Christians have nothing to do with Christianity

[icharianchem]

Its true.
unfortunately
but it is.

so few of these "followers of Jesus" even take the time to find out what he said.
The amount of appaliing contradictions between these people and the God they claim to follow is embaressing.

So my question is; would the teachings of Jesus (and apostles?) ,really be so bad if it werent for the horde of shit mongers and hypocrits following it around?

[odin_dax]

Its true.
unfortunately
but it is.

so few of these "followers of Jesus" even take the time to find out what he said.
The amount of appaliing contradictions between these people and the God they claim to follow is embaressing.

So my question is; would the teachings of Jesus (and apostles?) ,really be so bad if it werent for the horde of shit mongers and hypocrits following it around?

(According to, well... I'm ignorant of the Bible and logic - ha! - but I will give it a go here - lol)

Most of Jesus' teachings make a lot of common sense, don't they? I think your whole premise is flawed. "All fall short of the glory of God." We're all sinners. What else? One can easily put a Christian under the magnifying glass, find an action against Jesus' teachings, do the same with another Christian, find a different sin, do the same with more people, and as a whole, everybody is a hypocrite because they don't follow Jesus. See the problem?

There's a scripture verse about not forsaking the community. Sure, there are people who just call themselves Christian, for whatever reason, but because a good-hearted, trying person falls to sin, he's full of shit and a hypocrite as well? Judge an individual by the vine, my friend, as Christians are taught to do.

There will always be the "shit mongers" and "hypocrites" but that fact doesn't change the wisdom of Jesus' teachings.

[icharianchem]

i wasnt forsaking Christianity
i was merely pointing out that alot of "Christians" really dont act like christ

they are either not in the world or of it
or
they are in the world and of it

ive met, maybe 3 who werent

as for "forsaking the assemblage of your brothers" im just really wondering who my brothers are

[odin_dax]

i wasnt forsaking Christianity
i was merely pointing out that alot of "Christians" really dont act like christ

they are either not in the world or of it
or
they are in the world and of it

ive met, maybe 3 who werent

as for "forsaking the assemblage of your brothers" im just really wondering who my brothers are

By their fruits.

[icharianchem]

oh
little reminders
thanx




brother?

[Armalite]

So my question is; would the teachings of Jesus (and apostles?) ,really be so bad if it werent for the horde of shit mongers and hypocrits following it around?

You mean like these teachings?

What Jesus says about:

Cruelty and Injustice

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt.html

Family Values

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/fv/nt.html

Women

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/nt.html




Just a little taste. Much more on the website. Ever actually read the Bible?

[icharianchem]

more than you ever have
I have answers for every one of those very shallow observations
if you care to raise them independently and not as some one elses ill founded research Ill answer them individualy

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

You mean like these teachings?

What Jesus says about:

Cruelty and Injustice

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt.html

Family Values

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/fv/nt.html

Women

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/nt.html




Just a little taste. Much more on the website. Ever actually read the Bible?

LOL. More faith asskicking in high time!!!! woohoo!! :tongue1:


more than you ever have
I have answers for every one of those very shallow observations
if you care to raise them independently and not as some one elses ill founded research Ill answer them individualy

oooh! I sense arrogance!!!! And shitty ass grammar and punctuation!!!!

...I'm impressed!!!

LOL

[icharianchem]

all im saying is that i have had years of study (seminary ect.) to back up my statements concerning the bible and that was one of the most off hand dismissals of it i have ever seen

p.s. i cant type
big fucking deal

[odin_dax]

Those links aren't new or special, Armalite. A lot of it isn't literal, and rarely do single verses in the Bible give the full meaning.

For example, ""Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days." Why? Does God especially hate pregnant and nursing women?
These questions could be answered just be reading the chapter.

"Jesus shows disrespect for his mother and family by asking, "Who is my mother, or my brethren?" when he is told that his family wants to speak with him. 3:31-34
I'm sure the person who commented on these verses didn't read the ones before or after. After, it is written, "3:34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother."

Paul was personally against marriage because he devoted his life to God. The responsibilities of marriage were great, and he felt those earthly responsibilities would interfere with spiritual responsibilities. Most men couldn't resist finding a wife, having children. Basically, the verse Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians "to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife." means if you can't resist the need or want to have sex, marry so you're not tempted to engage in homosexual acts.

Your links wouldn't exist if they writers actually read the Bible or asked questions about parts they didn't understand. Hardly the faith ass kicking Tal was referring to (just shows bias, nothing else).

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

Your links wouldn't exist if they writers actually read the Bible or asked questions about parts they didn't understand. Hardly the faith ass kicking Tal was referring to (just shows bias, nothing else).

Tsk tsk tsk.

Dicto Simpliciter, odin. Not everyone will think like you. Better brush up on your already very rusty logic.

Call it bias if you like. But in debate I have yet to encounter a valid argument proving deity.
...Could there be a reason why?


hmmm...

[icharianchem]

Tsk tsk tsk.

Dicto Simpliciter, odin. Not everyone will think like you. Better brush up on your already very rusty logic.

Call it bias if you like. But in debate I have yet to encounter a valid argument proving deity.
...Could there be a reason why?


hmmm...

Actaully this thread was more about the validity of christianity as a worldveiw via the teachings of Jesus, main question being "would Christianity be so bad if its followers werent primarilly composed of gitbags". Odins post had nothing to do with proving deity, it merely stated that the objections posted by Armalite were ill researched. I would have said the same were i more patient

[Armalite]

The entire KJV is online there, with all quotes also listed in context, as well linked to a myriad of other pages about other aspects. Plus I have read the Bible. Why do you think I'm an atheist?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/mt/5.html#17

Does Jesus say we should obey the laws of the old testament? I certainly hope not, they are pretty foul.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/otlaw.html

Actually, can we even get a straight answer out of Jesus?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/7.html#21

Well I sure hope he doesn't support that. BUt it's looking grim.


Face it bro, interpretations, contextual inconsistencies, contradictions, the Bible is crap.

[odin_dax]

Tsk tsk tsk.

Dicto Simpliciter, odin. Not everyone will think like you. Better brush up on your already very rusty logic.

Call it bias if you like. But in debate I have yet to encounter a valid argument proving deity.
...Could there be a reason why?


hmmm...

To answer your question, because your reading comprehension isn't the greatest, or it's very selective. In either case, the results are just the same, results you've demonstrated time and time again. Like icharianchem said, my post had nothing to do with proving a deity, nor was it a post consisting of logic, but simply stating fact. Debate that all you want, I'm not. I've already proven my statements in this thread.

[Armalite]

Actually you haven't proven anything. All you have done is assert that tal, me, and the author of the SAB are all incapable of understanding the bible. In all honesty you don't what you are talking about. I have read the bible many times, and in the process of eviscerating religious concepts, I have had to study them to some degree. Tal probably has as well.

As for the SAB, before you criticize, take a look at the IMMENSE amount of information, all crossreferenced and compared to other documents. Any annotation is linked to numerous articles for and against both in site and third party. Even sites containing versions intended for seminary students. It really is a great tool for looking into the bible.

[odin_dax]

Actually you haven't proven anything. All you have done is assert that tal, me, and the author of the SAB are all incapable of understanding the bible. In all honesty you don't what you are talking about. I have read the bible many times, and in the process of eviscerating religious concepts, I have had to study them to some degree. Tal probably has as well.

As for the SAB, before you criticize, take a look at the IMMENSE amount of information, all crossreferenced and compared to other documents. Any annotation is linked to numerous articles for and against both in site and third party. Even sites containing versions intended for seminary students. It really is a great tool for looking into the bible.

So, you assert my verse explanations are wrong? Is that right? Or is this another one of your generalized post without substantial substance? Tell me, wise one, biblical scholar, sir, where did I go wrong? Please teach the masses with your wisdom. Forgive me for leading people astray, o wise one. Are Christians not taught to judge who is a brother by their fruits? Do the following verses I provided not change the meaning of the "Who is my mother" verse? Did Paul not say those things on marriage, and isn't the meaning not to engage in homosexual acts?

SAB references other versions of the Bible, and it also highlights text to fit the bias. Tell me, how is highlighting without explaining neutral? There's nothing on the site that makes me say to myself, "Hmm, this website has more authority on the Bible than all the others." In fact, quite the opposite. I don't see any in depth study of the Biblical chapters verse by verse, just commentary personal, unintelligent commentary. Some of these facts apparently elude you, or maybe you just like the site because you can use it as a copy and paste mill for your anti-religious diatribe.

It's obvious to me you're no authority on the Bible. Maybe you've read it once or many times, but one could read the Theory of Relativity Explained several times and not get it. The Bible is much more complex. Stick to The Hungry, Hungry Caterpillar, Armalite.

And, yes, I did prove MY statements in this thread correct. If you know anything about logic, which you continue to prove otherwise, you'd know that I did.

[Armalite]

No claim to nuetrality has ever been made, nor is one needed. The text is shown IN CONTEXT along with explanations and interpretations for and against Christianity. This is done very nearly verse by verse through the entire Bible. Obviously some verses will be left out because they are either irrelevent to the purpose of the SAB, or unimportant filler. These verses are still left in context alongside the verses that are analyzed.

I have never said that the SAB is infallible in its criticism of the bible, but it doesn't have to be. It is intended to provide a study guide on the bible from a different perspective.

What have you proven odin? Honestly, what has been your point from the beginning?

Edit: Seriously, what is your point, I don't know. Not trying to be an asshole.

[odin_dax]

No claim to nuetrality has ever been made, nor is one needed. The text is shown IN CONTEXT along with explanations and interpretations for and against Christianity. This is done very nearly verse by verse through the entire Bible. Obviously some verses will be left out because they are either irrelevent to the purpose of the SAB, or unimportant filler. These verses are still left in context alongside the verses that are analyzed.

I have never said that the SAB is infallible in its criticism of the bible, but it doesn't have to be. It is intended to provide a study guide on the bible from a different perspective.

What have you proven odin? Honestly, what has been your point from the beginning?

Edit: Seriously, what is your point, I don't know. Not trying to be an asshole.

I understand you're not trying to be an asshole. The point is, I picked a few verses and made specific comments on them that attempt to explain them in their original context, contrary to the commentary on SAB. I don't have the time to go through them all to prove the site 100% incorrect, and I'm not saying it is or isn't, but the verses I took from there are all misused and taken out of context. You keep claiming I don't know anything about what I'm talking about, including the Bible, but I made specific claims, and if you're going to respond with the usual, the very least you can try do is respond to my specific points. Again, I asked which ones were incorrect, and you haven't commented. That's what I mean by specifics. You make general statements, and most, if not all, haven't been supported by directed responses to prove something I've said is wrong.

Here's the way I'm seeing things:

Me: Topic X is this way because of A (which is supported by D), B (supported by E) and C (which is supported F).

Your response: X is wrong because A, B and C are wrong.
----
If D is true, A is true. If E is true, B is true. If A and B are true, X isn't necessarily true, only that A and B can be used to support the position.

[Armalite]

Very well, the three specific verses pointed out are indeed interpreted poorly. I wouldn't go so far as to say they are taken out of context so much as emphasized excessively.

However, I concede no ground on the general issue of the morality of the bible. There are quite a large number of stories in the bible that showcase reprehensible morality on the part of the righteous and holy.

2 Corinthians 6:14-17 tells us to shun non Christians.

1 Peter, Titus, 1 Timothy, Collossians, Ephesians, and Luke all seem to support a pro-slavery stance.

There are a lot of things in the Old Testament, but I was trying to stay away from it and focus on Jesus and his apostles. But he did say he had no intention of invalidating the old laws.

[odin_dax]

Very well, the three specific verses pointed out are indeed interpreted poorly. I wouldn't go so far as to say they are taken out of context so much as emphasized excessively.

However, I concede no ground on the general issue of the morality of the bible. There are quite a large number of stories in the bible that showcase reprehensible morality on the part of the righteous and holy.

2 Corinthians 6:14-17 tells us to shun non Christians.

1 Peter, Titus, 1 Timothy, Collossians, Ephesians, and Luke all seem to support a pro-slavery stance.

There are a lot of things in the Old Testament, but I was trying to stay away from it and focus on Jesus and his apostles. But he did say he had no intention of invalidating the old laws.

I admit, I haven't read all those books, but I have read Philemon. It's very short, and I think you'd find that book interesting, in regards to slavery.

It's true, the Bible doesn't condemn the practice of slavery, but it does instruct how slaves should be treated. In context, the slaves of today are much different than the slaves of that time. Slaves back then were people in debt. Slavery wasn't based on the forced labor of one race, etc. I wouldn't go as far as saying slavery in New Testament times was like indentured servitude during the colonial era. In NT times, slaves were sometimes doctors and lawyers.

[icharianchem]

also it pays to have a look at the "freedom in Christ" that paul talks about where he says that all things are permissable but not all things are beneficial.... course then it get really hazy

[Armalite]

I really find it hard to believe that NT slavery was full of kittens and roses.

What of all the references in the bible to slaves taken by conquest? Or simply bought and sold?

Sorry, I find it almost impossible to swallow.

[icharianchem]

you will also find that Jewish law forbids the keeping of slaves for more than seven years. after that the slave can become indentured servants if they want or go there merry way. im not saying everyone did what they were supposed to but it certainly wasnt supported by the bible. Leviticus and numbers are chock full of rules about slavery. But thats the old tesatament.....

[odin_dax]

I really find it hard to believe that NT slavery was full of kittens and roses.

What of all the references in the bible to slaves taken by conquest? Or simply bought and sold?

Sorry, I find it almost impossible to swallow.

I agree. Nobody said it was easy or "kittens and roses." Of course, I'm only talking about the Jewish people. All I know is that it was a different kind of slavery. The word has been poisoned over history (and rightfully so). All I can say is research it.

icharianchem, the Old Testament is relevant because the NT wasn't written yet! ;-) If I remember correctly, the Romans soon took over that land after Jesus died (but I'd have to go with hearsay on that because I've never studied that time period).

[Armalite]

Judea was already under Roman domination for some time before the birth of Jesus.

In fact, it's been proposed to some degree that much of Christian tradition and interpretation of Jewish law -as well as the hostility towards the religious establishment at the time(Pharisees)- was influenced by anti-Roman patriotism. The Pharisees were seen as a sort of Vichy-type enabler for Roman rule, which had been violently resisted before(Maccabees?). Many of Jesus' teachings in this context can be interpreted to be indicative sort of passive-aggressive political movement. Kind of like a Jewish Gandhi.

[icharianchem]

in fact it was expected so much that Jesus' was to be a strong defender of Isreal by violent means if neccessary that his ride into Jersualem was lined with zealots hoping to join in the fight. But he came in on an asses foal. Kinda threw them off

[odin_dax]

Judea was already under Roman domination for some time before the birth of Jesus.

In fact, it's been proposed to some degree that much of Christian tradition and interpretation of Jewish law -as well as the hostility towards the religious establishment at the time(Pharisees)- was influenced by anti-Roman patriotism. The Pharisees were seen as a sort of Vichy-type enabler for Roman rule, which had been violently resisted before(Maccabees?). Many of Jesus' teachings in this context can be interpreted to be indicative sort of passive-aggressive political movement. Kind of like a Jewish Gandhi.

But I think the governing and autonomy of Judea was different... That's what I meant.

[Armalite]

What do you mean?

[odin_dax]

What do you mean?

That during the time of Christ and before, the Romans let Judea run itself, so long as Rome was paid taxes. Afterwards, the fear of Christianity spreading, the Romans started the slaughter, changed governors and took over the lands as resident occupiers.

That's what I meant. I may be incorrect.

[Armalite]

I'm no historian, but I'm pretty sure the Romans slaughtered from day one. As for the autonomy, what was Pontius Pilate doing there then?

[odin_dax]

I'm no historian, but I'm pretty sure the Romans slaughtered from day one. As for the autonomy, what was Pontius Pilate doing there then?

Overseer?

[icharianchem]

judea was technically autonomous but most of the leaders were there under roman support and it was heavily occupied. Mostly a puppet government. Romans just never tolerated even the slightest bit of dissent if they got word of it.

[Armalite]

Not to sure if I really understand the dates and meaning, but at a glance it would seem that Judea was sort of under military control by the governor of Syria, until a puppet kingdom under the Herodians was established, with intermittant periods of restored military control.

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

[REL0AD]

What Jesus says about:

Cruelty and Injustice

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt.html

Family Values

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/fv/nt.html

Women

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/nt.html



He's a real dick huh.

[headcase]

I don't think so. Everything there is pretty central to Christian beliefs. Anything in particular offended you?

[REL0AD]

No nothing offended me, but i'm sure some people would get offended by parts of it.

Religion doesn't bother me one bit, it's just a farce if you ask me.

[odin_dax]

No nothing offended me, but i'm sure some people would get offended by parts of it.

Religion doesn't bother me one bit, it's just a farce if you ask me.

To get philosophical, if religion is a farce, so is everything in life - monogamy, consumerism, the public school system. Better yet, those things are independent from religion being a farce or not. :vote4me:

[REL0AD]

No, what I mean is... Religion to me is 'fake'.

It's like if I buried a Buffy the Vamp Slayer monster guide book in my garden and several years later something apocalyptic happend, then billions years later humans pop up again... dig up my book, read it... then belive the shit... See what I mean.

That's my view on religion, it's just someones imagination being belived.

[Armalite]

To get philosophical, if religion is a farce, so is everything in life - monogamy, consumerism, the public school system. Better yet, those things are independent from religion being a farce or not. :vote4me:

Explain.

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

To get philosophical, if religion is a farce, so is everything in life - monogamy, consumerism, the public school system. Better yet, those things are independent from religion being a farce or not. :vote4me:

I believe that perhaps odin is suffering from anomy. If religion is meaningless, then so is everything, resulting in nihilism.

Then odin goes on to state that monogamy, consumerism, and the public school system are all farces.

These each deserve their own thread and do not need to be taken up here.

[odin_dax]

I believe that perhaps odin is suffering from anomy. If religion is meaningless, then so is everything, resulting in nihilism.

Then odin goes on to state that monogamy, consumerism, and the public school system are all farces.

These each deserve their own thread and do not need to be taken up here.

In a fun, not-so-serious way I was saying that anything can be seen as a farce. The statement goes deeper, but it's not important. :wiggle: Just having fun...

[Armalite]

Your words make no sense.

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

Let him be.

[odin_dax]

Let him be.

Yes, listen to Tal. It'd be like trying to explain a psychedelic experience to those whom has never had one. Like Tal said, those subjects deserve their owns threads.

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

Yes, listen to Tal. It'd be like trying to explain a psychedelic experience to those whom has never had one. Like Tal said, those subjects deserve their owns threads.
I just tell Armalite to leave you alone, and all of the sudden you get pissed at me.
...Such bad manners you have, odin.

You never fail to suprise me, odin. Especially coming from a hardcore christian like you.

Yes, it takes only three ambiguous words to offend you.

Three ambiguous words.

What a shame.

[icharianchem]

dude so ready to be offended

he was thanking you

[odin_dax]

dude so ready to be offended

he was thanking you

Seriously... That took me by surprise.

[REL0AD]

Get half cut, take a dose of cowies and drink some more... Fuck religion.

[Heavy_'TalMeMan]

Seriously... That took me by surprise.

oops.. Misread your post.

LOL.

Sorry bout that dude.

I blame Elvis.:wiggle:

Get half cut, take a dose of cowies and drink some more... Fuck religion.
Spoken like a true hedonist. I can relate.

[icharianchem]

.... i like to combine the two...

[Axxess of Evil]

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Luke 22:36 He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Revalation 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Acts 3:22-23 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

[odin_dax]

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

Luke 22:36 He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Revalation 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Acts 3:22-23 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

That's great, but can we get a little context?

[REL0AD]

In a fun, not-so-serious way I was saying that anything can be seen as a farce. The statement goes deeper, but it's not important. Just having fun...
I know what you mean.
That's great, but can we get a little context?
What does that mean? His own opinion/comment & not just a copy & paste job, or something else?
And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Sucks for the hard of hearing huh...
He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
Bah, sell ya fucking wife & get an M4.

[odin_dax]

What does that mean? His own opinion/comment & not just a copy & paste job, or something else?



Not so much as his own, but some sort of statement. A bunch of quotes doesn't mean anything.

[Mr.A]

Hate to bump an old thread. Especially one based on Christianity but, I think almost all religions have both their fair share of bs and "sense."

Jesus wasn't the only person to walk around talking since in the past. I believe the goal of all religions to create the perfect society and help guide a person to better their relationship with God.

Fuck, teachings of Confucius would do both of those. As well as almost all religions if you pick and choose what you want to learn. Like all do, no matter what the teachings.:yikes:

[odin_dax]

Hate to bump an old thread. Especially one based on Christianity but, I think almost all religions have both their fair share of bs and "sense."

Jesus wasn't the only person to walk around talking since in the past. I believe the goal of all religions to create the perfect society and help guide a person to better their relationship with God.

Fuck, teachings of Confucius would do both of those. As well as almost all religions if you pick and choose what you want to learn. Like all do, no matter what the teachings.:yikes:

To me, religion is spirituality corrupted by the folly and greed of man. It's true, there are many examples of religious dominance and control. It is true that religious councils decide some issues for themselves. It is true there are many hypocrites out there. It is true too, however, that there are many good people. It is also true that there are places in a man's faith that religion can't touch. It is also true that regardless of all these things, God is good and not to blame for man's sinful ambitions. And, lastly, it is also true that the core of any religion, the uncorruptable core, is a core of wisdom, of recording man's past mistakes so that we learn from them and avoid them. It's amazing how often history repeats itself...

:welcome:

[Day_N_Night]

It is also true that regardless of all these things, God is good and not to blame for man's sinful ambitions.
:welcome:

Surely you can't be speaking of the god of the Old Testament? He must have set such a good example for man to follow.....

[odin_dax]

Surely you can't be speaking of the god of the Old Testament? He must have set such a good example for man to follow.....

Such pick-and-choose replies obviously don't need direct responses, especially when so deeply rooted in sarcasm and ignorance of religious fact.

[Mr.A]

To me, religion is spirituality corrupted by the folly and greed of man. It's true, there are many examples of religious dominance and control. It is true that religious councils decide some issues for themselves. It is true there are many hypocrites out there. It is true too, however, that there are many good people. It is also true that there are places in a man's faith that religion can't touch. It is also true that regardless of all these things, God is good and not to blame for man's sinful ambitions. And, lastly, it is also true that the core of any religion, the uncorruptable core, is a core of wisdom, of recording man's past mistakes so that we learn from them and avoid them. It's amazing how often history repeats itself...

:welcome:

Now this sounds like your starting to understand the concept of truth. Nice post.

[odin_dax]

Now this sounds like your starting to understand the concept of truth. Nice post.

Starting?

[Mr.A]

Yep:stupid:

What you said sounded nice.

Why should the religion matter anyways, if one could have the correct ideals of being a good person which most religions agree, thats the way to win Gods approval.

I'm extremely tired atm.

Why the fuck would God care if you called yourself a Christian or a Buddhist. One could worship their God all day every day without having to go to some group therapy session.

[odin_dax]

Yep:stupid:

What you said sounded nice.

Why should the religion matter anyways, if one could have the correct ideals of being a good person which most religions agree, thats the way to win Gods approval.

I'm extremely tired atm.

Why the fuck would God care if you called yourself a Christian or a Buddhist. One could worship their God all day every day without having to go to some group therapy session.

I can only speak on behalf of Christianity, but the church was designed for community, for help in need, etc. Christians are taught not to forsake the church, but doesn't mean you have to go. In fact, according to Christianity, if three Christians are together in one place, that is considered church. It's a nice thought.:grouphug:

[Mr.A]

I can only speak on behalf of Christianity, but the church was designed for community, for help in need, etc. Christians are taught not to forsake the church, but doesn't mean you have to go. In fact, according to Christianity, if three Christians are together in one place, that is considered church. It's a nice thought.:grouphug:

I wish more Christians would understand this. Maybe its unfair to refer to all of them as Christians...I'll refrase, I wish more church goers would understand this.