Is Christianity that bad?

[dianaiad]

Up to you, and yes i do read my own posts
Your post was a deliberate insult.

How do you know?

You didn't read it.

 

[ChristineM]

How do you know?

You didn't read it.

I read it up to and including your insult and as you know, answered the pre insulting paragraph.

From the insult i figured why bother

 

[dianaiad]

I read it up to and including your insult and as you know, answered the pre insulting paragraph.

From the insult i figured why bother

That's what I said. You didn't read it.


btw, Merry Christmas.

 

[ChristineM]

That's what I said. You didn't read it.


btw, Merry Christmas.

I read enough, why do you have difficulty with that? Its not hard to understand

Thanks but i dont do Christmas but happy winter fete to you

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Another area where Christianity is rotten is the wide spread support for "conversation 'therapy,'" and continuing to support and condone it despite it being very destructive. But they don't care, it's a big "oh well" that people are often left worse off than they were, it doesn't matter that it doesn't work as desired in the long run, all that matters to them is desperately clinging onto to ancient and primitive superstitions and doing everything they can to force it upon others.
It's about like demanding evolution not be taught in science classes so they can force their personal dogma upon others. And they don't give a damn about freedom of religion, because there's is the only one that is important and they are starting to show a trend where they'd rather have none if they can't have a monopoly. (such as courthouse monuments and city council prayers). Ever see a Satanist try to begin a meeting with an invocation? Christians have shown they don't respect the rights of the Satanists or the permission he was granted to do the invocation.

 

[dianaiad]

I read enough, why do you have difficulty with that? Its not hard to understand

Thanks but i dont do Christmas but happy winter fete to you

If you didn't read it all, you got what you did read out of context.

As to Christmas, I am quite aware that Christ wasn't born on Dec. 25th. That's OK by me. It means, in fact, that I get to celebrate His birth twice: once now, with songs and parties, gifts and celebration.

Then I get to remember His birth later in the year, a little closer to when we think it happened, with reverence and quiet contemplation, as well as thankfulness.


So you have a lovely winter fete.

 

[ChristineM]

If you didn't read it all, you got what you did read out of context.

As to Christmas, I am quite aware that Christ wasn't born on Dec. 25th. That's OK by me. It means, in fact, that I get to celebrate His birth twice: once now, with songs and parties, gifts and celebration.

Then I get to remember His birth later in the year, a little closer to when we think it happened, with reverence and quiet contemplation, as well as thankfulness.


So you have a lovely winter fete.

A single line insult is not out of context

So your proof JC, assuming he even existed at all actually existed as depicted in the bible is what?

 

[wellwisher]

Through recorded history religion had killed far more than any other un-natural cause.

And are you counting Hiller, Stalin (and arguably Pol Pot) as atheist because that is not so.
Both Stalin and Hitler were christian until their deaths
Pol Pot was Buddhist, educated by catholics.

Religion that indoctrinates children from birth is wrong
Religion that kills in the name of religion (or its gods) is wrong
Religion that bars progress and lives in deliberate ignorance is wrong

There are more but i can't be bothered considering you purloined my post from another thread and forced this on me

Is Atheism wrong? Is the disbileaf in gods when no evidence exists for gods wrong? Is not collecting stamps wrong, is not playing football wrong?

The atheist movement, in the West, up to about the 1980-90s, was based on people who had been Christians and sometimes Jews as children. You are saying all Atheists, from the 16th century, until then, were still technically Christians, since what you were as a child, cannot change when you become an adult.

Hitler and others may have been raised Christian, but like the atheists, they made different choices, as an adult. They chose a different path based on a conflicting philosophy. The Superior Race philosophy of Hitler was a spin off from science and social Darwinism. Hitler became atheistic later in life, since this philosophy was not Christian. Christianity is about the inner man and not the material and superficial man.

Stalin took a similar path. His path is now being pushed by the modern left; Socialism and forced conformity. Big government was something common to both Hitler and Stalin. They also both believed in Globalism. This was not the Christianity of their youth, but some form of adult Big Government Liberalism Atheism.

The thing about Christianity, was it dominated Western Culture for many centuries. The Church formed from a merger of Christianity and Rome in the 4th century AD. Like in any organization, if you were different minded and wished to avoid harassment and/or wanted to move up the company ladder, you had to go along and not make waves.

If you were an atheist or heathen in the Church, you would need to keep this on the low, and do what was necessary to get along and advance. If not, you would be harassed like a Conservative in a Liberal College. Your career would be doomed or worse. If you conformed and reached a placed of power and influence, while maintaining your own beliefs, you could then contaminate the message with your atheism. This is the basis for most of the atrocity. Atheism was always part of the Church, but it did not feel secure about coming out of the closet until about the 16th century. It had been on the low before then, but its members often rose to power and could influence the Church of the day. After that they worked from the outside contaminating the rank and file. Atheists, ask yourself, if you could sabotage the Church so it self destructs would you do it? Or, can you live and let live?

 

[ChristineM]

The atheist movement, in the West, up to about the 1980-90s, was based on people who had been Christians and sometimes Jews as children. You are saying all Atheists, from the 16th century, until then, were still technically Christians, since what you were as a child, cannot change when you become an adult.

Hitler and others may have been raised Christian, but like the atheists, they made different choices, as an adult. They chose a different path based on a conflicting philosophy. The Superior Race philosophy of Hitler was a spin off from science and social Darwinism. Hitler became atheistic later in life, since this philosophy was not Christian. Christianity is about the inner man and not the material and superficial man.

Stalin took a similar path. His path is now being pushed by the modern left; Socialism and forced conformity. Big government was something common to both Hitler and Stalin. They also both believed in Globalism. This was not the Christianity of their youth, but some form of adult Big Government Liberalism Atheism.

The thing about Christianity, was it dominated Western Culture for many centuries. The Church formed from a merger of Christianity and Rome in the 4th century AD. Like in any organization, if you were different minded and wished to avoid harassment and/or wanted to move up the company ladder, you had to go along and not make waves.

If you were an atheist or heathen in the Church, you would need to keep this on the low, and do what was necessary to get along and advance. If not, you would be harassed like a Conservative in a Liberal College. Your career would be doomed or worse. If you conformed and reached a placed of power and influence, while maintaining your own beliefs, you could then contaminate the message with your atheism. This is the basis for most of the atrocity. Atheism was always part of the Church, but it did not feel secure about coming out of the closet until about the 16th century. It had been on the low before then, but its members often rose to power and could influence the Church of the day. After that they worked from the outside contaminating the rank and file. Atheists, ask yourself, if you could sabotage the Church so it self destructs would you do it? Or, can you live and let live?

Both Stalin and Hitler remained christian all their lives. Sure they did seem as anti christian in the name of nationalism. In Stalins case, gatherings or more than 6 people were made illegal. Many tens of thousands were executed for defying this law, both religious and non religious. Russia was (still is) a majority christian state with over 90% of the population being christian, stands to reason this is now seen as persecution against christianity. However, both religious and non religious people were killefd

It is said Hitler commited holocaust against Jews because the Jew was responsible for the death of his christ. Although i have seen no evidence for this claim it was repeated often enough. What i have seen is his religious writings, his appeals to god, his religious justifications.

Those conflicts i listed had little or nothing to do with atheist involvement.The list i provided i compiled from peoples attempting to impose their faith on other people's, or peoples trying to obliterate people of another faith. Not necessarily christian it included other faiths long before christianity reared it head, it included folk religion, i.e. religion in general.

 

[Augustus]

Both Stalin and Hitler remained christian all their lives.

This is absolute, total nonsense.

Stalin's seminary noted he was an atheist, Stalin acknowledged he was an atheist. Stalin implemented an "atheist 5 year plan", called for the liquidation of the clergy, killed tens of thousands of clergy and implemented policies that led to the almost complete destruction of the Church.

He changed his anti-religious policies during WW2 after Germany attacked and used the Church for domestic morale and as an instrument of foreign policy in order to score points with Britain and America to generate more support and to encourage an opening of a 2nd front against Germany.

It was noted in Party documents that this was not a change in policy regarding the Church and State Atheism, but a means to an end. After the war, the policies started to be reversed again and the atheist and anti-religious propaganda was increased again.



The seminary journal reports that Stalin declared himself an atheist, stalked out of prayers, chatted in class, was late for tea and refused to doff his hat to monks. He had eleven more warnings... [Stalin] adored Gogol, Saltykov-Shchedrin and Chekhov, whose works he memorized and “could recite by heart.” He admired Tolstoy “but was bored by his Christianity,” later in life scrawling “ha-ha-ha!” beside Tolstoyan musings on redemption and salvation... In his seventies, the dictator was still chuckling about these arguments. “I became an atheist in the first year,” he said, which led to arguments with other boys such as his pious friend Simon Natroshvili.
Young Stalin - S. Sebag-Motefiore

the party and Soviet power have not altered their principled attitude to religion and the church ... especially since the clergy has been making attempts to enhance church influence among the masses ... by preaching that the motherland and the church, Orthodoxy and patriotism are insepar- able ... that a nation is strong only as long as it keeps its faith.

The memorandum then explained that in conditions of war it was necessary to come to an accommodation with the church because of 'its political weight owing to its influence upon the masses ... still having tens of millions of faithful'. Party workers should therefore educate the believers 'in the true scientific world view', and draw them away from the church; but 'crude attacks on religion and the church are particularly intolerable as long as the war lasts ...'. Party workers should explain to the population that the exchanges of greetings between Stalin and the hierarchs occur not because the latter are church officials, but because they are Soviet citizens helping the war effort...

In short, instead of playing the role of a world religious leader, which if successful would have forced the Soviet authorities to treat the church with as much respect as Stalin did in 1943, it became merely a secondary tool of Soviet foreign policy; useful, but not so vital as to force the Soviet government to modify its internal policies towards the church. What
is more, the Cold War was now firmly established, and Stalin was practising increasing isolationism - foreign policy itself, and particularly its propaganda aspect, were becoming matters of secondary importance to him.

It was therefore no coincidence that 1948 saw the last opening of a new seminary (Saratov). Thereafter all pleas to open seminaries were rejected. Antireligious propaganda was considerably enhanced and before the end of 1949 a net decline in the number of operating churches set in. The ‘best years’ of Stalin's church policy (1942–1948) in the light of archival documents - Dimitry Pospielovsky

 

[Rival]

This is absolute, total nonsense.

Stalin's seminary noted he was an atheist, Stalin acknowledged he was an atheist. Stalin implemented an "atheist 5 year plan", called for the liquidation of the clergy, killed tens of thousands of clergy and oversaw the almost complete destruction of the Church.

He changed his anti-religious policies during WW2 after Germany attacked and used the Church for domestic morale and as an instrument of foreign policy in order to score points with Britain and America to generate more support and to encourage an opening of a 2nd front against Germany.

It was noted in Party documents that this was not a change in policy regarding the Church and State Atheism, but a means to an end. After the war, the policies started to be reversed again and the atheist and anti-religious propaganda was increased again.



The seminary journal reports that Stalin declared himself an atheist, stalked out of prayers, chatted in class, was late for tea and refused to doff his hat to monks. He had eleven more warnings... [Stalin] adored Gogol, Saltykov-Shchedrin and Chekhov, whose works he memorized and “could recite by heart.” He admired Tolstoy “but was bored by his Christianity,” later in life scrawling “ha-ha-ha!” beside Tolstoyan musings on redemption and salvation... In his seventies, the dictator was still chuckling about these arguments. “I became an atheist in the first year,” he said, which led to arguments with other boys such as his pious friend Simon Natroshvili.
Young Stalin - S. Sebag-Motefiore

the party and Soviet power have not altered their principled attitude to religion and the church ... especially since the clergy has been making attempts to enhance church influence among the masses ... by preaching that the motherland and the church, Orthodoxy and patriotism are insepar- able ... that a nation is strong only as long as it keeps its faith.

The memorandum then explained that in conditions of war it was necessary to come to an accommodation with the church because of 'its political weight owing to its influence upon the masses ... still having tens of millions of faithful'. Party workers should therefore educate the believers 'in the true scientific world view', and draw them away from the church; but 'crude attacks on religion and the church are particularly intolerable as long as the war lasts ...'. Party workers should explain to the population that the exchanges of greetings between Stalin and the hierarchs occur not because the latter are church officials, but because they are Soviet citizens helping the war effort...

In short, instead of playing the role of a world religious leader, which if successful would have forced the Soviet authorities to treat the church with as much respect as Stalin did in 1943, it became merely a secondary tool of Soviet foreign policy; useful, but not so vital as to force the Soviet government to modify its internal policies towards the church. What
is more, the Cold War was now firmly established, and Stalin was practising increasing isolationism - foreign policy itself, and particularly its propaganda aspect, were becoming matters of secondary importance to him.

It was therefore no coincidence that 1948 saw the last opening of a new seminary (Saratov). Thereafter all pleas to open seminaries were rejected. Antireligious propaganda was considerably enhanced and before the end of 1949 a net decline in the number of operating churches set in. The ‘best years’ of Stalin's church policy (1942–1948) in the light of archival documents - Dimitry Pospielovsky

I can winner ths with minimal reading of it. I've read Young Stalin many times. First when I was 14. I never forgot the logs for hell bit your other post mentioned either

 

[Heyo]

The atheist movement, in the West, up to about the 1980-90s, was based on people who had been Christians and sometimes Jews as children. You are saying all Atheists, from the 16th century, until then, were still technically Christians, since what you were as a child, cannot change when you become an adult.

Hitler and others may have been raised Christian, but like the atheists, they made different choices, as an adult. They chose a different path based on a conflicting philosophy. The Superior Race philosophy of Hitler was a spin off from science and social Darwinism. Hitler became atheistic later in life, since this philosophy was not Christian. Christianity is about the inner man and not the material and superficial man.

Stalin took a similar path. His path is now being pushed by the modern left; Socialism and forced conformity. Big government was something common to both Hitler and Stalin. They also both believed in Globalism. This was not the Christianity of their youth, but some form of adult Big Government Liberalism Atheism.

The thing about Christianity, was it dominated Western Culture for many centuries. The Church formed from a merger of Christianity and Rome in the 4th century AD. Like in any organization, if you were different minded and wished to avoid harassment and/or wanted to move up the company ladder, you had to go along and not make waves.

If you were an atheist or heathen in the Church, you would need to keep this on the low, and do what was necessary to get along and advance. If not, you would be harassed like a Conservative in a Liberal College. Your career would be doomed or worse. If you conformed and reached a placed of power and influence, while maintaining your own beliefs, you could then contaminate the message with your atheism. This is the basis for most of the atrocity. Atheism was always part of the Church, but it did not feel secure about coming out of the closet until about the 16th century. It had been on the low before then, but its members often rose to power and could influence the Church of the day. After that they worked from the outside contaminating the rank and file. Atheists, ask yourself, if you could sabotage the Church so it self destructs would you do it? Or, can you live and let live?

How do you know if someone is a Christian?
You don't because there is no objective definition.

 

[gnomon]

True many Christians do a lot of damage, but atheist communists killed more people in the 20th century than Christians did. That doesn't make atheists bad does it?

Is there anything intrinsically wrong with Christianity?
Atheism?
Islam?
Judaism?

No. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with Christianity.

Nor atheism.

Nor Islam.

Nor Judaism.

Nor anyone else.

You just have to talk to people and understand them.

How this thread became a ***** fest of fools who thought they knew something.....

Just give them the old familiar suggestion.

edit: Just have to love the generalizations being posited by so called progressive minded fools of this forum in this thread. What a waste.