Americans Are Losing Their Religion -- But the Fundamentalists Have a Plan

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

perverted ideas are supplanting the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

I have no argument with you on this subject.
The true gospel doesn't involve burning in hell...
it has to do with looking within, to find the Divine Spark.

reply to post by wildtimes


I believe the purpose of any religion is to get closer to the deity of that religion. It's to run towards something, rather than run away from something else. If one does that under threats or duress, then the motivation is out of whack. I think it's entirely probable that I would rather do my time in hell than with a deity who would use a threat of hell to force me into his fold. If that's all the draw he has, then I'd do my time with the sinners instead of the saints, who would only be there because they live in fear. Who wants to exist in fear? Fortunately, my God has more to offer than threats and intimidations. He pulls, rather than pushes.

reply to post by nenothtu

Who wants to exist in fear? Fortunately, my God has more to offer than threats and intimidations. He pulls, rather than pushes.

Exactly my point. Helping someone and then telling them they'll burn in hell if they don't 'say' this or that, or surrender themselves to something that is beyond humans' ability to grasp, is wrong.

This thread reminded me of a documentary I watched called Pururambo.

For the most part it's a typical film about some of the tribal people in New Guinea, a film crew earns their trust and gains access to film them for a while. It's really interesting, but at the end of the film the crew is nearly killed because after they moved on to meet with another tribe, a christian missionary group made contact with the original group and showed them a video of the modern world with all our technology. They told them how they where left behind and their natural way of living was wrong, their forest spirits where a lie, and that they needed Christ in their life. Hearing this completely devastated the entire village.

I'll never forget the look on their faces when the film crew returned, it was as if all their hope and purpose in life had been sucked out of them. It ruined their lives, they where broken dejected people after that. It was one of the most maddening things I've seen in any documentary.

Those missionaries had no right doing that. They had no foresight, or mindfulness in their handling of that situation. In their mind they where doing a great job by spreading Christ, and that's all that mattered. Instead they caused a major dose of suffering to people who didn't need their religion, and weren't at all ready to see the video of the modern world in that context.

If you haven't watched it, you should check it out. I think it's still on netflix.

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by wildtimes

 

here too,
they convert people by promise of money and then still show caste discrimination by making the lower caste christian converts to sit far behind not to offend the higher caste converts!!

They are filling a religious/spiritual vacuum but causing a lot of hatred and violence as the hindu fundamentalists clash with them and the people who suffer are the poor converts.
Its sick to prey on ignorant people just because they desperately need money!!

Less then 50% protestant?? Maybe more Catholics?? In California Anglos are in not the majority any more. Bethinks a lot of this is 'hidden' racisim.

Caste system is a good way to describe it.

> godtards

reply to post by nenothtu

Make no mistake - you have lost your faith.

My faith is so strong that I could figuratively run through a brink wall. I also know there is no reason to have doubts about God because there is overwhelming evidence that He delivers on what He says.

When "knowing" comes, the need for faith is gone, and faith is lost

Incorrect, I know that Christianity (and the SDA expression of it) is the only true, publicly defensible religion on the planet. I still need to have faith to understand what God would want me to use my life for according to His will.

All is not lost, however

Nothing was ever lost, you don't know me

claimed tro be "ziggurats", which didn't exist in Israel

Lot didn't settle in the promised land (with his back towards the Mediterranean, he didn't choose to go left (north) or right (south) in the promised land, he opted to go straight ahead which was east)

reply to post by mahatche

I'll never forget the look on their faces when the film crew returned, it was as if all their hope and purpose in life had been sucked out of them. It ruined their lives, they where broken dejected people after that. It was one of the most maddening things I've seen in any documentary.

Can you image how mad and dejected they will be at the Judgment (if God deems they reject Him at that point and not a false representation of Him) with their ancestors for following the false spirits of the fallen angels. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes reality hurts.

Those missionaries had no right doing that

The missionaries had no need to tell them 'how they where left behind and their natural way of living was wrong' and that was wrong. They would be perfectly right to tell them about Jesus, as forest spirits as God is BS and Jesus isn't. Whether they did an adequate job of telling them about Jesus and giving them some knowledge and hope in Christianity to help overcome doubts is another story (as I have not seen the movie or was there).

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by mahatche

 

I'll never forget the look on their faces when the film crew returned, it was as if all their hope and purpose in life had been sucked out of them. It ruined their lives, they where broken dejected people after that. It was one of the most maddening things I've seen in any documentary.

Can you image how mad and dejected they will be at the Judgment (if God deems they reject Him at that point and not a false representation of Him) with their ancestors for following the false spirits of the fallen angels. Ignorance is bliss, sometimes reality hurts.

The reality is that they don't need your ignorant, flawed, exoteric, localized, self-serving exegesis.

You think they do because you have no real faith. You have a tiny, phallocentric, tribalistic, uninformed concept of God that you have made an idol out of. You can't see past form, concept, dogma.

An ant hurries along a threshing floor with its wheat grain, moving between huge stacks of wheat, not knowing the abundance all around.

It thinks its one grain is all there is to love.

So we choose a tiny seed to be devoted to. This body, one path or one teacher. Look wider and farther. …

-Rumi

But on the other hand you are what you have to be. So carry on, idolator. It's all good.

reply to post by BlueMule

The reality is that they don't need your ignorant, flawed, exoteric, localized, self-serving exegesis. You think they do because you have no real faith. You have a tiny, phallocentric, tribalistic, uninformed concept of God that you have made an idol out of. You can't see past form, concept, dogma.

Following a 'Forest Spirit' would imply a deity contained to within existing creation, i.e a pantheistic religious base and as such the deity would have to create by means explained inside creation (i.e through naturalistic mechanisms) to understand the reality of the world as we know it

Well what is the reality of the world as we know it?

The reality is that the entire Milky Way galaxy is without anti-matter! Why is this a problem for the Forest Spirit religion...??? because of matter creation from energy through naturalistic mechanisms would produce an equal amount of anti-matter. As there is no anti-matter to be found in reality it means that creation happened by a deity that represents itself as being OUTSIDE of our creation.

Where's all the Anti-Matter?
One of the many scientific problems with the big-bang notion is called the “baryon number problem.” In the big-bang scenario, the universe starts out infinitely small, and infinitely hot, in a point called a “singularity.” All the energy in the universe, and even “space itself,” is contained in this point. The point rapidly expands like a balloon and the energy cools as it is dispersed. The energy forms matter—hydrogen and helium gas. It is this gas which allegedly condenses to form stars and galaxies. Virtually every step in this conjectured process is riddled with problems that are indicative of the big bang’s dismal inadequacy as a scientific model. Let’s highlight one of these problems involving the conversion of energy to matter.

Energy can indeed be transformed into matter. This can be done in a laboratory. However, such reactions always produce an equal amount of a substance called “antimatter.” Each class of particle of matter has a corresponding anti-particle. Antimatter is identical to ordinary matter in virtually all respects except one: the charge of the particle is reversed. So, whereas a proton has a positive electrical charge, its antimatter counterpart, the “anti-proton,” has a negative charge. Likewise, electrons are negatively charged, but an anti-election (also called a “positron”) has a positive charge. As far as we know, it is impossible to create matter from energy without creating an exactly equal amount of antimatter. This is what laboratory science has shown us.

If the big bang had actually happened, it too would have produced an equal amount of antimatter. Therefore, the universe today should have an equal amount of matter and antimatter. But it doesn’t. The universe is made almost entirely of matter. This is no slight imbalance; it is a huge problem. It is estimated that the universe contains 10 to the power 80 atoms (that’s a one followed by 80 zeros). Each of these has a nucleus made of protons (and sometimes neutrons). Protons and neutrons are “baryons.” There are ubiquitous baryons in the universe, and yet there are virtually no anti-baryons to be found!

Big-bang supporters have come up with an idea to try and save the big bang from this baryon number problem. They have proposed that on extremely rare occasions energy can produce matter only—with no antimatter produced as a by-product. Indeed, there are a number of variant speculations in physics that rely on this notion to solve the problem of the missing antimatter, but, of course, this idea does not rely on the results of observational science. Observations have shown that matter and antimatter are always produced in pairs; we have never seen one produced without the other. As usual, the naturalist must rely on conjectures that are inconsistent with observations. The baryon number problem remains a serious defect in the big-bang model.

This problem for the big bang is actually a design feature for biblical creation. When particles and anti-particles touch, they destroy each other and release enormous amounts of energy. If God had made the universe with equal amounts of matter and antimatter (as physics requires for a natural origin), then the matter in the universe would have been destroyed by any contact with antimatter, releasing devastating amounts of dangerous radiation. The universe contains virtually matter only because it was supernaturally designed and created by God.
Taking back Astronomy: The Heavens Declare Creation and Science Confirms It (2011), p.80-82

Science affirms supernatural creation only, so anyone following the Forest Spirit is following a false god. No pretend esoteric understanding defeats commonsense

So carry on, idolator. It's all good.

idolater to what...commonsense...

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Make no mistake - you have lost your faith.

My faith is so strong that I could figuratively run through a brink wall. I also know there is no reason to have doubts about God because there is overwhelming evidence that He delivers on what He says.

When "knowing" comes, the need for faith is gone, and faith is lost

Incorrect, I know that Christianity (and the SDA expression of it) is the only true, publicly defensible religion on the planet. I still need to have faith to understand what God would want me to use my life for according to His will.

This is one of those times I've already mentioned, when someone decides that what is written in their own holy books is insufficient, so they must add to it to make it sufficient for them. To be entirely honest with you, I have no idea what an SDA is, nor can I think of a reason I need to know. I DO know what faith is, and the difference between it and "certain knowledge", and that certain knowledge, which you claim to possess, destroys faith which is, at that point, unnecessary any how.

In case you need a refresher, you can find the explanation in 1 Corinthians:10-12. You claim to have certain knowledge, and as seen there if that is true, your faith is lost. It's very simple.

Now, in addition to certain knowledge, you claimed to be in possession of proof. THAT is what is most damaging to faith, rather than just thinking you have certain knowledge. That claimed proof is what does the damage. You seem to be under the impression that faith leaves room for doubt. It does not. Faith is knowing in the absence of proof. Once one has empirical proof, then faith is gone. There is no more need for it.

All is not lost, however

Nothing was ever lost, you don't know me

No, I don't know you, nor do I need to in order to know what your own holy books say faith is. Who you are is irrelevant to that discussion. I know you claimed to possess proof, then proceeded to post a link to not-proof.

claimed tro be "ziggurats", which didn't exist in Israel

Lot didn't settle in the promised land (with his back towards the Mediterranean, he didn't choose to go left (north) or right (south) in the promised land, he opted to go straight ahead which was east)

Unless you are claiming that Sodom and Gomorrah are in Mesopotamia, then whatever you are trying to say here is irrelevant to the fact that there are no ziggurats in said cities, because there are no ziggurats in Israel. Are you now claiming then that Sodom and Gomorrah are in Mesopotamia?

Are you perhaps confusing the Five Cities of the Plain with the First Five Cities mentioned as being founded by Nimrod in Shinar? Those latter are in Mesopotamia, but the former are not.

Maybe you need some faith after all, because your "certain knowledge" is faulty.

reply to post by JesuitGarlic

JG,
Your beliefs are bizarre. And your posts here are off topic.
Those people believing in the Forest spirits are way closer to their Creator than anyone who is touting: Adam and Eve are real people, original sin a given, and that all people suck and deserve to burn in hell for not "knowing" what you think you "know. No matter what "science" you think affirms it, your version is skewed, bud. Really, really warped.

I shudder to think that you actually are a missionary! How is anyone without an advanced education - let alone any 'industrialized' or 'modern' influence - going to be even remotely equipped to deal with your madness and see past your crap? You are dangerous, a danger to societies and civilizations of all kinds.

What is your real fear, JG? That you'll be all alone in Heaven because nobody else will make it there? You'll get bored chatting up Jesus, or he'll get bored listening to you while he yawns and rolls his eyes and drums his fingers on his throne arm? That he'll tell you you didn't do enough, or do it well, and the place should be teeming with "saved souls", except that YOU failed to get the invitations out?

Originally posted by CristobalColonic
> godtards

Perhaps you would be happier then in a forum NOT devoted to religion.

Life is too short to go around being pissed off all the time over things that you have no regard for to begin with.

I'd recommend that you grab happy while you still can, and leave the dead to bury the dead. Since this life is all you get, go for the gusto and leave us blind folks to lead the blind around.

Ignore us. We are harmless to you - unless, of course, you devote too much of your time to us, time that would better be spent pursuing your happiness while you are still drawing breath and able.

reply to post by mahatche


I will check it out...
although it sounds like a story that would make me livid..

those poor people!
Thanks!!

Originally posted by wildtimes

No matter what "science" you think affirms it, your version is skewed, bud. Really, really warped.

I am mystified by people who attempt to use science to support or refute religion. Science is not antithetical to religion as they appear to assume, it is an entirely different field of endeavor. It's like trying to use bowling balls to support or refute the existence of uranium mines. The two are not only not linked or related, they are entirely different things, with no bearing on one another. They have entirely different aims, goals, methodologies, and purposes.

reply to post by nenothtu

That claimed proof is what does the damage.

The claimed proof is what enables me to share my faith with confidence on the forums using logical arguments that can't be refuted rather than just saying that 'Jesus loves you' and being laughed by every non-Christian around.

Faith is knowing in the absence of supporting evidence

One supporting evidence line is perfect prophecy fulfillment of the bible (as the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus Rec. 19:10)...that is historical fact. I don't need to rely on science to have confidence, the understanding of the Bible is all the understanding I need

I know you claimed to possess proof, then proceeded to post a link to not-proof.

I am not here to act like a missionary on the forum....if you don't like my lines of arguments then too bad. I am using logical arguments because I am answering questions of skeptics....answering by means of difficult to measure soft subjective personal anecdotes are no way to prove a point on ATS.

whatever you are trying to say here is irrelevant to the fact that there are no ziggurats in said cities

According to which authority who recorded it as such at the time before they were destroyed. You have provided no evidence to support your claim as a valid criticism, it is only a unsubstantiated personal opinion of what was there and what wasn't.

reply to post by nenothtu


LOL!!
Yes, good analogy.

At least we have had a couple of the people who are described by the article here to show us, and everyone else, what the article is talking about.

And they wonder why they're a vanishing breed.

reply to post by nenothtu

I am mystified by people who attempt to use science to support or refute religion. Science is not antithetical to religion as they appear to assume, it is an entirely different field of endeavor.

My Christianity affirms that the Bible is the inspired word of God and that the events portrayed as happening literally did happen as described. So I would need a scientific and logic basis to understand the world and explain it in light of the Genesis or Exodus account for instance. Science that provides evidence that only supports the Biblical account of described reality to the exclusion of any other belief or religion is the kind of science and evidence I advocate. I have found that any true understanding of a scientific fact ends up having to conform to the Biblical account in one form or another on closer inspection. The lack of anti-matter is just one proof of such evidence. The lack of anti-matter destroys the argument of naturalistic Big Bang theory and thus a naturalistic evolution mechanism to explain reality of how we got here. This line of evidence also destroys every pantheistic based religion on the planet as false.

reply to post by JesuitGarlic

I am not herel to act like a missionary on the forum....if you don't like my lines of arguments then too bad. I am using logical arguments because I am answering questions of skeptics....answering by means of difficult to measure soft subjective personal anecdotes are no way to prove a point on ATS.

Well, you certainly are proving the point of the OP! Thanks for taking on the role of "example" for us. You're an interesting case to study.

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by nenothtu

 

That claimed proof is what does the damage.

The claimed proof is what enables me to share my faith with confidence on the forums using logical arguments that can't be refuted rather than just saying that 'Jesus loves you' and being laughed by every non-Christian around.

Why? To what purpose?

One supporting evidence line is perfect prophecy fulfillment of the bible (as the spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus Rec. 19:10)...that is historical fact. I don't need to rely on science to have confidence, the understanding of the Bible is all the understanding I need

Then why attempt to use science (i.e. archaeology of the Dead Sea) to bolster it? If the Bible is sufficient for you, why drag in external irrelevancies? To what purpose?

I am not here to act like a missionary on the forum....if you don't like my lines of arguments then too bad. I am using logical arguments because I am answering questions of skeptics....answering by means of difficult to measure soft subjective personal anecdotes are no way to prove a point on ATS.

Again, why? To what purpose? Why is it you even feel "skeptics" NEED or deserve an answer? Why are you not leaving the dead to bury the dead and following your Lord instead?

whatever you are trying to say here is irrelevant to the fact that there are no ziggurats in said cities

According to which authority who recorded it as such at the time before they were destroyed. You have provided no evidence to support your claim as a valid criticism, it is only a unsubstantiated personal opinion of what was there and what wasn't.

Perhaps you do not understand how this works. First, I do not need to prove a negative. There are no ziggurats in Israel, and that stands until such time that you are able to prove a positive - that there ARE ziggurats in Israel. Second, You made the bold claim that ziggurats exist in Israel by posting a link that claims so - but without any evidence for their existence. You would need to bring evidence then to support your initial claim. Pictures of hillsides are not that evidence. The zigguruats in Mesopotamia were also destroyed, and yet they have been discovered. Evidence.

Now it's your turn. Give me evidence for the existence of ziggurats in Israel.

Otherwise, my "unsubstantiated personal opinion" of what WASN'T there is every bit as valid - and MORE supported - than your unsubstantiated opinion of what WAS there, but evidently is not any more, having been eradicated without a trace. I say without a trace because you have yet to provide evidence of any trace of them.