Religous Extremism

[Flyingjj]

Now you've just gone off your rocker.

 

I don't even know what to say to that. Laws aren't laws if they aren't followed, simple as that, in any society.

[Alg]

The Old Testament was Jewish though. According to the almighty Wiki, it predates Christianity by 200 years at least.

The Roman empire didn't accept Christianity until around 400 CE. The Christians were the ones being stoned, not the other way around. Anyone who went to an Easter mass would have heard that.

[RexMilotic]

The Old Testament was Jewish though. According to the almighty Wiki, it predates Christianity by 200 years at least.

The Roman empire didn't accept Christianity until around 400 CE. The Christians were the ones being stoned, not the other way around. Anyone who went to an Easter mass would have heard that.

 

The Old Testament still applies to Christians though. Or are you implying that anything from the Old Testament doesn't matter at all to Christians?

 

Now you've just gone off your rocker.

 

I don't even know what to say to that. Laws aren't laws if they aren't followed, simple as that, in any society.

 

What are you talking about now..? Laws are still laws even if they're not followed. Does that mean if you're going 55mph in a 10mph zone, it's not a law? It just means you're breaking the law.

[Romy]

The point of me talking about it being the foundation is that the foundation shows it's an extreme religion. Sure people have dulled it out, but that's only because they're not following their own religion, which is likely to get them sent to hell anyways (making following the religion just useless imo). Your analogy is incorrect, which is why I'm not going to go too far into discussing it. You see, the way the analogy works for is this:

 

I don't know about Christianity, but for Judiasm there is a very specific rule that can only be interpreted in one way- "Yehudi, al af shehata, Yehudi hu" which means that any Jew, whether have sinned or not, is a Jew, Or in other words, you're following your religion even if you're a sinner.

[RexMilotic]

The point of me talking about it being the foundation is that the foundation shows it's an extreme religion. Sure people have dulled it out, but that's only because they're not following their own religion, which is likely to get them sent to hell anyways (making following the religion just useless imo). Your analogy is incorrect, which is why I'm not going to go too far into discussing it. You see, the way the analogy works for is this:

 

I don't know about Christianity, but for Judiasm there is a very specific rule that can only be interpreted in one way- "Yehudi, al af shehata, Yehudi hu" which means that any Jew, whether have sinned or not, is a Jew, Or in other words, you're following your religion even if you're a sinner.

By "following their own religion" I simply meant the laws of their religion.

[Alg]

First

It's not hard to catch onto something when the only other choice you have is to be stoned.

Then

The Old Testament was Jewish though. According to the almighty Wiki, it predates Christianity by 200 years at least.

The Roman empire didn't accept Christianity until around 400 CE. The Christians were the ones being stoned, not the other way around. Anyone who went to an Easter mass would have heard that.

 

The Old Testament still applies to Christians though. Or are you implying that anything from the Old Testament doesn't matter at all to Christians?

No. I'm implying that you missed the part where the Old Testament - the source of the passage you quoted - predates Christianity's spread by 600 years or more. The Jewish religion did not spread in the way that you implied (namely, brutal murder) and by the time Christianity spread that passage you quoted was 600 years old.

Hopefully you can piece it together from there. But it seems you're willing to ignore history if it means you can discredit Christianity.

[Flyingjj]

What I should have said is laws are not laws if they are not enforced.

 

Besides that, most Christians I know would openly admit they're hypocrites when it comes to following the Bible, and if they don't, they're lying. It's called being a sinner. At least at a theological level (I'm not sure the average Christian gives it enough thought), a Christian acknowledges the fact that they don't, and in fact can't, live up to God's expectations.

 

And so came Jesus. He fulfilled the law by carrying it out perfectly, yet was still sacrificed for all the imperfections of the rest of humanity.

 

Yes, Christians are hypocrites. Anyone who tells you differently is lying. It is a pursuit of being better that makes a Christian, not being perfect that does.

[RexMilotic]

First

It's not hard to catch onto something when the only other choice you have is to be stoned.

Then

The Old Testament was Jewish though. According to the almighty Wiki, it predates Christianity by 200 years at least.

The Roman empire didn't accept Christianity until around 400 CE. The Christians were the ones being stoned, not the other way around. Anyone who went to an Easter mass would have heard that.

 

The Old Testament still applies to Christians though. Or are you implying that anything from the Old Testament doesn't matter at all to Christians?

No. I'm implying that you missed the part where the Old Testament - the source of the passage you quoted - predates Christianity's spread by 600 years or more. The Jewish religion did not spread in the way that you implied (namely, brutal murder) and by the time Christianity spread that passage you quoted was 600 years old.

Hopefully you can piece it together from there. But it seems you're willing to ignore history if it means you can discredit Christianity.

 

 

The Old Testament is part of Christianity, whether or not it predates it doesn't matter. Jesus said all the Old Laws are still to be followed, and Jesus is the basis for Christianity. What you're attempting to use for an argument doesn't even apply to this topic, because we're not discussing it's spread, but the actual religion itself.

 

What I should have said is laws are not laws if they are not enforced.

 

Besides that, most Christians I know would openly admit they're hypocrites when it comes to following the Bible, and if they don't, they're lying. It's called being a sinner. At least at a theological level (I'm not sure the average Christian gives it enough thought), a Christian acknowledges the fact that they don't, and in fact can't, live up to God's expectations.

 

And so came Jesus. He fulfilled the law by carrying it out perfectly, yet was still sacrificed for all the imperfections of the rest of humanity.

 

Yes, Christians are hypocrites. Anyone who tells you differently is lying. It is a pursuit of being better that makes a Christian, not being perfect that does.

 

No, they're still laws even if they're not enforced. They're not laws until God has returned (or so that's how Christianity works).

[n_odie]

 

The point of me talking about it being the foundation is that the foundation shows it's an extreme religion. Sure people have dulled it out, but that's only because they're not following their own religion, which is likely to get them sent to hell anyways (making following the religion just useless imo). Your analogy is incorrect, which is why I'm not going to go too far into discussing it.

 

 

For a religion to teach hell in the way it is common in Christendom today just shows how shaky the foundation of it really is. The doctrine that hell is a place of torment is not based on the Bible. Rather, it is a pagan belief masquerading as a Christian teaching.

 

Just saying, hell, imo, is the prime example of scripture being taken out of context to promote a "truth."

 

I know it's not directly on topic but seeing that comment made me cringe.

[Alg]

The Old Testament is part of Christianity, whether or not it predates it doesn't matter. Jesus said all the Old Laws are still to be followed, and Jesus is the basis for Christianity. What you're attempting to use for an argument doesn't even apply to this topic, because we're not discussing it's spread, but the actual religion itself.

Why do I bother? You did bring it up. That's why I answered it. The fact that it predates Christianity shows that by the time the religion was created that law would have been an established idea.

The thing with forcing laws on people is that they tend to resist, or it goes underground. Look at drugs. Illegal, but pretty much everywhere.

[Perakp]

I got three questions.

 

1) Is zionism religious extremism or nationalism?

 

2) Do jews have a godly right to trash human rights in Israel?

 

3) Is it possible to criticize Israel without instantly becoming antisemitic in the process?

 

Thanks, this is not me trolling but a serious attempt at trying to understand the world a bit better.

[Panzerlord]

I got three questions.

 

1) Is zionism religious extremism or nationalism?

 

2) Do jews have a godly right to trash human rights in Israel?

 

3) Is it possible to criticize Israel without instantly becoming antisemitic in the process?

 

Thanks, this is not me trolling but a serious attempt at trying to understand the world a bit better.

1) A little bit of both in my opinion

2) I'm going to say no.

3) Yes, as long as your not criticizing because they're Jewish.

[fakeitormakeit2]

I got three questions.

 

1) Is zionism religious extremism or nationalism?

It's extremism because the Jews who aren't even genetically Semitic anymore feel the right to take land from other peoples who have lived there for the last 2400yrs. The only reason why they are allowed to carry their injustice of land stealing is because might makes right.

2) Do jews have a godly right to trash human rights in Israel?

No. First of all, if God is suppose to be an all loving being, He would not approve of their evil. They are attacking others who believe in the same god.

3) Is it possible to criticize Israel without instantly becoming antisemitic in the process?

I am a Semite. I have no problem with Jews. I have a problem with supposed "Israelis".

 

Thanks, this is not me trolling but a serious attempt at trying to understand the world a bit better.

[RexMilotic]

 

The point of me talking about it being the foundation is that the foundation shows it's an extreme religion. Sure people have dulled it out, but that's only because they're not following their own religion, which is likely to get them sent to hell anyways (making following the religion just useless imo). Your analogy is incorrect, which is why I'm not going to go too far into discussing it.

 

 

For a religion to teach hell in the way it is common in Christendom today just shows how shaky the foundation of it really is. The doctrine that hell is a place of torment is not based on the Bible. Rather, it is a pagan belief masquerading as a Christian teaching.

 

Just saying, hell, imo, is the prime example of scripture being taken out of context to promote a "truth."

 

I know it's not directly on topic but seeing that comment made me cringe.

 

That actually confuses me. Without having hell as a consequence for not following God, I see no reason to even bother following it. I mean, you could take all the good parts out and create a philosophy on it, but wouldn't be the same as a religion.

[Alg]

Unless I'm wrong (probable), hell was pretty much a place as far away from God as possible.

[Flyingjj]

The concept of "hell" in the Bible (insofar as the New Testament is concerned) is referred to (if the word is even used in a particular translation, as use of the word hell is decreasing in newer translations) as a place separate from God, a place where there will be "much weeping and gnashing of teeth." It's common conception of a fiery place of doom comes from the existence of "Gehenna," which was, if I remember correctly, a physical place on earth where garbage was thrown into and burned.

 

Common theology has most definitely expanded on the Biblical conception of hell. Sometimes I wonder how we came to our current conception of it.

[sarg1010]

One more non-trolling question:

If God is all-mighty (?), why doesn't he just get rid of hell and the devil and such?

 

(I am not religious, I don't go to church or anything, haven't read the bible or any religious text, but I wouldn't say I don't believe in Him or anything, I just don't worship. But I have a friend who is christian, and we talk about this kind of stuff once in a while, and he hasn't really given me a clean answer. I'm just wondering this.)

[Panzerlord]

One more non-trolling question:

If God is all-mighty (?), why doesn't he just get rid of hell and the devil and such?

 

(I am not religious, I don't go to church or anything, haven't read the bible or any religious text, but I wouldn't say I don't believe in Him or anything, I just don't worship. But I have a friend who is christian, and we talk about this kind of stuff once in a while, and he hasn't really given me a clean answer. I'm just wondering this.)

My best guess? Then there would be no consequences for sinners. I could be wrong though, being a not particularly devout Jew I don't know my new testement very well.

[RexMilotic]

The concept of "hell" in the Bible (insofar as the New Testament is concerned) is referred to (if the word is even used in a particular translation, as use of the word hell is decreasing in newer translations) as a place separate from God, a place where there will be "much weeping and gnashing of teeth." It's common conception of a fiery place of doom comes from the existence of "Gehenna," which was, if I remember correctly, a physical place on earth where garbage was thrown into and burned.

 

Common theology has most definitely expanded on the Biblical conception of hell. Sometimes I wonder how we came to our current conception of it.

 

 

Seriously? No wonder it got changed. That version of Hell isn't scary or anything (not like i care anyways). I'm sure if it got changed to that version then most people wouldn't use the Bible for anything more than a philosophical guide.

[Faux]

the fact that you're arguing christianity in an extremism thread makes me wonder if you know any christian

 

most christians go to mass because they want something from God, or the social aspect of it, etc, but not because they think they'll go to hell if they don't go. quote the old testament as much as you want, but i'm telling you know that VERY VERY few christians have ever read the old testament, let alone the entirety of the bible.

 

christianity is a very passive religion... to call them extremists is such a joke.

[Alg]

One more non-trolling question:

If God is all-mighty (?), why doesn't he just get rid of hell and the devil and such?

 

(I am not religious, I don't go to church or anything, haven't read the bible or any religious text, but I wouldn't say I don't believe in Him or anything, I just don't worship. But I have a friend who is christian, and we talk about this kind of stuff once in a while, and he hasn't really given me a clean answer. I'm just wondering this.)

My best guess? Then there would be no consequences for sinners. I could be wrong though, being a not particularly devout Jew I don't know my new testement very well.

I've just been assuming that if everything was perfect and good there would be really nothing to live for, personally. Let's face it, perfection is boring.

[Panzerlord]

One more non-trolling question:

If God is all-mighty (?), why doesn't he just get rid of hell and the devil and such?

 

(I am not religious, I don't go to church or anything, haven't read the bible or any religious text, but I wouldn't say I don't believe in Him or anything, I just don't worship. But I have a friend who is christian, and we talk about this kind of stuff once in a while, and he hasn't really given me a clean answer. I'm just wondering this.)

My best guess? Then there would be no consequences for sinners. I could be wrong though, being a not particularly devout Jew I don't know my new testement very well.

I've just been assuming that if everything was perfect and good there would be really nothing to live for, personally. Let's face it, perfection is boring.

I think I'll have to agree with you on that one local guy.

[K4ylan]

One more non-trolling question:

If God is all-mighty (?), why doesn't he just get rid of hell and the devil and such?

 

(I am not religious, I don't go to church or anything, haven't read the bible or any religious text, but I wouldn't say I don't believe in Him or anything, I just don't worship. But I have a friend who is christian, and we talk about this kind of stuff once in a while, and he hasn't really given me a clean answer. I'm just wondering this.)

My best guess? Then there would be no consequences for sinners. I could be wrong though, being a not particularly devout Jew I don't know my new testement very well.

I've just been assuming that if everything was perfect and good there would be really nothing to live for, personally. Let's face it, perfection is boring.

I think I'll have to agree with you on that one local guy.

 

I'd have to disagree. You seem to not know what the word PERFECT means. It means without flaws. If everything was perfect, we would all have something to live for. Saying something is perfect means that there would be nothing wrong at all. Perfect and boring do not go together.

[Alg]

I'd have to disagree. You seem to not know what the word PERFECT means. It means without flaws. If everything was perfect, we would all have something to live for. Saying something is perfect means that there would be nothing wrong at all. Perfect and boring do not go together.

I think it's fun to work out problems on my own though. If there were no flaws chances are there would be nothing to actually work for.

 

Plus we'd probably still have to die. Death hurts the survivors, but immortality is worse. It's the no-win situations that prevent perfection, but they do work...

[RexMilotic]

the fact that you're arguing christianity in an extremism thread makes me wonder if you know any christian

 

most christians go to mass because they want something from God, or the social aspect of it, etc, but not because they think they'll go to hell if they don't go. quote the old testament as much as you want, but i'm telling you know that VERY VERY few christians have ever read the old testament, let alone the entirety of the bible.

 

christianity is a very passive religion... to call them extremists is such a joke.

 

The fact that you're trying to pass off Christianity as passive is a joke. The religion is extreme, it's followers are just passive. I'm not calling most of the followers extremist, but I am saying that the religion is extreme. It's like how people say that Islam is extreme, when not all Muslims take it that far.