Christianity QA

Question:

I own about 30 dictionaries – I’LL BE HAPPY TO LOAN THEM OUT FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!  From my personal favorite:  Christendom – 1) Christians collectively, or 2) those parts of the world where most of the inhabitants profess the Christian faith.

Response:

Translation: Athiesm is a feel good crutch for those individuals that are scared to believe in Christ as then they would be held accountable to God for their actions and would have to begin living wholesome and moral lives. HELLO–THIS is a pagan newsgroup.  Why are the last, like, hundred messages I’ve read about Jesus?  As a Wiccan, I hold no ill will towards the man, but I’m tired of reading about him. He may have been a great spiritual teacher, and ONE of a god’s sons, but not the only one.

Can we stay on point a little more often, please? Go to alt.christianity if you wanna rap about JC, okay? Moonchylde

If you don’t wanna rap about JC, then don’t.  Note: Crossposts trimmed to just those groups I thought it likely        that Moonchylde was reading. — Daryl

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Translation: Athiesm is a feel good crutch for those individuals that are scared to believe in Christ as then they would be held accountable to God for their actions and would have to begin living wholesome and moral lives. HELLO–THIS is a pagan newsgroup.  Why are the last, like, hundred messages I’ve read about Jesus?  As a Wiccan, I hold no ill will towards the man, but I’m tired of reading about him. He may have been a great spiritual teacher, and ONE of a god’s sons, but not the only one. Can we stay on point a little more often, please? Go to alt.christianity if you wanna rap about JC, okay? Moonchylde If you don’t wanna rap about JC, then don’t.  Note: Crossposts trimmed to just those groups I thought it likely        that Moonchylde was reading. — DarylIts not that they are afraid to believe in jesus is just that they are

confused but i do not have anything against any religion but i hate people who ridicule me for being a wiccan

  PENTACLE.GIF

7K Download

Response:

Meanwhile, the imaginary creature called god you bow before must be, by it’s non-activity, some combination of shy, feeble, inept, or non-existant.

From the Tao Te ching:  the greatest of things goes unnoticed.  Lesser things gain respect, lesser things gain despite, and lesser things get laughed at.  Where does God fit into that?

Response:

Wow!  That’s really deep!  Thank you for enlightening me!

Response:

What you need is not a goog lawyer, but for someone to explain to you in detail, face to face, why Christianity is true.  I and many others have given you plenty of info and testimonies about why we believe in God and why we are convinced that Jesus is alive and how the prophecies of the Bible are coming to fulfillment today right before our very eyes. Aparently God has had mercy on your daughters and they have come to believe in Jesus.  They are not brain washed or possessed as you believe, but rather thay have been enlightened by God and have come to believe and receive the Truth.  Jesus has fulfilled some of the prophecies of the Old Testament like parts of Isaiah chapter 53, but soon He will return to bring in Everlasting Rightousness and usher in the Kingdom of God as promised by the Prophet Daniel.  

If your god isn’t going to grace us personally with his coersion that we should all see the world as you do, what makes you think you or anyone else should? Is your god feeble? You seem to think he won’t come and make us all christians (too busy or something), so it is your job to do it, that is what is implied in your post.   I think you are looking in a mirror and calling what you see "god." Your certainty that you are right and in league with "the big guy" appears to make you feel superior to anyone you encounter. Meanwhile, the imaginary creature called god you bow before must be, by it’s non-activity, some combination of shy, feeble, inept, or non-existant. Believe what you like, but don’t push it down anybody else’s throat. Unless your image of hell is someplace you want to inhabit.

Response:

I didn’t want to add anything to the arguments going on here as they are some of the most inane, self indulgent arguments I have ever seen on the internet (or in terraspace, for that matter).  But I did want to point something out here – I’ll start….. how about Plato and Aristotle, asshole.

Can I skip ahead a few centuries? How about Jefferson, Madison, Mason, et al? Maybe Locke? Lincoln? Although Plato and Aristotle eventuially (sorru, I sliced my finger on a slicer at work last night, so if there are extra letters strewn aroundm, its just my fingers not working) influenced many conservative and neo conservative groups, I would not call them conservative RELATIVE to their times.  Additionally, if you take their works as a whole, and not just the ideas and ideals which suit you, neither of theirr works are on the conservative angle.  As for Jefferson, Madison, Locke – they were so liberal for their time I am amazed yyou mentioned them here.  Just because they were trying to CONSERVE rights doesn’t make them CONSERVATIVES, you seem to be confusing two different uses of the word conserve (case in point – you will probably find most CONSERVationists are actually liberals).   Jefferson and Locke in particular were very much on the liberal side – again relative to their times, but even for our times, politically speaking they were quite liberal.   So, that being said, you may go back to  your silly word games and continue playing My-God-Has-A-Bigger-Dick-Than-Your-God, or whatever ridiculous pseudointellectual religious babble was going on in this thread. brightest blessings to all on all sides Tim

Response:

writes: So, that being said, you may go back to  your silly word games and continue playing My-God-Has-A-Bigger-Dick-Than-Your-God, or whatever ridiculous pseudointellectual religious babble was going on in this thread. brightest blessings to all on all sides Tim

Yet another chuckle.. I hope your sliced finger heals quickly! May you never hunger!  May you never thirst! Elien

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Snyder) writes: Marie Glore) writes:    You speek like all your kind. According to your own law, killing is always immoral…"Thou shall not kill." You just misquoted the Bible. The verse actually says, "Thou shalt not murder." There’s a difference. Why do non-Christians like you always misquote this verse? Is there no truth in you? Haven’t you spent any time doing any real investigation? Perhaps you are reading a different version of the bible other than the Vulgate, New American, New Jerusalem, or King James. Perhaps they were led astray by the ever-popular movie ‘Ten Commandments’. Perhaps you would enlighten us as to the Source of Absolute Truth? NASB and NIV: "You shall not murder." Also see Hebrew scholar Walter Kaiser’s commentary on Exodus in Volume 2 of "The Expositor’s Bible Commentary" published in 1990 by Zondervan (pages 424-425). He translates the word as "murder." Kaiser says the word used there "stresses the act or allegation of premeditation and deliberateness – and that is at the heart of this verb."

Who cares about Hebrew scholars? I’m Jewish, and I know Hebrew, and the language is not so different in the Tora/Old Testament that its indistinguishable from modern Hebrew: in both modern Hebrew and the Ancient Hebrew the Bible was written in, "Lirtzach" means "to murder" and "L’harog" means "to kill". The words in the Ten Commandments are "Lo Tirtzach" meaning do not murder. If it said "do not kill", it would be "Lo Taharog". -Alan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Another Hebrew scholar, Gleason Archer on page 121 of "Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties" published in 1982 by Zondervan, translates the passage the same way. He also refers to Exodus 21:12 and Gen. 9:6. Do you believe, as some do, that, "There is no absolute truth"? If so, is that an absolute truth and do you believe it absolutely? BTW, atheists Gordon Stein, Edward Tabash and Michael Martin (Boston University) have been completely devastated by the August issue of "Penpoint" from the South California Center for Christian Studies. Martin was the one who chickened out in a scheduled debate with the late Greg Bahnsen of SCCCS (Box 328, Placentia, CA 92871 (714) 572-8358 Compuserve 70754,1752). The article by Michael Butler destroys Martin’s transcendental argument for the nonexistence of God and validates Bahnsen’s transcendental argument for the existence of God. Tom S. http://www.answers.org

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    And since your surely right-wing, I babysit 3 homeschooled children and all are 3 years behind their peers. Both socially and academically. Then again, public schools aren’t all of what they are cracked up to be anyway… I don’t normally post to these types of messages, but you said two things that bother me.  The first one is above.  Now, I’m not an extremists Christian or a "right winger" in that I belive there is a middle ground.  Where schools are concerned, just because you don’t go to public school doesn’t mean you aren’t going to school or you are taught out of the home.  Many private schools are out there and the Christian and Catholic schools have some of the best students in the nation.  In fact, many of them go on to produce some of our countries greatest leaders and the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Cub Scouts, and Brownies all have references to God and Country (or at least they used to, I don’t know now) and they have helped to mold some of our country’s great leaders as well, both in industry and in government.

Yes, and quite a number of screwed up adults have been produced due to the fact that many of them were molested by these wonderful people working in Christian schools (see residential schools in Canada) and for the Boy Scouts. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Public schools aren’t the only schools and they are certainly NOT the best.  I’ll put my child in a Catholic school (and I’m not even Catholic) any day over a public school.    I’m guessing you don’t know the difference between clinically alive and biologically alive…    You pro-lifers want to bring children into this world that will be neither loved or cared for correctly by both parents. Thus destroying the same values you say you believe in. You need proof of this?? Look at all the orphans in this world who need homes. I don’t see any of you pro-lifers adopting or taking care of any of these children. You just want to bring more unwanted kids into the world to uphold your twisted beliefs. This is the second point.  You claim to be neither pro-life nor pro-choice.  Well, I can sort of understand your view.  I’m not "Pro-Life" as it has come to mean today.  I’m not an extremist, but I don’t believe abortion in just because you don’t want the child is right after a certain point.  Rape is a different story.  An abortion within the first tri-mester (when the fetus doesn’t have a brain or nervous system) is also another story, and if the choice is the mother’s life or the baby’s, I say save the mother.

Well, it’s really nice that you feel this way, but that’s the problem with the pro-life movement; it’s what OTHERS say is best for an INDIVIDUAL that I have a problem with.   A baby needs his/her mother, and so does the mother’s family (parents, siblings, and maybe even other children and a spouse/boyfriend). Once an unborn baby can feel pain, and has a brain and begins to resemble I human being, it is a human being.

Who says?  That’s your opinion. The logic that it isn’t viable outside the womb is the same logic used to justify euthenasia, the problem is that, with euthenasia, all you normally do is unplug a machine, and nowadays, the living will gives the person on the machine the chance to make that choice and not torment their loved ones, but you have to take surgical or chemical action to kill an unborn child and this results in the child’s suffering, plus the child NEVER has a chance to make the choice for him/her self. If you treated a pet that way, you’d be charged with cruelty which, while it doesn’t carry the same sentence as murder, is still a crime.

B.S.! – it is morally acceptable in our society for people to euthanize their pets, but it’s touted as being "immoral" and often illegal to do it for humans. As far as not being willing to adopt them.  You are so wrong.  My wife and I have been trying to adopt a child for some time now, but adopting is a long and drawn out process which screens applicants very carefully and looks into every aspect of their lives, where as birthing a child just requires unprotected sexual intercourse between two teenagers. You mention so many orphans.  The yet-to-be-born child would never BE an orphan.  The demand for babies is so high that the waiting list for prospective parents is years.

I would agree with this statement ONLY if you are talking about white healthy infants.  There aren’t many people out there lining up to adopt fetal alcohol syndrome babies, drug-addicted babies, etc. Orphans are normally the result of an accident or unfit parents or parents in custody.  They are never newborn babies because the demand is so high for them.  In fact, my wife and I are looking forward to a 2 or 3 year old because she’s 40 and I’m 30-something and we don’t want to be watching the child graduate with my wife’s nephew’s child (he’s 16 now). Before you spout off about adoption or schooling outside the public school system, I suggest you check your facts.  It’ll prevent your looking like an ass in the future.

Before you spout off, I suggest you realize that your opinions are simply that – opinions.  They are not true for everyone. Aquila – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –            . .        . . __ _  __        __ _  __ | ) ) | ) (_(_| | ) ) | ) |             |

Response:

Speaking of stupidity and ignorance, would it be beyond you to edit your newsgroups line at the top of these messages and not spam this crap across the net. Either that or talk about punk if you’re going to be posting in alt.punk. Love and Kisses Jim gem of wisdom to a bunch of innapropriate newsgroups – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -You have been nailed to the tree of your own stupidity and ignorance. Regards, Dan K.

Response:

On the one hand, you claim to inform others of Jesus’ truth.  But on the other hand, you gave them some pretty unpalatable optiions to choose from.   If I am incorrect in my understanding of the Scriptures, I encourage you to check it out for yourself and see if that is not what Jesus is saying.

Um, duh!  I’m regurgitating what you said in my reply. That is what the Scriptures say that Jesus said.  Since Jesus has revealed Himself to me in many ways and continues to do so, I know that He is alive and real and He has revealed to me as He has to all Christians that the Bible is God’s word.

In your heart and soul, He is alive.  But to me, He is not alive (although He is indeed a great teacher, just not the Son of God). I’m damned if I do follow Christ, because I chose not to follow Him after a lot of soul-searching, extensive introspection, and truth-seeking.  But I’m damned if I don’t follow Christ. In both cases you are choosing NOT to follow Him.

Exactly!  Thank you for making my point!  Just for the record, let me make this clearer, because when I sent that message, I had questions as to whether I made myself clear.  I am damned if I do follow Christ, because I will be living a life that doesn’t suit me, even though the "reward", as you so often put it, is eternal life.  And I am damned if I don’t follow Christ, because failing to go to Christ will lead me to eternal damnation. Sheesh… I’m in a lose-lose proposition.   No, win-win, follow Jesus and He will give you eternal life and joy and peace and all of God’s blessings.  You can not lose if you follow Him.

See above.  And perhaps you lost sight on what I may LOSE if I follow Jesus.  From my POV, I could lose my individuality, my personal freedom/free will, and quite possibly become a sheep, as well as spiritually bankrupt.  You may disagree, and that’s fine, but we’re talking about ME here, not YOU.  While I recognize that there are Christian sects that are more liberal than the kind you describe, that’s besides the point. Even though I no longer follow Christ, I still have the God and the Goddess’ blessings, AND to top it all off, I am living an eternal life.  After all, I’ve been living on this planet for 963 years, dating all the way back to the Dark Ages (the 963 years does not include the time I’ve spent astrally).  963 years is not a long time, considering that I’ve met people who lived for thousands and thousands of years.  In fact, I’m still a baby! So, I WILL live forever, and yet, I’m not following Christ. You do not have to please anyone except yourself, if you love life you will choose Christ because He is the only one who can give you eternal life. But to get His life, you must be willing to live a Godly life and turn your back on the lusts and abuses of this world.

I already AM pleasing myself.  I don’t NEED Him to love life.  WE’re talking about ME here.  What’s good for you may not be good for me, and vice-versa.  I wish you would understand that, but I seem to be talking to a brick wall here, so from now on, I won’t expect any surprises from you.

Response:

Related Posts