Christianity. Blasphemy. Brainwashing.

[eddo]

Shiek, you are confusing me. First you say Hitler was a Christian, then you say he was an atheist, now you are back to saying he was a Christian...

 

 

One does not have to vocalize the exact phrase: "I renounce God" to leave the Church or turn his back on God. The quotes that Timesjoke and Snafu have shared clearly show that Hitler turned his back on all religion, much less Christianity.

 

Christians have done some mighty stupid things over the eons in the name of God as well, but Hitler actions show that he was clearly not acting in a Godly way.

[ToriAllen]

I'm not sure what the point of this conversation is. What does it matter if one psycho was or was not a Christian. I'm sure there are many examples of atheist psychos and many examples of psychos claiming to be Christian. Yes, the difference in wording is on purpose and makes perfect sense if you stop to think. It is not possible to think you don't believe in anything or follow any faith when you actually do, but it is possible to claim Christianity while falling terribly short of following the principles of the faith. You all seem to be ignoring the 99 percent of the Christian and atheist population that is not psych. Honestly, mental instability doesn't have a place in a discussion about the validity of religion.

 

If you would like to talk about the link between mental illness and 'talking to God' or 'religious purposes', I think that could be an interesting conversation far removed from the current context of the thread. A great example is Schizophrenia. Most everyone has heard of God at some point in their lives and whether you actually believe in God growing up, when you start hearing a voice that isn't coming from you or anyone around you, you will try to attribute the voice to the only logical person you can think of, no matter how illogical it seems. Not that schizophrenics are really thinking straight anyway. Of course not all Schizophrenics think they are talking to God. Some think they are talking to Batman or Santa Clause. It is a fascinating study.

 

That brings up another point. How many of you are willing to blame a movie for some crazy person going on a killing spree in the name of that movie. Does that make the movie bad or evil? What about some crazy trying to emulate a video game? Is it the fault of the game or the person? Do you think that these people are just inherently crazy to begin with? If so, then why would it be so difficult to accept the fact that some crazies distort religion to fit into their own twisted purposes? To believe that religion is not naturally bad and that the majority of people who believe in religion are not evil people?

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

.

You have proven nothing.

 

TJ, I never claimed to have proven anything

 

I have proved he admitted to hating all religion,

You also have not proved anything. You have simply told us of your beliefs

 

he believed in evolution,

 

So what ? Many christian scientists do

 

and you even admitted he was an Athiest,

 

You really should chose your words more carefully. I admitted nothing of the sort. I said that I agreed he was an Atheist in belief. By this I mean that some of his thoughts were Atheist. But in actual fact Hitler was a Christian for the reasons I have given elsewhere several times

 

 

that means everything he did was done as an Athiest.

 

No, he was a lifelong Christian

 

 

Hitler was never a Christian, his family was, be he was not.

 

Nonsense

 

You already admitted he was an Athiest,

 

See above

 

so you now trying to say he was a Christian is simply stupidity in action, you can't have it both ways.

 

I am not trying to have anything two ways. I would make my position clear once more but have done so several times already. Go back and read my posts again if you are still unsure of what I have said

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

Shiek, you are confusing me. First you say Hitler was a Christian, then you say he was an atheist, now you are back to saying he was a Christian...

 

You are deliberately trying to cause confusion. Let me do this one more time . Hitler was a christian, I have explained why elsewhere. But yes, some of his beliefs were Atheist. Much like someone being a profesional musician by trade, but also studying poetry at night school. He still remains a musician.

 

Christians readily have a public rite so that everyone understands their new position. ie baptism, confirmation, marriage etc. Clearly you should also publicly announce your cessation in belief, if you cease to believe. This is how you publicise and formally announce, and enter apostasy. It really isn't good enough to claim Hitler was not a Christian when clearly he was.

 

 

One does not have to vocalize the exact phrase: "I renounce God" to leave the Church or turn his back on God.

I dont think an exact phrase is necessary. But a public

statement of belief is, so that we all understand his position. This is important from one who has officially joined a theist sect. Otherwise, how are we to know where he stood ? I must conclude in the absence of same, that he chose remain a christian.

 

The quotes that Timesjoke and Snafu have shared clearly show that Hitler turned his back on all religion,

 

I cannot agree, he said some unpleasant things presumably, much like Judas, and others, but they too died Christians. They too joined and never left their religion. What other conclusion can be made ? They should have renounced their positions were they unhappy for things to turn out as they have done.

 

Christians have done some mighty stupid things over the eons in the name of God as well, but Hitler actions show that he was clearly not acting in a Godly way.

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

I'm not sure what the point of this conversation is. What does it matter if one psycho was or was not a Christian.

 

This is about TJ's assertion that Atheists have killed 100 million people. This is absolute bull.

 

In fact, the majority of people who ever lived were theists. Before man like gods, there were Lakes mountains animals planets etc. All have been worshipped as gods. So then, if most people who have ever lived have been theists, then most tribes, groups, murderous regimes have been fronted by theists. Therefore the exact opposite is true. The god-botherers are responsible for most murders- the exact opposite of what TJ says.

 

He has been challenged several times to attempt to substantiate his claim, but ignores all requests to do so.

 

 

I'm sure there are many examples of atheist psychos and many examples of psychos claiming to be Christian. Yes, the difference in wording is on purpose and makes perfect sense if you stop to think. It is not possible to think you don't believe in anything or follow any faith when you actually do, but it is possible to claim Christianity while falling terribly short of following the principles of the faith. You all seem to be ignoring the 99 percent of the Christian and atheist population that is not psych. Honestly, mental instability doesn't have a place in a discussion about the validity of religion.

 

If you would like to talk about the link between mental illness and 'talking to God' or 'religious purposes', I think that could be an interesting conversation far removed from the current context of the thread. A great example is Schizophrenia. Most everyone has heard of God at some point in their lives and whether you actually believe in God growing up, when you start hearing a voice that isn't coming from you or anyone around you, you will try to attribute the voice to the only logical person you can think of, no matter how illogical it seems. Not that schizophrenics are really thinking straight anyway. Of course not all Schizophrenics think they are talking to God. Some think they are talking to Batman or Santa Clause. It is a fascinating study.

 

That brings up another point. How many of you are willing to blame a movie for some crazy person going on a killing spree in the name of that movie. Does that make the movie bad or evil? What about some crazy trying to emulate a video game? Is it the fault of the game or the person? Do you think that these people are just inherently crazy to begin with? If so, then why would it be so difficult to accept the fact that some crazies distort religion to fit into their own twisted purposes? To believe that religion is not naturally bad and that the majority of people who believe in religion are not evil people?

 

Good discussion material here.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

I'm not sure what the point of this conversation is. What does it matter if one psycho was or was not a Christian.

 

This is about TJ's assertion that Atheists have killed 100 million people. This is absolute bull.

 

In fact, the majority of people who ever lived were theists. Before man like gods, there were Lakes mountains animals planets that were worshipped as gods. So then, if most people who have ever lived have been theists, then most tribes, groups, murderous regimes have been fronted by theists. Therefore the exact opposite is true. The god-botherers are responsible for most murders- the exact opposite of what TJ says.

 

 

He has been challenged several times to attempt to substantiate his claim,that 100000000 have been murdered bt Atheists but ignores all requests to do so.

 

 

I'm sure there are many examples of atheist psychos and many examples of psychos claiming to be Christian. Yes, the difference in wording is on purpose and makes perfect sense if you stop to think. It is not possible to think you don't believe in anything or follow any faith when you actually do, but it is possible to claim Christianity while falling terribly short of following the principles of the faith. You all seem to be ignoring the 99 percent of the Christian and atheist population that is not psych. Honestly, mental instability doesn't have a place in a discussion about the validity of religion.

 

If you would like to talk about the link between mental illness and 'talking to God' or 'religious purposes', I think that could be an interesting conversation far removed from the current context of the thread. A great example is Schizophrenia. Most everyone has heard of God at some point in their lives and whether you actually believe in God growing up, when you start hearing a voice that isn't coming from you or anyone around you, you will try to attribute the voice to the only logical person you can think of, no matter how illogical it seems. Not that schizophrenics are really thinking straight anyway. Of course not all Schizophrenics think they are talking to God. Some think they are talking to Batman or Santa Clause. It is a fascinating study.

 

That brings up another point. How many of you are willing to blame a movie for some crazy person going on a killing spree in the name of that movie. Does that make the movie bad or evil? What about some crazy trying to emulate a video game? Is it the fault of the game or the person? Do you think that these people are just inherently crazy to begin with? If so, then why would it be so difficult to accept the fact that some crazies distort religion to fit into their own twisted purposes? To believe that religion is not naturally bad and that the majority of people who believe in religion are not evil people?

 

Good discussion material here.

[wez]

If I've never been baptized, will I go to hell, Eddo?

[eddo]

You are deliberately trying to cause confusion. Let me do this one more time . Hitler was a christian, I have explained why elsewhere. But yes, some of his beliefs were Atheist. Much like someone being a profesional musician by trade, but also studying poetry at night school. He still remains a musician.

 

That is the stupidest thing I have read today. Poetry and Music do not contradict each other in belief. Atheism and Christianity do. You cannot believe in a God and not believe in him at the same time.

 

duh...

 

 

oh, and please learn to use the quote function properly. It makes it easier for others to quote you (like you do to us) and thus keep the discussion in order. Thanks.

[eddo]

If I've never been baptized, will I go to hell, Eddo?

 

wez, there are some Christian sects that believe that if you aren't baptized that your salvation isn't complete.

 

I don't agree with that. So the answer to your question, as I understand the situation- no. Baptism isn't necessary for salvation.

[ToriAllen]

If I've never been baptized, will I go to hell, Eddo?

 

Baptism is symbolic of the new birth into Christianity. Giving up the old and becomeing the new. Obviously the symbolic act is not necessary but it is a nice jesture.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

That is the stupidest thing I have read today. Poetry and Music do not contradict each other in belief. Atheism and Christianity do. You cannot believe in a God and not believe in him at the same time.

 

duh...

 

The point I make is that a Theist may have some Atheist belief . For example Hitler, and myself too, and possibly many more. Hitler and I are both theists as neither have renounced our religion publicly. Yet both of us have Atheist belief. A contradiction yes. But contradictions can occur.

 

You ned to explore my previous posts. I have never said that one can believe in God and also not believe in God at the same time. Slow down and read with attention.

 

 

oh, and please learn to use the quote function properly. It makes it easier for others to quote you (like you do to us) and thus keep the discussion in order. Thanks.

 

Well you know what its like for us stupid Atheists. TJ can fill you in on it.. But I'll try.

[hugo]

A bit of info:

 

Yet I think no one who lived in the Third Reich could have failed to be impressed by Nietzsche's influence on it. His books might be full, as Santayana said, of "genial imbecility" and "boyish blasphemies." Yet Nazi scribblers never tired of extolling him. Hitler often visited the Nietzsche museum in Weimar and publicized his veneration for the philosopher by posing for photographs of himself staring in rapture at the bust of the great man.

 

There was some ground for this appropriation of Nietzsche as one of the originators of the Nazi Weltanschauung. Had not the philosopher thundered against democracy and parliaments, preached the will to power, praised war and proclaimed the coming of the master race and the superman--and in the most telling aphorisms? A Nazi could proudly quote him on almost every conceivable subject, and did. On Christianity: "the one great curse, the one enormous and innermost perversion... I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.... This Christianity is no more than the typical teaching of the Socialists"

 

Then we have Karl Marx: "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

 

An estimated 80 to a 100 million people died as a result of godless communism in the 20th Century. That is a fact. A dictator, whose favorite philosopher is most noted for his "God is dead" quote killed another 10 million plus. There is a reason that the enlightenment first arose in Protestant Christian nations and it is still those nations where the concept of individual liberty still thrives despite the attack on individual liberty by the irreligious left.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

A bit of info:

 

 

 

Then we have Karl Marx: "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

 

An estimated 80 to a 100 million people died as a result of godless communism in the 20th Century. That is a fact. A dictator, whose favorite philosopher is most noted for his "God is dead" quote killed another 10 million plus. There is a reason that the enlightenment first arose in Protestant Christian nations and it is still those nations where the concept of individual liberty still thrives despite the attack on individual liberty by the irreligious left.

 

I presume you are referring to the USSR Hugo. The man at the helm who must take responsibility for this dreadful statistic is Josef Stalin. A man brought up a Christian. Hardly a godless movement. I am not concerned with what he may have said about religion. Only actual fact. If Stalin never renounced his Christian faith, then he was, and died a Christian.

 

If he did renounce his Christianity at some point, then I will agree, that from that date onwards, he was no longer a Christian.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

Baptism is symbolic of the new birth into Christianity. Giving up the old and becomeing the new. Obviously the symbolic act is not necessary but it is a nice jesture.

 

This is not what my generation were told Tori. We were told that if a baby died without baptism, the baby went to Limbo.

 

For adults who had never heard the words of your god, they too went to Limbo.

 

For adults who had heard the words of your god, but had not become Christians and subsequently died - they went to hell. That's what we were told.

 

The message/threat was very clear. You have just been given the words. Become a Christian or go to hell and suffer forever. Children should not get to be frightened by this sort of crap.

[ToriAllen]

If Stalin never renounced his Christian faith, then he was, and died a Christian.

 

I'm confused. So if I decide I don't want to be a Christian anymore I have to...What? Announce it in front of witnesses? If so, how many? Is that even enough? Maybe I should have it published. Have to be sure I get this right. Wouldn't want to end up in heaven when I die having Saint Peter explain to me that I did not properly revoke my membership.

 

 

Aren't you the one that pointed out that there are many people who go through the motions but do not actually believe? I would think a persons actions would be enough proof of renouncing the religion.

[eddo]

You ned to explore my previous posts. I have never said that one can believe in God and also not believe in God at the same time. Slow down and read with attention.

I am fully aware you didn't say that. I said it. Here, I'll say it again:

 

One cannot believe in God and not believe in Him at the same time.

 

Atheists don't believe in some aspects of God- they don't believe in Him at all. And followers of God, by definition, cannot disbelieve in God. If they do, then they aren't followers anymore.

 

 

 

 

Well you know what its like for us stupid Atheists. TJ can fill you in on it.. But I'll try.

I don't think you are stupid, and didn't mean to imply that. But the way that you reply inside someone else's quote box is annoying and makes it hard to differentiate between your words and the original quote. Plus, as I stated earlier, it makes it a pain in the buttocks to quote you, thus affecting the flow of the post. You learned to use the bold function, so now, please, learn to use the quote function. (there is even a quote icon in the reply box to help you with it.)

[ToriAllen]

This is not what my generation were told Tori. We were told that if a baby died without baptism, the baby went to Limbo.

 

For adults who had never heard the words of your god, they too went to Limbo.

 

For adults who had heard the words of your god, but had not become Christians and subsequently died - they went to hell. That's what we were told.

 

The message/threat was very clear. You have just been given the words. Become a Christian or go to hell and suffer forever. Children should not get to be frightened by this sort of crap.

 

Obviously not all Churches preach that stuff. I've already pointed out the only three things that are not in dispute by the different denominations of the Church. Which denomination was that? Sounds like Catholic or Episcopal.

[ToriAllen]

LOL at Eddo!!! I was about to say...I know you are not going to complain about him not knowing how to use the 'quote function' in a post where you screw it up.

[eddo]

LOL at Eddo!!! I was about to say...I know you are not going to complain about him not knowing how to use the 'quote function' in a post where you screw it up.

 

oh shush! I fixed it!

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

I am fully aware you didn't say that. I said it. Here, I'll say it again:

 

One cannot believe in God and not believe in Him at the same time.

I agree, One cannot believe in god and not do so at the same time. But it is possible to be a lapsed Christian who entertains some Atheist belief. The lapsed Christian remains a Christian regardless of whatever ideas/thoughts S/he has become accustomed to entertain. The dudes Christianity remains in force until S/he calls time out and becomes an apostate. Can you see my point now Eddo ?

 

Atheists don't believe in some aspects of God- they don't believe in Him at all. And followers of God, by definition, cannot disbelieve in God. If they do, then they aren't followers anymore.

 

see above

 

I don't think you are stupid, and didn't mean to imply that.

 

You didn't. That was for TJ.

 

But the way that you reply inside someone else's quote box is annoying and makes it hard to differentiate between your words and the original quote. Plus, as I stated earlier, it makes it a pain in the buttocks to quote you, thus affecting the flow of the post. You learned to use the bold function, so now, please, learn to use the quote function. (there is even a quote icon in the reply box to help you with it.)

Well I apologize for the inconvenience, and hope this attempt works out to your satisfaction.

 

What a wonderful world it will be, when we can just be ourselves. It pisses me off that Atheists are seen as low lifes in the USA- the least trusted group of all, or so I have read. We dont start religious wars, or even blow up any children on buses. WTF...

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

Obviously not all Churches preach that stuff. I've already pointed out the only three things that are not in dispute by the different denominations of the Church. Which denomination was that? Sounds like Catholic or Episcopal.

 

Catholic. We were taught to not even tolerate other Christians, I mean Protestants here particularly. I am amazed that you are a multi christian. In my day it was sinful to go to another church. Maybe they still close each other out here.

I dont know and dont care.

[eddo]

I agree, One cannot believe in god and not do so at the same time. But it is possible to be a lapsed Christian who entertains some Atheist belief. The lapsed Christian remains a Christian regardless of whatever ideas/thoughts S/he has become accustomed to entertain. The dudes Christianity remains in force until S/he calls time out and becomes an apostate. Can you see my point now Eddo ?

 

I see your point, and saw it before. I just disagree with you. Much like the baptism thing before, there are sects of Christianity that believe "Once saved, always saved." These are the people that fit into the group of "Sunday Theists" as you called them elsewhere. I don't consider these people followers of Christ, and I don't think that He does either. (and I was one of them for YEARS. My family used to only go to church on Christmas and Easter, and to impress the grandparents when they came to visit.)

 

As I read it, being a real follower of Christ is a life changing decision. Your life focus changes, your relationships change, how you live your life changes- not out of guilt or pressure, but out of devotion to your creator and gratitude for your own existence and forgiveness.

 

This following and devotion of Christ is revocable by the follower at any time- just quit following. No fan fare necessary, not public announcement needed- just quit following. Your life apart from God will likely soon become evident to those around you (see: Hitler and Stalin and their life choices.) Being a Christian isn't a Nationality- ex.: I can't stop being white. Instead, it is a choice to have relationship with Christ, and a choice that even Christ himself doesn't force upon us.

[hugo]

I presume you are referring to the USSR Hugo. The man at the helm who must take responsibility for this dreadful statistic is Josef Stalin. A man brought up a Christian. Hardly a godless movement. I am not concerned with what he may have said about religion. Only actual fact. If Stalin never renounced his Christian faith, then he was, and died a Christian.

 

If he did renounce his Christianity at some point, then I will agree, that from that date onwards, he was no longer a Christian.

 

Stakin also ate bread. That makes breadeaters responsible. But you were wrong anyhow. The 100 million includes only about 20 million from Stalin. Mao. Pot, Castro and others account for the rest. Try learning some history . The murders we speak of had no more to do about Christianity than they had about bread. They were all spawned from godless philosophies. Atheist ideology at its worst.

 

Even atheist websites will admit Stalin, Pot and Mao were all atheists during the time they were in power. More importantly, Marx was an atheist, and the crimes of Pot, Stalin and Mao sprung directly from the godless philosophy of Marxism.

 

Atheists are overwhelmingly liberal. That is convincing evidence they do not tend to be the logical beings they claim to be. The religion of secular humanism is the most foolish religion of all, and the only one that forces me to donate to their "church" (big government)

 

A little info:

 

Goodman and the Times may be onto something. The idea that the liberal point of view is more appealing to atheists is supported by the network exit poll of the 2004 presidential election. Ten percent of respondents in that poll answered "none" when asked their religion. Liberal Democratic candidate John Kerry beat President Bush among those voters 67 percent to 31 percent.

[timesjoke]

Stakin also ate bread. That makes breadeaters responsible. But you were wrong anyhow. The 100 million includes only about 20 million from Stalin. Mao. Pot, Castro and others account for the rest. Try learning some history . The murders we speak of had no more to do about Christianity than they had about bread. They were all spawned from godless philosophies. Atheist ideology at its worst.

 

Hugo, sheik already knows this to be true, I have covered it and you have covered it but he will cling to the impossible possition that they were Christians because admitting the truth of their being Athiest would make him look bad.

 

 

That is why I used him against himself, he was not raised an Athiest but is an Athiest now, just like Hitler was raised Catholic but decided to follow the Athiest religion long before he took power. A person does not need the public's permission to be any religion or an Athiest, there is no need to announce it or tell anyone, a person's true beliefs is in his heart, not on his sleeve or on a piece of paper.

 

 

Even atheist websites will admit Stalin, Pot and Mao were all atheists during the time they were in power. More importantly, Marx was an atheist, and the crimes of Pot, Stalin and Mao sprung directly from the godless philosophy of Marxism.

 

Great point.

 

 

Atheists are overwhelmingly liberal. That is convincing evidence they do not tend to be the logical beings they claim to be. The religion of secular humanism is the most foolish religion of all, and the only one that forces me to donate to their "church" (big government)

 

 

Well, that is my point for every aspect of the liberal following. They seem to gather the bottom feeding scum of humanity, always trying to force the masses into submitting to their desires instead of learning to live in the world that made them possible. I don't hate Athiest followers but they hate me and that distinction is telling.

 

 

 

 

By the way sheik, I don't think you are stupid, I just see your admitting Hitler was an Athiest but not wanting to admit his actions were governed by his "true" beliefs is a tad silly. I am sure you are very smart in many ways.

 

But I will admit your not using quotes properly makes it more difficult to understand and reply to your posts.

[ToriAllen]

Well, that is my point for every aspect of the liberal following. They seem to gather the bottom feeding scum of humanity, always trying to force the masses into submitting to their desires instead of learning to live in the world that made them possible. I don't hate Athiest followers but they hate me and that distinction is telling.

 

I've noticed that too. The Dems are made up of the 'leftovers' of society at large. That is why they have no real platform. There is too much diversity within the group for them to really stand for anything rational. A bunch of misfits held together by a common goal: Forcing the majority to cater to and take care of them.

Dem motto: Give us your poor, your ingorant, your lazy, your freaks, and we can take over the country.

 

Sorry, off topic. Please continue...

 

Edit: I've figured out that Dems can be divided into four main categories: Orphan causes (aka. Causes without a political party of their own); Ignorant - Subcategories: Ignorant due to poor education, ignorant of the issues ('My parents were Democrats so I am even though I agree with all the republican issues and values' or 'The democrats helped me during the great depression'); Power Hungry (they know the ignorant are easily manipulated, they encourage dependence through government funding); Delusional (they have good intentions but poor methods, they would rather support the ignorant than educate them)