Notices
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: COUNTER CRUSADE VERSUS CHRISTIANITY

  1. #1 COUNTER CRUSADE VERSUS CHRISTIANITY 
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    COUNTER CRUSADE

    The attacks on our freedoms and free speech (excluding profanity and insults) by the popes and the ghosts of the Pharisees is going on today in our Constitutional Democracy.
    It is about time we fought back to keep them in their place which is the religious institutions and their homes.
    They are acting illegally when they enter into politics and the public school systems.
    This action violates our Constitutional mandate of 'Separation of Church and State'.

    These religious fanatics are also illegal crusaders promoting 'cruel and unusual punishment' with their symbolic crucifixes and crosses. These are NOT true symbols of the Gospel of Christ. Their symbols are the instruments that Pontius Pilate used to force his opponents to comply to his predatory and sadistic practice by torturing them to death.
    Our Constitution forbids this kind of punishment for any reason.
    In the case of Christ, he was punished for what? For free speech which was directed toward the Pharasees? Christ did not volenteer to be crucified. Therefore, the only true symbol of his church should be an icon of him preaching his Gospel.
    So, I suggest that the crucifixes and crosses be 'scrapped' and replaced with an icon of his image at the front of the congregation within the church.

    So I again suggest we start promoting the Christian Gospel of reform against an established religion that is NOT promoting the true nature of the message of what Christ was promoting like helping the poor and sick (I support jobs for all and volentary euthanasis) and private prayer rather than public prayer. Also, supporting our Constitutional law rather then the 'dogma' of a predatory empire like the Romans at the time of the Christian era.

    The first three commandments in the bible are also unconstitutional because they deny freedom of religion which is a personal right for all US citizens but practiced in the proper institutions and the private homes of the followers.

    A US citizen

    Mike NS


    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Please remember that this is an international forum, so if you want to discuss a US problem you have to explain it to those who aren't familiar with it. Or maybe you recognise a worldwide phenomenon?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    To Pendragon

    Since this is the only segment for religion, I had no other choice.

    For instance, it was not seperated into the various segments of other religions.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    It would still be helpful if you could set the background for non-Americans. A Saudi citizen, for example, would be perplexed by the required separation of Church and State.
    The issue of free speech is a complex one: correct me if I am wrong, but that was not in the original constitution, requiring an amendment (the First) to introduce it. [And the Fifth to provide its obverse.]
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    I suppose I should have included 'for Christianity' in the title.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    There, changed that for you, in line with your all caps title.

    Although I recognise your concern, surely your freedom prevents you from intervening in the faith of others? Are not the idols people choose to worship their God part of that faith, and thus not amongst those things up to you to control. Take from them their crucifixes, and they will make signs in their prisons.

    Should we censor Homer because he might be a bad influence on the troops? Should we remove de Sade altoghether because he might be perverting? What should we and what should we not censor?

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Mr U quote

    Although I recognise your concern, surely your freedom prevents you from intervening in the faith of others? Are not the idols people choose to worship their God part of that faith, and thus not amongst those things up to you to control. Take from them their crucifixes, and they will make signs in their prisons.

    Should we censor Homer because he might be a bad influence on the troops? Should we remove de Sade altoghether because he might be perverting? What should we and what should we not censor?

    reply
    Thank you for correcting my post title.

    My post is not to eliminate the Christian philosophy but to establish the proper deity as the 'head of the religion'.
    Also, to inform the current Christian leadership that it would be nice if they honored our Constitution as written rather than reinterpreting it their way.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    And how are you than not interpreting the constitution? Besides, is church and government not seperated? Should a church not be left alone by the government. Or at least, when it is not intervening in the affairs of the government?

    I do not vote, I do not support my government, and do not embrace democracy as a whole. That does not mean, however, that I am about to kill people for that view, or limit others in some way. Why would the censorship you suggest be any more constitutional, when the backthought of that constitution is the very freedom you seek to undermine?

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Mr U

    I just am informing the religious Christian faction that the concept of crucifixion and suffering is not the main intent of the Christian Gospel.
    The main intent is to direct ones attention to the needs of the poor and the handicapped and the general population. As I read the Gospel, I believe that is what Christ was preaching about.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    Ah, but how can you be certain that what you interpret is the true, real intent of christianity? How can you be so certain you are right, and they are wrong?

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Mr U

    If you will notice the current alliance between the Cristian faction and the corporate faction working contrary to the interests of the people as Christ
    was trying to promote in his sermons on behalf of the poor and sick, than you can understand why I think the way I do. Our government is serving the above mentioned factions rather than the interests of the general population.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Mike, I agree that the current expression of Christianity by many of its branches seems remote form how I would interpret Christianity, but as HU suggests, what makes us think we are right. This may be a case where the [practicing] majority wins.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    I love christian theology. For one, the possible interpretation of murder. The sin, as follows from various verses, resides in the blood, and is transmitted to the children, but also to a murderer. This by implication turns murder into something 'beautiful', into also ending a life, but also giving that life eternal bliss, while you degrade yourself to a life in hell, claiming the sins of your victim.

    The bible even stated that the punishments of death meant that their blood would be theirs. If a person was stoned for working on sunday/saturday (depending on how you interpret this), no one would get his sins. Jesus' teachings of not punishing even when the law tells you to, showing mercy and forgiveness is an additional interpretation, where he has the Caine-parabel backing him up. Caine after the murder, was not put to death, but left alive.

    However, this interpretation of murder and death is not one shared by christians, while following biblical texts, it is at least possible. However, I do not wish to force this onto christians, even when it might improve society, because I respect their sovereignty.

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Ophi quote
    Mike, I agree that the current expression of Christianity by many of its branches seems remote form how I would interpret Christianity, but as HU suggests, what makes us think we are right. This may be a case where the [practicing] majority wins.

    reply
    Well, they have the guns, dollars, the bible and Pontius Pilates sadistic appetite for suffering others.
    Since they have us all by the economic throats, we have to reduce ourselves to robots for their appetites for dollars.
    I believe in an honest living but when they degrade the working people to the lowly status of contemtable robots, that is where I disagree.

    There are only two sources of REAL wealth and they are Nature and work.
    Nature provides most commodities and the workers produce the REAL TANGIBLE WEALTH that we can all see and feel like the skysrcapers, roads, bridges, automobiles, houses and other such tangible products.
    The people at the top provide the ideas, dreams and the greed.

    Workers deserve better.
    Our current crop of billionaires reducing minimum wage earners to the lowly level of bare subsistence is not the way our Constitution mandates. Christs himself advised that those wealthy individuals will not go to heaven unless they dispose of their wealth.
    Well, I hope he is right.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    935
    Mike, what do you have against using the quote functions built into the message boards? It makes posts much more readable.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Mike, I think you do your underlying arguments a disservice by the self righteous anger you clothe them in.

    One point that seemed quite strange to me was where you said
    The people at the top provide the ideas, dreams and the greed.
    What is wrong with providing the ideas and the dreams? Surely these are good things? If you disagree why are you sitting at a computer, powered by electricity, in a house built of materials. all of which are the result of many people having dreams and ideas?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    neutrino

    The reason I do not use the quote function in the thread is because this can extend the pages to unecassary lengths.
    I am only interested in using the relavant data to reply to.

    Ophi

    The people at the top want to skim all the wealth for themselves. This is already happening with the increase of billionaires and the reduction of the worker wages to the lowest level of subsistence.
    Now the republocan congress has given the corporations the right to terminate the pension plans of the workers that was EARNED income.

    What I quoted above about the top people supplying the 'ideas, dreams and greed' is not REAL wealth. Real tangible wealth is what you can see and feel like the procuct of Nature and work.
    So reduciong the workers that create the RTW to the lowly level of robots is an insult to the workers.

    They deserve better. So sharing the wealth on a more equitable level is good for the economy because this increased mass purchasing power increases the demand for more goods which can then create more jobs and so forth to escalate the economy to prosperity.

    The only part of the economy that is booming now here in the US is the billionaires building mansions for themselves with all that unearned income they have today.

    Mike NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike NS
    neutrino
    The reason I do not use the quote function in the thread is because this can extend the pages to unecassary lengths.
    I am only interested in using the relavant data to reply to.
    Delete the material in the quote that you don't need. Before you delete it, make a copy, so that you can 'serve up' portions of the post as desired. For example:
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike NS
    neutrino
    I am only interested in using the relavant data to reply to.
    Much easier for the reader, and it does not take up significant space.

    I'll respond to your remarks on Robber Barons later.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •