The Anti-Christian conspiracy

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and the initial cause of the extermination of the native americans?
survey says: RELIGION!

Okay, so you're saying it wasn't because of land, power, livestock and loot? Let's not forget about all those missionaries who carried guns and shot up people instead of building churches and making peace with the natives eh? Sounds like somebody has GOT to fix all these history books.

[edit on 9-9-2007 by saint4God]

Originally posted by shaunybaby
This is Saint's judgement,

No, my judgement would be that we all screw up and everyone should live in eternal happiness and in accord with God. Unfortunately for me, that's not God's judgement.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
when I point this out, I get the response: 'God is the judge, His Word decides'. However, I don't see in Saint's sentence where God was doing the judging.

I am not the one judging, I'm saying who is and is not a follower of Christ according to Christ himself and what he has said. If I repeat Christ, who then is the judge?

[edit on 9-9-2007 by saint4God]

Originally posted by saint4God
I am not the one judging, I'm saying who is and is not a follower of Christ according to Christ himself and what he has said. If I repeat Christ, who then is the judge?

You are the one judging. If you take a book and then personally judge people from what is written in that book, then this means you are judging.

If Christ said love thy neighbour, then surely he would be therefore willing to forgive those who did not?

You seem very quick to put words in to Christ's mouth and say that 'He will judge those people as non-Christians'. So not only do you personally judge those people as non-Christians, you even take it upon yourself by interpreting Christ's words in The Bible and then speak for Christ saying he would also judge them as non-Christians.

If I've got it wrong, then please explain. However, when you say 'those people are non-Christians' and then say 'that is not me judging, that is Christ', it's clear as day.

reply to post by saint4God


i said INITIAL... initial, as in first. hell, it wouldn't have been about land. native american populations in north america equaled populations in europe when columbus arrived.... on a much larger area of land. they died at first for a refusal to accept religion. the inca were attacked so fervently because their ruler through a bible to the ground and didn't convert to christianity (mainly because the inca had no written word and the guy had no idea what the people were giving him)

i never said it was the only cause..

and saint, if your judgment is more benevolent than that of your god... i think there's an issue there

Originally posted by shaunybaby
You seem very quick to put words in to Christ's mouth and say that 'He will judge those people as non-Christians'.

Not what he will do, what he HAS already done. It takes a reading of the gospels to know what he said. What do the gospels say that contradict what I say?

Originally posted by shaunybaby
If I've got it wrong, then please explain.

Doing my best, thanks for your patience and I can understand why it seems like I'm speaking from myself as I am an intermediary/representative.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
However, when you say 'those people are non-Christians' and then say 'that is not me judging, that is Christ', it's clear as day.

I do enjoy the catch-22 set up though. I have to say what the Bible says but get blasted for quoting it. Nice.

Yes, Christ told us to love our neighbors and enemies, but he also said God is the judge and his enemies don't fare to well in the end.

[edit on 10-9-2007 by saint4God]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
the inca were attacked so fervently because their ruler through a bible to the ground and didn't convert to christianity (mainly because the inca had no written word and the guy had no idea what the people were giving him)

Not for the gold? If not, why did the Spanish take it? C'mon madness, you cannot be serious.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and saint, if your judgment is more benevolent than that of your god... i think there's an issue there

If I am the one who is judging, then I am wrong. Period. Doubley so if anyone (including myself) were to think my judgement is more benevolent than that of God.

Even though this is off-topic, I'll stand before the court and testify.

[edit on 10-9-2007 by saint4God]

Originally posted by saint4God
Not what he will do, what he HAS already done. It takes a reading of the gospels to know what he said. What do the gospels say that contradict what I say?

But how do you know that Jesus would call them non-Christians? Are you speaking for Him as a 'representative'?

Originally posted by saint4God
I do enjoy the catch-22 set up though. I have to say what the Bible says but get blasted for quoting it. Nice.

I didn't blast you for pointing out what The Bible says. You've interpreted The Bible and then you've stated what Jesus' opinion would be on the matter. I'm just wondering why you would think you can tell us all what Jesus would think on certain matters, because surely no one would know that?

[edit on 10-9-2007 by shaunybaby]

Originally posted by shaunybaby
But how do you know that Jesus would call them non-Christians? Are you speaking for Him as a 'representative'?

This is a very good question. I am not to form my own opinions on the matter, rather to accept the criteria already written. Looking back, I may have presumed listeners are already familiar with the examples I'm refferring to, which is probably not the best approach. A bit more stepwise this time...

Christians are disciples of Christ:

"The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." - from Acts 11:26

What is a disciple?

Someone who is not seeking personal gain:

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. " - Matthew 16:24

This includes following what Christ said. Also denying the love/worship of money

"Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."

"Which ones?" the man inquired.

Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,' and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'"

"All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still lack?"

Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth." - Matthew 19:16-22

Christians are those who obey Jesus' commands:

"If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love." - John 15:10

Jesus' commands include:

"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." - Luke 6:27

The best way to get the whole picture of what a believer/Christian is, is to start with the book of Matthew. It is a great guide (as I see it) for knowing what to be and do as a Christian. Next would be James, who challenges Christians to do what Christ said. As stated in the book...

"Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says." - James 1:22

This is a reflection of what Christ said here:

"He told them, "The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field." - Luke 10:2

Originally posted by shaunybaby

Originally posted by saint4God
I do enjoy the catch-22 set up though. I have to say what the Bible says but get blasted for quoting it. Nice.

I didn't blast you for pointing out what The Bible says.

I believe you are one of the few non-believers here who wouldn't and am grateful.

Originally posted by saint4God
You've interpreted The Bible and then you've stated what Jesus' opinion would be on the matter.

I haven't the ability to quote all four books here. If I've said something incorrect according to the scripture, be a brother and please point it out. That goes for JungleJake, WiseSheep, or any other believer as well.

Originally posted by saint4God
I'm just wondering why you would think you can tell us all what Jesus would think on certain matters, because surely no one would know that?

Jesus has made it clear, I'm just relaying to what he has already said. As I've said, I'm not needed, it's already there. You don't even have to read the Book to find it. Ask him yourself. Ask God. Just don't be surprised if He directs you to read the Book for your many questions (as was the case for me), then come to Him when you run into something that's difficult to understand.

[edit on 10-9-2007 by saint4God]

Had some more people come to my door today and talk about God. This time they were on about why there is suffering in the world, and how it could be stopped. I said a few less wars would be a good start. And so eventually we got on to 'why'. And turns out somewhere in The Bible it mentions how Satan actually rules the Earth, and because he is angry, hateful etc, that so are the people of the world. I just find this a hard concept to believe because God cannot possibly be omnipotent, if Satan rules our planet.

Anyways they left a little book, i'll be flicking through. Just wanted to know what the concensus is on Satan ruling the planet.

Shauny makes some awesome points here and am glad I'm able to talk a bit about them...

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Had some more people come to my door today and talk about God. This time they were on about why there is suffering in the world, and how it could be stopped.

Not by us.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
I said a few less wars would be a good start.

Totally.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
And so eventually we got on to 'why'. And turns out somewhere in The Bible it mentions how Satan actually rules the Earth, and because he is angry, hateful etc, that so are the people of the world. I just find this a hard concept to believe because God cannot possibly be omnipotent, if Satan rules our planet.

Yeah, it is a hard concept. Why, if God is a loving God, would He allow the world to suffer?

"Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you." - 1 Peter 4:12

"Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him. " James 1:2-4, 12

And to that the people may say - "Why must I suffer to get the crown of life! Just gimme the crown!" Dude, I know how you feel...

"For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future." - Jeremiah 29:11

And the people say - "Tell me the plan! Tell me why I need to suffer to fulfill the plan, THEN I'll have hope!" But God says...

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD." - Isaiah 55:8

...then the people in their frustration walk away pissed off and "everyone did as he saw fit" - Judges 21:25 , but "those who are pure in their own eyes and yet are not cleansed of their filth" - Proverbs 30:12

Trust is the key that opens the door to hope/faith. "Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God ; trust also in me." - John 14:1. Only then can we receive these gifts of hope and faith. After those gifts we can receive our proofs.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Anyways they left a little book, i'll be flicking through. Just wanted to know what the concensus is on Satan ruling the planet.

May I ask the name of the book?

What verse are we referring to? I believe the world is rife with his work, but to say he has complete ownership means that it's not under God's ultimate authority/kingship...which frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Satan would kill off all the Christians to shut them up and give microphones to the ones doing the killing. Maybe that time is coming, but it's not here now. *taps the microphone* Nope, mine still works. Maybe it was this one in "Revelation", aka the book of things to come:

"For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to give the beast their power to rule, until God's words are fulfilled. The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth." - Revelation 17:17-18

Looks like God is still king here, though Satan is given governorship.

I have my own theories as to why we're made to suffer, feel free to U2U me about them, as they're my thoughts rather than record.

[edit on 12-9-2007 by saint4God]

i Think it's pretty amusing that the bible itself predicts that eventually the majority of the world will be against Christians, during which the world will be globalized under one curreny and one government. All the movements seem to look as if they are leading towards that.

Originally posted by dominicus
i Think it's pretty amusing that the bible itself predicts that eventually the majority of the world will be against Christians, during which the world will be globalized under one curreny and one government.

My definition of a banker is 'Someone who watches your money with great interest'

This is a very interesting point if I may expand a bit. I worked in banking for 10 years. It started as a part-time job in college but eventually worked in Customer Service, Fraud, Billing Disputes, Lending (Credit Analyst), Human Resources, Management, and some other areas. Although this company really cared about it's customers and employees, it did do some things I thought were quite disturbing. First, it had the highest rate that it could get away with while still being lower that competitors (meaning they'd jack up interest to 40% if they were the only kids on the block). Second, it was in the race for globalization. When you use your credit card overseas, it automatically converts it to U.S. dollars. Then came the 'security chip' which seemed to lose popularity but is now replaced by a chip where you can 'blink' to pay instead of swiping and signing a receipt. How novel. Instead of having card, wouldn't it be more 'secure' to have that chip imbedding in your hand or forehead? Sounds gross now, but think about it, it can have you dental records, medical records, financial transactions, emergency contact information, etc. One chip, one currency.
As many may have heard, Americans (perhaps other nationists of their own country who are experiencing the same) are concerned about domestic jobs being sent overseas. Why? Due to inflation and exchange rates, it's cheaper to pay a less well-off country to do the work. Aka - cheap labor. What results is that country climbing the economic ladder. Once it's on a peer level, it's time to move the company work to another, cheaper country. The result is a one world economy through globalization. If we have one econonmy, we're going to need one currency. At first, this sounds like a good idea (and will work at first with everyone declaring "Peace at last! Peace!"...but think about what happens when one company or government gets complete control of all of it. Ooops! It's no longer fun to be under the wrenching arm of a monopoly. No food unless this company/government approves your chip. Ugly. I'm automatically rejected, in fact, because I won't have the chip.

Is globalization part of the Anti-Christian Conspiracy? Yes, but perhaps not yet. I don't think I'll see it in my life-time, but my children may depending on how strong the push will be. I'd mark it down for between 400 and 1,500 years, but is just a guess. You can see the footprints leading forward though and we're on track.

[edit on 14-9-2007 by saint4God]

In repsonse to the post previous to this one, as to "where it looks like we're headed."

You know the U.S. and Bush (who by the way seems to be the epitome of crazy) just passed North American Union legislation, or should I say didn't pass it. You see, Bush started a whole seperate entity (Peace & Prosperity Coalition) in which he doesn't need approval from the rest of the Government to make any decisions. And so he decided one day to meet with Canadan'a prme minister and Mexico's prez to make thi shappen.

Do I smell illuminati???

And so just like that, we are on the verge of being Unionized with Canada and Mexico, and 90 something percent of the country/world doesnt have a clue.

Also, a new currency is being prepared for this North American Union (NAU) called the Amero.

Globalization, is just around the corner. Let the revolutionary groups begin.

Originally posted by saint4God
Not for the gold? If not, why did the Spanish take it? C'mon madness, you cannot be serious.

never said that greed wasn't a factor. i'm just saying religion was one of the factors. i'm sure it would've been far less bloody had the inca accepted christianity and subjugation

If I am the one who is judging, then I am wrong. Period. Doubley so if anyone (including myself) were to think my judgement is more benevolent than that of God.

well... god damns people that you wouldn't damn. i know you're more benevolent than god if you'd be far more forgiving.


now, it's quite clear that there is no anti-christian conspiracy. especially when the most powerful country in the world is majority christian and has a massive problem with discrimination against atheists.

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
and the initial cause of the extermination of the native americans?
survey says: RELIGION!

Okay, so you're saying it wasn't because of land, power, livestock and loot? Let's not forget about all those missionaries who carried guns and shot up people instead of building churches and making peace with the natives eh? Sounds like somebody has GOT to fix all these history books.

[edit on 9-9-2007 by saint4God]

Well according to this:

Romanus Pontifex, a papal bull issued by Pope Nicholas V in 1455, established some basic principles and rules for the interaction of Christians and non-Christians. Since the Portugese were the principal "navigators" then engaged in ocean exploration, the bull is specifically addressed to them, granting privileges to "the illustrious Alfonso, king of the kingdoms of Portugal and Algarve," to "invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed." The bull notes that previous letters from the pope have already affirmed various priveleges of this sort; the bull is intended to pull these items together and give them the force of papal law. It asserts that the overriding purpose of exploration and conquest is to spread Christianity, but, in the process it is acceptable to conquer, kill, confiscate, and enslave.

and this

The "Doctrine of Discovery": Even before Columbus's first voyage to the Americas, Europeans had been making explorations that placed them in contact--and conflict--with non-Europeans. Portugese navigators, for example, had been working their way down the west coast of Africa for decades (Bartholomeu Dias reached the Cape of Good Hope, the southern tip of Africa, in 1487). An essential piece of background for understanding the "age of discovery" is the religious context of Catholic Europe in the fifteenth century. The world is divided into "Christian" and "non-Christian," a distinction that is felt with special clarity in Spain, where there have been several centuries of armed conflict with the "Moors," Muslims who invaded from northern Africa and controlled much of the Iberian peninsula. When the Muslims are finally driven out in 1492, it is not entirely a coincidence that Columbus is at once given approval and support to undertake his first voyage. Well before this, however, the church had taken an interest in the process of contact, Christianization, and conflict.

they also did this link is above

The Requerimiento of 1510: Romanus Pontifex had established the principle that "Christian princes" had the right to overcome the interests of "non-Christian princes" in order to spread Christianity throughout the world. A (to us) curious result of this principle was the composition of a document known as the "Requerimiento" by the Spanish jurist Palacios Rubios in 1510. Springing from a legalistic culture, this document was designed to encapsulate the legal claim of the Spanish to carry out the provisions of Romanus Pontifex. The document was to be read out in either Spanish or Latin to native peoples, on the pretext that this would give them the opportunity to submit to Christianization peacefully; when they did not (not surprising, since they could not understand the language used, and would have been puzzled by the cultural context even if they could have understood the language), the Spanish were then free to attack and subdue them by force.

And did they Ever.

European contact with the Americas in the late 15th century was a fateful event--both for the peoples of the Americas and the peoples of Europe. For the native peoples of the Americas it meant the beginning of a process which, in a matter of a few decades, destroyed a way of life that had been developing for over ten millenia. Warfare, enslavement, and European diseases often resulted in the death of 95% of a native population within years. For Europeans, the contact was usually not deadly, but the cultural impacts were powerful. American gold and silver made Spain and Portugal--briefly--the richest nations in Europe and also multiplied the European money supply by a factor of eleven, an important element in the industrial revolution. American food plants not only transformed European cuisine (even Asian: Szechuan cookery is based on the pepper from South America) but also led to an explosion of the European peasant population (based on the calorie-rich potato) that had political and social repercussions that lasted for centuries.

Christians Murdered Indians

corporate avenger the bible is bs

Google is great

[edit on 15-9-2007 by LDragonFire]

I really do think there is a Christian conspiracy, as well there should be. Christianity is Guilty of murder on the scale never before witnessed on Earth, these crimes have been occurring for thousands of years.

The only problem with that is that Saint denies that those people were Christian, as they weren't following Christ's word.

Exactly what is Christ's word? Does the whole Bible not count. Afterall it is entirely inspired by God, so should you not follow it?

Exodus 22:18

''Put to death any woman who practises magic''.

Exodus 22:20

''Condemn to death anyone who offers sacrifices to any god except to me, the Lord''.

These two quotes are under 'Moral and Religious Laws'.

If Christians aren't supposed to follow this, then why have it in The Bible. Surely both those quotes have absolutely no relavence in the world we live in today.

Okay so those are from the OT, but these sort of morals are also found in the NT.

2 John 1:11

''So then, if someone comes to you who does not bring this teaching (talking about Jesus' teachings) do not welcome him or her in your homes, do not even say 'peace be with you''.

So both the OT and NT speak of not accepting non-Christians. So how is that not anti-every-other-religion/atheist? You've got parts in your Bible that specifically talk about the killing of people with different beliefs, yet we're the ones who are anti-Christian.

Originally posted by shaunybaby
The only problem with that is that Saint denies that those people were Christian, as they weren't following Christ's word.

Exactly what is Christ's word? Does the whole Bible not count. Afterall it is entirely inspired by God, so should you not follow it?

Well, that ain't the only problem.

- "Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved"
So how do you call, how much calling do you do, what exactly does it mean 'call' - who owns this written formulation of words that will grant salvation

- you have the 'once saved always saved group'
- you have the group that looses their salvation as soon as they leave the alter and sin by crossing their eyes wrong on the way back down the isle.
- you have the group who believe that it isnt up to you period...predestination.
In this scenario, your stuck - "Who are you old clay pot if the potter chooses some clay for royal use and other for hell fire"

So, as you enter the world of Christianity those are 3 major factors that in the MAIN doctrine they cant even agree on - and here we are talking about the most important part of this religion, the value of ones own soul.

If you choose to go down this traditional path, or anyone, have fun...each group thinks their right - but on the outside, you see that those 3 scenarios about the soul is something you better resolve before committing your energy to such a group.

Oh, then lets go into the sects - those that evangelical Christianity label cult, or whatnot. Jehovah witness, mormons, they vary the opinion on who "Gods son Jesus" is.

Now while there is a united effort from evangelicals to point out that this is something major that must be believed (that is the nature of who Jesus is), they neglet to realize those 3 points of disagreement over who is saved - (those chosen by God for hell and heaven, those who lose it constantly...if you lost it, where do you pick it up? And those who cant loose it and will kill everyone in the name of the loving christ. - not all are like that

So have fun with this

Peace

dAlen - the missonary to the the lost - evangelical christians

By all means continue, you're proving the point without me having to say anything. Hey, you guys wouldn't happen to be working together would you? It's the same names I see on many threads discussing Christianity.