christianity was wrong before

[BIG D]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Well for starters saying that "Christianity was wrong about Galileo and carried out the Inquisition" is about as accurate as saying that money lead us to the Iraq war. At face value it may seem so, but when you look deeper you will see it is the indeed the people, and not the religion, that is causing problems. Religion is purely an inanimate abstract idea. It can't do anything. It depends on how people use it that matters. And since alot of good has come out of religion, which recently includes a group of churches that is working to help people find jobs and with assistance, to call it wrong or evil is grossly unfair.
As for the teachings of Christianity, I find nothing wrong with teaching love and peace, charity and altruism, unity and forgiveness. Jesus did indeed have a pretty good message when you think about it.

 

[outhouse]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

MORE then 2/3 of the world think the christian religion is a joke.

many of the christians themselves know the bible is not the word of god nor was it ment to be taken literally.

It is not correct in its teaching.

NOW dont get bent out of shape there cross lovers If taken with a grain of salt it is a great guide to live a peacefull fruitfull life, for those who are so poor they must eat dirt to survive it gives them a light at the end of the tunnel. It helps calm the sick, old and dieing.

It is not a history book and the fables were never ment to be read that way.

interpretation is the key and it has claimed countless lives because of humans errors in this proccess

 

[truseeker]

there is a difference between Christianity and churches. The churches off this world are run by humans who make mistakes but true Christianity is in perfect agreement with nature and true science.

 

[Quiddity]

That is a loaded question that no answer could possibly satisfy. It's just too much to consider.

Also, the Roman Inquisition was more then just about Galileo.

 

[Archer]

Well for starters saying that "Christianity was wrong about Galileo and carried out the Inquisition" is about as accurate as saying that money lead us to the Iraq war. At face value it may seem so, but when you look deeper you will see it is the indeed the people, and not the religion, that is causing problems. Religion is purely an inanimate abstract idea. It can't do anything. It depends on how people use it that matters. And since alot of good has come out of religion, which recently includes a group of churches that is working to help people find jobs and with assistance, to call it wrong or evil is grossly unfair.
As for the teachings of Christianity, I find nothing wrong with teaching love and peace, charity and altruism, unity and forgiveness. Jesus did indeed have a pretty good message when you think about it.

:yes: Decent answer.

 

[Willamena]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

So what makes you say Christianity is wrong?

 

[Oberon]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

And scientists have been wrong too, better throw that approach out as well...

 

[Archer]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

I did not have time earlier but I do now. The "Christians" of the time were absolutely wrong! The which trials were wrong, the crusades were wrong and all military action based on faith (superstition) alone is wrong.

Christian and Christianity are not the same. Christian is the individual and Christianity is the faith. :yes:

Focus on the people (self proclaimed Christians) and their motives. Focus on the time frame, who was in power, what was the history until that time, what was the literacy rate, what was the political situation, how was national leadership tied with the Church and much more.

The teachings of Christianity are not wrong if they are from the Book. The teachings by man based on the Book with no direct foundation in the Book are many times wrong.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And scientists have been wrong too, better throw that approach out as well...

That is very true. I'm sure that some day when he have seen more of the universe and studied it in greater detail, what we think is how the universe functions today will be made obsolete as new and better theories are built around observations that we simply do not have today.

 

[Poisonshady313]

so the christians were wrong about Galileo and carried out the inquisition,etc etc...what makes you think christianity is correct in its teachings??

Christianity was wrong straight from Matthew 1:1... and just kinda went downhill since then.

 

[Archer]

Christianity was wrong straight from Matthew 1:1... and just kinda went downhill since then.

So then what is the genealogy of Jesus?

 

[outhouse]

So then what is the genealogy of Jesus?

doesnt 1 tim 1:4 tell you to avoid this question lol

 

[Poisonshady313]

So then what is the genealogy of Jesus?

It doesn't really matter.

 

[Poisonshady313]

doesnt 1 tim 1:4 tell you to avoid this question lol

good point

 

[waitasec]

Well for starters saying that "Christianity was wrong about Galileo and carried out the Inquisition" is about as accurate as saying that money lead us to the Iraq war. At face value it may seem so, but when you look deeper you will see it is the indeed the people, and not the religion, that is causing problems. Religion is purely an inanimate abstract idea. It can't do anything. It depends on how people use it that matters. And since alot of good has come out of religion, which recently includes a group of churches that is working to help people find jobs and with assistance, to call it wrong or evil is grossly unfair.
As for the teachings of Christianity, I find nothing wrong with teaching love and peace, charity and altruism, unity and forgiveness. Jesus did indeed have a pretty good message when you think about it.

but you can't deny religion is what controls the masses. "holy crusade" and "axis of evil" where lines fed to the this nation of christians as a rally call for war, was it not?

it's actually funny that you mention love and peace in the teachings of jesus, and why was this new concept of hell something he brought up too, because god loves us so much?

 

[Archer]

doesnt 1 tim 1:4 tell you to avoid this question lol

good point

And what was Paul speaking of? It was not about me making a reference:no:

3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith.

Not speaking to this.

 

[Poisonshady313]

And what was Paul speaking of? It was not about me making a reference:no:

3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith.

Not speaking to this.

It's really neither here nor there.

There are three errors with Matthew 1:1. The first is obvious at first sight. For the other two, you need to make it to the end of chapter 1.

First error: "Christ" If you understand that this word is supposed to indicate that Jesus is the Messiah, (and some versions simply use the word Messiah instead of Christ) and you're a Jewish person with even a most basic understanding of Judaism, you know that Jesus wasn't the Messiah. You don't need to read past the first verse to understand that... you just see the word "Christ", and immediately you think to yourself "WRONG!"

Second error: son of David. Even as a person who fully rejects the concept of the virgin birth, the fact is that the story is part of the first chapter of Matthew. When Jews are called by name, they are the son of their father (i.e. Moses the son of Amram, or Abraham the son of Terah). Or perhaps even the son of their grandfather... or perhaps even the son of their male ancestor through his paternal line. If Jesus had no paternal line, he had no paternal line. The only half-correct way to go about it would be to call him "son of Mary"... I say half correct because a Jew is only called the son of his mother when he is sick and someone is saying a prayer for recovery on his behalf.

Third error: son of Abraham. See second error.

 

[Archer]

It's really neither here nor there.

There are three errors with Matthew 1:1. The first is obvious at first sight. For the other two, you need to make it to the end of chapter 1.

First error: "Christ" If you understand that this word is supposed to indicate that Jesus is the Messiah, (and some versions simply use the word Messiah instead of Christ) and you're a Jewish person with even a most basic understanding of Judaism, you know that Jesus wasn't the Messiah. You don't need to read past the first verse to understand that... you just see the word "Christ", and immediately you think to yourself "WRONG!"

Second error: son of David. Even as a person who fully rejects the concept of the virgin birth, the fact is that the story is part of the first chapter of Matthew. When Jews are called by name, they are the son of their father (i.e. Moses the son of Amram, or Abraham the son of Terah). Or perhaps even the son of their grandfather... or perhaps even the son of their male ancestor through his paternal line. If Jesus had no paternal line, he had no paternal line. The only half-correct way to go about it would be to call him "son of Mary"... I say half correct because a Jew is only called the son of his mother when he is sick and someone is saying a prayer for recovery on his behalf.

Third error: son of Abraham. See second error.

And that is how you should see it as a person of Jewish faith. I have heard the same arguments before and I do not necessarily deny them. Considering Joseph accepted him as his son put him in the House of David. Biological ties? Who knows I mean stranger things have been done at the hand of God. Look at us

 

[Poisonshady313]

Considering Joseph accepted him as his son put him in the House of David.

No, it most certainly did not. A man is of the house of his biological father. Adoption does not change that.