Pick and choose from each religion

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

HammerStone

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Feb 12, 2006
5,113
279
83
36
South Carolina
prayerforums.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Agreed, this topic is being moved to the nonChristian forum so that the poster can respond. We have to draw the line and one worldism will not thrive on this forum. You're free to worship who/what you want (if anything) but we have to draw the line.Topic moved.
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
(kriss;45455)
What your not getting here Telerea is this is not Christainity
There are many (thousands) of Christianities - what version are you talking about? Please respond without using the term 'truth' or any variant thereof.{I realise I am taking a risk at putting limits on how answers should be presented, especially given that none of my previous queries have been addressed in any way, shape, or form.}(kriss;45455)
you are of course welcome to refine your views
So nice of you to give permission.(kriss;45455)
they are just not Christain
See first comment of this post.(kriss;45455)
and because of this we can not relate much to your views
That I can agree with.(kriss;45455)
as they do not apply to Gods Word.
Most of my questions most certainly apply.(kriss;45455)
The bible is 100% accurate in every single Word historically, and every other way
I am going to assume that you missed some punctuation here and that this is a sentence.I would highly recommend reading some German theologians from the 18th century - Julius Wellhausen's Prolegomena to the History of Israel, and David F. Strauss' Life of Jesus. Some more contemporary material that may be of interest would be John Wimber's Sign's and Wonders, and if you are feeling really adventurous take a look at pretty much anything by Harvey Cox.(kriss;45455)
You dont believe that your choice but we see it differntly.
One more time: what I personally do or do not believe is irrelevant.When you say "we" who are you presuming to speak for? And I wonder - do the women you know and consider Christian cover their hair?(kriss;45455)
Just because you know some of the Words doesnt mean you get it
You would do well to heed your own advice.~~~~Moving On~~~~(Denver;45499)
Agreed, this topic is being moved to the nonChristian forum so that the poster can respond. We have to draw the line and one worldism will not thrive on this forum.
And again I ask (and hope in vain for an answer): what is "one worldism"?(Denver;45499)
You're free to worship who/what you want (if anything) but we have to draw the line.
Who or what I worship (if anything) is of no consequence. Querying the patterns, behaviors, and beliefs of those who claim "Truth" however, is a completely legitimate act, done with all due respect.
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
There is only one word of God that is the Bible the old testament is the new testament concealed the New testament is the old testament revealed one word of God one truththere are many interpretations by men some divided into denominations some are right some are wrong but Gods Word only says one thing that's what we study here what Gods says not what men say not what other religions say and to be christian means to believe that Christ is the only way to salvation that he died for your sins
 

HammerStone

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Feb 12, 2006
5,113
279
83
36
South Carolina
prayerforums.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
progress.gif
Who or what I worship (if anything) is of no consequence. Querying the patterns, behaviors, and beliefs of those who claim "Truth" however, is a completely legitimate act, done with all due respect.
On the contrary, this is a Christian site, where the authority is established upon the Bible. If you'd like to run a website with contrary intentions, then by all means do so, but this being my website it will be run ultimately by my rules. We're only interested in Christians that believe in the authority of the Word.
 

Telerea

New Member
Apr 4, 2008
26
0
0
39
(Denver;45532)
On the contrary, this is a Christian site, where the authority is established upon the Bible. If you'd like to run a website with contrary intentions, then by all means do so, but this being my website it will be run ultimately by my rules. We're only interested in Christians that believe in the authority of the Word.
Yes, but you are assuming my posts are a direct representations of my beliefs, which is not necessarily true. I take no issue with following your rules. However, having my (really, very simple) questions answered in a direct manner - or even answered at all - would do wonders for all involved understanding each other.
 

RaddSpencer

New Member
Mar 28, 2008
285
0
0
44
(Telerea;45253)
Sorry Kriss - didn't mean to misrepresent you. - how do you (collectively, not aimed at any one individual) know what Jesus actually said? The words recorded in the multitudinous English translations of the Bible are incredibly far from the original... and even that was written (at the most conservative) over a decade after the estimated death year of Jesus. - And if "no mans {I assume you meant 'man'} comes to the Father, but through me." Half the population (females) are in serious trouble anyways.
Some of this stuff I don't fully understand, but I will attempt to answer.As for the first question (about the new testament and its veracity)....The new testament has plenty of evidence behind it. In fact look at the following link:http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6068 "What can we conclude from this evidence? New Testament specialist Daniel Wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the New Testament, this number is very misleading. Most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like. A side by side comparison between the two main text families (the Majority Text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18] Of the remaining differences, virtually all yield to vigorous textual criticism. This means that our New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. In the entire text of 20,000 lines, only 40 lines are in doubt (about 400 words), and none affects any significant doctrine."There is similar evidence for the Old Testament as well. Don't laugh at the Bible... it is the most accurate ancient document that humanity has in its possession --- period.As for your second question...What about this quote"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." (from the Declaration of Independence)I guess this means that women have no rights? SCHWEET, that will put those pesky womens in their place!!! HAHA :amen:(if you can't tell, its a joke son, a joke!). Hardy har har!!!!
 

adren@line

New Member
Feb 24, 2008
128
0
0
44
Well, historically speaking the people most close-minded about other religions are the ones who were most capable of horrific acts of violence.A brief synopsis of European/American-Christian and middle-eastern-Islamic history proves this assertion correct.
 

RobinD69

New Member
Oct 7, 2007
293
1
0
54
(adren@line;45682)
Well, historically speaking the people most close-minded about other religions are the ones who were most capable of horrific acts of violence.A brief synopsis of European/American-Christian and middle-eastern-Islamic history proves this assertion correct.
As usual you didnt do proper research.:naughty:
 

adren@line

New Member
Feb 24, 2008
128
0
0
44
Yes Robin, it was the Buddhists and Daoists who enslaved the Africans, slaughtered the native Americans, discriminated against the blacks, initiated the inquisitions, crusades, burned witches at the stake, and conquered most of the known world through force (those pesky Arabs, Turks, Persians, Afghans, Mongols, British, Spanish, French, and Portuguese).Or not.But I digress. Name one religious group that historically have been more violent than Christians or Muslims.Even today, the majority of wars involve Muslims and the two major wars were started by George Bush, a fundamentalist Christian who likened his war on terror as a "crusade" and told the nation that God himself told him to wage war.
 

RobinD69

New Member
Oct 7, 2007
293
1
0
54
(adren@line;45701)
Yes Robin, it was the Buddhists and Daoists who enslaved the Africans, slaughtered the native Americans, discriminated against the blacks, initiated the inquisitions, crusades, burned witches at the stake, and conquered most of the known world through force (those pesky Arabs, Turks, Persians, Afghans, Mongols, British, Spanish, French, and Portuguese).You must understand, which apparently you dont, these were not true Christians they were extremist sects or small groups of cultic origin. As for the discrimination of the blacks, this was not a religious group, as you like to define it, this was secular groups and yes the Christians stood by and did nothing for the most part, but it was Christians, eventually, who stopped slavery and are still working to stop discrimination. Inquisitions and Crusades were the Catholics, Burned witches, all of the 21, were the Puritans, a small cultic type sect. Conquring most of the world was the Britains, no particular faith group.Or not.But I digress. Name one religious group that historically have been more violent than Christians or Muslims.I will give you the Muslims, no arguement there, but you must realize that the Catholics are their own faith group that claim to be Christian but follow their own doctrines and their pope rather than the Bible.Even today, the majority of wars involve Muslims and the two major wars were started by George Bush, a fundamentalist Christian who likened his war on terror as a "crusade" and told the nation that God himself told him to wage war.
Bush did not start either war but He did oblige those who did start it, the Muslim extremists led by Osama Bin Laden. Keep on following the media bias and you will never know the truth.
 

Christina

New Member
Apr 10, 2006
10,885
101
0
15
(adren@line;45682)
Well, historically speaking the people most close-minded about other religions are the ones who were most capable of horrific acts of violence.A brief synopsis of European/American-Christian and middle-eastern-Islamic history proves this assertion correct.
If anyone here is closed mined its you and I will warn you for last time you do not get space on this board for you insults either ask questions you want answers to keep quite your smart elic remarks and insults are not acceptable THIS IS THE LAST TIME I'M TELLING YOU
 

Jerusalem Junkie

New Member
Jan 7, 2008
654
0
0
67
So are you legitimizing slavery and/or shifting the blame from the white Christians to the African Heathens?
Quit twisting words. I am not legitimizing anything. This is a racially charged issue that has no place on this board or any other board. Africans are not heathens as you so politely put it, Christians are not to blame either. Apparently you do not live in the South do you? Its best you leave this alone take my word for it..........
 

Nyoka

New Member
Mar 26, 2008
122
1
0
61
Mods please delete my reply if I am out of line. adren@line do you want answers to your questions or are you just after an argument? You seem to pick and choose your replies based on what will be the most argumentative. We are here to discuss not argue.Jerusalem Junkie good answer.
smile.gif
 

tim_from_pa

New Member
Jul 11, 2007
1,656
12
0
65
But I digress. Name one religious group that historically have been more violent than Christians or Muslims.
Then again, the nations that were of these faiths are the most predominant. Of course, man being the base being that he is, will use the mask of these religions (or deceive himself into thinking he is part of them) to do horrific acts.Muslim nations are basically of the house of Ishmael. Christian nations are historically descended from the house of Israel physically, and Judaism descended from the house of Judah. These are your major biblical religions, or I should say, the biblical people that embraced these religions that were prophesied to become powerful. And indeed, if I may reiterate, there will be those who use this advantage to push their diabolical cause. What you said proves nothing against biblical Judaism, Christianity, or Islamic beliefs per se. it only shows that there are those willing to call themselves those things that smear the religions.
 

tim_from_pa

New Member
Jul 11, 2007
1,656
12
0
65
(adren@line;46173)
How are Christian nations physical descendants of the house of Israel? What does that mean?
Read my online book in my signature below. If you do not know, then I don't think you are in a position to debate the subject in this thread for the same reason that I would not debate a surgeon's expertise if I was a farmer.
 

Jerusalem Junkie

New Member
Jan 7, 2008
654
0
0
67
(tim_from_pa;46197)
Read my online book in my signature below. If you do not know, then I don't think you are in a position to debate the subject in this thread for the same reason that I would not debate a surgeon's expertise if I was a farmer.
Tim you hit the nail on the head with that remark....was going to answer his post myself but you covered pretty well.
 

adren@line

New Member
Feb 24, 2008
128
0
0
44
(tim_from_pa;46197)
Read my online book in my signature below. If you do not know, then I don't think you are in a position to debate the subject in this thread for the same reason that I would not debate a surgeon's expertise if I was a farmer.
I do follow genealogy and genetics. What you stated earlier was questionable to me since it made no sense.The majority of historical Christian nations were Europeans, not ancient Semites. Nor were they descendants of the ancient Semites. They primarily belonged to Indo-European subgroups who migrated from the supposed Indo-European homeland which was somewhere between the Caucus mountains and southern Russia. This is solid genetics. You are making statements and using the Bible as "proof" which isnt solid genetics. So if you state that modern Christian nations are "physical descendants of Israel", that makes no sense. Modern Christian nations are mostly Europeans or descendants of Europeans whos ancestors converted to Christianity. The non-European Christian nations were primarily converted through Europeans.
 

RobinD69

New Member
Oct 7, 2007
293
1
0
54
(adren@line;46236)
I do follow genealogy and genetics. What you stated earlier was questionable to me since it made no sense.The majority of historical Christian nations were Europeans, not ancient Semites. Nor were they descendants of the ancient Semites. They primarily belonged to Indo-European subgroups who migrated from the supposed Indo-European homeland which was somewhere between the Caucus mountains and southern Russia. This is solid genetics. You are making statements and using the Bible as "proof" which isnt solid genetics. So if you state that modern Christian nations are "physical descendants of Israel", that makes no sense. Modern Christian nations are mostly Europeans or descendants of Europeans whos ancestors converted to Christianity. The non-European Christian nations were primarily converted through Europeans.
There were twelve tribes of Israel, they were constantly sent into exiles by wars with other nations. It is believed that the tribes of Ephram and Mannaseh were taken into captivity and sent thru the Caucus mountains to what we now call Europe. Artifacts and remnants of scrolls and tablets have been found to confirm this exile as well as many of the folklore of various Eropean groups of the time.