The Real Truth About Christianity
- Thread starter Medicine*Woman
- Start date
"Heresy" was a wonderful charge to level against captives, because only the Church could define it. The victims were tortured until they confessed, and having confessed they were executed. If they did not confess, then the torture continued until they died anyway. One recorded form of torture was to spread the victim, little by little, with fat (beginning with his feet), and then to roast him alive in sections, limb by limb, over an open fire.
The Bible is much more available is it not. Does the Bible preach the alleged torture methods described herein?
Therefore why pin it on "Christianity"?
Inane generalizations.
Think.
The Bible is much more available is it not. Does the Bible preach the alleged torture methods described herein?
Therefore why pin it on "Christianity"?
Inane generalizations.
Think.
The bible isn't christianity. The bible was the flint that sparked christianity.
Europe and its offspring(america, australia, etc) are christianity.
Islam, christianity, judaism, hinduism are all cultural evolutions. They are not books for todays weak people to pick and choose between.
If you are some white guy in england picking and choosing between religions or a lack there of you are merely evidence of christianity losing strength, you are still a christian regardless and you will be and your children will be and their children will be untill christian society is destroyed.
Mcdonalds is christianity.
Torture in europe in the middle ages can most definately be 'pinned' on christianity. Just as 9/11 can be pinned on islam.
§outh§tar said:
I think the grail is a metaphor for the true, inner and secret teachings of Jesus, with would have been considered heresy even by some of his own disciples, which is why he gave them to "the disciple whom Jesus loved", Thomas. Discovered among the Nag Hamadi texts in 1948, and only recently revealed by biblical historian, Elaine Pagels, The Gospel of Thomas paints a very different picture of early Christianity which, if believed, would have toppled the monopoly of the bishops as sole authority to interpret scripture.
Well, it's on a website. Apparently, a fan of Marion Zimmer Bradley. Personally, I'm convinced.
*************spidergoat said:
M*W: spider, you may be right about the grail. I think it was the womb of MM. The disciple whom Jesus loved has always been thought to be John. The truth is, his most beloved disciple was MM, his wife. Thomas is now thought to be Jesus' twin brother.
*************DoctorNO said:
M*W: The RCC will never be able to hide its past. I believe in a wonderful future without Christianity.
It would be argued by the middle-age Church that since the person who has been baptised has made a solemn vow, the Church can duly punish someone who has broken it under treason. If they confessed, I'm certain that a inquisition done by the Church, not the state, would let them free.
*************okinrus said:
M*W: The solemn vow is to deny the treason, the confession, to set the victum free of any wrongdoing. No baptism was necessry to institute a soluem vow. The Church was sanctified beyond the spiritual nature of humanity. There is no God but the God of Humanity.
How about LIES ? Christians tend to lie so much:
The English dictionary defines 'lie' as: intentional false statement, imposture, be deceptive, convey a false impression. If one were to say it is the methodology of the Christian missionary to lie about Islam, this claim would have a ring of truth to it. Their endeavours have not only left Islam as a misunderstood religion in the West, but also one that is mistreated. This methodology has as its origin a seldom-publicised statement of Paul in which he is happy to proclaim:
'If through my falsehood God's truthfulness abounds to His glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner.' (Romans 3:7)
Paul felt little reluctance in spreading 'falsehood' so long as the end result achieved the greater glory of God. One will never know, therefore, whether his claimed vision of Jesus on the Damascus road, his appointment as preacher to the Gentiles, and the other teachings he propagated in the name of Christianity were all part of this use of 'falsehood' or not. He would have done well to take into consideration another Biblical text:
'A faithful witness does not lie, but a false witness breathes out lies.' (Proverbs 14:5)
http://www.access24.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/in/waqia/tactics.htm
The English dictionary defines 'lie' as: intentional false statement, imposture, be deceptive, convey a false impression. If one were to say it is the methodology of the Christian missionary to lie about Islam, this claim would have a ring of truth to it. Their endeavours have not only left Islam as a misunderstood religion in the West, but also one that is mistreated. This methodology has as its origin a seldom-publicised statement of Paul in which he is happy to proclaim:
'If through my falsehood God's truthfulness abounds to His glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner.' (Romans 3:7)
Paul felt little reluctance in spreading 'falsehood' so long as the end result achieved the greater glory of God. One will never know, therefore, whether his claimed vision of Jesus on the Damascus road, his appointment as preacher to the Gentiles, and the other teachings he propagated in the name of Christianity were all part of this use of 'falsehood' or not. He would have done well to take into consideration another Biblical text:
'A faithful witness does not lie, but a false witness breathes out lies.' (Proverbs 14:5)
http://www.access24.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/in/waqia/tactics.htm
Dr Lou Natic said:
I like this statement. Somehow it sums up something important but I am not quite sure what. Maybe it ties in with Walt Disney. Walt Disney introduces our youth a set of morals (which previously might have been done by the church). The same is true for McDonalds probably. Look at the phenomenon of the happy meal. A fatty meal is associated with a reward. Consumer Christianity. Consume and be blessed.
Amen.
*************okinrus said:
M*W: Why does PM need to 'own' a Bible? Do you 'own' a copy of the Qur'an? You're being argumentative.
I think his point is if you are going to continuously quote from a book it is better to have access to that book. I quote the quran often and when I do I use an islamic website with 3 different translations. The quran PM gets all his biblical quotes from flagrantly anti-christian websites. If you want to attack a religions doctrine using the actual documents has alot more validity than posting interpretations of those documents that fit your argument.
*************path said:
M*W: I got his point. What's yours?
Medicine Woman said:
You cant change the past but you can change the future. Christianity has evolved so much since the dark ages. Catholicism has changed. Presently it is a very peaceful, productive, and caring religion. I know so many good religious christians.
Medicine Woman said:
Why? Without christianity 2 billion people would have to choose between Islam, hinduism, buddhism & secularism. What if the majority of that 2 billion becomes muslims? They would turn this world into afghanistan & saudi arabia. That is not "wonderful". IT IS A NIGHTMARE!