Jews vs Christians [Archive]

Dre Crabbe

2006-08-03, 15:37

quote:Originally posted by LostCause:

There's a big part of me that wants to send this to Bitch & Moan. But, whatever...

Cheers,

Lost

Why? At least here it could turn into a decent thread, B&M would just transform it into a flamefest.

Besides, he makes a good point. I'm officially catholic myself, and I am tired about protestants bitching about everybody else, catholics included. Practically all popes from modern times have promoted tolerance for other religions, so any decent catholic would not whine about jews killing their messiah, because:

1. The jews were forgiven the instant they "killed" Christ.

(2. Jesus went to fucking heaven anyway.)

[This message has been edited by Dre Crabbe (edited 08-03-2006).]

postdiluvium

2006-08-03, 16:34

Actually since Pope John Paul II, we Catholics have embraced the Jews as our bretheren. Sure their are some Catholics that are extremely conservative to their religion, but for the most part we do not see Jews as the enemy anymore, or are not suppose to atleast.

Yes, the protestants still see us as an enemy like we used to see Jews... but all and all, just thank God you aren't a Jehovah's Witness.

Graemy

2006-08-03, 18:13

wasn't jesus a jew?

Cooking with Zyklon B

2006-08-03, 18:53

quote:Originally posted by Bruce4444:

over the 17 years of my life i have witnessed many christians insult jews due to the whole jesus died for them thing. im sick and tired of this shit. i am a catholic, yes i am part of the most judgemental religion. I am sick and tired of jews being insulted. Jesus died for their sins and that is why we should treat them equally with respect because then the death of jesus would have been useless if the people he loved had become hated by his followers. For all the descriminated jews on behalf of the christian people. i am sorry for our ignorance

It's often the ignorant that yell the loudest in a group of people, religion for this matter.

quote:Originally posted by Graemy:

wasn't jesus a jew?

That infact he was.

An interesting fact about the islamic religion is their take on jesus.

[This message has been edited by Cooking with Zyklon B (edited 08-03-2006).]

malaria

2006-08-03, 19:13

quote:Originally posted by Graemy:

wasn't jesus a jew?

According to Christianity, no. Jesus was God, and even though he was born to a Jew, Mary was the vessel of sorts.

For example, when water comes out of a pitcher, you don't call it a pitcher. See what I am saying?

Of course, if you are not Christian, then yes he was an ethnic Jew and reform-oriented religions Jew.

karma_sleeper

2006-08-03, 21:07

Becuase Jesus' first followers and the apostles were Jews, many people thought that his teachings were the completion of Judaism and therefore only meant for Jews. They thought they should only preach the message of Christ to Jews.

Later I think a couple of the apostles, I can't remember who, decided that they should preach to gentiles (non-Jews) as well.

@malaria: According to Christianity Jesus wasn't a Jew but God? What Christianity? Your narrow minded fundamentalism? You're a fucking retard. JESUS WAS A JEW. I don't know how to make that any clearer. It's a fact of history.

"when water comes out of a pitcher, you don't call it a pitcher." So when a Jewish boy is born of his Jewish mother he isn't called a Jew?

malaria

2006-08-03, 21:57

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

Becuase Jesus' first followers and the apostles were Jews, many people thought that his teachings were the completion of Judaism and therefore only meant for Jews. They thought they should only preach the message of Christ to Jews.

Later I think a couple of the apostles, I can't remember who, decided that they should preach to gentiles (non-Jews) as well.

@malaria: According to Christianity Jesus wasn't a Jew but God? What Christianity? Your narrow minded fundamentalism? You're a fucking retard. JESUS WAS A JEW. I don't know how to make that any clearer. It's a fact of history.

"when water comes out of a pitcher, you don't call it a pitcher." So when a Jewish boy is born of his Jewish mother he isn't called a Jew?

Not when said "Jewish boy" is God. I am not Christian, by the way. And Jesus himself said to preach only to Jews, not Samaritans or Gentiles.

Abrahim

2006-08-03, 22:51

Here is the Islamic Take on Jesus:

Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian but he was an upright man and one who had submitted (to the will of God)(the definition of Muslim is "one who has submitted (to the will of God))

Jesus and Mary and Zakariya and Yaya and all those people were not Jews either.

The Qur'an differenciates between Jews (Yahudi) and the ancient Tribe of the B'nei Israel who were in Africa (The Qur'an doesn't specify Africa but "Civilization")

I believe they were in Pre Babylonian/Pre Egyptian Northern and Eastern Africa in early civilization, their remnants can still be found in some tribes in the region who also posess similar ancient traditions.

In any case Mary was raised and brought up around pious men and prophets like Zakariya, who raised her, they lived in a sanctuary somewhere and they were dealing with the tribe called the B'nei Israel who had just prior dealt with Musa and the exodus from Civilization (the Qur'an doesn't specify Egypt and the story of Moses appears prior to Babylon, Babylon has an almost identicle story and so does Akkadia all which speak of events as if prior to Babylon and thus prior to Egypt.)

So Mary was a pious girl and was righteous and did good and gifts and miracles were bestowed upon her and one day a messenger (Maliaka/Angel) appeared to her and gave her the message that she was to have a son born to her and his name would be Isa. She wondered how she could have a son since no man had touched her but the messenger said that for God it is only Be and it is.

And so it was, she gave birth to Isa and he was, by the help of a maliaka able to speak as a baby and a child to the amazement of the people. He preached the message of the One God and had arrived to correct the B'nei Israel after they had corrupted to the Taurath of Musa and edited and added it to the point of loss of the message. Isa brought the book known as the Injeel (now lost). The B'Nei Israel (and I dont believe this was happening in Roman times at all) disliked that Isa was attempted to ruin their traditions and captured him and had hoped to kill him.

Isa prayed to God to be saved from them and so he was, and he escaped, dying in his place was either another person who they thought was him or an illusion of somekind, and they all believed they had killed Isa but they hadn't, and he and his mother escaped.

The explanation is that like Adam was created from scratch pretty much, so too was Isa. Furthermore, Jesus taught the message of all the prophets prior to him, worship and submission to the One God, Islam, and to do right.

The most important part in which Christianity and Islam conflict in the Jesus story is that Islam claims Jesus didn't die on the cross, thus removing the entire "He died for our sins" business. Also Islam explains God is not a man, nor a father, nor a son, and is far beyond having sons, but that God is the all encompassing Reality, the creator, surrounding everything, within and without, what all are dependant on, not some being in the image of man.

karma_sleeper

2006-08-04, 00:14

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

Not when said "Jewish boy" is God. I am not Christian, by the way. And Jesus himself said to preach only to Jews, not Samaritans or Gentiles.

Jesus, to Christians, was both God AND man. He wasn't either or. The Word of God made flesh in the form of a man that happened to be Jewish. Get over it.

malaria

2006-08-04, 01:23

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

Jesus, to Christians, was both God AND man. He wasn't either or. The Word of God made flesh in the form of a man that happened to be Jewish. Get over it.

Haha, you are so anti-Christian you don't even realize I told you I am NOT Christian. He is God in the flesh. God in the flesh has no ethnicity or religion. He is GOD, whether he is in the form of a man or not. He certainly wasn't Jewish, or he wouldn't be calling for reform.

Like I said, this is the CHRISTIAN view. I am NOT Christian, and I know he was a Jew.

Get it through this time or do we need to keep repeating ourselves like the Civil Liberties thread?

Oh wait, I mean.. Get over it.

[This message has been edited by malaria (edited 08-04-2006).]

karma_sleeper

2006-08-04, 05:25

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

Haha, you are so anti-Christian you don't even realize I told you I am NOT Christian. He is God in the flesh. God in the flesh has no ethnicity or religion. He is GOD, whether he is in the form of a man or not. He certainly wasn't Jewish, or he wouldn't be calling for reform.

Like I said, this is the CHRISTIAN view. I am NOT Christian, and I know he was a Jew.

Get it through this time or do we need to keep repeating ourselves like the Civil Liberties thread?

Oh wait, I mean.. Get over it.

From newadvent.org ( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14597a.htm

"(a) Christ's Humanity in the Pauline Epistles

The expressions "form of a servant", "in habit found as a man", "in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Philippians 2:7; Romans 8:3) may seem to impair the real humanity of Christ in the Pauline teaching. But in reality they only describe a mode of being or hint at the presence of a higher nature in Christ not seen by the senses, or they contrast Christ's human nature with the nature of that sinful race to which it belongs. On the other hand the Apostle plainly speaks of Our Lord manifested in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16), as possessing a body of flesh (Colossians 1:22), as being "made of a woman" (Galatians 4:4), as being born of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:3), as belonging according to the flesh to the race of Israel (Romans 9:5). As a Jew, Jesus Christ was born under the Law (Galatians 4:4). The Apostle dwells with emphasis on Our Lord's real share in our physical human weakness (2 Corinthians 13:4), on His life of suffering (Hebrews 5:8) reaching its climax in the Passion (ibid., 1:5; Philippians 3:10; Colossians 1:24)."

Catholics, at least, recognize Jesus' place in the Davidic line of kings. That makes him ethnically Jewish. The ideas you're talking about relate to movements later declared heretical in the early Church, some of which claimed among other things that Christ's body was brought down from Heaven. This would make Christ not a Jew, but born of a Jew. This was how they attempted to reconcile his Divinity with his humanity. Catholic doctrine holds that "the Divine and the human nature are physically united in Christ." This is known as the hypostatic union (unity of the person and the Word). Some argued that a result of this union was either the absorbtion of the human into the Divine or vice versa. Despite the many variations of ideas regarding Christ's humanity, in the Church, the Catholic doctrine was always upheld. Protestants, on the other hand, are a different story since they lack a centralized teaching authority and are splintered in countless denominations. Hence, each denominations view on the matter will differ and I would not be surprised if some have stated things resembling past heresies of the early Church.

I don't care if you're a Christian or not. You cannot rightfully claim that all Christians do not recognize the Jewish heritage of Christ.

nicky69

2006-08-04, 06:03

Growing up Catholic well into the reign of pope john paul the II i can tell you that Catholics are the most pro-jewish people besides the bah'ai faith (spelling? its the religion from Iran that respects all forms of religions)

Testament

2006-08-04, 07:11

I have a question. How can there be Christian White Nationalists (the ones more leaning toward Nazism) who hate Jews when Jesus's mother and his apostles were Jewish? The fact that he himself was ethnically Jewish (depends on how you wanna look at it) is another factor. They then further themselves away from this by saying it's a "ZOG" media infiltration even though many holy figures all over the world admit to this. I find it humerous.

[This message has been edited by Testament (edited 08-04-2006).]

karma_sleeper

2006-08-04, 07:21

quote:Originally posted by Testament:

I have a question. How can there be Christian White Nationalists (the ones more leaning toward Nazism) who hate Jews when Jesus's mother and his apostles were Jewish? The fact that he himself was ethnically Jewish (depends on how you wanna look at it) is another factor. They then further themselves away from this by saying it's a "ZOG" media infiltration even though many holy figures all over the world admit to this. I find it humerous.

White Nationalists claim that Jesus wasn't Jewish but instead an Aryan. Much in the same manner that German Protestant groups in Nazi Germany did.

Testament

2006-08-04, 07:39

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

White Nationalists claim that Jesus wasn't Jewish but instead an Aryan. Much in the same manner that German Protestant groups in Nazi Germany did.

Is there anything HISTORICALLY valid to that claim (and I'm not talking about pro-David Duke sites).

theBishop

2006-08-04, 08:02

I think the main problem with Jews is that they are responsible for all the wars.

... oh, and killing God's only son was pretty messed up.

Shame on you, Jews.

PS: i love Mel Gibson

Kallisti

2006-08-04, 09:12

Just wanted to address a few things that have been brought up throughout this thread.

Point 1: None of the original apostles ministered to Gentiles. They would've been long dead by the time Christianity spread beyond Judea. Some later disciples "decided" to start converting Gentiles after the Christians, then a minority sect of Judaism, were driven out of their homeland after the Jewish insurrection against the Romans.

Point 2: The Christian notions promoted by the Nazi Party and still alive in white power groups today are called "Positive Christianity". They focus on Jesus as a rebel against the Jews and their traditions. Later they added in that Jesus was in fact an Aryan, and thus still pure.

Point 3: Yes, Mel Gibson is a shining beacon to Catholics everywhere. I surprise even myself with the joy I experience at watching that self-righteous maggot squirm.

Truth is all

2006-08-04, 09:18

Haha, you are so anti-Christian you don't even realize I told you I am NOT Christian. He is God in the flesh. God in the flesh has no ethnicity or religion. He is GOD, whether he is in the form of a man or not. He certainly wasn't Jewish, or he wouldn't be calling for reform.

Like I said, this is the CHRISTIAN view. I am NOT Christian, and I know he was a Jew.

Get it through this time or do we need to keep repeating ourselves like the Civil Liberties thread?

Oh wait, I mean.. Get over it.

Ok I AM Christian and this is not a Christian view. All Christians know or at least should know that Jesus Christ was a Jew. They also know that He gave His life for the WORLD, not just Jews. Paul was the first apostle to begin a large scale preaching to the gentiles, but so did many of the other apostles. Soo I would like to see where Jesus says this. Yes He says that He must feed His Children first, it was already prophesied that He would preach to a nation other than that which called themselves Gods people, and the woman said "even the dogs eat the crumbs from the table" and so Jesus so her faith and healed her. It is those who have faith in Christ, not just jews. O and it was not the Jews that killed Christ. It was everyone. He died that the world might be saved. Therefore it is everyones fault. We all killed Christ. Hating the jews is being ignorant. I dont know what kind of Christians you were talking about but I have never heard anyone claim taht Jesus was not a jew.

Truth is all

2006-08-04, 09:21

Kallisti,

What are you talking about? Paul, Peter and others preached to the Gentiles. These were Apostles. I honestly do not know where you got your sources but you better look again, because that is the farthest from the truth I have seen. By the time Christianity spread past judea? Are you kidding me? Pauls writings date back to the 50s AD and these were churchs all over the mediteranian. Again, get your facts straight.

karma_sleeper

2006-08-04, 17:03

quote:Originally posted by Testament:

Is there anything HISTORICALLY valid to that claim (and I'm not talking about pro-David Duke sites).

I really don't know where they draw proof for this claim. I spent a little time studying Deutsche Chriten movement in Nazi Germany, but I focused less on their depictions of Christ and more on their adoption of traditional Christian eschatological beliefs and how they were reworked to fit with Nazi party doctrine. Some groups within this movement completely rejected the Old Testament because of its Jewish origins and even the writings of St. Paul. As I mentioned in my post above, St. Paul talks about Jesus' place in the Davidic line. This they would've completely denied.

Kallisti is right when he talks about "Positive Christianity." These Protestants at the time believed Jesus was engaged in a "struggle" against Jewish culture and influence, much like they perceived Hitler and Germany to be in such a struggle. I'm sure if you looked into it, maybe you could find writers from the time who tried to academically legitimize this claim.

malaria

2006-08-04, 20:04

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

Catholics, at least, recognize Jesus' place in the Davidic line of kings. That makes him ethnically Jewish. The ideas you're talking about relate to movements later declared heretical in the early Church, some of which claimed among other things that Christ's body was brought down from Heaven. This would make Christ not a Jew, but born of a Jew. This was how they attempted to reconcile his Divinity with his humanity. Catholic doctrine holds that "the Divine and the human nature are physically united in Christ." This is known as the hypostatic union (unity of the person and the Word). Some argued that a result of this union was either the absorbtion of the human into the Divine or vice versa. Despite the many variations of ideas regarding Christ's humanity, in the Church, the Catholic doctrine was always upheld. Protestants, on the other hand, are a different story since they lack a centralized teaching authority and are splintered in countless denominations. Hence, each denominations view on the matter will differ and I would not be surprised if some have stated things resembling past heresies of the early Church.

I don't care if you're a Christian or not. You cannot rightfully claim that all Christians do not recognize the Jewish heritage of Christ.

No one can rightfully say Christians believe anything because they are so splintered. If you take the stance of the Catholic Church, that Jesus is descended from David (patrilineal), then he is NOT God. He can either be one or the other, but not both. At that point you have to choose which is more important to you: his virgin birth or his descent from David. Generally, most Protestant Christians will choose virgin birth.

To be a man means that one is SINFUL. Man inherited sin from Adam (Gen 5:3) and so God cannot be a Jewish man or any other ethnicity. (Numbers 23:19)

Now relating to his Jewishness, his teachings went directly against Judaism, therefore he is not Jewish religiously.

Now obviously some of this points out the flaws of Christianity even accepting Jesus as the Messiah, but what can you do. From my perspective, the only way to interpret it as a Christian is that Jesus was not a man of any ethnic persuasion, but God in the form of a man.

karma_sleeper

2006-08-04, 22:06

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

If you take the stance of the Catholic Church, that Jesus is descended from David (patrilineal), then he is NOT God. He can either be one or the other, but not both.

Had you read the article, the stance of the Church is hypostatic union, the human and the Divine combined in Christ, not one over the other. In other words, both. Did you even bother reading my post? You've only shown me that you don't understand the Catholic stance.

Christ did not sin because his humanity did not encompass that ability. He Himself said "Which of you shall convince Me of sin?" Instead, he bore the burden of sin for the entire world on his shoulders through the crucifixion. He assumed human form to prove himself an example of virtue. If in sin, he could not lead by example. Therefore, the Divinity of Christ is fused with the human nature to overcome the defect of sin.

As for Christ inheriting sin from Adam because of his humanity, this is questionable at best. To quote St. Augustine, "As in the seed there is a visible bulk and an invisible virtue, both have come from Adam. Now Christ took the visible substance of His flesh from the Virgin's flesh; but the virtue of His conception did not spring from the seed of man, but far otherwise--from on high." In other words, Christ may have inherited the physical form of Adam as all humans have, but not Adams capacity to sin. These latter elements came from Divine source, and because Divine, incapable of sin. As a result, Christ can be both of the form of man (a Jewish man since his earthly form was derived from the Davidic line) and without sin.

"Now relating to his Jewishness, his teachings went directly against Judaism, therefore he is not Jewish religiously."

I'm not talking about his faith, I'm talking about his ethnicity. That's a completely different subject.

I find it strange that you claim to know so much about what Christians believe because you've proved otherwise to me. I don't know where you're getting your ideas or info but it's obviously not representative of the whole.

[This message has been edited by karma_sleeper (edited 08-04-2006).]

malaria

2006-08-05, 02:01

quote:Originally posted by karma_sleeper:

Had you read the article, the stance of the Church is hypostatic union, the human and the Divine combined in Christ, not one over the other. In other words, both. Did you even bother reading my post? You've only shown me that you don't understand the Catholic stance.

Uh, what? I just said that the stance of the Catholic Church is laughable at best. If his descent comes from David through Joseph, then he is not the son of God. Get me now? I understand what they are saying, but it makes absolutely no sense at all.

quote:Christ did not sin because his humanity did not encompass that ability. He Himself said "Which of you shall convince Me of sin?" Instead, he bore the burden of sin for the entire world on his shoulders through the crucifixion. He assumed human form to prove himself an example of virtue. If in sin, he could not lead by example. Therefore, the Divinity of Christ is fused with the human nature to overcome the defect of sin.

It is impossible, if all humans are born with sin, not to sin. Even if no one could convince him to sin during his life, he was born with it. A perfect circle can not exist as an oval.

quote:As for Christ inheriting sin from Adam because of his humanity, this is questionable at best. To quote St. Augustine, "As in the seed there is a visible bulk and an invisible virtue, both have come from Adam. Now Christ took the visible substance of His flesh from the Virgin's flesh; but the virtue of His conception did not spring from the seed of man, but far otherwise--from on high." In other words, Christ may have inherited the physical form of Adam as all humans have, but not Adams capacity to sin. These latter elements came from Divine source, and because Divine, incapable of sin. As a result, Christ can be both of the form of man (a Jewish man since his earthly form was derived from the Davidic line) and without sin.

Taking the stance that Jesus was of David's descent, then he did in fact inherit that sin.

quote:I find it strange that you claim to know so much about what Christians believe because you've proved otherwise to me. I don't know where you're getting your ideas or info but it's obviously not representative of the whole.

I was raised Catholic, and most of them don't believe what the Catholic Church actually does. In fact, most of them don't even understand even a section of the bible. Other than that, I have been studying the various Christian branches with others (from their said branches) and alone, and I am only giving you what the majority of them have said. Obviously the Catholic Church is not the whole of Christianity (most US Protestants don't even consider it Christian).

Once again, it is impossible to give beliefs of all Christians. That is why there are so many different branches. Maybe I should've worded it differently, but the fact remains that most Christians that I have met and talked with believe what I have told you.

I have to tell you that it is difficult arguing a Christian's case for Jesus because I don't even believe the New Testament is factual itself, let alone that he was the Messiah/Son of God.

karma_sleeper

2006-08-05, 03:16

I find it difficult to believe most Christians you've met believe what you say they do, but then again I shouldn't really be surprised. There are indeed many many denominations, each with their own unique "character."

Yes, unfortunately, some Catholics decide to pick and choose what to believe, but that does not change what the Church officially teaches. I think you may misinterpret the reasoning some of these theories use to draw their conclusions. The Catholic Church is over a billion strong, and if I'm not mistaken, outnumber Protestants as a whole but I can't remember the exact figures. I could be wrong. Even if individual Catholics secretly vary in their beliefs, the Church still preaches one view on the matter. It is also unfortunate that some Protestants do not consider Catholics Christians. That has always disturbed me.

But whatever. Sorry for being an asshole.

napoleon_complex

2006-08-05, 03:36

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

Uh, what? I just said that the stance of the Catholic Church is laughable at best. If his descent comes from David through Joseph, then he is not the son of God. Get me now? I understand what they are saying, but it makes absolutely no sense at all.

What?

How can you say that? In the realm of religion, how can YOU just draw an arbitrary line between what is possible and impossible for God or the son of God?

If he's the son of God, then he can do anything, including being descended from David.

Seriously, do you know ANYTHING about Catholic theology?

karma_sleeper

2006-08-05, 14:51

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

Seriously, do you know ANYTHING about Catholic theology?

Don't even bother. It's hopeless.

Anti Christ Super Star

2006-08-05, 15:06

quote:Originally posted by LostCause:

There's a big part of me that wants to send this to Bitch & Moan. But, whatever...

Cheers,

Lost

Yeah, shut up:

fab fab fab

munch

2006-08-05, 22:01

Jews and Christians are just people. yes, through past experiance, i can say stereotypes exist for a reason, which does bring up a better question, do christians have any stereotypes? members of the clergy are excluded

Graemy

2006-08-05, 22:51

yes the stereotypical super christian.

they hate every other religion and go around telling people they will burn in hell.

Cooking with Zyklon B

2006-08-07, 06:51

quote:Originally posted by Graemy:

yes the stereotypical super christian.

they hate every other religion and go around telling people they will burn in hell.

I thought that was catholics?

Graemy

2006-08-07, 15:10

They are catholics too. they are every where. they take their religion too far and try and convert people everyday. they are worse than jehovas witnesses. they are in every religion.

napoleon_complex

2006-08-07, 16:36

There are even athiest versions(though with obvious slight variations).

Mellow_Fellow

2006-08-07, 17:36

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

There are even athiest versions(though with obvious slight variations).

"Nothing happens to you when you die, you're dead, so stop wasting your life with silly religions"

Hmmm

"You're going to burn in hell for rejecting the loving, all powerful Lord my God, I am right and you are wrong, it even says so in the bible you filthy unbeliever"

I'd prefer the former http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

munch

2006-08-07, 19:30

"If it is a sin to think about touching sindy's tits, then you might as well touch sindy's tits, because you've already sinned" Paraphrase-George Carlin

Only a human could creat a religion so fallible

napoleon_complex

2006-08-07, 20:00

quote:Originally posted by Mellow_Fellow:

"Nothing happens to you when you die, you're dead, so stop wasting your life with silly religions"

Hmmm

"You're going to burn in hell for rejecting the loving, all powerful Lord my God, I am right and you are wrong, it even says so in the bible you filthy unbeliever"

I'd prefer the former http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif)

I'd prefer neither. Both are self-righteous blowhards that pretend to have everything figured out.

As a matter of fact though, I'd prefer the latter. I like arguing with christians much more than athiests. It's more fun and they tend to be mor openminded(at least in my limited experiences).

Abrahim

2006-08-08, 00:05

Cooking with Zyklon B

2006-08-08, 02:17

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

I'd prefer neither. Both are self-righteous blowhards that pretend to have everything figured out.

As a matter of fact though, I'd prefer the latter. I like arguing with christians much more than athiests. It's more fun and they tend to be mor openminded(at least in my limited experiences).

I'm atheist and did attend to church and listened to the sermons, very very convincing but I'd much rahter not have someone dictate to me about the christian religion, I'd much rather read from the book in question and gather my own interpretation.

Open minded enough?

[This message has been edited by Cooking with Zyklon B (edited 08-08-2006).]

napoleon_complex

2006-08-08, 06:43

I never said all atheists are close minded...

Cooking with Zyklon B

2006-08-08, 20:33

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

I never said all atheists are close minded...

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make it out like that.

-Mephisto-

2006-08-09, 00:13

It is my firm belief that any zionist jew should be shot in the balls with a 12 gauge.

Cooking with Zyklon B

2006-08-09, 01:21

quote:Originally posted by -Mephisto-:

It is my firm belief that any zionist jew should be shot in the balls with a 12 gauge.

Is it because you think they own the media or some claim that lacks proof?

I found some site from stormfront that made a plethora of claims about how jews owned the media, the founders to warner brothers were jewish and such, well i did alittle looking around and couldn't find anything that expressly said or implied that they were jews.

Although someone on stormfront did notice how when you search "The Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_bible)" on wikipedia it comes up with the torah, and he extrapolated that wikipedia is therefore an unreliable source because it is owned by the enemy... I find that laughable.

*I double posted, pressed the quote button rather than the edit

[This message has been edited by Cooking with Zyklon B (edited 08-09-2006).]

malaria

2006-08-12, 04:10

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

What?

How can you say that? In the realm of religion, how can YOU just draw an arbitrary line between what is possible and impossible for God or the son of God?

If he's the son of God, then he can do anything, including being descended from David.

Seriously, do you know ANYTHING about Catholic theology?

So what you're saying is that Catholic theology states that "whatever we say goes," effectively. Listen, if he is not the son of Joseph, then he can' claim descent through Joseph from David. What doesn't make sense about this? If the RCC says "Well God can do what he want because he's God!" then I am pretty sure there is no reason to even bother debating with them. That's just as absurd as Digital Saviour's beliefs. It's either one or the other, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

You are asking me why I draw an 'arbitrary line between possible and impossible for God,' but why don't you ask yourself the same question? How about your Church? They are all men.

By the way, I thought you were just a Catholic apologist, not a die-hard Catholic. That's too bad, I thought you were heading in the right direction.

And to Karma, I know Catholic theology and dogma because I was raised Catholic. After I said 'no more' I went back and studied it on my own, which is why I still don't believe in it. Just because I don't agree with your doctrine doesn't mean I don't understand what it is attempting to say. It just means anyone literate who has read the bible can see the RCC is nuts.

I am on vacation so I don't know why I'm replying to this now, but I'll be back for your inevitable 'OMG U DUN UNDERSTZAND USZ CAHTLIX' on Monday.

napoleon_complex

2006-08-12, 05:10

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

So what you're saying is that Catholic theology states that "whatever we say goes," effectively. Listen, if he is not the son of Joseph, then he can' claim descent through Joseph from David. What doesn't make sense about this? If the RCC says "Well God can do what he want because he's God!" then I am pretty sure there is no reason to even bother debating with them. That's just as absurd as Digital Saviour's beliefs. It's either one or the other, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

No, I'm saying you don't understand, or possibly even know what the Catholic doctrine is. Aren't you at all familiar with the immaculate conception, or are you familiar with the idea of God acting through human vessels? The idea of the immaculate conception alone should be enough to show how Jesus could be both the son of God AND be a descendent of David. Think about it, if Mary is free from original sin, then it's entirely possible for her to give birth to the son of God, who at the same time would be man. How you don't get this is beyond me.

Another thing you discount, is that Mary is a descendent of David(Luke's genealogy of Christ goes through Mary, though this is heavily debated and I wouldn't argue if you didn't see it that way, but there is biblical evidence that Mary was a descendent of David aside from this including the fact that Mary and Joseph were related, albeit distantly). So even if we assume that Jesus couldn't descend from David through Joseph, he certainly could through Mary.

quote:You are asking me why I draw an 'arbitrary line between possible and impossible for God,' but why don't you ask yourself the same question? How about your Church? They are all men.

By the way, I thought you were just a Catholic apologist, not a die-hard Catholic. That's too bad, I thought you were heading in the right direction.

Where did I once claim or say in any of these posts that I'm a practicing Catholic? Never, so politely shut the fuck up unless you know what the hell you're talking about.

Anyways, if you knew ANYTHING about Catholic dogma, you'd know that it isn't arbitrary. Everything is firmly rooted in scripture and tradition. If I'm wrong, then point it out?

quote:I am on vacation so I don't know why I'm replying to this now, but I'll be back for your inevitable 'OMG U DUN UNDERSTZAND USZ CAHTLIX' on Monday.

And I'm sure you'll be just as stupid then as you are right now. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

shuu

2006-08-12, 05:35

Why is it that the stereotype is of christians hating jews but all I ever see is christians kissing as much jewish ass as they can manage (alot). Fuck, even jews aren't as pro-jewish as many of these christians.

Muhammad

2006-08-14, 10:57

MOTHERFUCKER, MY PEOPLE CAN BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF BOTH.

Abrahim

2006-08-14, 11:47

Christians and Jews seem to have a bit of an alliance these days but there were periods in some countries in which Jews were considered evil. Jews dislike Christians generally, not only for their beliefs but there is a general prejudice in most Jewish communities towards Gentiles. Some Christians dislike Jews immensely but in the majority I'd say both are on good terms these days.

Meeee

2006-08-14, 11:57

quote:Originally posted by Abrahim:

Christians and Jews seem to have a bit of an alliance these days but there were periods in some countries in which Jews were considered evil. Jews dislike Christians generally, not only for their beliefs but there is a general prejudice in most Jewish communities towards Gentiles. Some Christians dislike Jews immensely but in the majority I'd say both are on good terms these days.

yeh stfu u prick. stupid sand nigger.

no1 likes jews, they fucking did wtc.

Abrahim

2006-08-15, 02:12

quote:Originally posted by Meeee:

yeh stfu u prick. stupid sand nigger.

no1 likes jews, they fucking did wtc.

People liked Seinfeld before he became a Terrorist.

Satanz Handicaped Helper

2006-08-15, 14:36

page 2 http://www.totse.com/bbs/cool.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/cool.gif)

bellbottoms_and_gin

2006-08-15, 20:09

Jesus was both God and man. By being so, he had all the powers and wisdom of God, and all the frailties and weaknesses of humans, i.e. he could die.

However, you have to ask yourself, what other weaknesses did he possess? No humans are perfect, we all have longings, needs, and temptations. Did Jesus hunger after material goods? Did he chase women around Jerusalem? According to the bible, he didn't. Yet how can we know.

The New testament was written by followers of Jesus (generally speaking). These same followers were anxious to promote their fledgling religion. It is only logical to expect them to leave out the bad (read human) things that Jesus did (Or did they? Supposedly, some of the Gnostic gospels depict a more human Jesus), seeing as he is the founder of it all. Could this explain the lack of humanity (weakness) in the depiction of Jesus in the Bible.