• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Life From Dirt?

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I’m not denying the history of what was done in the name of Christianity. Pretty much every sector has done that.

Doesn’t change the message -
I wanted to add that the accusations of Hitler's Germany and Communist Russia are somewhat misguided. Yes, the leadership was predominantly atheist, but in reality they were Nationalist Socialist Dictatorships that appealed to the manifest destiny of their Nationalist cause.

When the Soviet empire collapsed it came back with a new call of Czarist manifest destiny restore the Czarist empire under Putin and with the blessing of the Russian Orthodox Church. Belarus at present endorses Putin's goal. Therefore the brutal assault on Ukraine that is the keystone of Russian Orthodox dominion, and many in the West especially in the USA prefer to turn their backs on the Russian assault on Ukraine that represent a thousand fold atrocities over anything that is happening in Israel and Gaza.

My greatest fear is the growing desire for Dominion and Manifest Destiny by many extreme factions of Christianity even in the USA and Russia at whatever means necessary even goals to establish a Christian Theocracy in the USA with a Christian Republican Party.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
There are records in China that Nestorian Christians were in China in ~645 CE. maybe a little earlier in Xinjiang and establish several churches centered on Xi'an.
That is not unreasonable. But his claim was that it occurred in the first century CE. Next thing we know he will be telling us of a lost tribe of Hebrews in the New World.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
I wanted to add that the accusations of Hitler's Germany and Communist Russia are somewhat misguided. Yes, the leadership was predominantly atheist, but in reality they were Nationalist Socialist Dictatorships that appealed to the manifest destiny of their Nationalist cause.

Yes… IMV, people like to soften the reality of what these atheists did. (Obviously I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil - just as I would say just because one Christian heads a “Save Jerusalem Crusade” means all Christians are evil). Of course what these particular atheists will do that - in the name of their political party/beliefs… it is their god, so to they do it in the name of politics as atheists.
When the Soviet empire collapsed it came back with a new call of Czarist manifest destiny restore the Czarist empire under Putin and with the blessing of the Russian Orthodox Church. Belarus at present endorses Putin's goal. Therefore the brutal assault on Ukraine that is the keystone of Russian Orthodox dominion, and many in the West especially in the USA prefer to turn their backs on the Russian assault on Ukraine that represent a thousand fold atrocities over anything that is happening in Israel and Gaza.

IMV, religion is still religion. Power hungry people are still power hungry people. They can be religion people, they can be agnostic/atheist people.

Don’t want to get in a political debate here… but certainly I don’t like what is going on.
My greatest fear is the growing desire for Dominion and Manifest Destiny by many extreme factions of Christianity even in the USA and Russia at whatever means necessary even goals to establish a Christian Theocracy in the USA with a Christian Republican Party.

Yes… there are extremes in every arena. IMV, those Christians who want a theocracy are few and far between. What is more difficult is how people view as “Theocracy”. For an example, someone in leadership like our new Speaker of the House, who expresses his religious viewpoints may be looked upon as trying to establish a Theocracy which would be the furthest from the truth. He would uphold the Constitution that permits freedom of Religion and be a Constitutionalist but others would shout out “Theocracy”>
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Yes… IMV, people like to soften the reality of what these atheists did. (Obviously I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil - just as I would say just because one Christian heads a “Save Jerusalem Crusade” means all Christians are evil). Of course what these particular atheists will do that - in the name of their political party/beliefs… it is their god, so to they do it in the name of politics as atheists.
Your unfortunate view of atheists reminds me of the McCarthy Era witch hunts for evil Communists, homosexuals and also by the way atheists. Many unfortunately had their lives ruined, suicides, and worse.

The reality is atheists represent only 5% of the USA population. In many socially advanced "evil" countries like Norway {(31-72%), Denmark (43-82%), and Japan (64-65%). By the way Russia (4%}.


IMV, religion is still religion. Power hungry people are still power hungry people. They can be religion people, they can be agnostic/atheist people.

Don’t want to get in a political debate here… but certainly I don’t like what is going on.
It is unfortunate that your first statement in this post made atheism in this thread an issue in politics.


Yes… there are extremes in every arena. IMV, those Christians who want a theocracy are few and far between. What is more difficult is how people view as “Theocracy”. For an example, someone in leadership like our new Speaker of the House, who expresses his religious viewpoints may be looked upon as trying to establish a Theocracy which would be the furthest from the truth. He would uphold the Constitution that permits freedom of Religion and be a Constitutionalist but others would shout out “Theocracy”>

You are apparently very naive and il linformed
If you are responding honestly.


Christian nationalism, a belief that the United States was founded as a white, Christian nation and that there is no separation between church and state, is gaining steam on the right.

Prominent Republican politicians have made the themes critical to their message to voters in the run up to the 2022 midterm elections. Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, has argued that America is a Christian nation and that the separation of church and state is a “myth.” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia hard-liner, declared: “We need to be the party of nationalism and I’m a Christian, and I say it proudly, we should be Christian Nationalists.” Amid a backlash, she doubled down and announced she would start selling “Christian Nationalist” shirts. Now Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis seems to be flirting with Christian nationalist rhetoric, as well.

Appeals to Christian nationalism have a long tradition in American history, though they have usually operated on the fringes. But the increasingly mainstream appearance of this belief in GOP circles makes sense if you look at new public opinion surveys. Our new University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll suggests that declaring the United States a Christian nation is a message that could be broadly embraced by Republicans in the midterms and 2024 presidential race. But our findings also see limits to its appeal — and over the long-term, Christian nationalism could be a political loser.


Most Republicans Say Christian Nationalism Is Unconstitutional — But Still Support It​

Our national poll included 2,091 participants, carried out May 6-16, 2022, with a margin of error of +/- 2.14 percent.
We started by asking participants if they believed the Constitution would even allow the United States government to declare the U.S. a “Christian Nation.” We found that 70 percent of Americans — including 57 percent of Republicans and 81 percent of Democrats — said that the Constitution would not allow such a declaration. (Indeed, the First Amendment says Congress can neither establish nor prohibit the practice of a religion.)
 
Last edited:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
yes… no matter what one finds, it’s never enough… Reminds me of a story:

Luke 16:30-31​

The Message​

30 “‘I know, Father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but they’re not listening. If someone came back to them from the dead, they would change their ways.’
31 “Abraham replied, ‘If they won’t listen to Moses and the Prophets, they’re not going to be convinced by someone who rises from the dead.’”

Within the context of my signaure
Jesus knew what he was talking about, didn't he.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Your unfortunate view of atheists reminds me of the McCarthy Era witch hunts for evil Communists, homosexuals and also by the way atheists. Many unfortunately had their lives ruined, suicides, and worse.

The reality is atheists represent only 5% of the USA population. In many socially advanced "evil" countries like Norway {(31-72%), Denmark (43-82%), and Japan (64-65%). By the way Russia (4%}.
Wow, your comprehension capacity is way below level… “ I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil “.. giving the understanding that there are good atheists. You could say I was making sure you didn’t do what you just did. Well… I guess it should be expected.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Wow, your comprehension capacity is way below level… “ I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil “..
YES you are!!!!! In particular your extreme biased view of what atheists do in history.
giving the understanding that there are good atheists. You could say I was making sure you didn’t do what you just did. Well… I guess it should be expected.

Not from the perspective you described in your previous post. Take out the polite verbage in the middle from your previous post and this is what you get,


"Yes… IMV, people like to soften the reality of what these atheists did. (Obviously I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil - just as I would say just because one Christian heads a “Save Jerusalem Crusade” means all Christians are evil). Of course what these particular atheists will do that - in the name of their political party/beliefs… it is their god, so to they do it in the name of politics as atheists."

You have been blatantly extreme and dishonest concerning atheists, and ignore the facts to soften the reality of the what Christians have done in hisotry.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
That is not unreasonable. But his claim was that it occurred in the first century CE. Next thing we know he will be telling us of a lost tribe of Hebrews in the New World.
When I was in China I visited Xin'jiang and saw what was claimed to be the oldest Chinese text from the Bible. There was tourist hype that a first century apostle visited Xin'jiang, but it was only hype as far as I could tell.
 
Last edited:

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Yes… IMV, people like to soften the reality of what these atheists did. (Obviously I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil - just as I would say just because one Christian heads a “Save Jerusalem Crusade” means all Christians are evil). Of course what these particular atheists will do that - in the name of their political party/beliefs… it is their god, so to they do it in the name of politics as atheists.
There is no atheist political party. There are no atheist beliefs.
IMV, religion is still religion. Power hungry people are still power hungry people. They can be religion people, they can be agnostic/atheist people.

Don’t want to get in a political debate here… but certainly I don’t like what is going on.


Yes… there are extremes in every arena. IMV, those Christians who want a theocracy are few and far between. What is more difficult is how people view as “Theocracy”. For an example, someone in leadership like our new Speaker of the House, who expresses his religious viewpoints may be looked upon as trying to establish a Theocracy which would be the furthest from the truth. He would uphold the Constitution that permits freedom of Religion and be a Constitutionalist but others would shout out “Theocracy”>
He could be viewed that way if he's trying to legislate his religious beliefs into law.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
YES you are!!!!! In particular your extreme biased view of what atheists do in history.


Not from the perspective you described in your previous post. Take out the polite verbage in the middle from your previous post and this is what you get,


"Yes… IMV, people like to soften the reality of what these atheists did. (Obviously I am not saying that if one is an atheist, he is evil - just as I would say just because one Christian heads a “Save Jerusalem Crusade” means all Christians are evil). Of course what these particular atheists will do that - in the name of their political party/beliefs… it is their god, so to they do it in the name of politics as atheists."

You have been blatantly extreme and dishonest concerning atheists, and ignore the facts to soften the reality of the what Christians have done in hisotry.
wow

Well… the world is made up of all different people. If that is what you want to think, I’m in good company.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
No… you had absolutely nothing of importance, just your desire to twist what was said.
I twisted nothing. You trashed atheists and extremely soften what Christians have done in history.

The only viable conclusion is regardless of religious belief there are good people and bad people.

The sky is Carolina blue on a clear 4th of July regardless of what people believe.
 
Last edited:

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
I twisted nothing. You trashed atheist and extremely soften what Christians have done in history.

The only viable conclusion is regardless of religious belief there are good people and bad people.

The sky is Carolina blue on a clear 4th of July regardless of what people believe.
Well… the world is made up of all different people. If that is what you want to think, I’m in good company.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Kenny said:
Well… the world is made up of all different people. If that is what you want to think, I’m in good company.

The point is the good company includes atheists, and there is no basis for considering the trashing of atheists.
 
Last edited:

Brian2

Veteran Member
Events said to be confirmed by witnesses. Stories passed through thousands of mouths and eventually written down. You don't think they might just be legends? You don"t think they might have been embellished, and finally edited to fit a preferred religious narrative?ææ
There are books claiming witnesses to orcs, sasquatches and færie's, too. How is Biblical hearsay any more authoritative than these?

According to the evidence the gospels were written not long enough after Jesus to account for the addition of embellishments. Witnesses of the events would still have been alive when the synoptic gospels were written.
Most agree that the resurrection story was proclaimed from the start of the preaching of the gospel.

Yet no actual objective evidence has ever been produced, and the ten or twelve common arguments for God are factually or logically flawed. If there were obvious evidence, why is God not generally accepted?

Weren't you confirming just the other day that the evidence for God is purely subjective, ie: perceived only by you?

Perceived by me and possibly the majority of the world's population. IOW God is generally accepted.
Everyone can see evidence for God but some people seem to think that it has been shown by science that God was not necessary in the design and creation of the universe, or just prefer to just say that we don't know and should not believe things that we don't know for sure. But these people believe many things that they don't know for sure. Their view that God was not necessary is subjective, just like my view that God would have been necessary.

So where are the eyewitnesses, or are the confirmations just hearsay?
Anyone can write a story claiming events that were witnessed by various characters. Most religions do. Surely you can see that without objective, confirmatory evidence it would be irrational to believe every written legend?

Evidence for Jesus is part of the evidence for God of course.
Witnesses wrote down their stories and Luke collected stories from witnesses.
So there is evidence from many witnesses and not just someone writing a story.
This is good evidence imo and confirms the prophecies and so that the God of the Bible is real, and the resurrection confirmations show also that Jesus is the one sent by this God.
Belief is of course a faith but is faith that you can be rational about. The evidence is there.
But of course it would be irrational to believe every written legend.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Hebrew did not exist back then.

The people who became the ones we know as Hebrews existed back then.

as an infant?

No, Moses would not have known the language of the Hebrews as an infant.

aramaic is the initial semitic language of northern Levant.

I don't think that is known.

Look up the commandments compared to the book of ma'at.

The book of Maat came from around 3000 BC and hopefully any laws made by humans would reflect something of what humans are.

Look up the time periods, they directly over lap.

It looks like Arkenatan reigned while Israel was conquering and settling down in Canaan in 2nd half of 14th cent BC. (1350-1335)

Funny stuff as there is zero evidence of abraham or circumcision before egypt. If anything, abraham could be egyptian, if you want to use the culture as your premise.

Why would I want to say Abraham was Egyptian when the story says he came from Ur of the Chaldeans, Mesopotamia.
Why would to circumcision of one family and it's servants by known in history? Even by the time they went into Egypt with Jacob there were only about 70 people.

Read torah.... No circumcision of moses.

Moses son had not been circumcised and it is not known if Moses was or not.

They are recorded in egypt before torah or moses even existed, no matter which dates you wish to use.

So?
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
What "design"? Life shows signs that it is not designed. You do not get to assume design. No one on the science side is making an argument from incredulity. Where did you get that idea from?

So have you got a way to determine if things in nature are designed or not?
I just assume design because that is what it looks like. How do you do it?
I did not say scientists are making an argument from incredulity. Where did you get that idea from?
 
Top