This should be interesting, Christians...

[no country for old wainds]

I'm just describing spin-offs from the Christian influence upon our politics and mindsets in the modern West. I'm not necessarily suggesting it's what the religion intends, I'm far more interested in the end than the reasons for coming to said end. I'm not trying to "blame", I'm just trying to trace problems to their source.

^ Don't forget this.

 

[MetalHeadMarc]

first of all, Christianity does not frown upon strength. instead, it applauds strength. those who have the mental or physical strength to achieve great things are encouraged to do so. we want to make life better. i'll agree that there is hardly (if at all) any such thing as a selfless act. but sacrifice for a cause does exist. i do think that we human beings can be strong, can help out for our own purposes or just on a whim. Christianity is not trying to impede that. i also disagree that such people are "stagnant." those who seek change and become that conduit of improvement are anything but stagnant.

like you, i value strength. strength to achieve feats of physical power, as well as mental strength. strength to continue with a charge, even at the end of that capacity. as you said, individual lives are important, but if the situation occurs, it is noble to give that life for the cause.

like you, i value honor. honor and integrity. these are core values to christianity and i do not see how you overlook that. honor is very important. revenge, however, as i infer you may include in that definition, (such as the case "to avenge my dead brother's honor in battle! etc.) is not honor. revenge is a product of hate. i beleive that an honorable warrior would always combat defensively. in defense of ideas, property, or fellow people such as friends, family. i think it is dishonorable to "strike back".

as i've stated before, achieving great things is something we all aspire to do. Christianity does not shun this either. it's not communism. you seem to have equated it as such with your views of it. and as for nature, nowhere in Christianity does it say "ignore nature". if anything, it holds nature (as God's creation) in high regard, and that we should respect the other life of this planet. why else would God instruct Noah to take with him 2 of every animal?

the whole point of this post is, i am doing what i see as the honorable warrior, defending my beliefs and the faith's ideals from what i see as misinterpretation or inaccurate understandings.

I deam this post, "Christianity for Manowar Fans"

 

[anonymousnick2001]

Manowar > You

 

[Kenneth R.]

manowar

yeah, i'll agree its true that some people use christianity as a tool to acomplish their less than well-intentioned ends. but there are those of us who do not warp it to our convenience and intentions...

 

[infoterror]

what is your definition of a "Christian" and what is your opinion/immediate perception of "Christians".

With a few exceptions, Christians are people who like to feel good for being nice to other people according to imaginary standards.

 

[speed]

Here is an excellent, reasoned, and wide ranging essay by Bertrand Russell called Why I am not a Christian http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/humftp/E-text/Russell/why.htm

Its short too, please read.

 

[Kenneth R.]

With a few exceptions, Christians are people who like to feel good for being nice to other people according to imaginary standards.

incorrect. you need to see what me and metalages have written above. that is what christianity really stands for.

 

[Kenneth R.]

as for that essay which was NOT short as you claimed... it had some interesting points, but overall i disagree with the image of christianity that it portrays. it's simply twisting the perspective of many arguments and points from their original meaning to suit its purpose.

 

[speed]

And what purpose is that?--Chrisitianity I mean? Or what do you perceive Christianity to be? Or do you follow a strict Christian dogma, and such a subjective question is impossible?

I see a weak ineffectual religion long corrupted and totally irrelevant to todays world. I see its counterpart Islam, which is in many ways the final form of Christianity, as far more effective yet unsuitable to western man. Im still shocked semi-intelligent people havent evolved past religion, but I suppose I am not surprised.

Its like 12 pages long, cmon, short reading. And well he surely could have expanded the essay, but I think its strength is in how frank and straightforward he is.

 

[Intoxicator]

incorrect. you need to see what me and metalages have written above. that is what christianity really stands for.

Notice: "With a few exceptions..."
I'd agree that the majority of Christians do not practice what they preach and merely use it as a crutch through bad times and to make themselves feel better about dying.

 

[speed]

Two relevant quotes for SIlent SOng:

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.

In all affairs it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.

 

[Kenneth R.]

why are you directing this at me with such patronizing statements? you don't know jack about me except what i've written in this thread and you (obviously) have not taken the time to read. come on. its only FOUR pages.

what is christianity? see above paragraph. it varies according to who you talk to. i believe that many would agree that it is a philosophy that the believer acknowledges Jesus Christ as what he said he was in the Bible, and believing in such, they would attempt their very best to model their lives on his teachings in hopes of fulfilling his charge to us human beings.

you say it is corrupted. the churches, i would agree, may be corrupted. the bible, however, is not. Jesus' teachings are still there, uncorrupt. irrelevant? I believe it is anything BUT irrelevant. it has core values that apply to each and every generation of mankind.

how can you be simultaneously shocked and not surprised? you make no sense, especially for one who shakes his head at "semi-intelligent" people. how can i not evolve beyond religion? i would ask of you: how can you not evolve beyond what lies the people of the world tell you? how can you not see for yourself, speak for yourself. i'm not asking you to be religious. but if you're going to go about making comments like that, at least back it up with your OWN. all you've done is post some person's rantings from 1926 (if i remember correctly) and then shoot off about how we "semi-intelligent" people haven't evolved.

now for .Scissors.: no. i was not saying that. therefore, you cannot agree with it. you missed the point as well. the point is, real christians do NOT use it as "a crutch" or an "excuse for fear of death". we all will die. this is fact. we are not dead yet. that is fact. i believe that what Jesus Christ said is true. i also believe that while i'm not dead, i will make my life as best i can to follow his teachings. NOT TO GET INTO HEAVEN. I HAVE TO CAPITALIZE THIS BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE KEEP MISSING THIS IMPORTANT POINT. i do this because i believe it is right. and i believe that, regardless of if i go to heaven or hell, i will do my best to do what Jesus instructed.

as for Speed's "relevant" quotes:
I disagree with the first one on the second half. doubt is important. and that goes to your second point, which i agree with. if you don't question what you believe, how can you believe it? blindly? that is false belief... i find strength in the questioning. strength reaffirmed when what i question, i research. i put it to doubt. and i find that i am reassured in its truth when i look for the answer. not because someone told me it's true. not because it was taught to me, but because i found it true by my own logic and reasoning. logic and reasoning are core to faith, because you would not base faith on nothing. faith is (as i already explained) a leap you make, but it is not blind. you have a foundation of logic and reasoning assuring you that you won't be failed by jumping, and that trusting jump is real faith. blind faith is, as far as i'm concerned, wholly useless.

so, like i said. before you start talking about things i "have long taken for granted", read the first 3 pages of this thread. you don't know me at all.

 

[Intoxicator]

now for .Scissors.: no. i was not saying that. therefore, you cannot agree with it. you missed the point as well. the point is, real christians do NOT use it as "a crutch" or an "excuse for fear of death". we all will die. this is fact. we are not dead yet. that is fact. i believe that what Jesus Christ said is true. i also believe that while i'm not dead, i will make my life as best i can to follow his teachings. NOT TO GET INTO HEAVEN. I HAVE TO CAPITALIZE THIS BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE KEEP MISSING THIS IMPORTANT POINT. i do this because i believe it is right. and i believe that, regardless of if i go to heaven or hell, i will do my best to do what Jesus instructed.

.

I said the majority of Christians use it as a crutch. The untrue ones. The ones I encounter everyday.

 

[speed]

You do make some rathe rinteresting points in your previous posts Silent Song. I say we have a nice civilized argument on the matter.

 

[Kenneth R.]

I said the majority of Christians use it as a crutch. The untrue ones. The ones I encounter everyday.

i'd agree with that. and wouldn't you say, those who are untrue, be it to christianity or any other cause, such as being a metal fan, are not even members of such a group?

in short, i'd say those people can call themselves Jesus if they want. they aren't christians in my eyes. they just think they are.

 

[speed]

If we can be civil with this, your statements Silent Song in previous posts, confirm you at least think over and beyond most Chrisitians. However, I have noticed you dont mind making defnitive statements about what is and is not Chrisitian. That takes some balls, and represents a definite independence of your character. But, you do understand how subjective your ideas on Chrisitianity are, dont you?

And I noticed you quoting John repeatedly. John represents an entirely different form of Christianity than say Matthew; so Id be cautious, even the new testament has a variety of different ideas on Christianity.

 

[Kenneth R.]

yes, you're right. what i've said is to some degree subjective as, the bible itself is a source for us to interpret. everyone will interpret it slightly differently. what i've described is how i see it.

yes, i'm aware that in other areas of the bible, other messages are expressed. I was using the book of John to debate with those who were arguing against the divinity of Jesus. i admit i am guilty of being lazy, and with such a set of strong verses in that book, i didn't look beyond it for more quotes as it seemed quite clear with what i used to defend what i see as true.

 

[Demiurge]

I disagree with the first one on the second half. doubt is important. and that goes to your second point, which i agree with. if you don't question what you believe, how can you believe it? blindly? that is false belief... i find strength in the questioning. strength reaffirmed when what i question, i research. i put it to doubt. and i find that i am reassured in its truth when i look for the answer. not because someone told me it's true. not because it was taught to me, but because i found it true by my own logic and reasoning. logic and reasoning are core to faith, because you would not base faith on nothing. faith is (as i already explained) a leap you make, but it is not blind. you have a foundation of logic and reasoning assuring you that you won't be failed by jumping, and that trusting jump is real faith. blind faith is, as far as i'm concerned, wholly useless.

If doubt were important, you'd wind up being skeptical and not accepting the Bible and its God as truth. You'd withhold judgment because no logical argument proves that Christ is the son of God. Your belief in him, ultimately, has its roots in faith, not reason. Take it for what it is and allow the subject to rest.

 

[Kenneth R.]

If doubt were important, you'd wind up being skeptical and not accepting the Bible and its God as truth. You'd withhold judgment because no logical argument proves that Christ is the son of God. Your belief in him, ultimately, has its roots in faith, not reason. Take it for what it is and allow the subject to rest.

no, you're wrong.

doubt is important because it ensures that i won't take my beliefs for granted. for instance, right now, i'm not going to just accept what you say "ok" and believe it. no. i have no proof that what you say is true. not even evidence.

on the contrary, if you read the previous pages of this thread, i have presented evidence that leads to show what i believe is true. it does not prove it. it shows strong evidence. that's where faith comes in. based on this evidence, i beleive it is true.

for example (a very very old and cliche example but it works) you'd have a hard time proving wind exists without equipment. however, you can easily show movement it causes and feel it against your body. thus, with evidence, you conclude it exists.

point is, doubt shows that we want to know what's really going on. "no, i'm not sure. let me find out more." i find that in regard to Christianity, when i have doubts, and i personally look for the answers to those questions, it makes my beliefs stronger. this is because i find the answers myself, or find evidence that the answers exist, myself. my own logic, my own reason. i accept the Bible as truth and as such, the first place to turn for those questions.

so no, i will not "take it for what it is" because i believe that is an incorrect portrayal of what i see "is". thus, i will not allow the subject to rest, because i find defending my faith an interesting and beneficial experience. this discussion is intriguing.

 

[Demiurge]

You've not presented any evidence. Arguing over interpretations of a text is quite different than offering evidence for believing a text reveals truth.

If your conclusion is reached by logical proof, you're not reliant upon faith by very definition. Leaps of faith cannot be rationally justified.