwary. If you want to gather them up and email some my way, go right ahead. I'd be interested in trying to find an answer in my spare time.
Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady.
I think all things in scripture should be open for discussion and questions should be posed and answers formed - the bad thrown out and the good kept. The only way you can temper your sword is by putting it into the flames.
There is as much evidence that Hercules existed as Jesus did.
This brings to mind one passage in scripture which states something to the effect that the nephilim became the heroes of old. You know the big tough guys that could rip a lion apart with their bare hands? Well, that would account for Hercules. Without researching the subject in depth, I would say that he may have existed; I wouldn't say that he probably did or probably didn't because I don't know what further evidence there is of him, but I believe there were temples dedicated to him.
Jesus may have existed and healed some people by some other means than what people were used to and this glorified him.
I believe that all things may be explained with science - miracles or not. Hey, I can take water and turn it into milk: add a little powdered milk and voila! It doesn't necessarily matter how much strength you have in technology or pure might, it just matters who you are and what you do with what you have. Should we worship a man even if he is pure of heart, of morals, of law, of character, of spirit? Perhaps if he can live forever and has made the universe as we know it? Maybe, but then I would doubt one thing, the other, or both: that he be a man or that he not have virtue as a guise.
Heck, it wouldn't matter to me if Christ had taken a personal replicator from Star Trek:TNG and had replicated a bunch of fish and loaves of bread for a multitude of people. It just matters that Christ, I believe, shared the spirit of God in his flesh and that he chose to humble himself from creating the entire universe to creating a few fish in order for a few people to enjoy a meal (intentional understatement).
I am aware of the apocrypha, but I wouldn't address Christ's validity or the nature of these documents in the space of the 22 minutes I have left to post.
good post
And by the way, thanks. I just hope that because one person cries wolf (or 18 in this case) that you won't brush it off for the rest of your life. It's tiring at times, but search for truth whenever the occasion permits.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
When I did go to church, all I did was what most people do; follow the pastor's lesson plan, listen to his sermon (when I wasn't sleeping) or go to sunday school and learn all the happy-happy stories from the Bible. Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady.
Actually, the church I went to spoke of occurences like this quite frequently. I assume you are speaking of how David saw Bathsheeba, was attracted to and slept with her, and she became pregnant. In fear of a scandal, he had her husband placed in a deadly position while in battle (he was already in the military), and therefore, he had him killed. At this time, a prophet came telling David that what he did was wrong. David, in realizing what he did wrong lamented over it for most of his life, considering himself a miserable sinner, yet God still forgave him when he repented. I just wanted to make it known that when I state I believe in the bible, I do not mean just the good "happy-happy" stuff. I believe in the FULL, not-waterred-down Bible. If other churches do not do this, it is a shame.
It was when these things seemed to not "make sense" to me and not fit when I started questioning what is truth and what is not. Now, I am not saying that Jesus did not exist, he may have, but history tends to glorify a person (did columbus discover the americas? NO! But it is still taught in grade school that he did).
That may have been true at one time, but Columbus is no longer considered to be the founder of America. Actually, in history lessons anymore, it is repeated that it is not true that Columbus was the first to explore America. I understand your point that history tends to glorify a person, but it is the Bible that glorifies Christ. History tends to down-play Him.
Also, just wanted to reiterate, that the Catholic church does not equal the entire Christian church. In truth, I don't think it is correct to label Catholics as true Christians, seeing as they don't believe the teachings of Christ. They don't believe that Christ died for and forgives all their sins freely. They believe the Pope to be more than a normal human (idolizing him), and they pray to someone other than God (Mary, the Saints, etc.). None of these are Christian acts, in fact, they oppose Christianity. In light of this, it is unfair to label Christians by looking at the Catholic church. My beliefs and Catholicism are entirely different. The church requires no money to be given from the members. We exist only to spread God's Word and to try to bring as many people to belief as we can.
------------------- 98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from: -Battlefield 2 -Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired) -SWG (Retired) -EQ2 (Retired)
Originally posted by Adreal There is as much evidence that Hercules existed as Jesus did. This brings to mind one passage in scripture which states something to the effect that the nephilim became the heroes of old. You know the big tough guys that could rip a lion apart with their bear hands? Well, that would account for Hercules. Without researching the subject in depth, I would say that he may have existed; I wouldn't say that he probably did or probably didn't because I don't know what further evidence there is of him, but I believe there were temples dedicated to him.
And this is an example of how some people are prepared to accept hearsay and writings as evidence. They are not evidence they are words. (not aimed at the poster just an observation)
A big sandal that carbon dated to the accepted period of Hercules existence with "property of Hercules" written on it, is evidence. Not an account from someone in an old book, even if that book is the bible.
The utter confusion between the terms "knowledge" and "belief" is where this entire arguments starts and finishes.
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Wow if you all took the time and energy used in creating all these posts on this topic you could have cured AIDS and found a fix for world hunger.
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
Originally posted by arvainis Wow if you all took the time and energy used in creating all these posts on this topic you could have cured AIDS and found a fix for world hunger.
How do you know we didnt
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
And this is an example of how some people are prepared to accept hearsay and writings as evidence.
Well, relating to my post, I'm ready to accept whatever is true on this matter. If Hercules existed, then he did - if he didn't, then he didn't. I'm just saying that he could have existed but in a lesser aura of heroic and godly deeds. I do think that people tend to rose-color historical accounts of their own cultural heroes.
Christ plays a big part in the history and culture of Judaism and Christianity; he did then and he does now. Flavius Josephus, an ancient Jewish historian, published an account of Christ circa 90AD within his Antiquities of the Jews. In the least, Josephus gives him credit for being a good man or supposedly having done great things. In the most, he calls him the Messiah. This is the same Christ who Jews, during his time here, wanted to kill. Josephus' Testimonium is debated, but it is interesting to note that, at first glance, Christians were the first to attack Josephus' supposed testimony of Christ in the 1500s. Josephus, whether his words were altered or not, still acknowledges that Christ existed though he does not seem to live during his time here (0-40AD).
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
". . .. For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the worlds creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. Although asserting they were wise, they became foolish..." Romans 1:19-22
Originally posted by arvainis Wow if you all took the time and energy used in creating all these posts on this topic you could have cured AIDS and found a fix for world hunger.
How do you know we didnt
Wouldn't surprise me if someone or some organization in some country did, but won't announce it. All that stuff shown in TVs about NSA, FBI, CIA and etc. My cousin told me those are all bullshit. He was recruited by the FBI and he told me otherthan office equipment, there's another different set of hardware that won't be released in commercial markets till 20 or so years later.
The only damn acurrate thing close to depicting the NSA he said is probably that one movie with Will Smith as an accused fugitive. Difference in that movie and now is that, the stuff in that movie were far older at the time. And what's in the hands of top secret government organization now, he can't imagine.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month? Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools? MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!
Comments
No. Pushing your beliefs on someone whether you think you are "saving" them is still harassment. How would you like it if a Muslim, Buddhist, etc. came to your door pushing their beliefs on you because they thought they were saving you.
-------------------
98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from:
-Battlefield 2
-Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired)
-SWG (Retired)
-EQ2 (Retired)
See, if every christian could be like you, things would definitely be better off than what it'd be now.
The problem with all this...Sometimes their so called "spreading idea" goes beyond measures of succeptibilty.
As a mass people can be very stupid, even if not the person. It's known in human history that people as a too large of a group can be very chaotic. Such is the reason why words like chaos, demonstrations, protests, hysteria bla bla go on...exists.
Now I'm not anti-christanity or anything, but you look at most historians and scholars, it's really hard for them to dedicate themselves to one religion. It's like a child's play for them, not that they disrespect any religion.
Toynbee even last gave his reply about what was the greatest arrival in western philosophy, and he said "Buddhism". In no way he favors the religion, because as a historian he would admit himself that it is hard to devote oneself to one religion when your field of study was wholly based upon the study of history.
What I'm trying to point out here? Toynbee meant the ideas of Buddha's teaching was maybe one so simple people blinded themselves to not see it. Or it was just that humanity was incapable of grasping the though.
Christians could go on and spread their kingdom of god to all the peoples of the world. And at times, even if you don't want to admit it, there may be times when some unnecessary procedures may be taken. But that is the consequences of moving as a denomination. You are bound to make mistakes. People grouped together too large enough for themselves to handle become chaotic. (By no means am I saying they go nuts or something...but when there's a mass of people with the same focus, they can become very unreasonable. <--- unreasonable as in, being persistent with their ideals only, and a lack of acceptance of what is unfavorable to them.)
Sometimes the best course of action isn't to go out and take action, but to just be yourself. When you set a "great" example, you are the influence itself, and people will follow you whether you like it or not. Whether you hide yourself in seclusion or not, when you are a great example people will take notice and follow your example.
When you cause no trouble to your surroundings, but do only good...when you can swallow your pride and are capable of abasing yourself even in front of anyone to beg for last scraps...when you have no worldly desires to "want" or "have", you become a calmer person, who has no worries, as value isn't held in posession. If you can do all this. You don't need to go out and spread ideas. You yourself is the ideal that stands firm as an influence and people will respect you. I mean this shit ain't ever going to happen to me, I'm lazy and a stoner, but you gotta give props to the idea.
Now...these shitz you rarely see anymore...since every religion is pretty much corrupt in its own way. They're all publizised material nowadays.
The idea that all answers are within yourself, you can't argue with this. When you pray to your god, your god or jesus(whoever) directs and guides you and gives you answers are no similar to others. Those guidelines and your answers are unqiue to you, and only you. If this is true why do you need to go out and bother trying to convince so many people? They will meet their god, and follow their guidelines. No matter how much you try to put a sphere of influence around someone, their god will never resemble yours. They can have the same verbal name and commonness, but they will never be the same between what you see and feel inside of you and another person.
You don't need to go out screaming to everyone Jesus is the only savior from eternal damnation, when you yourself know within the most profound part of your heart that, some or even alot of those people you tried to convince may never become christians or even look at a bible. Because in the christian mind-set those non-believers are going to burn in eternal flames...Why even go out convincing people when you know what's the fact? When you know you can't save everyone. Having to know that fact and realization that you can't save everyone before you even start...isn't that a let down of your religion's ideal in the first place? As much as you justify yourselves by saying we go out to "enlighten" those unaware, you are admitting to yourselves that you neglect those unwilling to believe.
I've been going to church since a little boy till my mid teen age days, and I can guaratee you most of those people I saw at churches will end up in hell, if everything was according to that bible. Half the people I knew never lived up to what ideal christian lives should be. Their quotidien lives may even be worse than most dysfunctional families. But if the fact that they are christians makes them anymore valid than others to go to a sanctuary and ask for forgiveness whenever...What value of forgiveness is that?
It just maybe me, having gone to a korean community church, where rumors spread like flies, half my life only to be dissapointed in the fact that it is only human nature that people as a group are no better than untamed wild animals.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month?
Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools?
MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!
There seems to be a lot of confusion over what a Christian believes. I am a Christian, and I believe in the Bible. Meaning if you can show me that something I said is not stated in the Bible, then I will look it up, and change accordingly. Just to avoid confusion and misconceptions about what I believes, I will briefly state my religion. I am from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS). In short we believe in the Bible. We have a traditional style of worship. We believe that people are saved through belief that Jesus, the Christ died for our sins. No amount of good actions or living a good life at all helps in getting yourself to heaven. Belief in Christ is brought about through the Holy Spirit. In effect, the believer does not choose for himself to believe, the believer can only refuse. If the person does not refuse, it is simply the act of God. That said, the only way the Holy Spirit works is through the Word and Sacraments. In effect, if you have not heard the Word or been baptized ever, then the Holy Spirit could not have worked in you. The main emphasis is that it is completely God's work when someone believes in God. The only thing we as people do is let the person hear the Word. Therefore harassing a person to believe does nothing.
Therefore, as you stated, we do realize that not everyone will be in heaven. However, that does not keep us from trying. The idea that some people won't be "good enough" for heaven is false though. No one is good enough for heaven. That is why Christ died to take our place. Christ did all the work, we need merely believe it to benefit from it. Though the Bible says that good works have no effect on whether someone gets to heaven, if a person never did anything good, you would have to wonder how strong/existant their faith is. Good works sprout from faith, so to never do anything good would raise question as to whether or not someone believes in God. Also, the idea of forgiveness does not warrant the ability to do anything since you will be forgiven. While every sin is forgiveable, it requires repentance. Repentance requires sorrow for sin, trust that God can/does/will forgive, and an attempt to change ways. Remember also, that God cannot be fooled, so true sorrow and honest attempts to change must occur.
I realize this does not mean anything to most of you. Also, just wanted to point out that, though I state it like it is fact, I merely mean to state it as my system of beliefs in order to clarify differences in religious doctrine. This is just what I believe and you can judge it as you wish.
-------------------
98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from:
-Battlefield 2
-Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired)
-SWG (Retired)
-EQ2 (Retired)
.
.
"Protect your MMORPG Accounts from Hackers."
Get your FREE Anti-Spyware Now!
Visit: http://www.the.darkscripts.com
.
.
.
What if the church decides to mandate another crusade and deemed it that if someone will not convert to christianity, they must die. Your argument would deem this moralistic because it was mandated by the church, I would still see it as immoral.
It depends on whose church that is. For someone who used to be Christian, Dekron, you certainly have a hard time of seeing from a Christian perspective. See my previous and first post - the Christianity section - on page three of this thread I think... If you've read it, reread it and then review the above statement you put forward. The Church is a body of believers that is supposed to follow God and his laws - not make up laws for themselves to follow. Now if the pope said that he had a revelation from God that he (for an easy example) was to be worshipped by Christians, then all you would have to do to find out if he was telling the truth is to look at what Christ and God taught.
By the way, Mugengaia and Marauder, good posts. As for Razorback, I think that Christians are to do whatever is necessary to save another human being (effectively making them Christian if you want to label them as belonging to Christ). Doing what is necessary does not necessarily mean forcing people to convert or hounding them to do so. There is a passage in scripture, if my memory proves correct, that states that wives who have unbelieving husbands should patiently endure and hold true to their faith while being an example for their husbands.
If dogging someone is necessary to get them out of hell and into paradise, then do that. If breaking a leg saves a life and the broken leg heals later, then break the leg. But more than likely, Razorback, hounding someone will only make them shun your belief system. Someone who is hounding you day in and day out about your eternal well-being and trying to get you saved (from their perspective) should not be shunned, but rather commended as a loyal friend. Don't you think that it would be easier for the person (Christian or not) to just relax and watch as you pass them by? So whenever someone says that Christians are trying to force their religion on other people, they have a good reason to but they may be using the wrong means to achieve a good end. This does not show a lack of heart, but rather a lack of wisdom.
If a Christian is trying to save as many people as possible to attain favor with God, then they are doing right, but they have the wrong motivation. If a certain preacher tries to save more people than the next preacher to try to get a greater "count", then they are doing wrong with the wrong motives. What is good in this last case works against the ultimate good. So not only to you, Razor or Dekron, but to everyone who is willing to read this: Feel free to correct us if we are wrong, but don't hate us for truly offering love and trying to save someone for simply the reward of saving them.
Now as for my posts, I was not trying to save anyone. I don't believe anyone here is willing to become saved even if they know they may lose everything and gain nothing in their current life. I'm merely trying to get those who are close-minded to see it from both perspectives and to truly consider both possibilities rather than clinging to one and shunning the other. I only argue the side I am on because the other is already argued. If you have read my other posts, then you will know that I may argue one side or the other when either one lacks a voice.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
I've been on both sides and made my choice and my conclusion. Offense is not meant to anyone, but I truly think that a religion (not just christianity) is just a political ideal to scare people into the organization's belief system to gain power and money. It just seems common sense to me. Why do I think this? Many reasons, but I will give one example.
I already spoke of the crusades, but many do not know how the crusades were financed. The Catholic Church financed it, of course, but they did not have an infinite amount of wealth. The income of the church at the time came from three primary sources:
1) The sale of Bibles (at the time they were handwritten manuscripts and were very expensive)
2) Donations
3) Letters of Indulgence
For those who do not know, Letters of Indulgence were written by the Pope to remit the sins of a person or remove their status of a heretic. There was one condition to recieve a Letter of Indulgence; a hefty donation to the church.
As corrupt as this may sound, it does get worse. Many people who were labeled heretics merely translated the Bible into a vernacular language (the Bible was only allowed to be written in Latin). The penalty for such an action ranged from excommunication to being burned at the stake. This kept the church in power because most people at the time could not read/speak/write Latin.
The Gutenberg printing press was invented around 1452. This allowed for the church to print more and more Letters of Indulgence. This is what financed the crusades. So, in short, the church used scare tactics to finance their crusades which in turn was used to convert people to Christianity or kill them.
It is research such as this that led me away from religion. I've also studied the Bible and found many contradictions (what I believe to be contradictions). I've also read the Gnositc scriptures which the chruch decided to leave out of the bible because of contradictory teachings. It's reasons like this why I believe what I do, not because of bad things that have happened to me, etc.
When I did go to church, all I did was what most people do; follow the pastor's lesson plan, listen to his sermon (when I wasn't sleeping) or go to sunday school and learn all the happy-happy stories from the Bible. Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady. It was when these things seemed to not "make sense" to me and not fit when I started questioning what is truth and what is not. Now, I am not saying that Jesus did not exist, he may have, but history tends to glorify a person (did columbus discover the americas? NO! But it is still taught in grade school that he did). Jesus may have existed, but he wasn't the man the bible claimed. There is as much evidence that Hercules existed as Jesus did. Does this mean he was truly a demi-god? No, of course not. He may have existed and he may have been just a really strong person. Jesus may have existed and healed some people by some other means than what people were used to and this glorified him.
If time travel were possible, someone from present time could go back with this era's technology and people would think that they were some kind of god, witch, etc. (far fetched, I know)
To end, that is why I believe what I do. Not because I am closed-minded, but because I have explored both avenues. I have seen more proof that God doesn't exist compared to proof he does. I'm not attempting to sway anyone to my beliefs as I respect others opinions and I just ask all others to do the same.
Dekron out, and by the way, good post Adreal (as usual).
Well, in early days of human history...(current homo sapiens) religion didn't have to be a political ideal to scare people into organizations. Looking at the earliest days of every religlion and its very essence, they were all very pure, simple, and small. They've just gotten too big nowadays with a lack of humbleness. When things become to large to handle, they become corrupt. Also the reason why you see most of backstabbings and betrayals in politics, religion, and business.
Like I mentioned in other replies, it was just a matter of consoling the clueless human mind, that at times had to lay responsibility on a supernatural figure, as humanity was not able to explain certain phenomenons.
Kind of like how the japanese shintoism works. They don't worship, but give thanks and pray to "nature" not necessarily a GOD resembling human charactersitics. Back in the days, when technology and human mind wasn't as well aware of natural consequences, saw catastrohies such as Tsunamis as fury of the Gods or mother nature. Alot of African cultures as well have traditions where they pray for better harvests and etc. not necessarily towards a GODly figure but more in accordance to mother nature.
The thing is. Out of all this, those fewer clever people were "cunning" enough to use religion against the moral ideas behind it. Normally most religions don't favor denominations. But as time progressed, humanity learned to build set standards in a social system, and this in the end helped those to use religion as the center of infrastructure in politics, because realistically religion was the most innovative tool in human history that tends to gather people with the same focus.
Like you said, it really is just common sense. And as much as I'd not want to admit it. Religion is a tool for politics and an automatic leeway towards gaining power and money. Though religion was never meant to be, but nature of religion allows this easier than any other.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month?
Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools?
MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!
"The great mass of the people will fall for a big lie, much easier then they will fall for a small lie"
Adolf Hitler
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Not because I am closed-minded, but because I have explored both avenues.
Well, it helps to know that you believe you were stating it as opinion and not as fact. On those occasions I try to put *I think* or *I believe* or *IMO*, etc. in close proximity to statements that I hold as opinion and uncertain truths. I don't do it all the time though...
It is research such as this that led me away from religion.
I know of all these things and I'm still a Christian. As I've said before, if you can't make a case against Christ, you can't make a case against Christianity. Aside from being rounded up and slapped with the label of a close-minded sheep among other things, Christianity is really quite refreshing and I see no point in leaving it.
I've also studied the Bible and found many contradictions (what I believe to be contradictions).
Alient mentioned one a long time ago that I find to be interesting. I still haven't found an answer yet to it that I would deem as sound and trustworthy. On the other hand, I have been able to find some answers to other supposed conflicting passages that seem to be contradictions to the unwary. If you want to gather them up and email some my way, go right ahead. I'd be interested in trying to find an answer in my spare time.
Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady.
I think all things in scripture should be open for discussion and questions should be posed and answers formed - the bad thrown out and the good kept. The only way you can temper your sword is by putting it into the flames.
There is as much evidence that Hercules existed as Jesus did.
This brings to mind one passage in scripture which states something to the effect that the nephilim became the heroes of old. You know the big tough guys that could rip a lion apart with their bare hands? Well, that would account for Hercules. Without researching the subject in depth, I would say that he may have existed; I wouldn't say that he probably did or probably didn't because I don't know what further evidence there is of him, but I believe there were temples dedicated to him.
Jesus may have existed and healed some people by some other means than what people were used to and this glorified him.
I believe that all things may be explained with science - miracles or not. Hey, I can take water and turn it into milk: add a little powdered milk and voila! It doesn't necessarily matter how much strength you have in technology or pure might, it just matters who you are and what you do with what you have. Should we worship a man even if he is pure of heart, of morals, of law, of character, of spirit? Perhaps if he can live forever and has made the universe as we know it? Maybe, but then I would doubt one thing, the other, or both: that he be a man or that he not have virtue as a guise.
Heck, it wouldn't matter to me if Christ had taken a personal replicator from Star Trek:TNG and had replicated a bunch of fish and loaves of bread for a multitude of people. It just matters that Christ, I believe, shared the spirit of God in his flesh and that he chose to humble himself from creating the entire universe to creating a few fish in order for a few people to enjoy a meal (intentional understatement).
I am aware of the apocrypha, but I wouldn't address Christ's validity or the nature of these documents in the space of the 22 minutes I have left to post.
good post
And by the way, thanks.
I just hope that because one person cries wolf (or 18 in this case) that you won't brush it off for the rest of your life. It's tiring at times, but search for truth whenever the occasion permits.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
When I did go to church, all I did was what most people do; follow the pastor's lesson plan, listen to his sermon (when I wasn't sleeping) or go to sunday school and learn all the happy-happy stories from the Bible. Remember, they don't teach things such as King David betraying his friend by sending him to war so he can have his way with his friends lady.
Actually, the church I went to spoke of occurences like this quite frequently. I assume you are speaking of how David saw Bathsheeba, was attracted to and slept with her, and she became pregnant. In fear of a scandal, he had her husband placed in a deadly position while in battle (he was already in the military), and therefore, he had him killed. At this time, a prophet came telling David that what he did was wrong. David, in realizing what he did wrong lamented over it for most of his life, considering himself a miserable sinner, yet God still forgave him when he repented. I just wanted to make it known that when I state I believe in the bible, I do not mean just the good "happy-happy" stuff. I believe in the FULL, not-waterred-down Bible. If other churches do not do this, it is a shame.
It was when these things seemed to not "make sense" to me and not fit when I started questioning what is truth and what is not. Now, I am not saying that Jesus did not exist, he may have, but history tends to glorify a person (did columbus discover the americas? NO! But it is still taught in grade school that he did).
That may have been true at one time, but Columbus is no longer considered to be the founder of America. Actually, in history lessons anymore, it is repeated that it is not true that Columbus was the first to explore America. I understand your point that history tends to glorify a person, but it is the Bible that glorifies Christ. History tends to down-play Him.
Also, just wanted to reiterate, that the Catholic church does not equal the entire Christian church. In truth, I don't think it is correct to label Catholics as true Christians, seeing as they don't believe the teachings of Christ. They don't believe that Christ died for and forgives all their sins freely. They believe the Pope to be more than a normal human (idolizing him), and they pray to someone other than God (Mary, the Saints, etc.). None of these are Christian acts, in fact, they oppose Christianity. In light of this, it is unfair to label Christians by looking at the Catholic church. My beliefs and Catholicism are entirely different. The church requires no money to be given from the members. We exist only to spread God's Word and to try to bring as many people to belief as we can.
-------------------
98% of the teenage population does or has tried smoking pot. If you're one of the 2% who hasn't, copy & paste this in your signature.
Linkster from:
-Battlefield 2
-Delta Force: Black Hawk Down (Retired)
-SWG (Retired)
-EQ2 (Retired)
And this is an example of how some people are prepared to accept hearsay and writings as evidence. They are not evidence they are words. (not aimed at the poster just an observation)
A big sandal that carbon dated to the accepted period of Hercules existence with "property of Hercules" written on it, is evidence. Not an account from someone in an old book, even if that book is the bible.
The utter confusion between the terms "knowledge" and "belief" is where this entire arguments starts and finishes.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." ~ Ronald Reagan
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
And this is an example of how some people are prepared to accept hearsay and writings as evidence.
Well, relating to my post, I'm ready to accept whatever is true on this matter. If Hercules existed, then he did - if he didn't, then he didn't. I'm just saying that he could have existed but in a lesser aura of heroic and godly deeds. I do think that people tend to rose-color historical accounts of their own cultural heroes.
Christ plays a big part in the history and culture of Judaism and Christianity; he did then and he does now. Flavius Josephus, an ancient Jewish historian, published an account of Christ circa 90AD within his Antiquities of the Jews. In the least, Josephus gives him credit for being a good man or supposedly having done great things. In the most, he calls him the Messiah. This is the same Christ who Jews, during his time here, wanted to kill. Josephus' Testimonium is debated, but it is interesting to note that, at first glance, Christians were the first to attack Josephus' supposed testimony of Christ in the 1500s. Josephus, whether his words were altered or not, still acknowledges that Christ existed though he does not seem to live during his time here (0-40AD).
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
". . .. For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the worlds creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened. Although asserting they were wise, they became foolish..." Romans 1:19-22
Wouldn't surprise me if someone or some organization in some country did, but won't announce it. All that stuff shown in TVs about NSA, FBI, CIA and etc. My cousin told me those are all bullshit. He was recruited by the FBI and he told me otherthan office equipment, there's another different set of hardware that won't be released in commercial markets till 20 or so years later.
The only damn acurrate thing close to depicting the NSA he said is probably that one movie with Will Smith as an accused fugitive. Difference in that movie and now is that, the stuff in that movie were far older at the time. And what's in the hands of top secret government organization now, he can't imagine.
GRIND sucks? You wanna be max level in a month?
Since when did society award easy-goers and lazy-fools?
MAKES ME PHOBIC OF STUPIDITY!