Christianity - A Religion of Death Part II

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Vicky32

 

So if you heard some disembodied voice claiming to be Jesus and commanding you to do as it said you would immediately set to work and wouldn't assume that it was either a trick or, if you are religious, perhaps a demon??

Even Thomas, who apparently knew Jesus while he was alive, wanted proof that he was, indeed, looking at and talking to Jesus.

How easily your allegiance is swayed.

I trust my sense of hearing is all I am saying!
Don't be silly... and as for giving you attention, I simply feel morally bound to correct your errors, for fear that a gullible person might take you seriously.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct

 

While I can't say much about your personal experiences I can say that the Gospel of John was written around 90 AD or later.

This places the Gospel of John at roughly 60 years after the death of Christ and makes it more recent than the Book of Acts and likely past the expected life span of any of Christ's disciples.

Well let's go to the Old Testament , then. The prophet Isaiah stated that an angel took tongs and got a live coal off the altar and touched his lips with it. There is your fire aspect to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which John the Baptist said would happen. In the OT it was one prophet at a time. Then came John & Jesus and now it's available to all.

Everything about the baptism of the Holy Spirit is found within the OT. The entire pathway into the temple itself are all parts of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. That torn veil gives us access, that we once didn't have. Inside the Holy of Holies - the kabbalist call it divine union, the gnostics the bridal chamber and modern man calls it the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

It's called 'The Way" for good reason.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Vicky32

 

So if you heard some disembodied voice claiming to be Jesus and commanding you to do as it said you would immediately set to work and wouldn't assume that it was either a trick or, if you are religious, perhaps a demon??

Even Thomas, who apparently knew Jesus while he was alive, wanted proof that he was, indeed, looking at and talking to Jesus.

How easily your allegiance is swayed.

I'm sure I would have considered if it were a trick at first. But hearing the voice and seeing my buddy's eyes fried and blinded by whatever it was that he saw would give me pause.....plus I would have heard everything that was said.

I'm Thomas. We're Thomas. Humans are Thomas. Proof Proof Proof! It's all that we ever want. Evidence, proof, something that can be counted and cataloged. Jesus' word was good enough. He was who He was. Thomas needed to see with his own eyes to know for certain. He got his proof and felt foolish for even asking. Jesus was Thomas' life and it must have torn at him that he ever doubted his Messiah. Of course his word was good. He was the Truth.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Unless this is what you're talking about:

The noncanonical Dead Sea Scrolls suggest an early Jewish origin, parallels and similarities to the Essene Scroll, and Rule of the Community.[47] Many phrases are duplicated in the Gospel of John and the Dead Sea Scrolls. These are sufficiently numerous to challenge the theory that the Gospel of John was the last to be written among the four Gospels[48] and that it shows marked non-Jewish influence.[49]

Yes, that's a part of what I was talking about.. I'd provide more links, if I didn't have to go right now...
Vicky
You should really back up your statements with some sort of reference, unless, like the followers of Paul, you expected me to take it "as a matter of faith".

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by jrstock

 

Well, since Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same patron tribal storm god of the bronze age Levant, I suppose you could lump them all together. (Although I sometimes wonder if Muslims worship the same god. Jews and Christians worship Yahweh and Muslims worship Allah, who's name comes from the ancient 'illu, a derivation on the name El, the chief deity of the ancient Levant)

The main subject of this particular series of articles, however, happens to be Christians.

Regardless, if I spoke about Jews I'd be called an anti-Semite and if I spoke about Muslims I'd probably be murdered since I live in NYC and there are many Muslims around.

Come now equal opportunity offender! Start a thread with 'Zionist'. Spread the love equally. Anti Christ is anti Christian. But the special laws do not protect them. Why?

reply to post by slowisfast


If God is all powerful and perfect and all seeing how can he not see his creation was doomed from the start?
Also we are ALL children of incest seems we all (according to your bible) came from one woman and one man so hence somebody either Adam or Cain or Abel had to be doing the sister or mother to populate the earth and they do their relatives and so on?
Thought incest is against your religion?
How can God so easily kill his children for simply being human and making mistakes and disagreeing with God which he gave us free will but only use it if it is inline with what God wants so therefore there is no free will.
I believe one of the ten commandments is "thou shall not kill" but he forgot to mention that it is ok for him to do so and the Catholic church can kill in his name and the pope still gets to go to heaven- yep seems like a fair and loving God to me.
If we go by the bible and God's actions then if our children disobey or get hooked on drugs or commit a crime or do not believe in the same God then it is ok for the parents to kill the child without fear of going to hell, after all it would be for God.
I also thought Jesus was against money and material possessions yet your pope sits in his golden castle with the finest marble, paintings, books, and lacks for nothing and sacrifices nothing while his servants live in squalor and poverty?
What would Jesus say upon arriving at the Vatican? What would Jesus say when after he sacrificed his life for mankind the Catholic church went right on ahead and is responsible for the largest genocide in history?
Thank you but i prefer my Creator who is loving and doesn't kill people for simply being human and asking questions as to the truth about our ancestry.
Are you also aware that pope Gregory changed the musical scale from the Solfeggio scale to the one we use today -do, re, mi so man could not elevate himself spiritually, but isn't the Catholic church all about getting closer to God and being more spiritual?
Or the real truth of keeping man down and in constant fear and servitude and sacrifice everything so the elites of the church have everything, all about power and money and control.
If the pope really cared then why doesn't he ever give to the poor? The church alone could end poverty and suffering with just the paintings they have so why does he live so lavishly when it goes against everything Jesus taught?
Also why does the pope have a Heliopolis from Egypt out in front of the vatican when it is a pagan symbol and his staff that he holds has the pineal gland (third eye) at the top of the staff? Why are there gargoyles and pagan symbols all over the vatican? Hum didn't the catholic church slaughter others for the same thing?
Organized religion of any kind is the destruction and downfall of mankind and responsible for the constant bloodshed throughout history including thee most recent wars.
If religion was truly about love and worship and honor then they would accept their fellow man regardless of thier beliefs like Jesus did.
Did Jesus kill people for not believing or did he even cure those that did not? Seems the catholic church did not follow in Jesus teachings.

Once again, my 2 cents from the Orthodox Christian faith (i am no expert however, so do not take my words as a definitive answer for Orthodoxy)

Just wanted to touch base on the symbol of the cross as an alleged symbol of death.
Yes indeed, it was a common and frightening form of execution used for hundreds of years before and after Jesus.
It is the symbol of Christianity as a reminder of the sacrifice that was made.
Up until the time of Jesus, man still made physical sacrifices to God for forgiveness. Jesus proclaimed that he would be the last physical sacrifice, ending the practice for all his followers.
He was killed in such a fashion for several reasons. I believe it was already mentioned that it was an intentional, selfless, yet frightening (he was incredibly burdened by it) sacrifice for mankind. However it was also fulfilling the prophecies of the Messiah from ancient past (too many to list here).
I don't believe anyone here can ever support the Catholic crusades or inquisitions, or that men have done terrible deeds in the name of God, this is a flaw of mankind, not of the dogma and faith. For every twisted maniac (this includes some of the Popes and clergy) touting their agenda as the "will of God" I would like to believe that there are at least 2 good-hearted Christians who truly believe in tolerance and love for all to balance that out.

So just another thread making claims with no proof, no back up, no reasoning, and hailed by the OP themself to be "truth"? Someone thinks a lot of their opinions. Again, unless you back up your claims with references, proof or sound logic, there is no reason for a rebuttal. It seems a waste of time to refute someones baseless opinions.

Thank you, great post , could not agree more.
I am confused though, with all this worship over the "cross" the bible does state that Jesus died not on the cross but by a hanging.
Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

reply to post by mark844


Hi Mark,

Again this is a phrase that has to take into consideration the time it was made and the context.
Historically speaking, during those times criminals against the Roman state were crucified in 2 ways.
One was to tie the arms and legs to a crucifx and days later the crucified would sucumb to exposure and the weight of their own head collapsing on their chest and suffocating.
The other was to actually nail their arms and legs to cause more pain to the victim.
Both types were phrased as "hung" where the "tree" was essentially the logs that formed the crucifix.

Hope that helps somewhat.

reply to post by Diceman22


Why would I need to provide proof for obvious historical facts? Do you really deny that crucifixion was used as a method of execution? I don't see how you can deny that the symbol of the cross is the same as the symbol of a noose.

Perhaps you should stop buying into the indoctrination and brainwashing you've been a victim of and learn to think for yourself.

reply to post by Konstantinos


If you really believe that Jesus was the last sacrifice that man should make then you must believe that the Jews are evil sinners.

Judaism still routinely sacrifices animals as an important part of their faith so you must, naturally, believe that they will be judged and condemned to Hell.

reply to post by Shadowflux


I believe all men are sinners, but I don't believe that all are evil.
Just because someone does not necessarily believe in Christianity does not make them evil.
I may see them as misguided, by my own personal opinion of course, but not evil.
As for condemnation into hell, as I said in my reply in your first article regarding generalizing Christianity as a relgion of death, Orthodox Christians (which I consider myself) do not believe in people being condemned to a hell, but to an existence with the absence of the grace of God. (Many have intepreted this as a type of hell).
I (and I hope all fellow Christians) try not to judge, as I am not, nor ever will be qualified enough to judge a person's soul.

reply to post by Konstantinos


You say that Christians shouldn't judge others, which is written in the Bible, yet you have judged all of mankind to be sinners. You have deemed the creation of your God to be sinful in it's very nature, the nature which God has programmed into us. How can you worship the same God who has created us and programmed us to sin as the only salvation from sin mankind can expect?

reply to post by Shadowflux

Let's not take my words out of context. I said I "believe" all mankind are sinners. That is not a judgement, but a statement of belief, I do not imply consequence or conclusion of punishment.
As for the nature of our creation, you're reminding me of Pacino's performance in Devil's Advocate (one of my fav movies btw).
A fundamental idea behind Christianity is to accept the limitations and faults of being human, but to strive to overcome them.
I can't tell you why God decided to create us in the manner that he did, nor will I try to understand a plan that is probably WAY beyond my ability. (I would liken it to trying to explain Nuclear-Physics to a caveman) but I do know that as a people, we can do great good if we choose to.
It all boils down to faith in a greater good both within us and in a divine being, and free will, which in my opinion is the essence of creation.

reply to post by Konstantinos


You say you operate on faith but faith shouldn't be an excuse to stop rational thought. I walk across the floor with total faith because I'm confident in the knowledge that it will support my weight. I have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow because I have knowledge that it rises every morning.

Faith shouldn't be used as an excuse to stop thinking, it shouldn't be used to justify a belief and adherence to something that you, admittedly, don't understand.

I've heard many other Christians speak as you do, referring to "Free will" as being one of the root causes of man's ability to sin. Free Will isn't limited to man, however, as your own religion has shown that other spiritual beings also have free will.

In the Book of Enoch, Shemjaza and the Grigori descend to Earth in direct opposition to God's will. They display free will in the actions they take on Earth, in the knowledge that what they're doing is directly against God's commands.

Even if you don't belief in the validity of Enoch then the bastardized story of Satan's rebellion in heaven displays the free will of Satan and the angels he converts.

If we are to assume that the most rational explanation is, most likely, the correct one, then shouldn't we assume that the views the church have presented are incorrect and this error, on their part, is the reason for so many contradictions in this religion. Wouldn't a divinely inspired, true understanding of the nature of the God, and his plan for us, not require one to accept the validity of concepts with the negation of all rational thought?

Would it not be more rational to assume that this doctrine of sin and judgment is, simply, wrong in light of the fact that we must constantly add caveats, that we must accept things without the hope of understanding it?

Wouldn't it be much more rational to assume that the Church is wrong and that God would not condemn his creations or punish them for acting according to the nature which He programmed into them?

If God is truly omnipotent then the idea that he could create things over which he has no power would logically make Him fallible and place limits on His power. The fallibility of God is necessary to a belief in doctrine and scripture yet, at the same time, completely invalidates the religion.

reply to post by Shadowflux


Ok, I'll try to touch on my opinion to each of your points.
First of all, I never implied that faith eliminates rational thought. Infact, faith and logic can go hand in hand.
I mean there are many things that logically make sense that I have never witnessed, therefore I have faith in their validity. There are also many things that logic cannot explain, are we to believe that these things therefore do not exist? Keep in mind, a few hundred years ago, rational logic dictated that the world was flat, therefore I cannot (in whole) accept the assumption that the most rational thought at the moment, is ALWAYS the correct one.

Second, nobody said that free will was an exclusive privilidge to mankind. Angels indeed share the ability to choose, the distinction between mankind is that Christians believe that God created man with his own hands and breathed life into him. Angels were created with the remainder of creation through the spoken word.

I will concede that man probably has, and will continue to interpret God's nature, plan, and the scriptures with errors here and there, but that's where mysticism and faith come to play. If a person does not believe in faith or the mysteries of things that could exist beyond his understanding, then perhaps said person will be unable to find any comfort in Christianity. A willingness to believe and humble one's own understanding is probably a pre-requisite.

As for God's judgement, nobody really knows how that will unfold, all we can do is try to live by virtues we can aspire to.
God's role in the free-will scenario.... well I can only offer my opinion that He more than likely knows what the consequences of our free will can lead to, and steers us in subtle ways to better ourselves on our own. Again, simply my opinion...

Looking back I can see how you may think my response is too vague and lacks substance. The reasoning for this is that personally I have accepted the mysticism of God, without needing proof or demanding understanding. I can hope for it, but not demand it

My goal in my replies is to simply state my opinions which probably are in contrast to yours, but at least we're discussing it in a civilized manner of which I enjoy! I hope to continue our conversation tomorrow when I am back online.

Goodnight!