Christianity Is Broken, but Can Be Fixed

That is not even debatable. Look up the crusades, the inquisitions, Malleus Malficorum. Exodus, now there is a good place to start. Try this page:Cruelty in the BibleThe present day examples abound. Look at the thinly disguised hate they have for homosexuals. Not to mention other religions. Members of the KKK considered themselves just as religious as any "chrisitian" anyone here might suggest as a "true christian."Question: Is the pope a true christian? What about in the past?

Hello randman, Please allow a clarification. I strongly suspect that the many or maybe even most of the members of the KKK held themselves as good christians. That is not to say they were in your eyes, the eyes of the pope, or Pat Robertson, or any person that truly is a good christian. But they (the KKK members) thought they were good christians and that god did indeed intend them (the KKK members) to hold the beliefs that they hold.Allow me to pose the following questions in the first person perspective, not to anger or insult you, but to reduce linguistic contortions. Let’s assume you claim you are a good Christian and I am speaking to you as such. Please assume also that I do not ask such questions to cast doubt upon your aspirations as a good christian, but to gain information, such as; "What constitutes a good christian?"Who are you to claim they are not good Christians and you are? It seems to me that they might have the same perspective as you, they are good Christians and you are not.I note that in other conversations within this forum, we (the participants) have not been able to come close to a consensus of the definition of a good Christian. Other than the fact that person K declares themselves a Christian, no one has been able to admit to defining characteristics that can be recognized by other Christians or non-Christians.

---

Truth fears no question.bkelly

I supose not, if you want to dodge the question. But evaluate we must. We all select friends by evaluation. We allow some close to us and other not so close by evaluation. We set out behavior with each individual by evaluating how they might respond compared with what we might need. We cannot continue as a society without evaluating each other.I try again: There is a question posed. You wrote in reply, but did not address the point. Will you do so now?

---

Truth fears no question.bkelly

Maybe you should. The bible says you should. Let’s check this out.What is a heretic? Just to verify I found this: Heretic Quotes - BrainyQuoteOne who holds to a heresy; one who believes some doctrine contrary to the established faith or prevailing religion.So then I went to exodus and found: There are many me lines from exodus and other books of the bible with the same spirit. Sounds to me like you are required to kill the heretics. What are you waiting for?

Weasel wordsFaith wrote Message 172, essentialy, the old testament does not count for us mortals. (As I read her post of course)What a bunch of weasel words! For someone that preaches the literal interpretation of the bible, you violate your own words.Can you quote me some place in the new testament that repudiates the old testament? If not, it must remain in force. It continues to be "The Word Of God"

No, you did not address the point. If you choose to not address it, the so be it. But don't think for one second you are kidding me or anyone else in saying that you did.

Faith posted: Ever since Martin Luther split off the protestants, (and maybe before?), the Christian church keeps splitting. Why did Luther and the protestants split off? Because he (and they) was certain that the church of the day was, in short (very short) doing it wrong. He was so certain he could not stay with them. In other words, the differences were irreconcilable. This notion is important. The differences are fundamental and were not fixable.Now we have not just two positions, but 21 within the Protestants and 16 within the Roman Catholic church. That is a total of 37 separate denominations.Again, why so many? Because each one of them is certain that the others are wrong. So certain are they that they feel obligated to further split the concept of Christianity. If these differences could be fixed, they would be.What does this mean? Of these 37 denominations, at most, how many can be right? Remember, All of them claim that they are right and the others are wrong. If that did not make that claim, they would not be separate.ONE! At most, only one can be right.So, what are the odds that you and your selection in the practice of Christianity is right?As most, it is 1 in 37.In reality, it is zero. If the bible was as good as the Christians claim it is, these splits would not have occurred. One might say that man cannot live up to god’s requirements. Nonsense, this is the way he made us. If we cannot live up to his requirements, then either we, (his creations), or his bible is in error.Please, don’t try to feed me any of that tired old crap about free will. The bible and god’s people came from the same creator. If he cannot get consistency, he is not anywhere near as great as is claimed.

Granted. I am not going to take the time to research that, but it does sound a little bit like dividing churches up into those that that insist that their communiion wine be authentic from Italian vineyards and those that don't. (note: I just made that up to exemplify my point, it is almost certainly wrong, but I like the analogy.) I won't grant that one. If the difference is minor, it would not be sufficient to create a splinter group. This same point fundamentaly holds for several paragraphs of your response. My point stands, and stands firmly. "God" is all powerful and all knowing. He can do anything he wants to do. As such, he knew darn well that he had created man such that man would fail. If he did not know that, then he has significant flaws. Either god made man to fail on purpose or he has flaws. Pick you poison and tell us which glass you hoist.I am making a point of trying to keep my posts short, to the point, and readable. I recognize I may sometimes fail, but that is my goal. The point is, don't take offense or read anything into it if I leave some points unanswered.I close by returning to the OT. (Original Topic as opposed to Old Testament) The preceding comments are intended to support the following position.A true christian must believe the bible, literally. So says Faith. That must mean the entire bible. Therefore, you (Faith) are obligated to destroy and kill all non believers. So it says in the bible. (as I have quoted) Since you cling to a literal reading of the bible that must be your position. If not, you have a conflict to resolve.(edited to specify OT)This message has been edited by bkelly, 12-12-2005 09:45 PM

---

Truth fears no question.bkelly

Hello Faith,
Your objection is not valid. I have not told you one single time that your position is not your position. I have told your position is wrong. To that end I have given you evidence in the form of unanswerable questions that show your position is untennable.You are not facing up to the question.Let us try this one simple question at a time.Does god know all there is to know?Can god do anything he wants to do?Does god understand the ramifications of what he does?If the answer to these questions are yes, then this proves that god created us to be the way we are. He created us to fail him. He created Adam and Eve to eat that apple. He knew they would.It is like setting up an infant to fail then severely punishing him for failing. No,..., Wait,..., it's not "like", it IS setting up an infant to fail.(bkelly edited to remove offensive statement)This message has been edited by bkelly, 12-15-2005 06:49 PMThis message has been edited by bkelly, 12-15-2005 06:52 PM

---

Truth fears no question.bkelly

Hello truthlover, I do not see scientists as prophets at all. Scientists discover information about how things work and more important, why they work that way. (Lets consider photons, electrons, gamma rays and the like things for the moment) They make predictions about how physical entities will react under certain circumstances. They make no statement or preidictions at to any spiritual concepts. At least not when speaking or writing as a scientists, and not that I know of regarding reputable scientist.I am a bit surprised that no one else has commented on this. Maybe no one is reading this thread.

Hello again, We may not be agreeing on this. In order to show something is false, I sometimes begin with the assumption that it is true. From these asumptions we make logical defendable conclusions. If at the end we find an inescapable conflict, we have proved that the assumption is false. This is a well know method of making logical deductions.The assumption was that god is perfect. The evidence is that we cannot live up to the bible. Both we and the bible are his creation. Either he wanted us to fail, or his creations were imperfect. Either way, god is far from perfect.BTW, this also goes on the "assumption" that god exists, a working position and not necessarily a fact.If I have misinterpreted your position, I do apologize.

Hello brennakimi,RE: wow. somehow i don't think that's on topic.Yes, It is getting a bit thin there. But Faith is supporting her position on christianity with false statements. I have asked her these questions before and she cannot answer and continues makeing the same claims. As I read posts about Faith, I am far from the only one.Christianity is broke in part because the bible is broke. I hold that literal interpertation of the bible has cause more pain and grief in this world than any other single cause. (and maybe most put together)

Hello brennakimi,RE: you have to move in the direction of added understanding very carefullyYou are indeed right and I do need to work on that. However, and this does not fully justify my abrasive attitude, there are damn few people that will actually look at the facts and face up to what they mean. I have not yet read any other posts tonight but I probably got an ear full along this topic.Why is it that the brains of intelligent people turn to mush when it comes to religion?

Hello Faith, You are right and I appologize.I will post the questions without adornment and let them stand on their own. I will also edit out the offensive parts of my previous post.Let us try this one simple question at a time.Does god know all there is to know?Can god do anything he wants to do?Does god understand the ramifications of what he does?

---

Truth fears no question.bkelly

Then it does seem that we agree in concept, but not in the definition of the word prophet. I went to Ask.com - What's Your Question? and specified "define prophet." In the first screen is
An authoritative person who divines the future - oracle , seer , vaticinator ...That is how I see prophet. In terms of people's trust, I have mixed opinions as to how much scientists are trusted. No facts, just opinions.Yes, purpledawn, I do see. Thanks.This message has been edited by bkelly, 12-15-2005 06:59 PMThis message has been edited by bkelly, 12-15-2005 07:02 PM