Religious Debate

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Alatariel

Originally posted by: Atomicus

Actually MOST KNOWLEDGABLE CHRISTIANS are staying away from the KJV, heard it from my minister a few years ago when I attended regularly. I forget the reasons, however, the bible doesn't have to explain anything. Your faith is judged, not the text.

You haven't debated that point with a conservative Christian yet, have you? There is actually a segment of the Christian population who thinks that modern English versions of the Bible are the work of Satan...

There are also were people who thought a superior race riding in the tail of a comet were coming to take them home. Your point?

Fixed.

 

[Alatariel]

Originally posted by: Greyd

Especially those who have no idea what they are talking about. A little study of biblical theology, history and culture would prevent noob questions like these. Not that it ever happens or will happen before flame wars start.

Showing your own ignorance, nothing else. I've done more than a little study...

Can you actually refute any of the points with hard data?

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: ThePresence

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Alatariel

Originally posted by: Atomicus

Actually MOST KNOWLEDGABLE CHRISTIANS are staying away from the KJV, heard it from my minister a few years ago when I attended regularly. I forget the reasons, however, the bible doesn't have to explain anything. Your faith is judged, not the text.

You haven't debated that point with a conservative Christian yet, have you? There is actually a segment of the Christian population who thinks that modern English versions of the Bible are the work of Satan...

There are also were people who thought a superior race riding in the tail of a comet were coming to take them home. Your point?

Fixed.

NIKE!

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Yeah but I just was repeating common knowledge.


Sysadmin

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

Cool, My post was from the heart


SYsadmin

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

Yep.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

Yep.

See??

Fausto :heart: Sysadmin

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

Yep.

See??

Fausto :heart: Sysadmin

Only when he remembers to pay me.

:Q

 

[KarenMarie]

People have been fighting about the Bible and Religion since time began. Whatever... people have their own thoughts and beliefs.. and that is fine... it pisses me off, however, when people take ONE sentence out of an entire paragraph and twist and spin it into what it is not meant to be. I have my own problems with Religion and certain things in the Bible, so I checked it myself... here is what I have found...

I have pasted the text from Ephesians below:
What it says is that man is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. He is not the BOSS of the wife. But as Christ, in his love and guidance, is the head of the church. It also says that husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church, handing himself over her. To nourish and cherish her.

Not to boss her around and make her second to himself. As the man puts Christ and the church above himself, so should he do the same for his wife. In context the direction was that they BOTH gave themselves to each other, 100% above and beyond what they wanted for themselves.

Ephasians 5:21-5.33
Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord.
For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church, he himself the savior of the body.
As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her
to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word,
that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
So (also) husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church,
because we are members of his body.
"For this reason a man shall leave (his) father and (his) mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."
This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.
In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband.

 

[Gurck]

What it says is that man is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. He is not the BOSS of the wife. But as Christ, in his love and guidance, is the head of the church. It also says that husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church, handing himself over her. To nourish and cherish her.

Is there really a difference? Subordinance is subordinance, any way you dress it up.

 

[fredtam]

Originally posted by: Alatariel

Originally posted by: fredtam

Second Jesus was a Jew and and for the most part did not throw out previous Jewish law which does in fact condemn homosexuality. Who denies Mary was a prostitute?

Ummm...the Bible.

Read it - you'd be surprised. That is a myth that was touted in the 6th century to justify the church's stance towards women and to denigrate the fact that Mary was the first to see the risen Christ.

OK , at first I was just trying to help you get your flame war started but I'll play your silly little game.

Although it is not specifically stated in the Bible that she was a prostitute (nor do I care either way) it also doesn't say otherwise.the Gnostic text you seem to be worried about seem to point in that direction. Would you still like to play?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Sysadmin

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: bobbybe01

Originally posted by: Sysadmin
Bible =fiction

Religion=Brainwashing

This THread= SHiat


Sysadmin

Wow did you come up with that all by yourself? Maybe it's the thread crappers that make threads crappy?

Look at the OP. You can't polish a turd, son.

You didn't like my post?



Sysadmin

I think he's referring to the OP (thread starter)

Yep.

See??

Fausto :heart: Sysadmin

Only when he remembers to pay me.

:Q

What's the tab up to now??



BTW, I see my check has cleared.

 

[SuPrEIVIE]

Originally posted by: Gurck

What it says is that man is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. He is not the BOSS of the wife. But as Christ, in his love and guidance, is the head of the church. It also says that husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church, handing himself over her. To nourish and cherish her.

Is there really a difference? Subordinance is subordinance, any way you dress it up.

yes there is a difference maybe boss doesn't seem like too much of a negative word, but if you truly loved your wife(if you have one ofcourse) the way its quoted up above etc. it is easily understood

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Gurck

What it says is that man is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. He is not the BOSS of the wife. But as Christ, in his love and guidance, is the head of the church. It also says that husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church, handing himself over her. To nourish and cherish her.

Is there really a difference? Subordinance is subordinance, any way you dress it up.

It also says to be subordinant to EACH OTHER.
And yes there is a difference. Being subordinant to someone who will love. nurture and cherish me... putting me above himself... is HUGELY different to being subordinant to someone who wants to be my boss.

But the point I was trying to make was that... it sucks that people will pull ONE sentence out of an entire paragraph and spin it to death.

 

[bandana163]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Vaerilis

Originally posted by: K1052
Well, it's a well known fact, Sunny Jim, that there's a secret society of the five wealthiest people in the world, known as The Pentaveret, who run everything in the world, including the newspapers, and meet tri annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado, known as The Meadows.

The top ones
Their vicous henchmen

Are those pics of the last OT meet?

Definitely

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

next time you religious fanatics and agnostic/antiest christian bashers want an argument, go kick your neighbors dog or something. punch the cashier at your local piggly wiggly in the face. stop starting topics with the malicious intent of arguing a point of obvious stalemate which is devoid almost entirely of fact and shrouded with fingerpointing and namecalling. it's like a presidential debate in here! jeez!!

 

[Insane3D]

*smells a BBQ*

*peeks head in*

*sees Fausto with no pants again*

Hey! I wasn't invited to the latest Fausto's pantless n00b BBQ?

/offended :|

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
*smells a BBQ*

*peeks head in*

*sees Fausto with no pants again*

Hey! I wasn't invited to the latest Fausto's pantless n00b BBQ?

/offended :|

Hey, I put up the searchlight with the thong emblem. Not my fault you missed it. :roll:

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: fredtam
Lastly it was not the King who did the picking and choosing of the books. There are a lot of valid reasons that some text were not included like the time it was written.

True, it was the Emperor Constantine who was responsible for formalizing Christianity, long before there was an English language.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Insane3D
*smells a BBQ*

*peeks head in*

*sees Fausto with no pants again*

Hey! I wasn't invited to the latest Fausto's pantless n00b BBQ?

/offended :|

Hey, I put up the searchlight with the thong emblem. Not my fault you missed it. :roll:

Ohhhhhh...that's what that was! I thought it was the bat signal obscured by a thong shaped cloud...my bad.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Alatariel
Since reading the discussions on here about the Holy Spirit and Satan, I have been thinking a lot about religion in general today. So I wonder what others would say to the following:

First, Christianity is basically patriarchy surviving to bash women and build men up. This is evidenced by the consistent use of a few scriptures that talk about "men being the head" and how "women should submit to their husbands" while completely ignoring the scriptures talking about how "all are worthy in God."

Second, Christians don't know their own history or the Bible as well as they think they do. There are two pieces of evidence that I bring up here. The first is that never once does Jesus condemn anyone for homosexual behavior. The second is merely a question - do YOU believe that Mary Magdalene was a repentant whore?

Third, most Christians think that the King James version of the Bible is the complete and unadulterated word of God. So how do they explain the crusades? Why do they think that something with the name of an English king who picked and chose what to include is so infallible? And, how do they explain the wisdom contained in the Gnostic texts found in Qumran and Nag Hammadi?

1) a weak point. I'll agree that Christianity is Patriarchal, but disagree that it continues to exist for that reason. In fact it has been instrumental in empowering women, though not always and certainly not from every form of it

2) a) true, he was also big on Forgieness and Tolerance; b) sure, why not?

3) The Crusades occured centuries before the King James version of the Bible was written, so I don't see how that applies to anything. As for the King deciding on things, I think he only commissioned that it be done, he didn't actually oversee and approve of every detail what went into it. Last part, I dunno.

That said, I agree, the KJV is not superior to all other versions, it is especially not THE inspired Word of God as some claim it to be. The problem with all Religions is that they vault certain things within their Religion as something else, something the original writers/sculptors/other Artisans never intended. They succumb to Mysticism over time where the Originators were thinking in a more Practical sense. This is also true outside of Religion and becomes the norm of any Philosophy such as Communism or Capitalism, in time Hyperbole takes over and those inside of it become the last bastions against the evils of x(anything else). This Hyperbole and Mysticism is what is called "Corruption", the loss of the original intent and the hardening of the original spirit which is replaced by the Letter of the Law.