Page 16 of 19 [ 293 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next


Did Jesus really exist?
Yes 74%  74%  [ 31 ]
No 26%  26%  [ 11 ]
Total votes : 42

DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

17 Feb 2014, 8:11 pm

Aghogday you seem to be making what I see as a logical fallacy. That is, without religion no secular organizations would exist fulfilling the same social functions. You appear to be saying that religion is necessary for humanity and we just have to accept the blood price which comes with it.

I reject both proposals. As religion declines many secular support groups are comming into existence. Both online and in the real world. I have a friend with MS and the support she receives is astounding and it comes without a hint of a blood price. You mention the solace you get from the RC church yet only give passing comment on the blood price homosexuals must pay and absolutely no refernce to the spread of aids and unwanted pregnancies due to the position on contraception. Arguably the the rape of thousands of children at the hands of church authorities is not supported by scripture, but it is still another price people have paid for your solace.. Like I say the blood price is too high, and more to the point, unnecessary.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,562

17 Feb 2014, 10:32 pm

DentArthurDent wrote:
Aghogday you seem to be making what I see as a logical fallacy. That is, without religion no secular organizations would exist fulfilling the same social functions. You appear to be saying that religion is necessary for humanity and we just have to accept the blood price which comes with it.

I reject both proposals. As religion declines many secular support groups are comming into existence. Both online and in the real world. I have a friend with MS and the support she receives is astounding and it comes without a hint of a blood price. You mention the solace you get from the RC church yet only give passing comment on the blood price homosexuals must pay and absolutely no refernce to the spread of aids and unwanted pregnancies due to the position on contraception. Arguably the the rape of thousands of children at the hands of church authorities is not supported by scripture, but it is still another price people have paid for your solace.. Like I say the blood price is too high, and more to the point, unnecessary.


Dude.. humanity can be a rather dirty proposition at times..

Considering the Catholic Church is the largest CHRISTIAN church DENOMINATION in the world..the fact that a few priests ..single as required..who stay in one location long enough and are trackable got their hands caught in the pants of some kids..is no less predictive of this pedophilia nature..than the big macho coach of the local football team..i.e. Penn State...

That pedophilia thingy is spread out evenly in the general population...there is just a much larger target group of single men..with access to children..who are in a position of authority..that aren't getting their jolllies...that can be noticed..reported..tracked and apprehended...in the huge world-wide..spread of the Catholic Church..and all the male only priests associated...

Any large demographic of men with access to children..in a position of authority.. can and will produce the thank god relatively rare... pedophile...

And yes as was the case with Penn State..this is far from the first time..that someone kept 'IT' quite..not to embarrass the rest of the team..so to speak...

The problem of loneliness in culture is a REAL DEAL..AND THAT'S ALREADY WITH THE FACTOR of churches factored in for whole community social connections..

And seriously..no one i know pays any real attention..to the dogma of the Catholic church..the girls are still f88ing and the boys are still f88iong with condoms .. the pill ..or whatever the rest of the society overall is using to get the job done...WITHOUT over COMPLICATED .. RESULTS....

Same with most religions..with dogma..

People do what they can..but it would be an extreme case of black and white thinking..to suggest that everyone plays by the rules...of church dogma..Catholic or whatever the dogma may be in other denominations..

Now to be clear NOW AGAIN.. i have made it clear on this site..that i do not agree with oppression..and i myself stood up to the priest..in no uncertain terms in writing..that the one homily that suggested that homosexuals were not suitable to have children..was an act of hate in the church...

He already nipped it in the bud .and admonished the deacon thAT delivered that message of oppression..which is hate...

I do not agree with many of the stances of the church...per the ridiculous stance on birth control..in relationship to the stance on abortion..where we already know..from the World Health Organization..that abortion rates..are as high in Mexico as the US..with the illegality of it there...

But ..once again..while you may be fairly young ..have kids..big family..friends or whatever...

It is just me and my wife..for the future..my sister..who has Asperger's syndrome..and does not do well in any social condition..and aging parents..that are not going to be on this earth THAT MUCH LONGER...

While you may have social outlets to fulfill these needs in your area...

Other than the local bars..church is all there is to make friends..with kind and loving folks...

I am realistic about life..and being a social animal...

I realize this is a basic human need that will make life..not as full..iF I neglect my basic INSTINCTUAL duty as a human social animal..to make friends..in REAL FLESH AND BLOOD LIFE..and keep THE SOCIAL connections going...

It's no one else's fault if i do not make friends..in real life..except for me...

i take complete responsibility for my happiness..and don't sit around idly waiting for something to change..by the same useless actions...

Church is ONE avenue for greater happiness..when there IS LOVE preached and practiced in the church...

i personally take full advantage of it...

And for those who can truly give and feel love..that means it ALL in life...

For those who don't..

It is nothing..

But the less love is conscientiously cultivated IN REAL FLESH AND BLOOD FULL LIFE from whatever seed or shell of seed..that exists in a person's total being..

Whatever if anything that is there..

CAN wither and die...

Use it or lose..it..

YES.. that applies to love..as well..as almost every other..human valued attribute....

Love is real dude..that's what I'm in it for...and yes what most other people are in it for..regardless of what folks put in a book..2000 or 3500 years ago...or how who here or there interprets it...

Those are just details..and nah..everyone don't spend their time wringing their hands and gnashing their teeth..over an imperfect world..it is what it is..

And yes doing that..and the associated stress..can and will shorten life...

That's a documented fact..too...

I choose love and life..

Well over..discontent..

i never experience discontent anymore..

for i have free will..

and nah..not everyone experiences..that kind of discipline of mind..

it don't come cheap..@aLL

AND LITTLE OF THAT ..PART..HAS ANYTHING FOR ME SPECIFIC TO DO
WITH RELIGION ..CHURCH..OR ANY ABSTRACT TERM FOLKS USE..
LIKE GOD..TO RESTRICT THE ALLITIS...

THAT CAME THROUGH FREE WILL AND A MUCH GREATER CONNECTION WITH
WH@IS..

THAT PART IS A LOT BIGGER..
THAN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH..AS PEOPLE SAY..PER THAT GOD THINGY AND SUCH AS TH@
...


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

17 Feb 2014, 11:24 pm

Aghogday I get your point but I think you are missing mine.

With regard to sexual abuse, the main issue here is that it was covered up world wide, and this cover up happened from the top down. Yes sexual abuse has happened throughout institutions both secular and religious. However the church is guilty beyond comparison. This institution espouses the virtue of love, care and compassion, and yet it aided and abetted its office bearers in their abuse of young innocents.

Your experience of church seems to be a fortunate one, but for example you need to look around the world to see the effect of anti condom rhetoric.

If there were no church you would find solace in some other organisation. Like I say there is no rational reason to assume that only a religuos organisation has the ability or reason to provide for the needs of the lonely, the sick, the oppressed etc


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

17 Feb 2014, 11:46 pm

Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Really? Everything bad about Christianity outnumbers the good?


Yes, tell the millions of people who have been murdered in the name of Christianity, how good your religion is. :roll:

VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH

But can you honestly say that applies to today?


Yes I absolutely can. I have already given examples of rightwing Christian nut jobs murdering abortion clinic doctors, even to this day. After praying for their souls to your crappy god, of course. I'll add the 2012 Christian attack on the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and don't you dare tell me that he was not a Christian. We have already covered that. You can't just say they are bad Christians, so they are not really Christians. That's not logical. As others have pointed out, these type of people are a product of your lousy religion.

And don't even get me started on all the crappy wars that the Christian rightwing of this country keeps getting us into, and all the prisoners who are executed in this country. Think about why bible belt states like Texas execute the most people. Christians have been killing people for 2000 years, and using the bible to justify it. Nothing is going to change 2000 years of history. We will never be able to have peace in this world until Christianity has been eliminated.


Do not associate right wing nutjobs with mainline Christians.


Mainline or not, they are a substantial part of Christians. You can't just dissociate all the negative fractions of your religion. Again those type of people are a product of Christianity.


Okay, this is extremely unfair and intellectually dishonest. It's also a very dangerous way of thinking that too many people subscribe to, because I'd say it's safe to say that just about all of us are in some group with one or more individuals who used it to justify really awful things we want nothing to do with. Take Asperger's Syndrome, for instance. I can think of a certain individual who had it, and fairly recently committed an act of mass child-murder before killing himself. Do you really want to use the same logic you used to tie nearly everyone on this site to that guy?



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,562

18 Feb 2014, 12:07 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
Aghogday I get your point but I think you are missing mine.

With regard to sexual abuse, the main issue here is that it was covered up world wide, and this cover up happened from the top down. Yes sexual abuse has happened throughout institutions both secular and religious. However the church is guilty beyond comparison. This institution espouses the virtue of love, care and compassion, and yet it aided and abetted its office bearers in their abuse of young innocents.

Your experience of church seems to be a fortunate one, but for example you need to look around the world to see the effect of anti condom rhetoric.

If there were no church you would find solace in some other organisation. Like I say there is no rational reason to assume that only a religuos organisation has the ability or reason to provide for the needs of the lonely, the sick, the oppressed etc


Well..apparently you do not see the full extent of the benefit..and yes i do see the full extent of the cost..

My question to you is do you truly experience..the all encompassing power of sacred love..

and do you see it in the churches that do exist in your area...

If you do not..

you can not possibly understand the full benefit..

and i do understand that negative sentiment..
been there done that too...

The experience is relatively nothing..if one is not fully engaged with sacred love..

And this goes far far beyond..just all the charitable efforts...

And the church is an organization..like every organization..it holds no virtue..above other organizations overall in real effect in real life..no matter who tries to put it above..all secular organizations..in overall virtue...

Love is love..
and social human animals do most usually thrive off of it...
when they fully participate...church or wherever else..

but again..if not..
it's relatively speaking nothing....

And yes structured brick and mortar church is dying..but religious practices like those of Yogi's are
real and beneficial...for human health..and all around bliss..

There's always gonna be a way to reach a higher power..

As long as human beings..don't give up seeking it...as that part is real...

And establishing a known path that works..per the housing of religion..

Is a way there will always be to do it..

NO matter how imperfect it may be...or brick and mortar church or not...

IN my opinion..effective ways are available for those who can sift through all the crap..on
the information highway..official religion or not...brick or mortar or not...

But most people are gonna look for instructions and some type of social human connections to help 'em find it...in some type of group...

Not everyone is a maverick..that's kinda 'self'-explanatory i guess..though...:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Feb 2014, 1:03 am

Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Really? Everything bad about Christianity outnumbers the good?


Yes, tell the millions of people who have been murdered in the name of Christianity, how good your religion is. :roll:

VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH

But can you honestly say that applies to today?


Yes I absolutely can. I have already given examples of rightwing Christian nut jobs murdering abortion clinic doctors, even to this day. After praying for their souls to your crappy god, of course. I'll add the 2012 Christian attack on the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and don't you dare tell me that he was not a Christian. We have already covered that. You can't just say they are bad Christians, so they are not really Christians. That's not logical. As others have pointed out, these type of people are a product of your lousy religion.

And don't even get me started on all the crappy wars that the Christian rightwing of this country keeps getting us into, and all the prisoners who are executed in this country. Think about why bible belt states like Texas execute the most people. Christians have been killing people for 2000 years, and using the bible to justify it. Nothing is going to change 2000 years of history. We will never be able to have peace in this world until Christianity has been eliminated.


Do not associate right wing nutjobs with mainline Christians.


Mainline or not, they are a substantial part of Christians. You can't just dissociate all the negative fractions of your religion. Again those type of people are a product of Christianity.


People who commit murder today in the name of Christ, or who even demonstrate outside of gay funerals are not a substantial part of Christianity. The truth is, the evangelical right only represents a small part of Christianity, but have managed to worm their way into the right wing political system - with the exception of civil rights, the mainstream has only been interested for the most part in the Gospel, not secular politics.
And yes, I can differentiate between mainline and right wing Christians - are all Aspies going to be defined by some psycho school shooter who happens to have had an Asperger's diagnosis? It's not the theology that makes some Christians bad; rather, it's what bad people do with Christianity. How do you explain away Dr. King and Bonhoeffer? They were Christians who lived their faith when it could have been easier for either to lower their heads and ignore the injustices around them.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Feb 2014, 1:12 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
Firstly you are wrongly attributing 'mainsteam Christians' to me. I was responding to kraichgauer's definition of 'his' type of Christian affiliation.

Secondly I would have thought that my explanation that whilst I might wish for a marxist revolution, my beleif that it is improbable and unlikely to succeed in its aims, would attest that I have a relatively good grasp of political history and culture.

I note that you are making no attempt to refute my claim that much of the bible consists pf either forged or wrongly attributed authorship and that this has led to a very man made cultural document. In other words the basis of christianity is human philosophy and politics rather than devine inspirations.


No, the religious right is not a numerically significant element in Christianity when compared to the mainline Christians - but they are certainly the most vocal. Evangelicals and fundamentalists wield political power because their aims are earthly; very different from what Christ himself had said: "My kingdom is not of this earth." The emphasis of true Christianity must be one of peacefully promoting Christ, and loving our neighbor.
And no, I told you the argument about whether the NT is forged or not is hardly going to settled. Neither of us will ever convince the other, so I am no longer going to even try.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

18 Feb 2014, 2:11 am

Cheeses exist.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

18 Feb 2014, 3:13 am

xenon13 wrote:
Cheeses exist.


I must say, I was wondering utterly what Xenon13 was going to say in this thread as it has nothing to do with capitalism or NAIRU.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Max000
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

18 Feb 2014, 3:59 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
DentArthurDent wrote:
Firstly you are wrongly attributing 'mainsteam Christians' to me. I was responding to kraichgauer's definition of 'his' type of Christian affiliation.

Secondly I would have thought that my explanation that whilst I might wish for a marxist revolution, my beleif that it is improbable and unlikely to succeed in its aims, would attest that I have a relatively good grasp of political history and culture.

I note that you are making no attempt to refute my claim that much of the bible consists pf either forged or wrongly attributed authorship and that this has led to a very man made cultural document. In other words the basis of christianity is human philosophy and politics rather than devine inspirations.


No, the religious right is not a numerically significant element in Christianity when compared to the mainline Christians


BS, pull your head out of the sand. 44 million Americans identify with the religious right. Thats about 20% of Christians in the US. 20% is significant number.



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

18 Feb 2014, 4:10 am

Max000 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
DentArthurDent wrote:
Firstly you are wrongly attributing 'mainsteam Christians' to me. I was responding to kraichgauer's definition of 'his' type of Christian affiliation.

Secondly I would have thought that my explanation that whilst I might wish for a marxist revolution, my beleif that it is improbable and unlikely to succeed in its aims, would attest that I have a relatively good grasp of political history and culture.

I note that you are making no attempt to refute my claim that much of the bible consists pf either forged or wrongly attributed authorship and that this has led to a very man made cultural document. In other words the basis of christianity is human philosophy and politics rather than devine inspirations.


No, the religious right is not a numerically significant element in Christianity when compared to the mainline Christians


BS, pull your head out of the sand. 44 million Americans identify with the religious right. Thats about 20% of Christians in the US. 20% is significant number.


Also not forgetting the 2012 Gallup Poll which puts the percentage of Us citizens who believe in creation and reject evolution at 46%, the poll does not differentiate which religious dogma the respondents followed. BUt religious affiliation in the US puts christianity at 79%. To my mind a rejection of evolution puts the believer outside the Moderate category


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

18 Feb 2014, 4:41 am

91 wrote:

Its a boring debate to have dent and not the point you made that I engaged you on. You get to raise doubts as if you have nothing to prove if I engage along those lines. Play the continuous skeptic, I tire of the drawl nature of those back and forth disputes. You are the one defending the Eherman view, it sits on the outskirts of the academic consensus, academically speaking the ball is in your court. To just throw out the statement 'gospels are wrong' or something broad like that is not going to draw me into discussion with you, Unless you decide to go line for line or we go into one particular book and how its supposed falsity leads to some contemporary issue you are just stringing sentences together so as to make someone else do work for you. In the face of that, its far more interesting to explore why you want to employ such a tactic in the first place, which is what I have been doing so far.


With regard to the authorship of the BIble just how does Ehrman sit on the outside of academic consensus, except in his understanding that the practice of faked authorship was not an accepted practice at the time, and therefore these writings are more correctly termed forgeries. The texts he refers to are accepted by many scholars both religious and secular as being either faked authors (forgeries) or falsely attributed, at the very least theologians and historians regard these texts as being of dubious authorship.

Why does this matter? I am surprised you would ask this. At a time of turmoil between competing religious sects falsifying the authorship of a letter which presents your particular agenda gives it far greater authority. Stating that you are Paul, Peter, or a companion of an apostle, eg luke gives the message greater weight.

That you find it tedious to discuss the authorship of a book which has affected humanity for millennia I find somewhat perplexing, you do after all have a penchant for using the Argument From Authority. I would have thought that you could see how forging a letter in the name of an Apostle would give an agenda greater clout.

Or are you denying that this happened, are you denying that the early christians twisted events using false testimony to have the Jews, all jews, born and yet to be born accept responsibility for the death of Jesus.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


babybird
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 62,481
Location: UK

18 Feb 2014, 5:05 am

I'm not sure if I've answered this one before.

I think that he probably did exist.

I always wonder why Jesus isn't a more popular name for boys in England.

People use all the other Christian names.


_________________
We have existence


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

18 Feb 2014, 5:21 am

babybird wrote:

I always wonder why Jesus isn't a more popular name for boys in England.

People use all the other Christian names.


Dunno it may have something to do with the Armada, the English have not liked the Spanish since Phillip 2. the Spanish got Jesus first :lol:


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


91
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

18 Feb 2014, 7:23 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
With regard to the authorship of the BIble just how does Ehrman sit on the outside of academic consensus, except in his understanding that the practice of faked authorship was not an accepted practice at the time, and therefore these writings are more correctly termed forgeries. The texts he refers to are accepted by many scholars both religious and secular as being either faked authors (forgeries) or falsely attributed, at the very least theologians and historians regard these texts as being of dubious authorship.


Well Ehrman and his Jesus seminar sit on the radical fringe of the academic sphere and use methodology that is just woeful when it comes to deciding what is or isn't credible. Their voting method looks nothing like a legitimate system of peer review.

DentArthurDent wrote:
Why does this matter? I am surprised you would ask this. At a time of turmoil between competing religious sects falsifying the authorship of a letter which presents your particular agenda gives it far greater authority. Stating that you are Paul, Peter, or a companion of an apostle, eg luke gives the message greater weight.


The primary thing I challenged you on was to present something specific but it seems that you are just taking the subject of 'Forged' as if it were, pardon the pun, Gospel truth :P but as I said, it is a useless argument to have if all you are going to do is be vague.

DentArthurDent wrote:
That you find it tedious to discuss the authorship of a book which has affected humanity for millennia I find somewhat perplexing, you do after all have a penchant for using the Argument From Authority. I would have thought that you could see how forging a letter in the name of an Apostle would give an agenda greater clout.


Well for someone who rejects the Soviet style of Marxism, you do enjoy asking commissar worthy questions. I said the debate on the terms you presented are tedious, the subject matter however remains interesting. All you have presented me with is a Hobson's Choice where I either post a complete an unabashed breakdown of a book you have so far no named but have been asserting as both obvious and true or I can reject your premise by stating that the work has not found a home in the consensus of the literature. As you say, I am a fan of the argument from authority but only because it would be ridiculous to jump into a massive rebuttal of a couple of sentences and people on this forum love raising half-baked ideas and red herrings. Knocking them off with an argument from authority that is credible is quite acceptable in those situations. I mean be serious mate, the point you are making is mostly for rhetorical purposes, you have not made even a small effort to put together anything other than a disconnected argument, what do you honestly expect me to do?

DentArthurDent wrote:
Or are you denying that this happened, are you denying that the early christians twisted events using false testimony to have the Jews, all jews, born and yet to be born accept responsibility for the death of Jesus.


Another commissar question right there and like all good loaded questions it comes with a full stop. All I can say in response is that you already know my position on the subject. The books are flawed but that does not mean that any of those flaws impact the key claims of the faith, they do not. It is my view that the most important section is the passion story and that is pretty well supported and accurate. We can wave war in the middle space between inerrant and there but it would be essentially superfluous and esoteric to do so unless you actually construct and argument about a specific point and connect it to a specific conclusion.


_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

18 Feb 2014, 9:04 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
I am not suggesting that without religion the world would be without vicious immoral behaviour. I have been trying to point out that the message of Christianity is not totally peaceful, and that the authorship of the gospels and other scripture matters. For centuries the gospels have been manipulated by people claiming to be the original author. They did this to represent the teachings of the apostles in a contemporary light, and especially create hysteria against the Jews.

As to North Korea being even remotely Marxist I suggest you compare the two ideologies before you make further comment and make a complete fool of yourself.


Marx may not have liked North Korea's policy, but Stalin would.
It goes Communism, Marxism, Leninism/Trotsky-ism, Stalinism, Maoism.
North Korea is Stalinist, and not Marxist.
The fact is Karl Marx inspired more death than The Bible ever has,
and there fore is not any less peaceful than Marxists are.
If the Communists I listed don't represent Communism as a whole, neither do those Chritians.
If I brushed off as much as you are about Karl Marx, I'd be buried in lies.
You keep saying it doesn't matter that Communism killed millions of people, so I'll keep saying it doesn't matter my religion does the same.
Beating around the bush won't help me or you any.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8kc4V0GhYw[/youtube]


_________________
comedic burp