Do you believe that Jews are the sons of the devil? Becuase Jesus said they are:

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
John 8:44

According to the bible, it was the Jew's fault that Jesus died:

"The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God."
John 19:7


I'm sure Arthryon is more than capable of answering these questions himself, but this particular pair of issues has spurred me into action:

1. He was talking about the Pharisees, a particular Jewish sect, not the Jews as a whole. Sort of like saying how Communists are evil bastards who all need to be shot does not equal a declaration of genoicide on the entire Slavic race.

2.He was crucified by ROMAN soldiers on a ROMAN cross with the order for his death being signed by a ROMAN govenor. All blame can just as easily be laid on those canoli gobbling, horse decapitating Italians as it can the Jews. (When Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, the early Church decided it would be more politic to work hand in glove with the RE, and then we got the trend of Jews=Christ Killers. This is a gross oversimplification, of course).

I'm sure Arthryon is more than capable of answering these questions himself, but this particular pair of issues has spurred me into action:

1. He was talking about the Pharisees, a particular Jewish sect, not the Jews as a whole....

2.He was crucified by ROMAN soldiers on a ROMAN cross with the order for his death being signed by a ROMAN govenor...

That is, if you believe all that crap anyways...

True, it's all just a story anyway that didn't really happen.

The point is that Arthryon claimed that Nazis didn't have t3h r34l Christianity because they didn't follow the bible's teachings and I'm pointing out that if you want antisemitism in the bible, you got it. Therefore the nazis have just as much claim to th3 r3al Christianity as Arthryon does.

I believe in abortion only in clinical situations or in rape.


So if a birth-control device fails or two people make one stupid mistake, you think the woman should be forced to raise an unwanted child?

So if a birth-control device fails or two people make one stupid mistake, you think the woman should be forced to raise an unwanted child?

A man who "believes" in abortion? Who cares? He's never gonna have one.

Yeah, I had an algebra teacher who "didn't believe in calculators". I told him I didn't believe in algebra then & dropped the class & took Stats instead.

Dude, violating godwins law only counts for your side of the argument, it doesn't count if we do it.
Seriously, nazism isn't the best argument against xtians. Their attitude towards gays, contraceptives and abortion however....

And what attitudes would those be? Scripture says that homosexuality is a sin, for certain. It does not say that we should persecute those who sin, because guess what, we're ALL sinners (Romans 3:23). None of us is without sin, thus none of us is allowed to throw the first stone. I honestly don't know why so many alleged Christians persecute homosexuals (maybe they're secretly gay themselves and in denial?), because in the same passages that homosexuality is condemned in the New Testament, along with it are gossip, theft, slander, drunkenness, lying, heterosexual sins, and a slew of other things that folks like the Westboro Baptists tend to ignore.

Scripture says nothing about contraceptives, to my knowledge.

Scripture also says nothing about abortion, to my knowledge. It does say that one should not murder, but murder requires the taking of a human life. The entire abortion debate rests SOLELY on whether or not you think a human foetus is a human life, and at what stage foetus becomes human. This is a personal belief, not a religious one.

Virtually all the "problems" you assert that "Christians" have with these things are cases of individuals either not thinking for themselves and/or being unable to distinguish their personal beliefs from their religious beliefs (the same often occurs with political beliefs and personal beliefs). People don't like being wrong, so less intelligent and less honest people attribute all their beliefs and opinions to being justified by the highest authorities they can find. For some, that is Science, for some Experts, for some God. They, of course, often do this erroneously, simply for the sake of having the peace of mind that "I'm right and you're wrong."


Hey Arthryon, do you believe that unbaptized people go to hell? Because the bible says they do.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Mark 16:16

Firstly, I don't believe in "Hell" as it is commonly taught, because in the original Greek, there IS NO Hell. There are 4 words in Bibles that are commonly translated as Hell (Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and Tartarus), and they are 4 entirely different things that have 4 entirely different meanings. Most Bibles translate these words illegitimately as meaning the same thing, when they most CERTAINLY do not. For instance, "Gehenna" is another name for "The Valley of the Sons of Hinnom," a place just outside of Jerusalem that, when it was formerly occupied by tribes of Pagans, was used for human sacrifice. The Jews turned it into a trash dump. I don't feel like writing the dozens of pages it would take to undo the false teachings that have been taught about Hell, so I'll give you a link that explains it all in depth:

http://www.bible-truths.com/ -- Read the "Lake of Fire" series, it's the set of articles set within the red square.

Secondly, most people don't understand baptism. Baptism is more than a mere ritual dunking of someone in water. True baptism is baptism of the Spirit. Remember that Romans 7 talks about how we are no longer under the Old Law (speaking of the Mosaic Laws of the Old Testament), but under the New Way of the Spirit. Physical rituals do not bring salvation, forgiveness of sins, or justification. The physical is merely a manifestation or a response to the spiritual. A water baptism is irrelevant if one is not first spiritually baptized.

So yes, I believe that verse is true, but it does not mean what you think it means. Furthermore, I do not believe in eternal condemnation, and I can cite several verses and explain a few other terms which guarantee that God will save EVERYONE, if you would like. Some people will have to undergo judgment and extreme chastisement, have their sins and canrnal nature burnt out of them (though obviously this isn't a literal burning as with physical fire), but ultimately ALL of Creation will be reconciled unto the Almighty.


Do you believe that people who blaspheme against the holy ghost are can never be forgiven (and go straight to hell, no trial.) Becuase the bible says they do.

"And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven."

Luke 12:10

The Holy Spirit doesn't exist. That's it. I can only go straight to hell now according to the bible. No second chances for me.


Firstly, it does not say that they shall NEVER be forgiven, it says they will not be forgiven, there is a fine distinction there. When it says they will not be forgiven, it's referring to the coming White Throne Judgment spoken of several places in the New Testament. When it comes time for God to judge all mankind, they shall not be forgiven for this sin and will have to account for it and be chastised for it.

Furthermore, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not what you think it means either. Simply saying "I deny the Holy Spirit" or something like that is not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. You have to pay attention to the context. Christ says that just after the Pharisees accuse Him of using demonic powers to perform miracles, and then Christ pwns their argument with a quote that Abraham Lincoln later used. In order to actually blaspheme the Holy Spirit, you have to witness the Holy Spirit in action, know it is the Holy Spirit, and then spiritually spit in its face. That is what the Pharisees did. They knew full well that Christ could not have been doing the things He was doing unless He was doing it in accordance with the Will of God, yet they came against Him anyway, because He challenged their theocratic hypocrisy.


Do you believe in killing people that refuse to be ruled by God? Becuase the bible says you have to.

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
Luke 19:27


So are you even READING these verses you're posting at me or are you just copy/pasting from some anti-Christian website in an attempt to look smart out of spite? Do you even care about an answer, or are you just looking to stump me?

If you had used 2 brain cells and read this entire section, you'd see that those words come from a character IN A PARABLE, not the words of Christ directly and literally instructing all His followers. Do you know what a parable is?

par·a·ble http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pnghttp://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fparable) /ˈpærhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngbəl/ Pronunciation Key (http://bullshido.net/forums/) - Show Spelled Pronunciation (http://bullshido.net/forums/)[par-uh-buhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngl] –noun 1.a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson. 2.a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.
Need I go on? Come now, you're smarter than that.


Hmmm, so.. you live according to what Jesus taught eh? And Hitler didn't did he? Well let's see about that:

Do you believe that Jews are the sons of the devil? Becuase Jesus said they are:

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
John 8:44

He's speaking to the Pharisees who have come against Him. If you would stop isolating single Scriptures in an attempt to prove me wrong and look at the context, you'd see that He's responding to their claim that they are the sons of Abraham, and later the sons of God, and pointing out how clearly they are not the sons of either, as they would be behaving and responding to his message differently otherwise. He is not making a pronouncement against all Jews. By doing so, He would be calling Himself the son of the devil. Come now, seriously.


According to the bible, it was the Jew's fault that Jesus died:

"The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God."
John 19:7

And that's just one bit. There's many other passages that state that the Jews are responsible for Jesus's death.

The Pharisees played the biggest part in Christ's death, yes, but that doesn't mean that ALL JEWS are responsible. Christ came and died knowing full well what He was doing, Christ CAME to die. I'm thankful that they killed Him, because they were merely fulfilling the Father's will, and in doing so, made it possible for Christ to save us all. Christ had numerous opportunities to escape, to disappear, and to recant, and He chose to die for our sake. Why would I or anyone else harbor ill will against "the Jews" (whatever that means) for something that Christ clearly intended and wanted to happen to him?

Besides, Christ died for the sins of all. My sins put Him on the cross just as much as any Jew.


Do you believe that gay people are an abomination? Becuase the bible says they are:

"And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.
Kings 14:24.

Just wondering if you follow that stuff too? If you don't then I don't think you have t3h r34l christianity.

The Bible does not say that homosexuals are an abomination, it says that homosexualITY is an abomination. Homosexuals are not homosexuality, they are people, and God loves people. You see, you, like a lot of people, seem to be unable to make a distinction between a person and their sins/actions/inclinations/beliefs/desires. If there were no distinction between us and our sins, then Christ could not have taken our sins upon Himself and died in our place. Clearly our sins are distinct from us, thus homosexuals are not an abomination in the eyes of the Lord.

I do follow Scripture and the only Christianity I have is what Scripture teaches, which is by definition the only real Christianity.


I'm sure Arthryon is more than capable of answering these questions himself, but this particular pair of issues has spurred me into action:

1. He was talking about the Pharisees, a particular Jewish sect, not the Jews as a whole. Sort of like saying how Communists are evil bastards who all need to be shot does not equal a declaration of genoicide on the entire Slavic race.

2.He was crucified by ROMAN soldiers on a ROMAN cross with the order for his death being signed by a ROMAN govenor. All blame can just as easily be laid on those canoli gobbling, horse decapitating Italians as it can the Jews. (When Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, the early Church decided it would be more politic to work hand in glove with the RE, and then we got the trend of Jews=Christ Killers. This is a gross oversimplification, of course).

Indeed.


True, it's all just a story anyway that didn't really happen.

The point is that Arthryon claimed that Nazis didn't have t3h r34l Christianity because they didn't follow the bible's teachings and I'm pointing out that if you want antisemitism in the bible, you got it. Therefore the nazis have just as much claim to th3 r3al Christianity as Arthryon does.

The point is you don't know what you're talking about and neither did the Nazis.

Ok, since we are going down this path I might as well jump in. The majority of Germans were what I would call cultural Christians, like most Americans are today. Within that set there is the subset of true believers, which can be divided into subsets based on the different versions of Christianity. A lot of people call themselves Christians because it is the path of least resistence. They have no strong beliefs and to them church is more of a social rather than religious partaking. Therefore there is an intersection between the sets (true believer and Nazi) but neither is wholly contained in the other. This makes the Nazi = Christian argument moot.

Now as for the quoting of scripture. The scripture you are using to defend your arguments is part of your belief system. Those outside these belief systems (Christian, Jewish and Islamic) give no special credence to these words. Quoting the bible as evidence of God and his will is circular logic. I believe the bible is the word of God. I believe in God because the Bible says so. You can’t use A to prove B and then use B to prove A.

There, hopefully I have pissed off both groups for trashing my thread. I declare myself the winner! Thread closed.

:karated:

So if a birth-control device fails or two people make one stupid mistake, you think the woman should be forced to raise an unwanted child?If a birth-control device fails or two people make one stupid mistake, should a child be killed for no fault of his own?

See what I did there? I just nit-picked on your position regarding a complex moral issue that can and will never have a final solution for it while completely disregarding any other point that may or may not exist in the moral framework you operate with.

What did I achieve with it? Nothing. The only reason I mentioned my position on abortion, among the many other points which you happily decided to ignore as you kept fishing for something, anything to subjectively quote, was to demonstrate that there is no such monolithically thinking and believing entity regarded as 'they' in kultist's post.

It is also worth noting that any position you or I may declare here, is an ideal position, for what I believe in. Once you are into a situation where you have to choose, under specific stressful circumstances, that's where we will find out if we can live by it or not.

That position is my position, about my life and about those close to me. I'm not going to pretend to dictate how others live their life, certainly not on a complex moral issue.

Furthermore, I will never be so fucking stupid and arrogant as to presume what kind of people they are based on this one issue (or any one single issue) without taking into consideration the totality of what they believe in or how they conduct their lives (in particular their contribution to society, charity and those in need.) Doing so, in particular to prove that my POV is the valid one, it's not only immoral, but arrogant, and just plain fucking stupid.

Just as there are Christians like me who have this opinion of abortion, there are Christians who believe in abortion the way you do (that it is a choice, a right.) And Muslims, and Hindus, and Agnostics, and secular people without any denomination, and atheist, and so on and so on. These are moral issues we struggle with - which again, demonstrates the mistake on making these generalizations on they this and they that.

It is nice that you decided to nit-pick on that one while ignore every single point that was made on that post from which you decided to nit-pick-quote.

Do you actually think you can take a single issue and hammer on it, independent of everything else, and then get an objective view of a moral framework different from yours? How far are you willing to go in your search for something to argue about?

Care to search for another statement that you want to quote in isolation from everything else in your quest for the ultimate strawman? Go for it dude.

I like to belive that whatever I think I know about God, Science and the nature of the Universe, that the truth is much more complicated than that. And I belive that because it's probably true.


Originally by Shakespeare.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

So if a birth-control device fails or two people make one stupid mistake, you think the woman should be forced to raise an unwanted child?

No, that's not what he's saying. Just that they should be forced to carry the fetus to term and give birth to it. I think the purpose is to punish the woman for getting pregnant.

Then again, he did mention "clinical situations." Which could mean he's all for abortions, as long as it's done in a clinic.

No, that's not what he's saying. Just that they should be forced to carry the fetus to term and give birth to it. I think the purpose is to punish the woman for getting pregnant.Yeah, that's what it is for.

Ok, since we are going down this path I might as well jump in. The majority of Germans were what I would call cultural Christians, like most Americans are today. Within that set there is the subset of true believers, which can be divided into subsets based on the different versions of Christianity. A lot of people call themselves Christians because it is the path of least resistence. They have no strong beliefs and to them church is more of a social rather than religious partaking. Therefore there is an intersection between the sets (true believer and Nazi) but neither is wholly contained in the other. This makes the Nazi = Christian argument moot.

Interesting terminology, I tend to refer to them as members of the "Cult of Churcianity" or "Churchians." It has little to nothing to do with following Christ, so I do not think it's appropriate to associate them with him.


Now as for the quoting of scripture. The scripture you are using to defend your arguments is part of your belief system. Those outside these belief systems (Christian, Jewish and Islamic) give no special credence to these words. Quoting the bible as evidence of God and his will is circular logic. I believe the bible is the word of God. I believe in God because the Bible says so. You can’t use A to prove B and then use B to prove A.

There, hopefully I have pissed off both groups for trashing my thread. I declare myself the winner! Thread closed.

Where did I quote Scripture in an attempt to prove that God exists? The only time I've quoted Scripture is to demonstrate what is and is not Christian teaching/belief, because it is the ultimate authority on what is and is not Christian, as the very TERM Christian comes from it. Also, it is the only record we have of what Christ and His Apostles taught (outside of ancient external, secular sources which didn't have much to say about specific teachings, only that the early Christians abstained from over-indulgence and really loved each other), thus it is the only and highest authority on what the word "Christian" (one who follows Christ) means. Without it, to "follow Christ" would not mean anything.

Do you believe in Noah's Ark Arthyron?

Do you believe in Noah's Ark Arthyron?
Do you believe in Ziusudra's Riverboat, Virus?

Do you believe in Ziusudra's Riverboat, Virus?

Does anyone believe in Manu Vaivasvata? Flood Myths should be another thread.

haha

this thread is now about nazis.

i'm glad i mentioned nazis earlier. Didn't think it would turn out this lulzy anyhow...