Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

^
This guy has nailed it imo.

shingouki wrote:^
This guy has nailed it imo.

I agree. Cthulhu is the only true answer.

Soladrin wrote:To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

Gods don't live, they are.

Something that isn't there can't die as well.

No I can't really prove there isn't such a thing as a god, but I also can't prove there isn't a Magic Dwarf in a teapot floating around the moon that shoots lightning out of his boobs.

LordofHats wrote:

htj wrote:I can't say as I've heard of these rising Christian militant movements in Europe, LordofHats. Could you cite some sources on that?

The guy who just pulled all that crazy crap in Norway is what got my attention. He acted as an individual, but has caused a stir about certain fringe Christian groups in Western Europe who have some... extreme ideas. Like I said I haven't had time to read much into it. Right now, from what I understand, it is very very fringe but has been gaining more notice and attention slowly over the past decade (as I understand it).

Ah, yes, that whole thing. I might have to look into this, see how trends have been. I'd be interested to see what could be considered the root cause of this trend, if indeed it is going on. It may well be as you say. Food for though, certainly.

Soladrin wrote:To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

Gods don't live, they are.

you have no idea how powerful that statement really is.

in Genesis when Moses is speaking to God at the burning bush he asks "who shall I tell them sent me?" God's reply was "I am, that I am" (depending on interpretation, it can also mean I am because I am. in Hebrew its pronounced YahWey, in the latin dialect it came out as Johovah. in Arabic the same letters are Alluaha. hence the term Halleluallah, which is a sentance in Arabic. Hallel: to be pure and fit for sacrifice u: (an informal to) Allah: I am.)

so in effect, you are more correct than any statement I have ever heard.

Rimmy wrote:thge bolded comment is not limited to your mother. its actually founded in scripture. Christsians were told we would be pursecuted and eventually would be hunted down. thats actually there.

Oh don't get me wrong. I've read Revelations many times. One of the more interesting books in the NT. My problem is that my mother and her friends take this particular idea to an extreme pointing out things as attacks on Christianity that aren't. Frankly, I don't see the world as 'out to get Christianity' right now. Right now the world really doesn't seem to care one way or the other. There are certainly people out to get Christianity and who unfairly devalue it as a faith, but the idea that the current world goes out of its way to persecute Christians is absurd to me.

EDIT: To describe, there were some Menonites on my campus last year and naturally I saw them and was like "Oh boy. This won't end well." Nothing happened. Most people just ignored them (granted they were pretty wacky). They were forgotten the next day. No one was out to get them. No cared. They were left to do their thing and everyone left them be. On a college campus of all places!

So far this thread is at least 2 pages longer than I thought it would make it before getting locked.

I really just can't bring myself to hate on anyone but a-holes. jerk people irritate me.

beyond that, who am I to tell you what is right in your life? thats between you and whatever god you believe in.

your mother must be Penacostal BTW. they are pretty much the biggest victim sects of christianity I have heard of.

I am non denominational christian. I choose that to listen to ideals and concepts without the dilusion of self rightousness. I will listen to anything and discuss anything. but in the end, my belief's are my own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:So far this thread is at least 2 pages longer than I thought it would make it before getting locked.

can't really say anyone is really throwing insults here. its all about friendly discussion. as long as it stays friendly, I see no harm in it.

we all don't have to agree sure, but we can all be civil.

Rimmy wrote:your mother must be Penacostal BTW. they are pretty much the biggest victim sects of christianity I have heard of

Nah. She's an Angelican, formally of the Episcopal Church. So there's all THAT drama

Being an Army brat, I'm non-denominational. My ideas are most in line with a very liberal Baptist (I think I don't read about the specific denominations too much).

Rimmy wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:So far this thread is at least 2 pages longer than I thought it would make it before getting locked.

can't really say anyone is really throwing insults here. its all about friendly discussion. as long as it stays friendly, I see no harm in it.

we all don't have to agree sure, but we can all be civil.

I don't believe I stated people couldn't be civil, but having been here for more than a week and using past performance as an indicator I'm still suprised it has gone this far while remaining this civil. OTOH most people are civil, it usually just devolves into two or three that aren't and they may not have logged in yet.

Rimmy wrote:so AS an active Christian. lemme throw my $.02 in here.

you are all correct. all of you. faith is a personal gig. faith in nothing, and faith in something, is still faith.

the fallacy that exists in the western logic of christianity is wrong. VERY wrong.

our purpose, is not to convert people. ours is to follow Christ's example, and if someone searches for that, and desires that, we are encouraged to help guide them as best we can.

that being said, yes, I serve in an outreach ministry. my readings on the teachings and ministry of Christ are, go to the people, and be you.

so everyone who says you hate Christians, I completely concur with that. I have a sever distaste for the vast majority of hate spewing ignorant so called christians. I do not consider myself to be one of them.

so, in the words of my great master: Love your neighbor as you love yourself...

beyond that, who am I to tell you what is right in your life? thats between you and whatever god you believe in...

I am non denominational christian. I choose that to listen to ideals and concepts without the delusion of self righteousness. I will listen to anything and discuss anything. but in the end, my belief's are my own...

I've been watching this thread with interest and have been thinking very hard as to what my response should be...

And then you come along and write it for me...I applaud you for your civility good sir...

Ahtman: true LOL

LordofHats: yes well, it makes sense then.

its a real shame I can't meet most of you all in person. I would love to roll some dice and battle with you guys.

if anyone is out in my area, look me up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

WARORK93 wrote:
I've been watching this thread with interest and have been thinking very hard as to what my response should be...

And then you come along and write it for me...I applaud you for your civility good sir...

such IS the true teachings of Christ is it not? show people love and compassion and grace, regardless of any attribute they might have that differs from yours. everything else is inconsequencial.

mattyrm wrote: We already left mate, she moved here.

Ironically we hit and killed a whale when we were driving our electric car across the Ocean.

I meant non flyover country. California and NY in a separate country would not be a problem.

mattyrm wrote:

biccat wrote:[qI simply don't care enough about other people to want to save them from their own mistakes.

Well, we can heartily agree on something there old chap!

Glad to hear it! Everyone is responsible for their own choices in life, and if my choice is wrong (religion) I'll deal with it.

nectarprime wrote:

biccat wrote:I simply don't care enough about other people

Very Christian of you....

You're assuming I'm Christian and that I believe that Christianity requires me to care about others' acceptance or rejection of God.

Rimmy wrote:

WARORK93 wrote:I've been watching this thread with interest and have been thinking very hard as to what my response should be...

And then you come along and write it for me...I applaud you for your civility good sir...

such IS the true teachings of Christ is it not? show people love and compassion and grace, regardless of any attribute they might have that differs from yours. everything else is inconsequential.

Indeed, though I often get depressed to see what has become of his original teachings amongst his "flock." The sad truth is that there are large groups of Christians (that have been around ever since its inception) that give the faith a bad name...just as in a way there are extremist Muslims who give Islam a bad name...

Make no mistake and this is a fact...some Christians can be just as bad if not worse than that, fanatics are detestable, those who use the teachings of the faith to suit their own desires are cruel, it is the same for almost every religion and I can see why a lot of people say we're better off without it sometimes...

completely concur bro. we are of the same mind on this.

I often find more often than not, that Christianity has become a self defeating religion (not faith, religion).

in the end, its people that are failing God, not the other way around.

at any rate. I would be interested in reading these books of this guy.

of course I find it funny that people publish books under the guise of wisdom only to spout opinion and sell it for a profit.

and yes everyone, I am aware the Bible is a printed book for sale. most profitable book in the world. no royalties to pay, and the single most often printed and book in history.

its also available for free in many area's.

so, I am not going to dismiss the naysayers version of what I am saying, just pointing things out.

To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

So how do you kill that which has no life?



*Sorry, couldnt resist

As foretold by Salzman... In accounting.

thedude wrote:

To be considered dead, you have to be alive first.

So how do you kill that which has no life?



*Sorry, couldnt resist

/need
/roll

thedude wrote:/need
/roll

Druid ninja.

4 ench.

Indeed, though I often get depressed to see what has become of his original teachings amongst his "flock." The sad truth is that there are large groups of Christians (that have been around ever since its inception) that give the faith a bad name...just as in a way there are extremist Muslims who give Islam a bad name...

I mean this in honest sincerity, not to stir up trouble, but how do you know what 'his original teachings' were?

One of the flaws I see the deitification of Jesus and the resulting religion is that from what I understand the earliest known scriptures are from almost a hundred years after his death which are copies of copies (as there was no printing press), and of course we have all played the pass the story to your neighbor game. Further, the scriptures compiled into what is generally regarded as the New Testement are hand selected by the church (a powerful institution by that time) with other scriptures omitted. Other institutions/sect also compiled and omitted 'books', each resulting in their own versions of the Christs' teachings.

thedude wrote:I mean this in honest sincerity, not to stir up trouble, but how do you know what 'his original teachings' were?

How do you know that any history happened, ever?

People write things down, and that's how we base a lot of our historical perspectives.

The fact that books were rejected from being canon isn't really all that farfetched. There's a reason that internet fanfic doesn't make it into the Space Wolves omnibus.

Monster Rain wrote:The fact that books were rejected from being canon isn't really all that farfetched. There's a reason that internet fanfic doesn't make it into the Space Wolves omnibus.

Only the Book of Enoch was good enough to get a major video game based on it, which must mean it is the best book.

I can appreciate that, and that is exactly to my point... how do you decide which perspective of ancient history will be what defines you given that?

If there was no GW and the omnibus was created by a group of dedicated fans trying to reach an agreement of what to include, it may be reasonable to assume some good (truthful) stuff could be left out that would otherwise have affected how the overall history was perceived

thedude wrote:

Indeed, though I often get depressed to see what has become of his original teachings amongst his "flock." The sad truth is that there are large groups of Christians (that have been around ever since its inception) that give the faith a bad name...just as in a way there are extremist Muslims who give Islam a bad name...

I mean this in honest sincerity, not to stir up trouble, but how do you know what 'his original teachings' were?

1: One of the flaws I see the deitification of Jesus and the resulting religion is that from what I understand the earliest known scriptures are from almost a hundred years after his death which are copies of copies (as there was no printing press), and of course we have all played the pass the story to your neighbor game. 2: Further, the scriptures compiled into what is generally regarded as the New Testement are hand selected by the church (a powerful institution by that time) with other scriptures omitted. 3: Other institutions/sect also compiled and omitted 'books', each resulting in their own versions of the Christs' teachings.

I accept your challenge

I must answer this in segments:

1: This is not entirely true. There are scripts written by his deciples cataloging his journies in real time. though few because most of the disciples could not write. as such, most are transcribed. also, most of the originals are lost. so make an analogy here, Aesop's fables originals are lost, but the stories are accepted as written. I an not speaking in terms of what is holy or non holy, only addressing the issue of missing originals.

2: it was actually NOT the church that created the modern bible. you are referring to the Dead Sea scrolls. very vaild some of which containing actual gospels of the disciples, of most complete the gospel of Thomas and the gospel of Mary. The council that did in fact create the modern bible was The council of Nicea, founded by the Roman Emperor Constantine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea it was a gathering of the 12 tribes (or houses) of the new church founded in christs name in an effort to stop the bickering between the followers of the original 12 disciples. a concept the Catholic Church has been propagating over the centuries.

3: "other institutions" such as? there has not yet been a single organization that professes to be christian that has omitted any part of the modern bible. HOWEVER, there are various sects that have added books in addendum. such as the Mormons. the validity of the Book of Mormon is what is under dispute within the christian community, not their use of the bible.

lastly, let me just say that everyone who reads the bible WILL have a different interpretation of what it says. that's the problem. interpretation.

then you get into basing opinion based on your own interpretation etc etc etc.

you're not wrong in your line of thinking, I just wanted to clarify and maybe educate others on those points. none of those are really spiritual views, just points of fact learned over the centuries dare I say eons since Christ's birth (or earlier if you include the Tora)

biccat wrote:
You're assuming I'm Christian and that I believe that Christianity requires me to care about others' acceptance or rejection of God.

Well you pretty much say it without directly saying it.

Being a GOOD and DECENT PERSON means that you should care about your fellow man, no matter what mistakes they have made. If one is religious, then wanting others to be saved as well would follow under this. This doesn't mean you have to preach to everyone who does not share the same view, however. It just means that you should care, even if that person doesn't care about themselves!

If you are a Christian, you aren't a very good one.

thedude wrote:I can appreciate that, and that is exactly to my point... how do you decide which perspective of ancient history will be what defines you given that?

If there was no GW and the omnibus was created by a group of dedicated fans trying to reach an agreement of what to include, it may be reasonable to assume some good (truthful) stuff could be left out that would otherwise have affected how the overall history was perceived

If the basic theme was left untouched I don't see what the problem is.

Even if 100% of the manuscripts were completely accurate, they still couldn't all be used or the Bible would be an insanely enormous book.

nectarprime wrote:If you are a Christian, you aren't a very good one.

Statements like these are the kind that we could really do without.

nectarprime wrote:

biccat wrote:
You're assuming I'm Christian and that I believe that Christianity requires me to care about others' acceptance or rejection of God.

Well you pretty much say it without directly saying it.

Being a GOOD and DECENT PERSON means that you should care about your fellow man, no matter what mistakes they have made.

If you are a Christian, you aren't a very good one.

actually he's a perfect one. Christians are flawed people. at its most fundamental of belief's, we accept that we are flawed and are therefore asking for grace from one who is perfect. Understanding that we are flawed, admitting to those flaws especially publicly, is very christian. I am not accusing or assuming he is or is not, merely pointing out a point of contention.

there has never been, in history, a perfect christian. Christ himself, was Hebrew, and therefore Jewish. Though being the messiah, one could argue narcicism by believing he was trhe messiah and could argue slightly self belief, however he references all reign to God the Father, and not himself.