Christianity is a death cult

Jesus Lives!!!

maybe you meant Christianity is a life cult???

Jesus defeated death itself, Ya man it's a life thing see???

Christians around the World Thank Jesus for his promise of Eternal LIFE!!!

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Make an anti Christianity thread get stars and flags

from the OPs page 1 -

Jesus did not come to die for sins, he came to teach us the way to God, and that does not include his death at the hands of the Romans

In case your comprehension skills need honing - The main part of the op deals with the subversion of Jesus message at the hand of Paul and the different message he proclaimed. If by anti christian you mean the established "sanitized version" you're led to believe by your pastor exegesis then that is as far as your understanding will ever go. There are plenty of research tools out there if you truly seek.

As for Islam - they share common ancestry plenty of death in both -

a reply to: undo

the roman empire usurped christianity and proceeded to kill christians who didn't agree. to this day, non roman christians, are blamed for what the romans did,

The dying Roman empire institutionalized and turned itself into another newer theocracy. Cheaper than having legions everywhere. It worked well - most of those "christians" that were killed that you claim - had nothing in common with your perception of a New Testament christian. Jesus was simply a Essene who wanted to get rid of the Herods, pharisees and sadducees. Its right there in the New Testament but you have to take off those tinted glasses.

a reply to: undo

but considering the huge efforts being made to single out christians in particular, which remarkably mirror what happened to the jews in germany and the kulaks in ukraine

Genocide will be genocide whether done to "Christians" or not. The secular descriptor is used to conjure a "single enemy" or "outsider" or "different tribe" Much like what the USA is doing in the middle east with indiscriminate bombing.

BTW you forget to mention the gypsies and homosexuals and intelligentsia class targeted by Hitler as well

a reply to: NihilistSanta

If we are to discuss theological matters then the claims have to be based on the theology which comes from a source, the Bible. Everything else in this thread is conjecture

If you are making speculative claims present them as so instead of fact

Here we go - there is no contemporaneous historical evidence of Jesus having existed other than a dubious reference in Josephus - Note I clearly state having existed not having existed according to others accounts

Other than the "Roman decreed closed accepted by tradition book" called the 66 books bible do you have any other sources to prove Jesus existence in your theology?

BTW from
en.wikipedia.org...

Theology is the systematic and rational study of concepts of God and of the nature of religious ideas, or the learned profession acquired by completing specialized training in religious studies, usually at a university, seminary or school of divinity.
Augustine of Hippo defined the Latin equivalent, theologia, as "reasoning or discussion concerning the Deity";[2] Richard Hooker defined "theology" in English as "the science of things divine".[3] The term can, however, be used for a variety of different disciplines or fields of study.[4] Theologians use various forms of analysis and argument (philosophical, ethnographic, historical, spiritual and others) to help understand, explain, test, critique, defend or promote any of myriad religious topics. Theology might be undertaken to help the theologian:
understand more truly their own religious tradition,[5]
understand more truly another religious tradition,[6]
make comparisons among religious traditions,[7]
defend or justify a religious tradition,
facilitate reform of a particular tradition,[8]
assist in the propagation of a religious tradition,[9] or
draw on the resources of a tradition to address some present situation or need,[10]
draw on the resources of a tradition to explore possible ways of interpreting the world,[11] or
explore the nature of divinity without reference to any specific tradition.
challenge (ex. biblical criticism) or oppose (ex. irreligion) a religious tradition or the religious world-view.
History of the term[edit]

So the same theologians that have studied hard (you not included) may use other sources to reach their conclusions other than the "bible"

a reply to: NihilistSanta

The deniers are the ones who fear death so they create ideas to reduce the penalty of death and non-belief to justify their ways and existence.

I deny that Jesus died for my sins 1) I was not born under sin after Adam - children are born perfect - even jesus admonishes those who do anything to children claiming the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. In effect going against your interpretation of the evil Jehovahs deception that you ascribe to.

2) you get plenty of chances to find the kingdom of Heaven within as Jesus said.

3) I dont fear death but see it as a transition. You constantly fear death because you bought the lie of Hells existence.

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Religious cults as you call them are not doing these things governments and corporations are and are all to happy for you to lay the blame on God and his message

So when middle east countries are invaded to further US hegemony (in most case subtly using religious tones) why the silence from the christian populace? Why dont they as a group change the government - or is their war mongering jehovah not strong/weak, but in actual fact feeding on the misery. What is government but the acquiescence of the populace?

a reply to: NihilistSanta

governments and corporations are

Most churches ARE corporations so they claim tax free status. You cant serve God and Mammon

a reply to: BlueMule

World religion, as a single unit, is rooted in and evolved from primordial shamanism. Shamanism wasn't created because of fear of death. It is a reaction to entheogen ingestion.

Not all shaman practises involved entheogens. You draw a long bow...

Shamans taking entheogens to codified state sanctioned religious institutions! You better come up with some further explaining.

a reply to: ketsuko

. Heck, half the things the non-religious do are out of fear of death - eat this, don't eat that, exercise so much but only in this way, etc. All those things are done in the attempt to prolong life. Who has a fear of death?

And yet you would probably admit that the mind can be more powerful than the body. So the bodies natural/unnatural decay would not dwell as much on any non-religious folks minds as much as the idea of spiritual death to a believer. Eschatology is a great industry for Christian booksellers.

a reply to: Nochzwei

Jesus had to die on the cross and be raised up again, for if He did not ascend into Heaven, The Holy Spirit would not be in this world

Hehehe- you dont know your bible much. So when did the holy spirit come down - was it already in the pre-existing Triune god at the formation of the world out of chaos as per Genesis or did it come down many years after the death of Jesus in Acts 2: 5-13? Seems like according to you Jehovah was a different god than the New Testament one. The Holy spirit also seemed to descend on Mary impregnating her with the immaculate conception

a reply to: Nochzwei

Who are we to question the ways of our Lord?

Well the Lord gave you a rational mind? Using your logic Jehovah was being an a'rse'hole when he blamed Adam for not using his mind before eating of the Tree of knowledge

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Jesus lives alright!

John 14
19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live.

But....

Romans 6
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

And...

1 Corinthians 15
31 I affirm, brethren, by the boasting in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.

How can people who claim to sin and die every day be alive?

And why are you repeating yourself? Sounds like you're trying to convince yourself.

a reply to: Xtrozero

No matter how informed they are, they tend to be off somewhat in the end. When someone suggests that Christianity is a death cult what really does that mean to that person?

Having decided to convert to christianity in my late teens I can assure you that most Baptist/Pentecostal denominations in the 70's subtly used the fear of hell to keep the flock coming back and the tithing flowing into the coffers. It was obvious once the cognitive dissonance kicked in.

You state...

Even as Plato contemplated philosophy, logic, ethics etc. he had sex slave boys that were a a norm, and he lived in a time where life had little value. Do we then say today that the foundation of ethics is based on pedophilia and a death cult?

BUT....

en.wikipedia.org...

Scholars have debated the role or extent of pederasty, which is likely to have varied according to local custom and individual inclination.[9] The English word "pederasty" in present-day usage might imply the abuse of minors in certain jurisdictions, but Athenian law, for instance, recognized consent but not age as a factor in regulating sexual behavior.[10] As classical historian Robin Osborne has pointed out, historical discussion of paiderastia is complicated by 21st-century moral standards:

It helps if you do actual research before spouting off...again...they were not slaves

a reply to: Nochzwei

Everyone should seek to be Saved thru the Blood of Jesus

Just because your little dictator mind says so? Blood sacrifice is so OT; very vampiric as well

a reply to: Seede

Were it not for Yahusha not one would be allowed into the heavens of the Creator

Was that the pre-existing triune Christian NT god? Where did Elijah and Enoch disappear to?

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Religious cults as you call them are not doing these things governments and corporations are and are all to happy for you to lay the blame on God and his message

So when middle east countries are invaded to further US hegemony (in most case subtly using religious tones) why the silence from the christian populace? Why dont they as a group change the government - or is their war mongering jehovah not strong/weak, but in actual fact feeding on the misery. What is government but the acquiescence of the populace?

The same reasons no other groups are effective at changing the Govt. The govt is an illusion and the corporatocracy/oligarchy are fully in charge. Visit ATS much?

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: NihilistSanta

If we are to discuss theological matters then the claims have to be based on the theology which comes from a source, the Bible. Everything else in this thread is conjecture

If you are making speculative claims present them as so instead of fact

Here we go - there is no contemporaneous historical evidence of Jesus having existed other than a dubious reference in Josephus - Note I clearly state having existed not having existed according to others accounts

Other than the "Roman decreed closed accepted by tradition book" called the 66 books bible do you have any other sources to prove Jesus existence in your theology?

BTW from
en.wikipedia.org...

Theology is the systematic and rational study of concepts of God and of the nature of religious ideas, or the learned profession acquired by completing specialized training in religious studies, usually at a university, seminary or school of divinity.
Augustine of Hippo defined the Latin equivalent, theologia, as "reasoning or discussion concerning the Deity";[2] Richard Hooker defined "theology" in English as "the science of things divine".[3] The term can, however, be used for a variety of different disciplines or fields of study.[4] Theologians use various forms of analysis and argument (philosophical, ethnographic, historical, spiritual and others) to help understand, explain, test, critique, defend or promote any of myriad religious topics. Theology might be undertaken to help the theologian:
understand more truly their own religious tradition,[5]
understand more truly another religious tradition,[6]
make comparisons among religious traditions,[7]
defend or justify a religious tradition,
facilitate reform of a particular tradition,[8]
assist in the propagation of a religious tradition,[9] or
draw on the resources of a tradition to address some present situation or need,[10]
draw on the resources of a tradition to explore possible ways of interpreting the world,[11] or
explore the nature of divinity without reference to any specific tradition.
challenge (ex. biblical criticism) or oppose (ex. irreligion) a religious tradition or the religious world-view.
History of the term[edit]

So the same theologians that have studied hard (you not included) may use other sources to reach their conclusions other than the "bible"

The standard you are applying to a history of Christ was not used then for one thing. As I stated previously millions/billions have lived before our modern era without written record but I assure you that they did indeed live. Your reasoning could be applied to almost all religious leaders and philosophers. There is little remaining about Diogenes but we are not debating his existence. You have faith in thousands of things that you cannot verify for yourself from the past with scarce evidence outside of theories but do not question them.

There are witnesses to Christ and that is how the belief was spread. Do you really think the people at the time of Christ just gave up everything they believed in with no evidence? The prevalence of conversion was so great that cities and temples fell and governments adopted the belief and this was 300 years after Christ. If Muslims came to your country spreading Islam how easily would you adopt the faith without some measure of proof?

I am not here to convince you though. You have your institutions you have placed your faith and you choose to believe what regurgitated theories you desire just as the claim is made in regards to Christians.

*** I just noticed the mod post from bigfatfurrytexan . Feel free to remove that which has drifted on my part. We tend to get sidetracked then have to defend a position or disprove one in an attempt to "lay to rest" a false premise. I think when debating religious topics pointing out biases and exploring how belief is formed, the flaws in established academic premises , the way information in general is transmitted and believed by laypersons are important issues but I can definitely see how it can cause off-topic conversation. Thanks for the reminder BFFT.