namelesstavern.net

by **Muglack** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:03 pm

Mindia your list and Vonkaar's lists have a ton of discrepancies, and going off Board history alone I'm going to assume that Vonkaar actually researched his, and yours is made up from "personal experience".

If you want I can take the role of "Devil's Advocate" (excuse the term) and explain to you why God hates us. We broke the first rule of Intergovernmental, or in this case Transcendental Relations. We killed the messenger, and not just once. God sent down the best messenger he could of think of, his own son, to try and illuminate the world for us, and what did we do? We killed him for it. The only messenger from God that was heard with open ears and embraced with open arms was when Jesus spoke to Joseph Smith and the Mormon faith was created.

So what it boils down to is God hates everyone, except the Mormons, and especially the French and the Jews.

P.S Take a term like "You are of your Father" and translate it 7 or 8 times eventually resulting in a dialect that is almost completely gone from the planet and tell me what you come up with when it's all said and done. If you can't get clear translations from English to French and vice versa you're pretty much screwed doing anything more in complicated.

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:19 pm

Read paragraph 2 from the official Seventh-Day Adventist website.

http://www.seventh-dayadventist.org/beliefs/index.html

and this paragraph from Lakeside chruch's website:

Our Profile of a Disciple of Christ
At Lakeside we believe passionate & productive followers of Christ…

Have trusted (and are trusting) Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord (John 3:16, Acts 2:41)
Have been baptized by immersion (Matthew 28:19-20, Acts 2:41)
Have committed to the church (Acts 2:41, 1Corinthians 12:-27)

and here's the website for the United Methodist Church. What they say can be interpreted in two different ways, so I'll give you that one. If they don't believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit as one, then I have to question their "Christianity."
http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=166

by **vonkaar** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:06 pm

Alright... two interesting points have been brought up over the last couple hours. I just want to make them 'quite' clear before we continue. I'll call it a little disclaimer...

First question: Are you really sure that you want to open up the can of worms on the Biblical validity of the Trinity? I don't want to come off as cocky or overconfident, but that *is* a very hard thing to argue logically. It *will* end with you resorting to 'faith' and weak interpretations of *very* few scriptures. In this famous debate, those that are arguing for the proof of the Trinity are always the underdogs. I just wanted to ask this before we delve so deep into this.

Second: I've 'won' more than a few arguments with you Bible thumpers simply because one Christian decided that it was right for him/her to make statements like, "You aren't really a Christian unless you..." Do you want to rephrase that or are you really going to give me that bit? "Question their Christianity..." is rife with possibilities.

I'm only giving this little disclaimer because I like you... Although, this *could* turn into quite an epic fit of polemetry... great for a new NT =p. Plus, having Muglack in my corner is usually a good thing...

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:13 pm

Vonkaar, I'm in complete argreement with you about not being able to prove anything about the existence of God. From now on I'll just add the ol' safety acronym of "Imo" before I post anything in regards to the Trinity and Christianity issue. However, I still believe that God=Jesus and there is proof that Jesus existed. Jews even acknowledge Jesus' existence.

by **vonkaar** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:14 pm

Did you post the total number in the appropriate thread? ^_^

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:16 pm

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:18 pm

:roll:

by **Menelvir** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:20 pm

I think it is unfortunate that what essentially defines a Christian
has more to do with a person's metaphysical or spiritual beliefs or
what rituals they have undergone (i.e. baptism), rather than how well
they act in accordance with Jesus's teachings.

Shouldn't a true Christian be more concerned with how people (including
himself) treat one another, rather than what an individual's personal
metaphysical or spiritual beliefs are?

I would admire someone who acted in accordance with Jesus's
principles yet had never even heard of Jesus, and wasn't an
adherent of any particular religious faith.

by **brinstar** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:47 pm

Mindia wrote: Once again... you CANNOT be a true Christian if you do NOT believe in the Holy Trinity. The whole foundation and basis of "Christian" churches is rooted in the belief of the Holy Trinity.

bullshit

the whole foundation and basis of Christian churches is Christ Jesus as Savior and what he sought to teach, hence the fucking word "Christian"-- not the semantics argued among any number of dozens of splinter factions about whether there were actually three separate entities or they were all one entity

if it was all about the trinity it would be called Trinitianity or Trinianity

furthermore, i agree with muglack here. how do you know any of that stuff you read in the "bible" is anywhere near accurate considering the dozens if not hundreds of languages it's been translated through over the years since it was written? you can say "faith" and while that's certainly a valid answer, i still think that's an awful lot of trust to put into an organization soaked in centuries' worth of blood and corruption. you're trusting the same regime that thought up the concept of "indulgences", pieces of paper you buy for money that say you have reduced your time in purgatory. filthy, filthy organization that nurtures hatred and corruption.

edit: stupid quote didn't work

Metranon Metranome · by **Metranon** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 1:53 pm

stay away from my family with your freaky, "god" cults please

by **DangerPaul** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:08 pm

To simplify this entire thread. There cannot be a god, because if there was, no cockbag like Mindia would exist. That is all.

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:18 pm

I think it is unfortunate that what essentially defines a Christian
has more to do with a person's metaphysical or spiritual beliefs or
what rituals they have undergone (i.e. baptism), rather than how well
they act in accordance with Jesus's teachings.

Shouldn't a true Christian be more concerned with how people (including
himself) treat one another, rather than what an individual's personal
metaphysical or spiritual beliefs are?

I would admire someone who acted in accordance with Jesus's
principles yet had never even heard of Jesus, and wasn't an
adherent of any particular religious faith.

I hear what you're saying. But we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven based on our earthly good works alone. We can only enter the kingdom of heaven and get to the Father, through the Son, ie: being born again. IMO, more "proof" that God took the form of a human in Jesus. Being baptized is symbolic of you dedicating your life to becoming a passionate, devoted follower of Christ.

now to answer Brinstar...

Mindia wrote:
Once again... you CANNOT be a true Christian if you do NOT believe in the Holy Trinity. The whole foundation and basis of "Christian" churches is rooted in the belief of the Holy Trinity.

bullshit

the whole foundation and basis of Christian churches is Christ Jesus as Savior and what he sought to teach, hence the fucking word "Christian"-- not the semantics argued among any number of dozens of splinter factions about whether there were actually three separate entities or they were all one entity

if it was all about the trinity it would be called Trinitianity or Trinianity

furthermore, i agree with muglack here. how do you know any of that stuff you read in the "bible" is anywhere near accurate considering the dozens if not hundreds of languages it's been translated through over the years since it was written? you can say "faith" and while that's certainly a valid answer, i still think that's an awful lot of trust to put into an organization soaked in centuries' worth of blood and corruption. you're trusting the same regime that thought up the concept of "indulgences", pieces of paper you buy for money that say you have reduced your time in purgatory. filthy, filthy organization that nurtures hatred and corruption.

It's not bullshit Brinstar. Jesus Himself said that He, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are One. How can somebody believe in Jesus Christ the Savior, and not aknowledge that He is also our Lord and the Holy Spirit when He has proclaimed it several times? If you don't believe in the Holy Trinity ((as a self-proclaimed "Christian")and leaving atheists out of it) then you are not by Biblical definition, a Christian. Your spatial reasoning ability is overlooking this fact.

Mindia

p.s. Thank you Vonkaar

by **Narrock** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:20 pm

Gniltunmai wrote:To simplify this entire thread. There cannot be a god, because if there was, no cockbag like Mindia would exist. That is all.

Thank you Xaasf. I turn my other cheek to you as well.

by **Diekan** » Tue Mar 16, 2004 10:27 pm

Despite my more liberal views on most issues, I am a Presbyterian. The belief in God is solely grounded in faith fueled by personal experience. I am sure everyone here has had some sort of 'unexplained' luck that they may or may not have chalked up to the devine.

For me the very 'proof' I need lies in our own bodies. I have a degree in Biology and it was through my studies that I came to believe that something more than happenstance is responsible for our existence. Simply put, the sheer complexity of the human body coupled with my own consciousness is enough for me to believe in God. Just think for a moment how amazing the human body is. Everything from the firing of a neuron to the transcription / translation of our genes all working in concert to ultimately give us 'life.' I am hard pressed to believe that such a wonderful orchestra is merely the product of coincidental collisions of organic molecules in some ancient primordial soup some several billion years ago.

I am not saying I don't buy into the theory of evolution, quite the contrary actually. Anyone who knows anything about bacteria and the current on-going abuse of antibiotics, by the ignorant, knows that evolution, by definition, is in fact a reality. However, human evolution is another story, at least as far as I am concerned.

Furthermore, I don't believe that Christians have a right to impose their beliefs on atheists any more than I believe atheists have a right to impose their disbelief on Christians. We were given a will and the ability to reason. Whether or not one chooses not to believe is of course their right.

Both sides are just as hypocritical as the other. The religious zealots of our time have a tantrum every time a “Clockwork Orange” is released, just as the liberal left has a shitfit every time a “Passion of the Christ” is released. Why don’t we just let bygones be bygones. Instead of bashing each other over likes and tastes just avoid those things you personally find revolting?

Anyway, I am fairly intoxicated at the moment... I just got back from watching team USA beat the hell of Ireland in rugby, 33 - 10. Fosters was the drink of choice (Ireland and USA – Fosters… still trying to make the connection there).

by **Pike** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:44 am

No one ever answered my question. What if i have a blanket made out of lead. Will god still see me spanking it?

by **Narrock** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:56 am

For me the very 'proof' I need lies in our own bodies. I have a degree in Biology and it was through my studies that I came to believe that something more than happenstance is responsible for our existence. Simply put, the sheer complexity of the human body coupled with my own consciousness is enough for me to believe in God. Just think for a moment how amazing the human body is. Everything from the firing of a neuron to the transcription / translation of our genes all working in concert to ultimately give us 'life.' I am hard pressed to believe that such a wonderful orchestra is merely the product of coincidental collisions of organic molecules in some ancient primordial soup some several billion years ago.

Diekan, that's a very enlightening, open-minded, and logical thought you have there. I think you're ready for the next upward-progressing level. Please hear me out... if you don't have a bible, borrow one from your local neighborhood Presbyterian church. Even if you've read it before, or parts of it before, read it again. I'm not asking you to start attending church, or go to bible studies, or anything like that. I'm just saying... pick up a bible and start reading. You might be further enlightened. That's all.

by **brinstar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:57 am

whatever mindia, i'm not going to argue semantics with you because it's an argument nobody wins, especially on the internet

all i'm saying is:

a) there's an awful lot of christians that disagree with you

b) i don't trust the Church enough (given their track record) to believe that the current version of the bible is anywhere close to what it was originally-- not just factually, but also conceptually and contextually. also, i believe that even given today's modern version (or versions, how many different versions are there these days?), a great number of people who believe in religions based on what the bible teaches sure don't seem to take many of jesus' teachings to heart, much less actively apply them in their everyday lives

by **brinstar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:58 am

and no i'm not some know-nothing fool arguing out of my ass, i grew up a lutheran before i discovered the Tao

by **Narrock** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:28 am

brinstar wrote:whatever mindia, i'm not going to argue semantics with you because it's an argument nobody wins, especially on the internet

all i'm saying is:

a) there's an awful lot of christians that disagree with you

b) i don't trust the Church enough (given their track record) to believe that the current version of the bible is anywhere close to what it was originally-- not just factually, but also conceptually and contextually. also, i believe that even given today's modern version (or versions, how many different versions are there these days?), a great number of people who believe in religions based on what the bible teaches sure don't seem to take many of jesus' teachings to heart, much less actively apply them in their everyday lives

a) ok

b) When you say you don't trust the Church... which church(es) are you referring to? All of them? I do believe that current versions of the bible are extremely close to what they were when they were written. NIV changed only certain wording to help us understand better what the Aramaic word meant. I think it's ok to do that. I'm glad they did. Saves me time from having to refer to a Armaic-English translation book while I'm reading and studying scripture. KJV uses a lot of thou's, thy, thus's, etc. and is hard for me to read.

Anyway, getting back to churches... there's a lot of organizations I don't agree with and I wouldn't trust them either. Like the LDS's, JW's, and the Roman Catholic church. That's why I prefer to go along with some of the non-denominational community churches. They don't teach any weird doctrine or outlandish and far-fetched ideas. My girlfriend is a 7th-Day Adventist, and I even have to disagree with them about a couple different issues. They take a strict literal interpretation from the old testament. They also believe in a "prophetess" named Ellen G. White, who I have some issues with. Although she was a "non-cannonical prophet", according to the SDA church, I still think she's a little "out there" for me.
Catholics do so much that I disagree with I wouldn't even know where to start. Mormon's are flat-out deceiving people with the "Book of Mormon."
JW's also have some pretty outlandish ideas.

by **Narrock** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:32 am

brinstar wrote:and no i'm not some know-nothing fool arguing out of my ass, i grew up a lutheran before i discovered the Tao

I know you're not a fool Brin. We've had plenty of discussions on Toucher's board for me to realize that. On a side note... I too grew up in the Lutheran church. I even went through confirmation.

by **brinstar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:40 am

yes, i mean the Church, capital C, as in the whole mess of christianity. it all started as one Church you know, before Pope Bob and Paster George started disagreeing on whether indulgences (pieces of paper that stated "because you bought this you get out of purgatory 50 years early") were a good idea or not

7DA, mormons, roman catholics, anglicans, episcopalians, lutherans, southern baptists... they all originated with the same conniving den of simonists

by **brinstar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:44 am

ya baptism chatechism confirmation the whole 9 yards

then someone left a copy of the Tao Te Jing on my coffee table, and it was all over

you seem firmly grounded in your faith, so i'm going to suggest you read the Tao Te Jing for recreation. i don't think it stands a chance of turning you from your path, but you might gain either insight to your own spiritual walk with the lord or at the very least a feeling of peace

by **vonkaar** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 7:42 am

Any so-called Christian that reads from the NIV should stop going to church... stop calling themselves Christian and just accept Satan as their true lord and master. Seriously... how can you read and trust something translated by man when your very Bible strictly prohibits this? They did a *lot* more than change the thy's and thou's to 'common' pronouns... they twisted many controversial verses, made the Bible less contradictory and ironed out any theological wrinkles they could find. Who gave them the right to fuck with God's(my) word?

At least the Catholics Mormons believe that God(I) gave them the right =p. You can't even fall back on 'faith' this time... or, do you believe the committee of ten 'NIV translators' were Called by God? You NIV people say that it's alright for someone to go to school for 6 years, pass a fairly easy course (all History/Mythology curriculums are a joke), graduate with a degree in "theology" (haw!) and then go about altering the gospels. A course... taught by man... teaching doctrine that was invented by man... changing the word that you believe came from God. That's fucked up.

I have a much better time hearing the Mormons and Catholics say, "well, I have faith that our prophet/pope speaks to God and was ordained and given permission to change the scripture." But, you don't even get the 'faith' card... do you have a spiritual faith connection with Baylor's Theology program? You realize that they also teach Hindu?

Mindia wrote:They don't teach any weird doctrine or outlandish and far-fetched ideas.

That's because they are taught by a bunch of pussies. Take a stand you lazy motherfucker! Preach how YOU believe the Bible intended it... I swear... there must be pamphlets on how to teach in a 'politically-correct' world. Oh boo hoo... we don't know the mysteries of the Bible because it's just too deep for us... so, just believe in it. Are people of African descent 'cursed' by the punishment of Cain? Yes? Whoops, there goes half your congregation... better go back and read the 'How to be a pussy non-denominational pastor' booklets.

Non-Denominational Christian churches are a complete contradiction. They either believe what the Pastor's personal interpretation of the Bible or they read from the same 'pussy preacher' manual as the supposed 'non-denominational' church down the street. It seems to me that Christ set a VERY CLEAR set of rules to follow... Baptism by immersion... sacrament blessed and sanctified... repentance of sins... faith AND works needed to reach heaven... central figure at the head of the church... goat sacrifices... etc. Why do people have to throw such bullshit ideas like "We can't dance," or "we can't go to Doctors" into the mix?

Basically, you say that you have 'issues' with the JW's, Catholics and Mormons. I would answer that you probably know less about these three faiths than Leadaira knows about politics. If you followed your own advice and took the time to learn about these sects, you'd probably walk away with a lot more respect than you currently have for them.

Also... I would bet that 99% of every 18 year old Mormon knows the Bible a hell of a lot better than almost any other 18 year old out there =p. Try winning a bible-bash with a Mormon. If they are willing participants (instead of the common: pussy turn-the-other-cheek faggotry), they'll likely stomp you into the ground. You gain respect for these people not only for their knowledge of the Bible... but their knowledge of their OWN faith. Probably less than 10% of the average Catholic and 5% of every Baptist would know the difference between David and Joseph. Mormons keep up with that history, plus their own Book of Mormon history =p. Ask a Mormon what he believes in, boom... he tells you. Ask a Baptist what makes him different from a Presbyterian and he'll probably start crying.

by **Thon** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:13 am

hey fellas i found a new hip bible for you

by **Ginzburgh** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:15 am

Why don't you people stop arguing about this subject and let other people believe what they want to believe?

Ginzburgh

namelesstavern.net

The Passion

Who is online