Hatred of Christianity!

[krsnaraja]

The institutions we have are no more than tools and methods. Some people have and do use them inappropriately.

Can you innumerate to me what these institutions are & that some not all use them as tools & methods inappropriately? Example. Mental institutions, Penal institutions, etc.? Or what you really mean was Religious institutions. & the latter are used by some as tools & methods were they can influence politicians to tow the line or else?

 

[Viker]

Can you innumerate to me what these institutions are & that some not all use them as tools & methods inappropriately? Example. Mental institutions, Penal institutions, etc.? Or what you really mean was Religious institutions. & the latter are used by some as tools & methods were they can influence politicians to tow the line or else?

Sure thing. Pretty much all those "tools" we are talking about there are designed to aid society. Unfortunately, there are some folk who would rather manipulate them to their own selfish advantage. This corruption does not imply that the "tool" is the problem.

 

[krsnaraja]

Sure thing. Pretty much all those "tools" we are talking about there are designed to aid society. Unfortunately, there are some folk who would rather manipulate them to their own selfish advantage. This corruption does not imply that the "tool" is the problem.

The problem, dude, is the corrupter & the corrupted. They are like the law of supply and demand. If there`s no demand there`s no supply. If there`s no corrupted there`s no corrupter.

 

[Viker]

The problem, dude, is the corrupter & the corrupted. They are like the law of supply and demand. If there`s no demand there`s no supply. If there`s no corrupted there`s no corrupter.

Okay. If I had a garden hoe and hit your neighbor in the leg with the hoe, is it the garden hoes fault? Religion is a thing that embodies a code of conduct and central belief a people share, it's a lot like that poor garden hoe. Comparing a religion to a body now. Corruption is a rogue "institution" that infects it's host like a virus.

 

[krsnaraja]

Okay. If I had a garden hoe and hit your neighbor in the leg with the hoe, is it the garden hoes fault? Religion is a thing that embodies a code of conduct and central belief a people share, it's a lot like that poor garden hoe. Comparing a religion to a body now. Corruption is a rogue "institution" that infects it's host like a virus.

The church or institution is the people. & it should be, of the people, by the people & for the people. Not of the preacher, by the preacher & for the preacher. Just replace preacher with any word you want that fits your angst say, pastor or whatever.

 

[Viker]

The church or institution is the people. & it should be, of the people, by the people & for the people. Not of the preacher, by the preacher & for the preacher. Just replace preacher with any word you want that fits your angst say, pastor or whatever.

Exactly.

My angst feels like saying minister because it is angsty.

 

[Nadia Faiazova]

Hi! Modern Christianity has gone way far from what Jesus taught. When people (christians and non-christians) see it's hypocrisy, luxury, and it's "fornication" with political leaders and business structures, then those people start to disrespect Bible or become atheits.(Revelation 18:3)

 

[JacobEzra.]

Hi! Modern Christianity has gone way far from what Jesus taught. When people (christians and non-christians) see it's hypocrisy, luxury, and it's "fornication" with political leaders and business structures, then those people start to disrespect Bible or become atheits.(Revelation 18:3)

What religion has not grown?

What is "'fornication' with political leaders" suppose to mean?

And on the hypocrisy, what do you expect? Humans themselves are hypocritical in every sense.

 

[ChristineES]

This is a good place to rant (and I hardly ever rant): There are some Christians out there, not a lot, but some, who make it easy to figure out why Christianity can be hated. Christians ARE NOT supposed to be hateful and it makes me very sad when I see it.

 

[Jainarayan]

This is a good place to rant (and I hardly ever rant): There are some Christians out there, not a lot, but some, who make it easy to figure out why Christianity can be hated. Christians ARE NOT supposed to be hateful and it makes me very sad when I see it.

You are not alone. There are some very hateful and adharmic ("not the right way") Hindus whose bile-spewing would make Cher's hair curl. One of their favorite words to throw around is mleccha, which contemptuously means a foreigner or non-Hindu. They even use it for non-Indian Hindus. Fortunately these adharmics are in the very small minority. And when you think about it, so are the hateful and judgmental Christians. People are people and just want to live their lives in peace.

 

[ohhcuppycakee]

Sounds like how it feels to be Muslim...

 

[JacobEzra.]

Anyone who knows anything about "real" history, knows The Bible was edited by the Romans, who combined as many religions as possible to appease as many people as possible to make a religion that would "hold" the people together ( research what happened at the council of Rome, and in Nicea ).

Oh, right,..."real" history, as in the misconceptions you read from amateur historians who parallel the likes of white supremacist who try to say the Jews are actually all Khazars, or the White man is the real Jew. Right.

 

[PrimordialSoup]

No REAL HISTORY

as in Council of Rome en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

and the 1st council of Nicea en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea


Of course, you probably think these events are a part of some FAKE history..

and who the **** said anything about white supremacy ?? you have some serious issues !!

 

[gnomon]

Why do so many people want to point the finger at Christianity for the evil done in its name instead of pointing the finger at the human heart? Pointing the finger at Christians is the same as pointing the finger at scientists saying look how evil science is pushing these drugs that can destroy lives on every T.V. comercial that pops up.
Hey Got a sniffle? try Snif away!
Side effects include headaches,nashau,depression,liver disease,flat tires on car,dog runs away,wars and rumors of wars.........etc.
science is evil and slowly murdering people through chemical processes all in the name of the almighty dollar!
Can't point the finger at science for the evil in mans heart.
Those who are full of evil and hatred ,greed will spread it by anymeans necessary and they will use the Bible,science,or any other means necessary to justify themselves.
Its not the institution of Christianity that is evil just like its not science or medicine that is evil.Pharmaceutical companies used mans faith in science(and in doctors with dumb commercials) as a means to push there selfish agendas for profits.
I don't blame scientists or consider them evil even from all of the horror and devestation that has been done through its creations.
Attacking the establishment of Christianity for the evil that man has in his heart is the same as attacking science and medicine for the evil being done in its name.
Christianity is one of the most strongest love based religions I know of and is why it is always pesecuted and in the state of resistance against hatred!

I understand what you are saying and I think the problem is that people view Christianity, in general, as a religion when it is not. Baptists, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Pentecostalism, Latter Day Saints..........those are religions. They just all happen to be Christian religions because Christianity is a generalized concept regarding the view of possibly a Jewish rabbi named Joshua as the Messiah.

When people consolidate all these religious views into one and place the blame on Christianity in context of specific social or historical issues they are often missing the point. Thus we have incorrect historical views that Christianity spread throughout Europe solely by violence, which isn't true, and that the Crusades were about religion rather than the political motivations behind the Crusades.

There is, essentially, hardly any reason to attack Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc. when it comes to specific issues because the breakdown of the vastly differing denominations shows that such attacks are too general in their approach. Even the oft claimed status of Buddhists as atheists is flat out incorrect.

But people like to generalize because it simplifies the argument but in doing so they are putting forth a simple minded argument.

 

[PrimordialSoup]

Do you even know what REAL history is ? of course not..well let me enlighten you.

NOTE: E.DEN
The origin of the term "Eden", which in Hebrew means "delight", may lie with the Akkadian word
edinu, which itself derives from the Sumerian term E.DIN. The Sumerian term means "plain" or
"steppe", so the connection between the words may be coincidental, although this word is known to
have been used by the Sumerians to refer to Mesopotamia as the "valley of E'din", meaning the fertile
lands between the Tigris and Euphrates.

TREE OF LIFE :
The original Sumerian (Indo-Iranian) concept was that wisdom is likened to a tree whose fruit endows
those who eat it with health and longevity. The symbol of an elixir of life had already been well
established in antiquity by the Indo-Iranian cultures long before Judaism, Christianity, Islam and other
cultures had the opportunity to recognise it.
A 4,500 year old clay tablet shows a man and a woman seated below the Tree of Life. Behind the
woman is seen a serpent.

THE SERPENT :
The oldest known representation of two snakes entwined around a rod is that of the Sumerian
fertility god Ningizzida. Enki's youngest son, Ningizzida, was Lord of the Tree of Truth, in
Mesopotamia. His name in Sumerian is translated as "lord of the good tree, His symbolic animal is the
bashmu

Traces of Sumerian religion survive today and are reflected in writings of the Bible. As late as Ezekiel,
there is mention of a Sumerian deity. In Ezekiel 8:14, the prophet sees women of Israel weeping for
Tammuz (Dumuzi) during a drought.
The bulk of Sumerian parallels can, however be found much earlier, in the book of Genesis. As in
Genesis, the Sumerians' world is formed out of the watery abyss and the heavens and earth are divinely
separated from one another by a solid dome. The second chapter of Genesis introduces the paradise
Eden, a place which is similar to the Sumerian Dilmun, described in the myth of "Enki and Ninhursag".
Dilmun is a pure, bright, and holy land - now often identified with Bahrain in the Persian Gulf. It is
blessed by Enki to have overflowing, sweet water. Enki fills it with lagoons and palm trees. He
impregnates Ninhursag and causes eight new plants to grow from the earth. Eden, "in the East" (Gen.
2:8) has a river which also "rises" or overflows, to form four rivers including the Tigris and Euphrates.
It too is lush and has fruit bearing trees. (Gen. 2:9-10) In the second version of the creation of man
"The Lord God formed man out of the clay of the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life,
and so man became a living being." Enki and Ninmah (Ninhursag) use a similar method in creating
man. Nammu, queen of the abyss and Enki's mother, bids Enki to "Kneed the 'heart' of the clay that is
over the Abzu " and "give it form" (Kramer & Maier p. 33) From there the similarities cease as the two
create several malformed humans and then the two deities get into an argument.
Returning to Enki and Ninhursag, we find a possible parallel to the creation of Eve.


This is just a taste of REAL HISTORY !!

 

[JacobEzra.]

No REAL HISTORY

as in Council of Rome en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

and the 1st council of Nicea en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea


Of course, you probably think these events are a part of some FAKE history..

lol no they happened. Just your misconceptions are FAKE. Especially the editing of Gospels

and who the **** said anything about white supremacy ?? you have some serious issues !!

I see what I wrote completely went over your head

 

[outhouse]

Why do so many people want to point the finger at Christianity for the evil done in its name instead of pointing the finger at the human heart?

becuase its not inoccent either. instead of switching the blame to the human hear,t maybe it would be better to figure out the problems and try and correct the ones you can.

 

[fallingblood]

No REAL HISTORY

as in Council of Rome en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

and the 1st council of Nicea en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea


Of course, you probably think these events are a part of some FAKE history..

and who the **** said anything about white supremacy ?? you have some serious issues !!

I think you should take your own advice and do some research regarding "real" history. There is a reason why the vast majority of scholars disagree with your position. That reason is that they know what the purpose of the council of Nicea was about. They also realize that the disagreements within Christianity didn't stop at Nicea either, that they continued on for decades.

They also understand the nature of Roman religions and they have better sources than Wikipedia. Basically, you are only repeating the conspiracy theories that have arisen by people who have no idea what they are talkin about.

 

[JacobEzra.]

Okay, I know its very edited, but all of the irrelevant crap, that no one has even disputed with you had to go.

of course they didn't pick and choose which books were to become official cannon ( lol )

Never said they didn't. There are many writings. They had a criterea which helped to choose the books they would keep in the NT. They needed to be known by all the people, written by an Apostle or a disciple of an Apostle, etc.

of course they didn't edit any of the texts ( lol )

Actually taking lines and words in and out? No,, they didnt.

of course the early church didn't attack and declare heretics anyone who did not accept this official version of the cannon

They excommunicated many heretics. Some had to run due to the suppression. When was that said to never happened? .

of course there are no contradictions in a book that is supposed to be from a perfect beings instructions ( lol )

What does this have to do with Nicea?

BTW, if there is so many contradictions, and the writings were edited at Nicea, why would their still be contradictions?

of course the early Hebrews were such kind and compassionate people when they - invaded - the holy lands after the exodus ( lol )

Never said they were not like all of the other primitive people. So what does this have to do with Nicea?

of course there are no rich Christians because they do not value money or riches ( lol ) , of course Christians do not judge other people for that is up to there invisible sacrificial man god ( lol )

Again, what does this have to do with Nicea? LOL

 

[fallingblood]

I forgot what it was like debating Christians !, lol.. like trying to tell a 5 year old that the tooth fairy isn't real...and people wonder why Christians are the most ill imformed, ignorant, hypocritical human beings on the planet....

That was uncalled for, and only shows ignorance and bias on your part. It shows complete lack of regard for the scholarship that has been done by Christian.

More so, it is taking the position that what is true for the minority, is true for the majority. That in itself is ignorant.

Finally, it seems to me that the only reason you would mention such a thing is because you really can not argue the points that are brought up fully, and thus have to attack the persons instead.

Okay, since you do not have the ability to carry on a rational debate ( like that's a surprise ) lets get right down to the nitty gritty........

Again, a biased and ignorant statement. The fact that you even state such, would suggest that you are not ready for a rational debate yourself. The reason being that most rational debates do not start off with one of the individuals coming out and attacking their opposition.

.of course they didn't pick and choose which books were to become....

And this is a rational debate? It seems to me that you are taking every stereotypical position of a minority of Christians, and acting as if it defines all of Christianity. You are arguing against positions that no one here is bringing up. Really, none of that is a rational argument.

The main thing here though is that no one really mentioned the majority of those items that you said. And since you didn't take the time to actually make a real argument, but instead just list a bunch of misconceptions, there is no need to respond further.

I would continue but my fingers are starting to hurt, from typing all of these contradictions................

That is actually a good thing. Because really they show nothing of real substance. All that it shows is that you can take a bunch of unrelated ideas, act as if all Christians believe them, and then list them in a fashion that shows nothing.

Oh well, maybe when someone on here actually knows real facts....

Well, if you begin telling us some real history, instead of conspiracy theories based on ignorance, we could have an intelligent conversation. Maybe if you didn't attack Christians, and all of Christianity with sweeping generalization that are not based on fact, but on your own preconceived biases, and poor research, we could have an intelligent rational conversation. However, you really haven't done much to help such a thing.

I presented valid, points, and in no reply were these specific points reputed with ACTUAL FACTS, just opinions, and useless dribble.......as is always the case, when those who follow lies, are confronted with the truth......

me..

You are not talking about the truth though. You are talking about conspiracy theories that are not founded in actual history, but poorly researched dribble.

If you look at the council of Nicaea, you will see that the books for the NT, for the most part, were already chosen. There is no mention of the books of the NT being chosen. Yes, Constantine did demand that copies of the Bible be produced. However, before that time, we do see that the list of books that were included in the NT basically were already chosen. We can see this by looking at various early canons that were being circulated.

More so, the Council of Nicaea may have made some ideas official; however, that did not stop the debating among Christians. If we just look at the NT Canon itself, we will see that it was being debated long after Nicaea, and wasn't closed until around a millennia afterwards.

The idea that the Romans (and what Romans are you talking about?) took and edited the Bible is simply ridiculous. First, we can look at the OT. We can look back to the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as the tradition associated with it, you can clearly see that it was not edited by the Romans. Did it undergo some editing? Of course, pretty much all books are. But that really doesn't mean anything if one doesn't consider the Bible to be the literal word of God. And that is not a requirement to be a Christian.

Second, there is no evidence that the Romans even took the NT and edited it all. What evidence do we see for such a position? Especially when the NT contains various verses that deny Roman religious practices, such as the idea that there is only one God. If we really saw that the Romans edited the Bible, we would expect to see a pantheon of gods. And much of the ethical sections of the Bible simply would not be there, as Roman religion really didn't deal with ethical concerns. That was more left to the various philosophies.

As for the sacrificial man, you really don't see that in other traditions, at least not one that is similar to Jesus. There are stories of gods dying and rising again, but those are quite different from the story of Jesus. One of the reasons is that for those other gods, we see a cycle of birth and death. And in some cases, the figure doesn't actually really die.

As for virginal births (many don't actually contain a virgin, and many actually contain physical unions, both being different from the Jesus story) it was said of many historical figures as well. Both of these two points are myths. That doesn't mean the figure did not exist, but that myths surrounded them. It is better to try to understand why those myths originated. For the virgin birth, it is probably quite simple. Jesus was seen as important. Thus, his birth signified that.

As for thousand of texts being left out, the Dead Sea Scrolls don't show that. I'm guessing you've never read the Dead Sea Scrolls, and you probably don't know much about them. Yes, they contain various works that were considered scripture. They also contained many other portions that were community works. They did hold to some additional "scripture", but the fact is, the majority didn't. That is why they were not included. The Essenes were only one sect of Judaism, and they were not the majority.

The reason some books were left out is simple; they were not used by the majority. Thus, the majority didn't see them as scripture.

Finally, your humble opinion really isn't humble. It relies on the idea that you some how are smarter than all of these ignorant Christians. The fact is though, you know very little about Christianity. Your posts have clearly shown that. We do not all think that the Bible is literal, or the inerrant word of God. We don't all believe in the myths such as the virgin birth. We don't all even necessarily believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.

Before you start insulting a religion, you should at least take the time to do some credible research. Things that you just find on the internet, that have no scholarly support, really aren't the place to find "real" history.