Christ

[NBVegita]

Dolphins are !@#$%^&* smart.

 

I would rather focus more time believing in myself. I do what is right, by my standards. I am a good man. If your God, happens to be the being that judges me when I die, then as he is supposedly a being of forgiveness, the acts I do on a daily basis, should get me into your heaven. In actually you can say the acts I do on a daily basis are more sincere in nature, because I don't do something nice because my church or god tells me to do so, I do something nice because it is in my heart to do so.

 

A man should not do what is right because his God tells him to, a man should do what is right because it is truly what he, as a man wishes to do for a fellow man. If being a good man in your heart is not enough to be spared a lifetime of agony and misery, I pity those of you who worship this diety. If the only way to be spared an eternity with the deity called satan is through life long servitude, devotion, piety and prayer, you might want to reconsider just what you are worship, and just what kind of deity would require that of you.

 

Also ironically the christian religion is polytheistic in nature. If you believe in god and Jesus, you believe in Lucifer aka satan. Satan himself in your religion is a deity of evil, a god of evil.

[SeVeR]

Haha, !@#$%^&* awaits apparently.

 

Nightflame: If a God exists then he gave us the world, the laws of science, and the freedom of thought to investigate the wonders he has created for us. If a God exists then he values the ultimately objective gaze of science upon his creation, and acknowledges science as the greatest tool for understanding his marvel and glory. If a God exists then he would never have shown "wrath" or the emotional disdain shown in the Bible, for God would be timeless, unsurprised and unemotional. If a God exists then Christianity is the tool of all who object to the free will he has given us. If a God exists, then Christianity is the voice of those who want to tarnish his name with the bigotry of men. Christianity is the opposite of God, a creation of Lucifer, the bearer of light, the morning star, Jesus.

 

If there is a !@#$%^&*, then it's far more likely that you'll be burning in it Nightflame. Your perception is narrow, ignorant and reliant on the words of few men with motives unclear.

Edited June 23, 2007 by SeVeR

[Aileron]

Rootbear's post was deleted due to profanity.

 

Keep in mind that this forum is open to children. I for one sometimes have to access these forums in a library which happens to be nextdoor to my old elementary school, flanked by 7 and 8 year olds as well as library volunteers who know my family. The prospects of one of those kids reading my screen and repeating that stuff is unsettling. Besides, use of profanity is only going to increase the chances of this forum being blocked by filters used by schools and offices.

 

 

 

 

SeVeR, your statement !@#$%^&*umes Christianity to be anti-scientific and anti-free will when outside of the dark ages Christianity has done no such thing, and even during the dark ages Christianity was only partially subverted to the dominant powers at a time when all other socio-economic forces were completely subverted.

 

The Crusades for instance were one of the biggest contributors to scientific thought in history. The primary benefit was that the returning Crusaders brought back scientific works from the Arab world after the Arabians were no longer interested in science. Most of what we know of Greek and Roman science actually came by this route. The Crusades also brought a time of peace in Europe because the Europeans didn't have to worry about each other. England and France for instance were at peace for the only time in history prior to the 1800s because the armies of both countries were in the Holy Land. This peace also lead to scientific advancement.

 

The anti-free will thing is what irks me though. The notion of some religious figure commanding a legion of unquestioning followers is something that doesn't exist outside of Hollywood. Sure there were cases in history of religious leaders, but those leaders needed to have a real-world buerocratic system under them just like any purely secular leader. Yes, the Pharohs of Egypt claimed to be deities, but what kept the Egyptian populace from revolting was the efficient buerocracy that was in place.

 

I for one have never had a priest try to tell me how to live my life. I've gone three years straight of not putting any money in the collection bin, and haven't been scorned for it. Usually the church recieves more finances than they need and they have to find some way to give it back to the community. I have never been told to hate anyone of a different belief, and certainly not race because "Catholic" means "universal" as in "one church for everyone", and besides we are doing much better among African and Hispanic populations anyway. The only time I've experienced that style of manipulation was when I attended a Baptist service, in which I observed that their followers are taught to scorn Catholics. However, that is a very small denomination.

 

There is something however that is more detrimental to free will. As odd as my next source is, this was covered in the second Matrix movie. In the opinion of the machines, humans were controlled by environment and biochemical impulses. For instance, Dopamine causes anger. If a human being only used the standard of what he or she "feels" is right, that person would judge situations based upon their mood, which is based upon hormones, and would essentially be a slave to those hormones. That's how it works with animals. Animals don't have free will; they are merely slaves of their own biology. Religion in general attempts to challenge followers to overcome those chemicals by setting a constant model of behavior.

[rootbear75]

reworded it:

 

Why is everybody talking like this(Read Sever's comments on Christ pg. 4)' date='they are so ignorant and although they make a joke they will pay in !@#$%^&* for this and they will fall at the gate of Heaven.

 

I thank you for backing me on our faith. You are a TRUE friend and christian. GOD BLESS![/quote']

 

backing you up?

backing you up?

 

where the heck did i say i was backing you up?!

 

I Don't want to be converted! NOR DOES ANYONE appreciate or even LIKE your attempts to do so!

so just stop! and get the !@#$%^&* out!

Edited June 23, 2007 by rootbear75

[Aileron]

First off he's as welcome here as your are. There's nothing wrong with trying to convert people, and as annoying as it might be to you, asking him to stop would be undemocratic.

 

Secondly what do you expect from a topic en!@#$%^&*led "Christ"? A conversation about Tiger Woods not winning first at Oakmont? You could easily avoid such "pressure" by not reading the topic.

 

Personally, I think watching an evangelist and a couple satanists argue is funny. They barely speak the same language.

[rootbear75]

First off he's as welcome here as your are. There's nothing wrong with trying to convert people, and as annoying as it might be to you, asking him to stop would be undemocratic.

Well, i wasnt exactly sure what i wrote since you deleted it. you could have just censored it....

 

Secondly what do you expect from a topic en!@#$%^&*led "Christ"? A conversation about Tiger Woods not winning first at Oakmont? You could easily avoid such "pressure" by not reading the topic.

I expect people to discuss things and view each other's opinions fairly, and not try to prove that your way is the "best" way.

EDIT: and dont call me a hypocrite. i was just trying to get him to stop pushing his faith as the ONLY faith

 

Personally, I think watching an evangelist and a couple satanists argue is funny. They barely speak the same language.

who's who? Edited June 24, 2007 by rootbear75

[JDS]

i hate ignorant people

There's nothing wrong with trying to convert people, and as annoying as it might be to you, asking him to stop would be undemocratic.

 

trying to convert someone could be considerd verbal harr!@#$%^&*ment, everything is wrong with it.

[Dav]

All depends how it is carried out.

 

To do so with civilised debate is acceptable whereas to go down the channel of forcing ones belief on others is not.

 

We have to remember that the point of debate is to convert someone to your line of thinking weather that be religion, gun laws, war in iraq or even which SCI-FI show is the best.

 

 

Religion always seems to bring up this controversy anywhere it is debated. As far as I see things are going down the route of a civilised debate (for the most part) where all views ate taken and debated without getting onto the realm of forceful convention.

 

[Aileron]

You dropped the f-bomb a couple times rootbear. In hindsight I should have censored.

 

As for who's who...Knightflame is obviously the evangelist, though I mean than in a general rather than technical sense. If I had to guess I'd say he is a Baptist missionary, but I obviously can't be sure. SeVeR happens to be a satanist or atleast has the mindset of one according to an internet testing site as I doubt he spends his free time drawing pentagrams on the floor in goat's blood, though we have establised that he spends a lot of time playing Dungeons & Dragons and in my experience the stereotype of all satanists playing D&D is true. (Keep in mind that this is a non-reversable if-then statement.) I don't recall whether or not Drake considers himself satanistic or atheistic.

 

 

And there is no debate as to which science fiction show is best. Stargate is. Anyone who thinks otherwise is denying the path of origion and we all know what that means.

[SeVeR]

SeVeR happens to be a satanist or atleast has the mindset of one according to an internet testing site as I doubt he spends his free time drawing pentagrams on the floor in goat's blood, though we have establised that he spends a lot of time playing Dungeons & Dragons

WTF Aileron, I've never played that in my life.

 

I'm not a Satanist. I've never played D&D, You're an idiot.

 

The Crusades for instance were one of the biggest contributors to scientific thought in history.

Wars are known to contribute to science. Your argument is that Christianity causes wars which in turn advance science. It's not a very good argument because nothing about Christianity directly advances science. For instance, those within the war who advance science may just as well be non-Christians trying to save their own !@#$%^&*es. If a plague infects every human on the planet and one human saves us all at the last minute with a scientific cure, then the plague doesn't deserve the credit for advancing science. It's also a terrible argument because it relies on the premise that Christianity causes wars, something i believe, but something that you'd have to agree with to carry on this argument.

 

SeVeR, your statement !@#$%^&*umes Christianity to be anti-scientific and anti-free will when outside of the dark ages Christianity

From the birth of popular Christianity (around 300 A.D. under Constantine) until around 1600 A.D. when Christianity began to decline, scientists did not enjoy the freedom to publish any ideas that may have conflicted with the Bible or the Christian view of the universe.

 

England and France for instance were at peace for the only time in history prior to the 1800s because the armies of both countries were in the Holy Land. This peace also lead to scientific advancement.

Examples? How did this peace lead to advancement? In fact what examples do you have of scientific advancement during the crusades?

 

The anti-free will thing is what irks me though. The notion of some religious figure commanding a legion of unquestioning followers is something that doesn't exist outside of Hollywood.

All the things that Christians say we cannot do (sex before marriage, sodomy, pornography, homosexuality, abortion) and all the things its ever said we cannot do, or which result in punishment... is what i mean when i talk about a restriction of free will. If God gave us the ability to do all these things then why not do them? And where has God said we cannot do them?

 

I for one have never had a priest try to tell me how to live my life.

So they don't tell you to believe in God, forgive your enemies, accept Jesus, love your neighbour etc?

 

That's how it works with animals. Animals don't have free will; they are merely slaves of their own biology. Religion in general attempts to challenge followers to overcome those chemicals by setting a constant model of behavior.

Yes we are limited by our biology. How does religion overcome this limit? Religion is nothing more than a set of extra limitations on top of our biological ones... how am i wrong? Edited June 24, 2007 by SeVeR

[Falcoknight]

And there is no debate as to which science fiction show is best. Stargate is. Anyone who thinks otherwise is denying the path of origion and we all know what that means.

 

 

Yes.

Even though the final show sucked bigtime, I'll still accept that as the correct answer.

 

Also, I partially disagree with your statement that "there's nothing wrong with trying to convert someone" It depends how it is done.

If I tell someone they if they don't do something on this forum that I will hunt them down and kill them, how is that any different than Knight telling us that if we don't conform to his beliefs we will be punished in !@#$%^&* for eternity?

 

Presenting a logical, well thought out case and letting people make their own decisions is one thing, and perfectly all right. Saying do what I say or is not.

[Aileron]

I wouldn't say the final episode "sucked", though I would say it wasn't very "final". They must be planning on finishing things up with a feature film.

 

 

I swear one of you people was claiming to be satanist sometimes and making some D&D references including having a mage with 22 intelligence...SeVeR, I must be confusing you with another radical liberal on these forums.

 

 

Christianity doesn't cause wars. The Crusades were caused by the constant need of European nobles to expand their territory, though I admit some of the nobles were idealogical. There's another point to be made about that event. When the Crusaders were sacking whatever place they got those writings from, they looted the writings. They could have !@#$%^&*umed the writings were "black magic" and burned them on the spot. They could have also simply ignored the writings thinking them worthless. The very fact that atleast some Crusaders chose to loot books rather than silver and gold implies that they were atleast enlightened enough to value knowledge.

 

Generally peace always advances science. War advances engineering and technology.

 

As for Christianity advancing science, Christianity did do a lot to advance medicine, atleast when compaired to the pagans that came before it. Most primative religions considered disease some sort of omen, and would cast out people with diseases. Christians however would care for diseased individuals. This caused immunities to build up in the general populace. While for the first few hundred years the medicine sucked, eventually advancements were made because diseased people were treated rather than cast out.

 

Don't pretend to be an expert on the Dark Ages, because there is no such thing as an expert on the Dark Ages. There are virtually no records from this period today. We can today only guess what role Christianity played during this time.

 

 

 

The rules Christianity adds run counter to biology though. For instance sex before marriage is a rule design to prevent people from giving in to biological urges before they in our society are ready for a life-long commitment. And for reference, there is no Christian rule against watching porn, though there is an interpretation forbiding the making of it.

[rootbear75]

You dropped the f-bomb a couple times rootbear. In hindsight I should have censored.

i dropped the f-bomb cause i am allowed, as it isn't illegal in the rules.

and i dropped the f-bomb, cause i was pissed that he 1) though i was on his side when reading my posts, i clearly wasn't, and 2) he called me Christian as most people on here know I'm a Jew

[AstroProdigy]

And there is no debate as to which science fiction show is best. Stargate is. Anyone who thinks otherwise is denying the path of origion and we all know what that means.

AMEN!

 

I swear one of you people was claiming to be satanist

LOL at "you people". If Sever has repeated anything about himself the most its that he is an avid atheist. Atheist does not equal satanist. In fact atheists are anti satanist seeing as that's another religion.

 

Just because the undisciplined people fighting the wars can follow their own interests doesn't mean that when the pope calls to Christians to fight for God that this isn't a holy war. It's true that it was to a great extent caused by a knight class bored and looking for glory' date=' but otherwise it was a holy war that was fought by Catholic Christians to convert "heathens". All wars are more complicated and a single cause is almost never the sole reason for a war, but Christianity and the resulting anti-non Christianity has influenced the fighting of many wars and has been the excuse for countless atrocities.

 

Generally peace always advances science. War advances engineering and technology.

Engineering and technology are byproducts of science.

 

As for Christianity advancing science' date=' Christianity did do a lot to advance medicine, atleast when compaired to the pagans that came before it. Most primative religions considered disease some sort of omen, and would cast out people with diseases. Christians however would care for diseased individuals. This caused immunities to build up in the general populace. While for the first few hundred years the medicine sucked, eventually advancements were made because diseased people were treated rather than cast out.[/quote']

That's a strange analogy you have there. Christianity didn't teach people to care for diseased individuals. Morality didn't spring up with Christianity. Christians also considered disease to be an omen and would go as far as saying someone dying from disease was being punished because they must have been evil. Christianity was exactly the same as pagan religions when it came to medicine. Medicine was advanced due to the pursuit of knowledge and one of the major advancements of medicine, understanding the human body, was strictly forbidden by the church because dissecting a dead body was seen as bad. Once again Christianity becomes an inhibitor to progress here. In fact I find that the Christian world back then was easily as bad as Afghanistan under the Taliban if not worse.

Edited June 25, 2007 by AstroProdigy

[SeVeR]

If Christianity doesn't cause wars then you can't !@#$%^&*ociate Christianity with the scientific advancements that bring about war-time technological advancements. That's a rather simple point.

 

The Crusades were not caused by the greed of European nobles. You are once again trying to give something that is !@#$%^&*ing to religion a non-religious edge (do you just make this stuff up?). The Crusades were initiated by the call for help from the Byzantine Empire to the Western Christians for help against the Muslims. In 1074, Pope Gregory VII called for the milites Christi ("soldiers of Christ") to go to the aid of the Byzantine Empire in the east. The Pope promised: "those who die in this endevour will get immediate remission of their sins". The Pope decided that Jerusalem should be captured aswell, a city that had nothing to do with the Byzantine Empire. The crusaders massacred Jews across Europe and the Holy lands, massacred Christians in Constantinople, and killed everyone in Jerusalem regardless of their religion. (source: wikipedia)

 

When the Crusaders were sacking whatever place they got those writings from, they looted the writings. They could have !@#$%^&*umed the writings were "black magic" and burned them on the spot. They could have also simply ignored the writings thinking them worthless. The very fact that atleast some Crusaders chose to loot books rather than silver and gold implies that they were atleast enlightened enough to value knowledge.

I was with you up until the "loot books rather than silver and gold" as this is clearly a mistake. You really need evidence to support the claim that some of the Crusaders ignored gold and silver in favour of books. I think most historians woud subs!@#$%^&*ute "rather" with "aswell as". The books were the next objects of value once the gold and silver had been completely looted. It certainly does not prove the Crusaders were avid readers and enlightened folk.

 

As for Christianity advancing science, Christianity did do a lot to advance medicine, atleast when compaired to the pagans that came before it.

Not true, the ancient Greeks that came before Christianity developed science, philosophy and mathematics to a point of sophistication that was not equalled until about 500 years ago. The Church maintained a flat Earth for up to 1500 years after Eratosthenes had calculated it's cir!@#$%^&*ference. The Church maintained a geo-centric universe and !@#$%^&*ed scientists sayng otherwise as heretics. Galileo and Copernicus are two examples of those who suffered under the Church, and they were born well after the Crusades.

 

Christians caring for the weak is not a direct ambition from Christians to further science, as we didn't understand immunities until a century ago. It can be argued that not allowing the weak to die has weakened our spieces by allowing the faulty genes to propagate.

 

Don't pretend to be an expert on the Dark Ages, because there is no such thing as an expert on the Dark Ages. There are virtually no records from this period today. We can today only guess what role Christianity played during this time.

I'm not pretending to be an expert. In fact i'm asking why you think you're an expert based on the far-fetched claims within your post.

 

The rules Christianity adds run counter to biology though. For instance sex before marriage is a rule design to prevent people from giving in to biological urges before they in our society are ready for a life-long commitment. And for reference, there is no Christian rule against watching porn, though there is an interpretation forbiding the making of it.

Then sex before marriage extends our biological rules. If biology prevents us from reproducing until the age of 13, then Christianity extends that further. Whether that's a good thing is debatable. Sex can be a physical act only and doesn't require a commitment.

 

I took that religion test and scored well on Satanist, but I had recently read the Satanic Bible and agreed with much of the anti-Christian rhetoric. I didn't agree with the mystical side. At the time i claimed not to be a Satanist (Ducky might be who you're thinking about, but i'm not sure). As for D&D, i've never played it in my life.

 

I take issue with you labelling me a radical liberal. For one, i would gladly elect a republican for President if he knew how to fix the economy (Ron Paul). Secondly, i believe in an elitist society where voting is on a points based system with the educated, doctors, teachers and armed forces having more voting points than someone who is an unemployed idiot. This is very right wing. I deplore communism, value capitalism, am disgusted with over-taxation... i don't see any leftist routes. I am pro-choice because women should own their own bodies. I am anti-gun because i believe the legal gun-system in America is the primary source for criminals to obtain firearms. I am pro-environment, but I'm a scientist... so what would you expect? I don't think you can call me radical on anything.

 

Astro: I'm agnostic. My vehement criticism of Christianity just leads many to assume atheist or satanist.

Edited June 25, 2007 by SeVeR

[Guest Knightflame]

First off Rootbear75 or whatever I am sorry I did not know you were a Jew. You sounded like a Baptist to me in your replies. Sever I may be wrong but your photo is weird. I know don't judge a book by it's cover but you present yourself on the border of Satanist. Oh and Aileron good guess, but I am a Pentecostal Christian. If you check I am not the one using vulgar languages, others are. Lastly, If me trying to talk to you guys, not convert about Christiananity is Verbal Harrasment, then you guys are like Level 10 Verbal on me. Like Aileron said, I too have to use my Library computer sometimes and there are kids from 4-13 swarming around the computers.

 

 

GOD BLESS

[Aileron]

Yeah, I think it was Ducky...sorry SeVeR.

 

Wikipedia cites the official cause of the war, but one thing that is obvious about European history, especially while monarchy was still around, was that the official cause and the practical cause were usually two entirely different things. Armies don't come out of nowhere. They have to be recruited. Most people when given that proclaimation would say they would stick with confession. There had to be other factors. The serfs were recruited simply because if they did not go they were thrown off their lord's land and would be homeless, or worse. The knights went because it was their job. The lords went because most of them had two or more sons, by tradition the eldest would get the estate, and the lords wanted to give their younger sons a piece of real estate.

 

The article didn't mention the crusades of children holding flowers. And the persecution of Jews in Europe was more or less constant rather than something that happened during the crusades. I would have expected more detail and less opinionative speculation from wikipedia...

 

 

 

To be honest the people who likely looted the books were some sort of scribes or monks who were the only one educated enough to understand their value. Those type of people would take books rather than wealth.

 

Not all science is Astronomy, but more importantly compairing the Greek Empire at its peak to Dark Age Christianity. During the height of Greek civilization, they knew these things. During the time before their civilization, writing didn't exist, but I'd venture to say that they probably didn't know much about astrology until after their civilization grew. I'm trying to say that Dark Age officials weren't crooks - they were! When the Christian civilization developed, their understanding of science was enough to start the modern age.

 

It wasn't Christianity that caused the Dark Ages, it was the corruption and eventual collapse of Rome that did.

 

 

And none of this is a valid reason to not follow Christ, who himself despised the Pharasise who were the dominant fundimentalist ideology at the time.

[Falcoknight]

This is now the 8th largest topic in the World Politics section, barily beating out Abortion.

[rootbear75]

First off Rootbear75 or whatever I am sorry I did not know you were a Jew. You sounded like a Baptist to me in your replies.

how the f*** did i sound like a baptist?!

[AceSpades]

* how do you know this !@#$%^&*ing bible wasn't written up by some !@#$%^&*ing tosspot homo?

 

You're 500 years early. The author of the quran was that.

[SeVeR]

All the reasons you've mentioned for the lords, knights and serfs to go on the crusades are not incompatible with a religious desire to follow the Pope's call for war. It's also quite clear that the crusades wouldn't have happened without the Pope calling for it. If the Pope hadn't ordered a war, then the nobles would not have raised armies to go on that war. So whatever the specific motives of the nobles (greed or religious duty or both), the crusades were down to the Pope and no-one else.

 

You haven't really made a case against the Greeks, in fact you've supported mine. The Greeks had to develop writing before using it to create the great many works of genius that came out of their culture, that's an added example of scientific and methodical thinking.

 

The Christian civilisation took a millenium to develop anything close to the Greeks and they already had the benefits of the written word. Many of the Greek works were destroyed as herecy and paganism and were not expanded upon. In my opinion we could be a few centuries ahead of our current development if the Greek discoveries had survived the Dark Ages. Even when Christian civilisation finally surp!@#$%^&*ed the Greeks, around 1500 years later, they still persecuted the scientists as heretics.

 

You're right, the collapse of Rome caused the Dark Ages, and i think both events were inevitable. However, one can't dis!@#$%^&*ociate Christianity from the Crusades, the lack of scientific advancement and the persecution of scientists as heretics.

[JDS]

bush> this is one nation under god, as far as im conserned atheists should NOT be considered citizens of america

 

!@#$%^&* you bush

[SeVeR]

i'm pretty sure that was Bush senior.

[AstroProdigy]

Really? I thought he was much more moderate.

[JDS]

Aileron, why do you keep using the term 'satanists'

 

to believe in Satan is to believe in god, evil / good go hand in hand.., so in hindsight you cant even consider the posibility to be 'he's either atheist or satanist' since they are much so polar opposite