Go back
why is everyone so intrested in religion?

why is everyone so intrested in religion?

Spirituality

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
What is the nature of the religious work mentioned in your first definition?

In historical terms, I see missionaries primarily as harbingers of death preceding a rain of guns, germs & steel. That they also at a later stage seek to "mop up" (as you put it) or alleviate this destruction--in which they remain implicated by virtue of their status as ...[text shortened]... That being said, two thumbs up to everyone trying to help others out, whatever your convictions.
What is the nature of the religious work mentioned in your first definition?

Showing the love of Christ to people in hardship.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by genius
the logic fails when you assume that everyone who calls themselves a Christain is a Christain. Christains are called to follow in the ways of Christ, and Christs message was not one of hate.

The criteria for a Christain is that you follow Christ, not that you proclaim to follow Christ.
But who are we, the external observers, to believe?

You have your definition of what makes someone a christian, other people have different, more inclusive definitions. Why should anyone accept your definition, especially when it is based on circular logic.

Your 'logic' can be used to prove pretty much any old tosh.

For example, I reckon christians must have ginger hair. You will show me people who have black hair and claim to be christians, but I will reply that they are mistaken in calling themselves christians, because they don't have ginger hair.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
What is the nature of the religious work mentioned in your first definition?

In historical terms, I see missionaries primarily as harbingers of death preceding a rain of guns, germs & steel. That they also at a later stage seek to "mop up" (as you put it) or alleviate this destruction--in which they remain implicated by virtue of their status as ...[text shortened]... That being said, two thumbs up to everyone trying to help others out, whatever your convictions.
In historical terms, I see missionaries primarily as harbingers of death preceding a rain of guns, germs & steel.

How many of the missionaries listed on the link below would you categorise as harbringers of death?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christian_Missions

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Redmike
But who are we, the external observers, to believe?

You have your definition of what makes someone a christian, other people have different, more inclusive definitions. Why should anyone accept your definition, especially when it is based on circular logic.

Your 'logic' can be used to prove pretty much any old tosh.

For example, I reckon christian ...[text shortened]... y that they are mistaken in calling themselves christians, because they don't have ginger hair.
C'mon Mike, aren't you beating the ol' fluff out of the ol' pillow here? The very essense of the word Christian, means to be a follower of Christ and His teachings. There's nothing circular about that.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]In historical terms, I see missionaries primarily as harbingers of death preceding a rain of guns, germs & steel.

How many of the missionaries listed on the link below would you categorise as harbringers of death?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christian_Missions [/b]
The biggest one would be the first: Paul. Of the rest, John Calvin & John Eliot stand out. Technically, though, any missionary followed sooner or later by a conquering army would be a harbinger of death.

What do you make of Derrida's notion of the Gift:

http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/derrida.htm#SH7a

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Halitose
C'mon Mike, aren't you beating the ol' fluff out of the ol' pillow here? The very essense of the word [b]Christian, means to be a follower of Christ and His teachings. There's nothing circular about that.[/b]
I'm not saying that the definition is circular.
I'm saying that Genius's use of the definition to prove itself is circular.

The people who run the 'godhatesfags' site think they are following christ and his teachings too.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
The biggest one would be the first: Paul. Of the rest, John Calvin & John Eliot stand out. Technically, though, any missionary followed sooner or later by a conquering army would be a harbinger of death.

What do you make of Derrida's notion of the Gift:

http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/derrida.htm#SH7a
What do you make of Derrida's notion of the Gift:

Quite true. Don't let your left hand know... Occasionally, this style of gifting is not always possible or just impractical and it requires an essentially good person. This is especially true when the very work you do is the gift you give.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Redmike
I'm not saying that the definition is circular.
I'm saying that Genius's use of the definition to prove itself is circular.

The people who run the 'godhatesfags' site think they are following christ and his teachings too.
Right. So it would be quite easy to compare the faghaters with the teachings of Christ and see whether they are sanctimonious bigots or true followers.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Halitose
What do you mean?
uh, did you see the portions of your quote that I put in bold? Doesn't that seem a tad arrogant to you?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Halitose

Quite true. Don't let your left hand know... Occasionally, this style of gifting is not always possible or just impractical and it requires an essentially good person. This is especially true when the very work you do is the gift you give.
Giving can turn to poison--foreign aid often brings nightmares in its wake. It's an interesting phenomenon. I think of the Spaniards' reaction to the gift of cooked human flesh...they should have eaten it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by David C
uh, did you see the portions of your quote that I put in bold? Doesn't that seem a tad arrogant to you?
I was actually putting it in a secular perspective, since the topic of dicsussion seemed to be the politically and economically elite.

My reasons would be vastly different.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Giving can turn to poison--foreign aid often brings nightmares in its wake. It's an interesting phenomenon. I think of the Spaniards' reaction to the gift of cooked human flesh...they should have eaten it.
Giving can turn to poison

Especially when you add politics into the mix.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]Giving can turn to poison

Especially when you add politics into the mix.[/b]
Yes. Lucifer's fall from grace was all about politics 🙂

4 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

I truly don't appreciate Christianity being referred to as a "religion." How can you say believing in the factual resurrection and life of Jesus Christ is a religion? We can do anything religiously. We can brush our teeth religiously. We can run religiously. Still, today, we cannot love our brothers and sisters religiously. Everyone's out for themselves! Christianity a religion? No, I don't believe this is true; in fact, I know it's not true. A religion is only based on faith and the unfounded beliefs of individuals. However, Jesus is recored in non-Christianl manuscripts by Jocephus, the historian and others. Five hundred people saw Jesus ascend into Heaven, and because they saw this and believed on the Son of God, there was a great spiritual awakening in the world! Until the beginning of the first millennium, you see in the history books very few people devoted to the Holy Father God. After his son came, people risked their lives to spread the Word that He has risen! People were burnt on crosses, because they would not deny Jesus had risen, that he was the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Now, today, I find that people - even with Katrina, 9/11, and all the other terrible signs of the coming Antichrist - they deny that Jesus is returning. The prophecies are evident in the Bible. "When the fig tree blossoms, that generation shall not pass until the second coming of the Lord." The fig tree all through the Bible is Jerusalem (Israel). 1967 was the Six Day War where the Jews gained substantial land back as prophecied in the Bible. "That generation shall not pass away until the second coming of the Lord?" If you caculate what a generation is with 2000 years/42 generations at the beginning of the first chapter of Matthew, you get 47.61904! Add 47.61904 to 1967 and you get 2014.61904. Round that number off to 2015. Then, turn to the book of Revelations in the Bible. The tribulation will last 7 years. Subtract 2015 - 7 years of tribulation and you get 2008. Remember, we rounded off 2014.61904. Jesus said we shall know the generation. This means - being that it is nearly 2006 - that we have very little time left before the return of Jesus Christ. The rapture is approaching. All the prophecies in the Bible have never been disproven. They have happened! The euro dollar seems very much like a world money system; country's are joining this new money system every day. Churches have been infiltrated by Satan and his angels, introducing paganistic theology to the Christian's house of God. On the top of the European Union capital exists inverted WITCHCRAFT pentagrams! The European Union's symbol is the woman riding the beast. The European Union anthem was written by a Satanist. The only empty seat in the European Union cabinet is number 666 - the mark of the beast! They are waiting for him to take over. 2008? I wish everyone would wake up. Also, Wormwood out of Revelations - the star that falls from the heavens and massacres Earth - all of the sudden correlates with Planet X (Niribu) and it's approaching Earth in 2012. Nasa has seen Niribu. Just pieces of it falling to Earth will create all the pictures of horror in the Revelations. Last, the Mayan calendar ends in December of 2012. What did the Mayans know that we do not know? There exist many Mayan mysteries of science, archaeology, etc... What did they know we do not know? Did they see Wormwood (Niribu)? They say if someone calls you a duck, you can doubt it's true. If two people call you a duck, you can think about whether you are. But, if three people call you a duck, you better start quacking! How many ducks did I just mention? And, there are vastly hundreds more than that. Look up how possible it would be in a court of law to disprove Jesus has risen! There's a book out called THE CASE FOR JESUS. The author - a Mr. Strobel - use to be a doubter! He didn't believe Jesus lives! He goes to disprove Christianity - "the religion" - and ends up finding out you don't really even need belief to know that Jesus lives. Jesis is FACT. The only thing stopping people from believing in the one true Son of God is Satan himself. The facts are simply there, but the minds are clouded by the dark spiritual realm. This is the way it shall be in the Tribulation also. People will forsake all to worship the antichrist. More archaeologists will unearth more Christian finds. They've already discovered UR was a real place, the place Abraham once resided. They've already found a Jewish tomb and on the coffin is James brother of Jesus. How likely is it that the brother James in the bible is not the James on that coffin? Laugh all you want. Jesus is returning and His reward is with Him! PRAISE JESUS, the LAMB OF GOD!

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by powershaker
I truly don't appreciate Christianity being referred to as a "religion." How can you say believing in the factual resurrection and life of Jesus Christ is a religion?
I can say it because it's true. Just read the dictionary:

www.m-w.com
Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
- re·li·gion·less adjective