Okay this is what I have to say to all you Christians - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-17-2004, 03:56 AM   #91
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 09:20 AM
Thats what I was thinking!

Yep, the nation of "half arsed sceptics" where the church and state are separate (theres no huge impact on daily life unless you choose) is arguing about religion.
__________________

__________________
beli is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 04:06 AM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
Laura M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,932
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by beli

I know only too well how spiteful and arrogant Christians can be (not in this thread) to Athiests but thats no reason for you to do the same. Kindness is the key.

I have met some Christians at uni. Coming from a Catholic grammar school to a place with lots of different religions was a totally new experience for me. I have lots of protestant friends but they like me, never go to their church so our religion was never discussed. Living here, religion is not something people talk about.

I don't like some of the Christians who I have met, if I have gone out to a pub they assume I'm an alcoholic and take drugs. They also think they are better than people who drink because they can resist temptation. What's Christian about saying that to someone? I don't slander other peoples choices not to drink I don't appreciate someone assuming I drink too much and take drugs because I stepped foot into a pub.

This thread has just made me even more confused. I don't think I'll ever be completely convinced one way or another about the existance of God/ need for religion.
__________________

__________________
Laura M is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 04:16 AM   #93
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Lara Mullen
I don't think I'll ever be completely convinced one way or another about the existance of God/ need for religion.
You dont have to be Lara. Think want you want to think.
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 04:32 AM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Song of the week "sentimental" by Porcupine Tree
Posts: 3,854
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Lara Mullen


I don't think I'll ever be completely convinced one way or another about the existance of God/ need for religion.
__________________
AcrobatMan is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 05:15 AM   #95
War Child
 
iacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 585
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay this is what I have to say to all you Christians

Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Who claimed it was Jesus's shroud? The Christians. They lied, pure and simple. And if it wasn't it used to prove Jesus existed, why did they make it up then? The historical texts are not enough to convince people that Jesus supposedly existed, they needed hard proof. Recruitment tool for some reason I believe, I do not know a lot about the renaisance period, including the spelling.


Okay you are still saying "the Christians" as if that is sufficient. Are talking now? Or in the past? If what you want to say is that those in power sought to use the shroud to enhance their control of the populace, etc, that is another thing. Or that it reflects a group of people in power at the Vatican, not all the Christians that were and are. If we are talking 300 years ago, well most people would not have needed the shroud because the existence of Christ was taken for granted. Among all the relics to inspire faith amongst masses, one more would not have made a great difference. If it was made because Christianity was being challenged and losing influence, well those with power don't let go easily do they?

There are 1001 reasonable explanations, why dream up a conspiracy theory? Angela is right too, those in power probably believed it was authentic anyway.

Quote:
'P.S If you ask me, I would take the side of science anytime. 'it can be made, tailored or presented in a way to suit whoever is funding the research.' Huh? How could science favor someone who funds the research when it must be accepted by everyone? People who come up with fucked up theories aren't recognised obviously, becuase people must actually accept them in order for these theories to be sucessful. Science would be a much more reliable system than whatever they claim in the Christian faith in my opinion. And yes it must be pretty damn accurate. Man on moon? Television? Communication? etc etc.
Seeing and touching isn't believeing enough? But word of mouth and a couple of books is? Hmmmm......
No need to chose sides Aussie, science is not a replacement for religion. Science is objective, people are not, which is why we have business interests suppress or cut off funding for research when it suits them(big tabacco). Should I discount all science because a lot of research is funded by business interests? There is and has been bad science accpeted by lay people as truth, what does that mean for science?

"Word of mouth and a couple of books?" Is that how you sum of 4000 years of history? You do yourself a disservice by doing so.
__________________
iacrobat is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 05:32 AM   #96
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 08:20 PM
Question for Aussie man: do you just hate Christians or people who believe in God in any religion?
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 05:43 AM   #97
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 11:50 AM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay this is what I have to say to all you Christians

Quote:
Originally posted by iacrobat


Okay you are still saying "the Christians" as if that is sufficient. Are talking now? Or in the past? If what you want to say is that those in power sought to use the shroud to enhance their control of the populace, etc, that is another thing. Or that it reflects a group of people in power at the Vatican, not all the Christians that were and are. If we are talking 300 years ago, well most people would not have needed the shroud because the existence of Christ was taken for granted. Among all the relics to inspire faith amongst masses, one more would not have made a great difference. If it was made because Christianity was being challenged and losing influence, well those with power don't let go easily do they?

There are 1001 reasonable explanations, why dream up a conspiracy theory? Angela is right too, those in power probably believed it was authentic anyway.



No need to chose sides Aussie, science is not a replacement for religion. Science is objective, people are not, which is why we have business interests suppress or cut off funding for research when it suits them(big tabacco). Should I discount all science because a lot of research is funded by business interests? There is and has been bad science accpeted by lay people as truth, what does that mean for science?

"Word of mouth and a couple of books?" Is that how you sum of 4000 years of history? You do yourself a disservice by doing so.
Yes I could have been more specific, obviously not every Christian was in on it, but you know what I mean. I've been doing some reading and I can't find any solid reason as to why they did what they did, it was too long ago. Logically, whoever was responsible did it for a reason, not just for a leisure activity. And nobody is helping me find another reason as to why it could have possibly been done, apart from what I have been saying before.

'Word of mouth and a couple of Books.' Keep it in context. That was pretty much the form unto which history has been passed down? Of course there is art, structures etc. but that wasn't really the main point. The point I was trying to make is that I would rather choose scientific explanation if applicable rather than religious conviction, as religious history as a base for anything, is very iffy, rather than science, which has proven itself almost every time. Somebody said previously that science shouldn't be relied on so heavily as a rebuttal to my statement that science is proving some parts of religion wrong (eg. Shroud discussion). That is why I am comparing both religious and scientific conviction in this paragraph.
__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 05:50 AM   #98
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 11:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
Question for Aussie man: do you just hate Christians or people who believe in God in any religion?
Wow, this is the frivolous question I have ever heard. For the 12th time please read my posts before asking things like this! How could you think that I HATE Christians?! HUH! That is absolutely ludicrous! Let alone hate EVERYONE that believes in any religion. I have absolutely nothing against people that believe in God from any religion. I am expressing how I don't agree with some religious teachings (specifically Christianity). Comeon, I don't want to offend you, but that's a stupid question. If it's a joke, I don't get it. If it isn't, please don't be so careless.
__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 06:58 AM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Song of the week "sentimental" by Porcupine Tree
Posts: 3,854
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


I am expressing how I don't agree with some religious teachings (specifically Christianity).
Why target Christanity specifically ?

I am ok till as long as you say that you dont agree with religious teachings.
__________________
AcrobatMan is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:09 AM   #100
War Child
 
iacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 585
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay this is what I have to say to all you Christians

Quote:
Originally posted by AussieU2fanman


Yes I could have been more specific, obviously not every Christian was in on it, but you know what I mean. I've been doing some reading and I can't find any solid reason as to why they did what they did, it was too long ago. Logically, whoever was responsible did it for a reason, not just for a leisure activity. And nobody is helping me find another reason as to why it could have possibly been done, apart from what I have been saying before.


No, I don't know what you mean. Are you admitting that you are casting judgement on an entire religion based on the actions of a few? Based on a relic? Well, why stop there? There are hundreds of them that most likely are not real, but what difference does it make? Was it a grand to conspiracy to legitimize the invention of Jesus Christ? Or were they pieces that people honestly thought were connected to saints and Christ? I doubt this is a conspiracy 2000 years in the making.

BTW, I also gave you 2 possible reasons for the shroud's creation in my last post, you didn't respond to them.


Quote:
'Word of mouth and a couple of Books.' Keep it in context. That was pretty much the form unto which history has been passed down? Of course there is art, structures etc. but that wasn't really the main point. The point I was trying to make is that I would rather choose scientific explanation if applicable rather than religious conviction, as religious history as a base for anything, is very iffy, rather than science, which has proven itself almost every time. Somebody said previously that science shouldn't be relied on so heavily as a rebuttal to my statement that science is proving some parts of religion wrong (eg. Shroud discussion). That is why I am comparing both religious and scientific conviction in this paragraph.
Keep what it context? Don't assume I know what you mean when you make dismissive comments.

Don't place to much weight on the importance of the shroud. I think it is safe to say that most Catholics' faith do not rely on it's authenticity.

Nobody here is arguing that the world is flat or that the world was made in seven, 24 hour days, so your argument is somewhat misplaced. You are ignoring the diversity of Christianity. Try reading Dominic Crossan if you haven't.

BTW, do you happen to be reading the Da Vinci Code?
__________________
iacrobat is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:17 AM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 11:20 AM
I think all these issues get needlessly mixed up and muddled.

Just my personal perspective, but I always try to draw a very clear distinction between 'Christ' and 'Christianity'. You'll never catch me trying to defend any institutional church, because really, why bother? These are human institutions, and subject to gross corruption like any large political or corporate body.

As for science, don't worship it. Science is a method. It's silly to be 'pro' or 'anti' science, it is simply a method for attempting to objectively observe and predict things. It's not impossible to find scientists who believe in God, and really, there's no reason why the two need be mutually exclusive. If there is a God, scientific probing won't make him go away like the tooth fairy or something. If there isn't, well, then there isn't.
__________________
Kieran McConville is online now  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:20 AM   #102
War Child
 
iacrobat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 585
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Kieran
__________________
iacrobat is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:21 AM   #103
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 08:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AcrobatMan


Why target Christanity specifically ?

I am ok till as long as you say that you dont agree with religious teachings.
Exactly my point. That's what I meant, why pick on Christians specifically? If you are against religion, and God, then you obviously don't believe in ANY religion so why just single out Christians for your statement? Can't you see how offensive that appears?
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:38 AM   #104
Refugee
 
AussieU2fanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Local Time: 11:50 AM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay this is what I have to say to all you Christians

Quote:
Originally posted by iacrobat


No, I don't know what you mean. Are you admitting that you are casting judgement on an entire religion based on the actions of a few? Based on a relic? Well, why stop there? There are hundreds of them that most likely are not real, but what difference does it make? Was it a grand to conspiracy to legitimize the invention of Jesus Christ? Or were they pieces that people honestly thought were connected to saints and Christ? I doubt this is a conspiracy 2000 years in the making.


Well like any other religion, although Christianity has a greater sense of community, it is still in the form of a Hierachy. I am not casting judgement on everyone, that's silly. The power was pruely in the hands of the very wealthy over the history of Christianity. The people in power could change whatever they sought please, and if anyone disagreed, they were classed as Heretics and were brutally slaughtered. Let's say for a second that none of the Jesus story actually happened, I guarantee we would get a similar\identical result today. This religion\sects were absolutely necessary at the time to turn the people away from Paganism that was tearing society apart. In my opinion, a person like Jesus would have been invented who is a Messiah, who will free the slaves, who will provide salvation for everyone, including the lower classes. If you suffer now, you will have true treasure in Heaven. Think about it, it would be just a ploy invented by the powerful to control the masses and create order in society. Even if all these stories didn't happen (which I believe), surely there would be a similar\identical result in today's society. I strongly believe this religion was going to be formed irrespective of whether the whole Jesus story was true. There was no choice.

Quote:
Originally posted by iacrobat


Keep what in context? Don't assume I know what you mean when you make dismissive comments.

Don't place to much weight on the importance of the shroud. I think it is safe to say that most Catholics' faith do not rely on it's authenticity.

Nobody here is arguing that the world is flat or that the world was made in seven, 24 hour days, so your argument is somewhat misplaced. You are ignoring the diversity of Christianity. Try reading Dominic Crossan if you haven't.

BTW, do you happen to be reading the Da Vinci Code?
Keep whatever was in quotes prior to when I said, 'Keep it in context.'
BTW what authenticity is this religion based on then? This is a concept I can't grasp. And no I am not reading the Da Vinci Code.
__________________
AussieU2fanman is offline  
Old 09-17-2004, 07:45 AM   #105
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Song of the week "sentimental" by Porcupine Tree
Posts: 3,854
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Kieran

Everything is not as simple as you think.

There are fantasies and there are facts. Please dont get confused.

AcrobatMan
__________________

__________________
AcrobatMan is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com