Ed Christianity Foments Villainy

[stanfr]

Thanks for answering... and yes of course you can answer anything... it is also well appreciated....

Now for some new questions....

Can you think like a Colombian Trafficante or an Italian Mafioso??? Or a Mega Church Televangelist???

What do you think their answers to the same questions be???

Keep in mind they were brought up steeped in their version of christianity.

Their answers probably would be different, I don't know for sure since every one is different. I suspect some of them would not even call themself christian. That is the whole point, what you are 'versed' in and who you and what you are are two distinct things. It boggles the mind that anyone would think of Donald Trump as being a "Christian"--He doesn't know a single verse of the book he claims to belove, and yet the far religious right embraces him, either for self interest or in some cases pure stupidity. The only 'god' he believes in is himself, if Jesus were around he would throw the Zombified son under the bus as easily as his ex attorneys.

 

[stanfr]

There's a reason there is about 45,000 different Christian denominations. They view the tenets differently. I use to think the way I interpreted the Bible was bizarrely different than what I had been taught. Christianity is dramatically different then it was hundreds of years ago and that is very different than it was in the first few centuries.

Everyone picks and chooses. Everyone.

Hence the problem with religion as a whole and christianity in particular. If it is so dang easy to understand what it 'truly' is, and if it is the supposed direct word of God--then why did the supreme being make it so easily misunderstood and manipulated? IMHO, that is a much more direct way of disproving the god of any of these religions than the convoluted approach Leumas takes.

 

[dudalb]

I think someone’s been binging on Jack Chick tracts and mistaking them as representative of all Christianity. As if salvation is a matter of simply checking a box and saying “I accept Jesus Christ,” and BOOM, salvation!

A villain cannot simply repent at the last hour. For one thing, that repentance must be true, not facetious. In any case, God isn’t concerned with earthly definitions of “villainy,” he is only concerned with us putting him first. If we do that, villainy cannot thrive because good works follow directly from being saved.

As for mafiosos and other villains being villains while at the same time being Catholics or whatever, well that’s just down to simple hypocrisy. Humans are very good at justifying whatever they want to do with rationalization. They will pick and choose which passages from their scripture they follow and ignore the overall message of the Bible and most other holy scriptures: love. A saved person loves his fellow man and can’t help but do good.

Too bad there’s actually no such thing as God because the truth is, it’s all of humanity that is “evil.” We do harm every day because at our core, we are selfish and greedy. Wipe out all the religions and that will still be true; we don’t need a scripture to justify our evil.

Political ideologies have probably killed more people then religion.

 

[Leumas]

And did Jesus tell them to follow or worship other gods? (You know, like it says in the part of your quote that somehow accidentally got turned into ellipsis.) What verse was that in?

The above statement is a perfidious slander.... but thanks yet again for all the strawmanning and ad hominems... they really do make me have a warm fuzzy feeling of satisfaction as to the extent of emotions my OP is causing... do carry on...

 

[stanfr]

Did these priests drop dead on the spot without a chance for repentance or redemption or even praying for their souls??

If not... did they go to confessional and confess their sins and repent???

Where do you think the Catholic church says they would be after their death???

Dunno and don't care. True story: when i was a kid i occasionally was 'forced' to attend a periodic "confession" in a booth with the priest behind a wall. I always thought it was seriously creepy but i didn't wanna get in trouble by telling the priest to go to hell, so i always had the same canned response when they asked me to confess my sins--some nonsense about disobeying my parents. In reality, i was dong all sorts of horrific things that Catholicism forbade, but no way in hell was i gonna let the creepy priest know about it. So I went on my way with a handful of hail marys and our fathers as my penance, and if i was feeling motivated i might have got a third of my way through my penance before giving in to go listen to satanic music or something...

 

[Leumas]

Political ideologies have probably killed more people then religion.

And for most of the history of Christianity ... it was political ideology... as evinced by HISTORY.... and as evinced by what is going on right now in their successful take over of the political ideology.

 

[stanfr]

Defense Lawyer: Your honor... yes my client did many vile crimes including this one he is on trial for... but he also gave to charity and he even drove one of his victims to the hospital after he shot him and consequently he did not die but was only maimed for life.

Yep, and those are called mitigating circumstances. While they generally will not get him acquitted of the crime (guilty) they will make a huge difference in sentencing. You want the sentence to remain as "DEATH!" I don't believe in the death penalty. It is largely counterproductive. So i say 'life in prison'

 

[Leumas]

Hence the problem with religion as a whole and christianity in particular. If it is so dang easy to understand what it 'truly' is, and if it is the supposed direct word of God--then why did the supreme being make it so easily misunderstood and manipulated? IMHO, that is a much more direct way of disproving the god of any of these religions...

WOW... yet again... BINGO!!!

What is going on???

But you spoiled the joy with this

than the convoluted approach Leumas takes.

Well.... if you were not always hell bent on false dichotomies despite contradictorily hailing nuances of things... you would have understood how nonsensical this statement of yours is.... moreover... multipronged approaches are what an intellectual should utilize to do or think about anything... additionally... your way is not the only way or the highway... right???

Besides.... I said what you said in the first part many times on numerous occasions HERE on this forum.... here is the latest example just recently....

This is abject piffle... no you must not... if you do then all you are doing is creating your very own NEW quran that says what you want it to say.

If the Quran were the word of any REAL GOD... it would not have words and would not be written by human hands and printing presses....

if Allah were a god his purported book would not be written in an obscure dialect of one little tribe in a desert that 99.9% of humanity needs it translated.

In fact if the book was a product of any God worthy of the epithet, it would not have words or letters at all ... it would be a magical volume that anyone who opens it is hit immediately with all the messages this GOD wants the person to have ... no need to read... no need for translations ... no need to learn a limited language written down in a flawed incomplete abjads to try to get what it says first hand ... which it won't be anyway because of all the copying of copying of copying ad nauseam.

All anyone who wants a copy of this magical book has to do is reach inside the miraculous tome and pull out a perfect other magical book of the exact same miraculous qualities, no need for scribes and no scribal errors. All who have even the most cursory glance inside this book will glean all that it has to say and everyone will PERFECTLY agree about what it says and what it means and what this GOD wants... there would not be any need for casuists or apologists or sophists or imams or Hadiths or hermeneutics or exegeses ... not a single person would disagree on its messages... and it would be a complete message that does not require modern reinterpretations by self-appointed charlatans to give us the latest ADDENDUM telling the rubes what this god left out of his written book.

The fact that it does not have any of these qualities means it is either a scam by wily charlatans... or ... a hoax by a DEMON... but most assuredly not the production of an omnipotent OMNISCIENT omnibenevolent GOD.
...

 

[stanfr]

I think someone’s been binging on Jack Chick tracts and mistaking them as representative of all Christianity. As if salvation is a matter of simply checking a box and saying “I accept Jesus Christ,” and BOOM, salvation!

A villain cannot simply repent at the last hour. For one thing, that repentance must be true, not facetious. In any case, God isn’t concerned with earthly definitions of “villainy,” he is only concerned with us putting him first. If we do that, villainy cannot thrive because good works follow directly from being saved.

As for mafiosos and other villains being villains while at the same time being Catholics or whatever, well that’s just down to simple hypocrisy. Humans are very good at justifying whatever they want to do with rationalization. They will pick and choose which passages from their scripture they follow and ignore the overall message of the Bible and most other holy scriptures: love. A saved person loves his fellow man and can’t help but do good.

Too bad there’s actually no such thing as God because the truth is, it’s all of humanity that is “evil.” We do harm every day because at our core, we are selfish and greedy. Wipe out all the religions and that will still be true; we don’t need a scripture to justify our evil.

Oh my, that's enough for about 6 new threads LOL. All I know is my dog is not evil, he just wants his belly rubbed, a couple chunks of cheese and he will give you back 10 fold. He is not religious in the least (as far as I know...)

 

[Leumas]

Yep, and those are called mitigating circumstances. While they generally will not get him acquitted of the crime (guilty) they will make a huge difference in sentencing. You want the sentence to remain as "DEATH!" I don't believe in the death penalty. It is largely counterproductive. So i say 'life in prison'

Yes!!! QED!!!

 

[Leumas]

Oh my, that's enough for about 6 new threads LOL. All I know is my dog is not evil, he just wants his belly rubbed, a couple chunks of cheese and he will give you back 10 fold. He is not religious in the least (as far as I know...)

Mine wants a belly rub... a massage... a walk at the right time every day... play at the right time every day... or else he would start biting my nose and licking my face until I submit to his majesty.

 

[Myriad]

The above statement is a perfidious slander.... but thanks yet again for all the strawmanning and ad hominems... they really do make me have a warm fuzzy feeling of satisfaction as to the extent of emotions my OP is causing... do carry on... ��

Nope, it shows that your claim about the meaning of the quote was false, and if you disclaim an accidental omission, then it was deliberately dishonest.

You claimed that the Deuteronomy quote justified Jesus being put to death ("According to [the Old Testament]...that is exactly what it says should have been done to him..."). The portion you included in your quote makes it sound like that's so, because it states that any prophet who exhibits a sign or a wonder that comes to pass shall be put to death. That certainly sounds like Jesus. But in the words you excised it specifies prophets who advocate following other gods. Which does not describe or apply to Jesus at all.

It's a small point, but if you're not arguing honestly who's going to believe your arguments? Most people aren't going to do you the favor I've done you, to check your quotes for accuracy or honesty. What happens to your credibility when you try to get away with a deceptive edit and you're called on it? And more so, when instead of acknowledging or correcting the error, you personalize the argument and talk about my emotions as a distraction?

 

[stanfr]

WOW... yet again... BINGO!!!

What is going on???

But you spoiled the joy with this



Well.... if you were not always hell bent on false dichotomies despite contradictorily hailing nuances of things... you would have understood how nonsensical this statement of yours is.... moreover... multipronged approaches are what an intellectual should utilize to do or think about anything... additionally... your way is not the only way or the highway... right???

Besides.... I said what you said in the first part many times on numerous occasions HERE on this forum.... here is the latest example just recently....

Going back to the supposed 'false dichotomy'--do you understand why one of these two questions leads to a FD and one is not? Do you recall which one I posed to you?
1) Do you believe all Christians are evil?
2) Do you believe Christians are evil?
I suppose one could give an answer like "I can't characterize an individual as pure good or evil, therefore I cannot answer yes or no"
But thats really a copout, cause even if that is your belief, then the only logical answer to (1) is "No"
I didn't prevent you from elucidating a response--I just pointed out your reluctance to respond directly.
It is NOT a false dichotomy.

 

[Leumas]

Dunno and don't care. True story: when i was a kid i occasionally was 'forced' to attend a periodic "confession" in a booth with the priest behind a wall. I always thought it was seriously creepy but i didn't wanna get in trouble by telling the priest to go to hell, so i always had the same canned response when they asked me to confess my sins--some nonsense about disobeying my parents. In reality, i was dong all sorts of horrific things that Catholicism forbade, but no way in hell was i gonna let the creepy priest know about it. So I went on my way with a handful of hail marys and our fathers as my penance, and if i was feeling motivated i might have got a third of my way through my penance before giving in to go listen to satanic music or something...

Did you partake in the communion despite your fake confession and consequently a continued state of sin without sacramental absolution??

Didn't they teach you about this in the classes for preparing for your confirmation???

Also... consider this... what if a naughty boy like this grows up to still believe in the tenets of christianity... and decides to join seminary and become a clergy... and he learns more in depth about the NUANCES of the facts in the OP... and tells himself...

Self... it is ok to succumb to the sordid temptations I feel burning inside me... because all I have to do is confess and repent and Jesus will still welcome me as the lost sheep in his parable.​

Would he be wrong in thinking that way... I do not mean immoral... I mean not in full compliance with the tenets he was taught???

Let me ask you another question... there is only two answers ... as you are fond of saying...

There are two religions

• Says that you can believe in any god or gods you want and do any rituals you want... the only tenet is to not harm any people and not to cheat and not to lie and not to etc. etc. ... after death you will be judged not according to any beliefs or rituals you performed... but according to the net balance of good and evil you did.
• Says that you have to believe in this one god and do what he wants the way he wants it done... when you die you will be judged NOT according to what you did or did not do or how much good or evil you did... you will be judged according to the amount of faith and obeisance you had for this one god.

Which of these two religions do you think will foment less evil and more good???


.

 

[xjx388]

Oh my, that's enough for about 6 new threads LOL. All I know is my dog is not evil, he just wants his belly rubbed, a couple chunks of cheese and he will give you back 10 fold. He is not religious in the least (as far as I know...)

Just the fact that you “own” a dog? Evil! (According some other humans, anyway.)

Anyway, I think my post goes to the heart of the whole thread. If we define “evil” as doing harm, then there are countless actions we take that cause harm to others. Christianity is evil? Sure it is, but only because it was created by humans and has been used to harm others with some bogus sky-daddy justification. Capitalism, communism, Islam, Buddhism -I don’t care what human created institution we are talking about: they have all been used to justify/rationalize harmful things.

We are the devil because we all think we are god.

 

[acbytesla]

Political ideologies have probably killed more people then religion.

Probably. But isn't it amazing how one gets tied to the other.

 

[GDon]

• If a mass murderer repents even in the last hour and is baptized and believes in Jesus ... he is saved ... no matter what the count of his victims or his crimes
• So... if a mass murderer is a repentant christian he goes to heaven for ever

What's wrong with that? Redemption can be a powerful lure for one thing. But what should God do to a mass murder who repents in the last hour? Throw him in hell regardless?

 

[GDon]

• Christianity says that if one does not believe in Jesus ... no matter what... one is condemned for eternity
• It says that if one believes in Jesus and repents ... no matter what... is saved for eternity

Depends on what "believe in Jesus" means I'd think. The Catholic Church got an update from God about that in Vatican II (the sequel: God strikes back!). According to Father Joseph Arsenault, SSA, archdiocesan consultant for ecumenical & interreligious affairs:
http://theleaven.org/can-only-catholics-go-to-heaven/

“Vatican II made it clear that there is the possibility of attaining heaven without being Catholic,” said Father Joseph.

“I think we would still say there is no salvation outside the church,” he continued, “but what we mean by that is that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, as he said.

Sounds like your argument falls over nowadays at that point I'm afraid Leumas. God for the win!

In fact, there are various passages in the Bible that get used to show what was required. I like this one in the Gospel of Matthew:

Matt 25:

31 "But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory.
32 Before him all the nations will be gathered, and he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33 He will set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then the King will tell those on his right hand, 'Come, blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;
35 for I was hungry, and you gave me food to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; 36 naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me.'
37 "Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry, and feed you; or thirsty, and give you a drink?
38 When did we see you as a stranger, and take you in; or naked, and clothe you?39 When did we see you sick, or in prison, and come to you?'
40 "The King will answer them, 'Most assuredly I tell you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'

The idea is that "following Jesus" is done by helping others, regardless of whether you know about Jesus or not.

I also like the quote mis-attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi: "Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words."

 

[Leumas]

Nope, it shows that your claim about the meaning of the quote was false, and if you disclaim an accidental omission, then it was deliberately dishonest.

You claimed that the Deuteronomy quote justified Jesus being put to death ("According to [the Old Testament]...that is exactly what it says should have been done to him..."). The portion you included in your quote makes it sound like that's so, because it states that any prophet who exhibits a sign or a wonder that comes to pass shall be put to death. That certainly sounds like Jesus. But in the words you excised it specifies prophets who advocate following other gods. Which does not describe or apply to Jesus at all.

It's a small point, but if you're not arguing honestly who's going to believe your arguments? Most people aren't going to do you the favor I've done you, to check your quotes for accuracy or honesty. What happens to your credibility when you try to get away with a deceptive edit and you're called on it? And more so, when instead of acknowledging or correcting the error, you personalize the argument and talk about my emotions as a distraction?

More perfidy and mendacity... thanks again!!!... do keep them coming...

 

[Leumas]

What's wrong with that? Redemption can be a powerful lure for one thing. But what should God do to a mass murder who repents in the last hour? Throw him in hell regardless?

do you think it is ok for a victim of the holocaust to be tortured for eternity in hell while the soldier who pulled the lever to gas the victim to death is in heaven looking upon his victims being tortured in hell???