[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mercury SingerOfLife wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]NTL wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color="indigo"><b>friedchicken \m/ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
ps: i love jesus and God more thean i love freddie. got a problem with that?[/QUOTE]
Not really, but I just cant belive we are living in the 21st century and we still have people like you beliving in this nonsence and stopping us moving forward, its annoying to the point of being absolutely hilarious.
The good thing about religeous people is that it makes me feel superior, so thanks for that.
And just to add on, scientific research shows that Athiests are in general more intelligent than religeous belivers.[/QUOTE]
hey, i wasn't stopping anyone from anything... and you're GENERALIZING. i'm not amish or anything and i live like you guys do. go ahead and call me stupid or "less superior or whatever. i'm still the same person with equal dignity as the atheists, jews, moslems, etc.
oh. and in what ways are atheists more intelligent than religious people? can you cite specific examples and instances where this applies? and why should religion be an aptitude for intelligence? it's not always that religion gets in the way of rationality, you know. maybe extremists, fine. but generalizing the other religious believers with the extremists somewhat insults me.
and i don't see why being a catholic in a free Queenzone community makes me less superior. it's insulting to be called less superior just because you believe in something. [/QUOTE]
Atheists are more intelligent because they dont fall for these stupid fairytales that is told to people. They are smarter cause they think for themselves , not just believing a book. They are smarter cause they can accept that maybe life is not more than this.
Now i believe those who created religion are very smart people and i think they are athiests.[/QUOTE]
to YOU these are fairy tales. where's the respect here? and i still don't see why religion is an aptitude for intelligence. the points given are not substantial, nor is it a fact. it is your opinion. and the only thing that could probably give a person's aptitude of intelligence are IQ tests or your school tests themselves and whatnot.
and if the atheists did create religion, then that makes them non-atheist, rather, religious believers. i haven't been isulting the non-believers here! or maybe i have, just tell me if i have then i'll just take this back but i don't see why there is so much disrespect for the people who have a religious faith. why can't all of you guys just accept that there are those with faiths and respect it? you treat people like me as if we were scumbags roaming the streets trying to change everyone in sight. heck i'm not even trying to change what you believe in! i'm just saying that it's not right to outright disrespect those with faiths. people with faiths are not lesser people. they are the same as all people are.
and yes, i still don't see why this has anything to do with Queen.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oh please! Freddie was a great singer, and musician, but he is not comparable to Jesus Christ! That's a gross blasphemy!
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy![/QUOTE]
I bet more people would still think you're the crazy one, Mr. Fundamentalist. At least they would have a tangible reason for forming their clique.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]redspecial85 wrote: [/QUOTENAME] Before WWII, any discussion among educated people reguarding Israel becoming a sovereign state again was quite a joke among people in positions of authority. Biblical prophecy said it would happen. They were occupied and slapped around for almost 3000 years under the yoke of the Persians, the Romans, and the Byzantine Empire (among several others). And to the shock and suprise of the international community; in 1948, Israel became its own sovereign nation. Look it up...Do your research, and call me out on it if I'm wrong. The prophecy about Israel is in the book of Revelation.[/QUOTE]
What nonsense... it wasn't biblical prophecy. The Hebrew prophets weren't writing to "predict the future". The prophets were simply writing poetically, as a reaction to what was happening at the time. Christianity just decided to twist around the Hebrew scriptures to match their social and political agendas while writing their gospels and forming their new religion in the late first century. You mentioned Revelation, which is not a prophetic book. Scholars have been studying it for centuries, and still there is no consensus as to what it's saying. Besides, at the time Revelation was written (which was well after the gospels), the Christian-Jewish hatred was very strong, so clearly no Christian scriptures from this time period would ever support Judaism in any way.
On the topic of Judaism in Christian scriptures, it's worth mentioning that some of the Christian scriptures are very anti-semitic documents. The gospel of John is one fine example, as is the story of Judas. Judas was simply created as a scapegoat to shift the blame of Jesus' death from Pilate to the Jews (note the aforementioned growing hostility between Christians and Jews). Paul, who wrote before the gospel stories were written, says Jesus came back to the 12 - but if the Judas story is correct, then it would be 11. Both stories can't be right! This is the true root of today's antisemitism, and so few people see it... either because they don't care enough about Christianity to analyze the scriptures, or they're so caught up in it that they refuse to accept something that doesn't support their tradition.
As for Isreal... it became its own state in 1948 because of WWII, and the subsequent pressure on the UN, mostly from the Zionists... among other reasons related to WWII which I won't elaborate on, simply because most people will label anyone who asks (even informed) questions about the historical accuracy of the holocaust as antisemitic.
[QUOTE]I pity all of you who don't know Jesus...[/QUOTE]
Take your preaching somewhere else. I'm definitely open to having an intelligent discussion about history, but we definitely don't need you or anyone else saying there is something wrong with people who don't agree with your beliefs.
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy![/QUOTE]
I bet more people would still think you're the crazy one, Mr. Fundamentalist. At least they would have a tangible reason for forming their clique.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]redspecial85 wrote: [/QUOTENAME] Before WWII, any discussion among educated people reguarding Israel becoming a sovereign state again was quite a joke among people in positions of authority. Biblical prophecy said it would happen. They were occupied and slapped around for almost 3000 years under the yoke of the Persians, the Romans, and the Byzantine Empire (among several others). And to the shock and suprise of the international community; in 1948, Israel became its own sovereign nation. Look it up...Do your research, and call me out on it if I'm wrong. The prophecy about Israel is in the book of Revelation.[/QUOTE]
What nonsense... it wasn't biblical prophecy. The Hebrew prophets weren't writing to "predict the future". The prophets were simply writing poetically, as a reaction to what was happening at the time. Christianity just decided to twist around the Hebrew scriptures to match their social and political agendas while writing their gospels and forming their new religion in the late first century. You mentioned Revelation, which is not a prophetic book. Scholars have been studying it for centuries, and still there is no consensus as to what it's saying. Besides, at the time Revelation was written (which was well after the gospels), the Christian-Jewish hatred was very strong, so clearly no Christian scriptures from this time period would ever support Judaism in any way.
On the topic of Judaism in Christian scriptures, it's worth mentioning that some of the Christian scriptures are very anti-semitic documents. The gospel of John is one fine example, as is the story of Judas. Judas was simply created as a scapegoat to shift the blame of Jesus' death from Pilate to the Jews (note the aforementioned growing hostility between Christians and Jews). Paul, who wrote before the gospel stories were written, says Jesus came back to the 12 - but if the Judas story is correct, then it would be 11. Both stories can't be right! This is the true root of today's antisemitism, and so few people see it... either because they don't care enough about Christianity to analyze the scriptures, or they're so caught up in it that they refuse to accept something that doesn't support their tradition.
As for Isreal... it became its own state in 1948 because of WWII, and the subsequent pressure on the UN, mostly from the Zionists... among other reasons related to WWII which I won't elaborate on, simply because most people will label anyone who asks (even informed) questions about the historical accuracy of the holocaust as antisemitic.
[QUOTE]I pity all of you who don't know Jesus...[/QUOTE]
Take your preaching somewhere else. I'm definitely open to having an intelligent discussion about history, but we definitely don't need you or anyone else saying there is something wrong with people who don't agree with your beliefs.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Who cares about church ?
I mean, except for people that go there. If they want to take the time to care, it doesn't matter to me what they do there unless they're having heathen sacrifices or something.[/QUOTE]
I do. I care deeply about churches. Afterall, shouldn't mankind's greatest enemy be watched and feared?
Religion: The disease of humanity.
I mean, except for people that go there. If they want to take the time to care, it doesn't matter to me what they do there unless they're having heathen sacrifices or something.[/QUOTE]
I do. I care deeply about churches. Afterall, shouldn't mankind's greatest enemy be watched and feared?
Religion: The disease of humanity.
Sir GH...
I respect the fact that someone such as yourself has given some interesting responses to what I said previously in this thread of discussion. If you look back to the Gospels, you'll see that Judas was replaced after his death, so there were 12 that Jesus came back to. The book of Revelation is looked back on as a poem, but more so as a prophetic poem. Yes there was a desire among the Jewish communtity in the first century for Israel to become a nation again; it was revealed to John that in the last days it would happen. Also for the record, I was preaching for a bit in there...but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying and assume things. I never said, "there's something wrong with you people who aren't Christians." I'm not an accuser, I don't condemn anyone for their lifestyle; nor do I believe to be better than anyone else. I'm still human. We all have free will to do whatever we please.
I respect the fact that someone such as yourself has given some interesting responses to what I said previously in this thread of discussion. If you look back to the Gospels, you'll see that Judas was replaced after his death, so there were 12 that Jesus came back to. The book of Revelation is looked back on as a poem, but more so as a prophetic poem. Yes there was a desire among the Jewish communtity in the first century for Israel to become a nation again; it was revealed to John that in the last days it would happen. Also for the record, I was preaching for a bit in there...but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying and assume things. I never said, "there's something wrong with you people who aren't Christians." I'm not an accuser, I don't condemn anyone for their lifestyle; nor do I believe to be better than anyone else. I'm still human. We all have free will to do whatever we please.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]redspecial85 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If you look back to the Gospels, you'll see that Judas was replaced after his death, so there were 12 that Jesus came back to.[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, that's the usual response. But that still doesn't make it less clear that the Judas story was added in later. Why didn't Paul have anything to say about it? In fact, he had nothing to say about the virgin birth, childhood, miracles, crucification story, and resurrection appearances. In his writings, he has about three or four biographical things to say about Jesus. This is because they hadn't come up with the stories yet. Christianity was in its extreme youth when Paul wrote. These above things all came later (after the year 70) when they needed to fill in the blanks. That's where the gospels come in. Since the writers were Jewish, they took elements from the Hebrew scriptures and created their own. Anyone who looks hard enough - without their spiritual blinders on - is able to see this. But if you're believing that the gospels are historically accurate as they're written, then you'll never see how the gospels are actually literary treasures, not history.
[QUOTE]The book of Revelation is looked back on as a poem, but more so as a prophetic poem.[/QUOTE]
I agree with the poetry part, but nobody knows what it means. Plenty of people who have good memorization skills and good intentions tend to play expert in the field of religion, but the truth is, very few people know what they're talking about on the subject. Traditional interpretations of scripture are rarely the historically correct ones.
[QUOTE]Yes there was a desire among the Jewish communtity in the first century for Israel to become a nation again[/QUOTE]
This is true. It took about 1800 years for it to happen again, and only because they threw everyone else out.
[QUOTE]it was revealed to John that in the last days it would happen.[/QUOTE]
Sure, you can believe that if you'd like, but when reading scripture, or any other ancient writing, you must understand how they came to be. Scrolls and papyrus didn't just fly out of the sky, and the writers weren't divinely inspired. People had political, religious, and social agendas for writing as they did. You have to ask: who wrote it, when was it written, why did they write it, who were the writing to, were they responding to another writing, what was happening at the time (socially, politically) that might have inspired the writing, etc. This is called historical criticism. Any credible historian uses this method when examining any ancient writing, but a major exception is usually made when it comes to religion.
The gospels were written between 40-70 years after Jesus died. That's a lot of time for stories to be running around in an oral culture. Remember, most people back then were illiterate, and couldn't write their thoughts and stories down. A new religious movement needed to grow to the point that scribes would be required (and interested), and so it took decades for word to spread before any of it was written down. Just think of the telephone game going on for 40 years. And then there's the translation. They were all written in ancient Greek, which had no spaces between words, no punctuation, and no difference between upper and lower case letters. No two manuscripts of any particular writing match. The entire Christian tradition has been the result of arguably the biggest guessing game ever played.
I bet they haven't told you all that in church... but your minister probably knows it. If they told you this stuff, the church would be dying even quicker than it already is.
[QUOTE]Also for the record, I was preaching for a bit in there...but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying and assume things. I never said, "there's something wrong with you people who aren't Christians." I'm not an accuser, I don't condemn anyone for their lifestyle; nor do I believe to be bett
Ah yes, that's the usual response. But that still doesn't make it less clear that the Judas story was added in later. Why didn't Paul have anything to say about it? In fact, he had nothing to say about the virgin birth, childhood, miracles, crucification story, and resurrection appearances. In his writings, he has about three or four biographical things to say about Jesus. This is because they hadn't come up with the stories yet. Christianity was in its extreme youth when Paul wrote. These above things all came later (after the year 70) when they needed to fill in the blanks. That's where the gospels come in. Since the writers were Jewish, they took elements from the Hebrew scriptures and created their own. Anyone who looks hard enough - without their spiritual blinders on - is able to see this. But if you're believing that the gospels are historically accurate as they're written, then you'll never see how the gospels are actually literary treasures, not history.
[QUOTE]The book of Revelation is looked back on as a poem, but more so as a prophetic poem.[/QUOTE]
I agree with the poetry part, but nobody knows what it means. Plenty of people who have good memorization skills and good intentions tend to play expert in the field of religion, but the truth is, very few people know what they're talking about on the subject. Traditional interpretations of scripture are rarely the historically correct ones.
[QUOTE]Yes there was a desire among the Jewish communtity in the first century for Israel to become a nation again[/QUOTE]
This is true. It took about 1800 years for it to happen again, and only because they threw everyone else out.
[QUOTE]it was revealed to John that in the last days it would happen.[/QUOTE]
Sure, you can believe that if you'd like, but when reading scripture, or any other ancient writing, you must understand how they came to be. Scrolls and papyrus didn't just fly out of the sky, and the writers weren't divinely inspired. People had political, religious, and social agendas for writing as they did. You have to ask: who wrote it, when was it written, why did they write it, who were the writing to, were they responding to another writing, what was happening at the time (socially, politically) that might have inspired the writing, etc. This is called historical criticism. Any credible historian uses this method when examining any ancient writing, but a major exception is usually made when it comes to religion.
The gospels were written between 40-70 years after Jesus died. That's a lot of time for stories to be running around in an oral culture. Remember, most people back then were illiterate, and couldn't write their thoughts and stories down. A new religious movement needed to grow to the point that scribes would be required (and interested), and so it took decades for word to spread before any of it was written down. Just think of the telephone game going on for 40 years. And then there's the translation. They were all written in ancient Greek, which had no spaces between words, no punctuation, and no difference between upper and lower case letters. No two manuscripts of any particular writing match. The entire Christian tradition has been the result of arguably the biggest guessing game ever played.
I bet they haven't told you all that in church... but your minister probably knows it. If they told you this stuff, the church would be dying even quicker than it already is.
[QUOTE]Also for the record, I was preaching for a bit in there...but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying and assume things. I never said, "there's something wrong with you people who aren't Christians." I'm not an accuser, I don't condemn anyone for their lifestyle; nor do I believe to be bett
I think that everyone should have his/her own view on religion since everyone of us has his/her own interpretation of the world:
For someone God can mean love, hope, understanding,...
...for someone other a higher force, a certain power or energy...
...or God as the reason of our existence...
...or God as the reaction between our body and soul...
...or as our ability to realize...
...or as gnosis...
...or the absolute amount of everything in the world...
etc. etc. etc.
...the same with religion...
We are only hurting each other if we are trying to prove something which is not bound on objectivity.
I think everyone should find his/her own personal 'truth' and accept the 'truth' of the others.
For someone God can mean love, hope, understanding,...
...for someone other a higher force, a certain power or energy...
...or God as the reason of our existence...
...or God as the reaction between our body and soul...
...or as our ability to realize...
...or as gnosis...
...or the absolute amount of everything in the world...
etc. etc. etc.
...the same with religion...
We are only hurting each other if we are trying to prove something which is not bound on objectivity.
I think everyone should find his/her own personal 'truth' and accept the 'truth' of the others.
Fantastic post, Daria. Such beautiful and wise words... words that will fly over the heads of most.
Personally, I no longer give any merit to the "God question". Anyone with objectivity is aware that religion has divided people throughout history far more than it has united them. To me, the question should be irrelevant until we have ensured that everyone in this world is fed, clothed, sheltered, and healthy... not to mention learning to love one another. These are not religious practices. These are basic fundamental ways of being.
After that has been established, then we can discuss which invisible man in the sky (or which interpretation of) is more important than the other, and which ancient fables are actually true, historically or metaphorically.
Personally, I no longer give any merit to the "God question". Anyone with objectivity is aware that religion has divided people throughout history far more than it has united them. To me, the question should be irrelevant until we have ensured that everyone in this world is fed, clothed, sheltered, and healthy... not to mention learning to love one another. These are not religious practices. These are basic fundamental ways of being.
After that has been established, then we can discuss which invisible man in the sky (or which interpretation of) is more important than the other, and which ancient fables are actually true, historically or metaphorically.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oh please! Freddie was a great singer, and musician, but he is not comparable to Jesus Christ! That's a gross blasphemy!
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
Some blaphemy a day, now keep the inquisition away
From me
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
Some blaphemy a day, now keep the inquisition away
From me
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]jkdrummerboy wrote: [/QUOTENAME]hello again you fucking piece of SHIT.If you think you hurt my feelings you must be fucking reterted!!! You are nobody in my eyes and I wouldn't even waste my spit on you!!! Once again you are a fucking piece of SHIT who doesn't deserve to LIVE...[/QUOTE]
Oh boy, how nice. A religious nut. Did you know that Jesus was either not immaculately conceived or female?
Oh boy, how nice. A religious nut. Did you know that Jesus was either not immaculately conceived or female?
I like Jesus
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SomebodyWhoLoves wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oh please! Freddie was a great singer, and musician, but he is not comparable to Jesus Christ! That's a gross blasphemy!
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
I'm not crazy, If anything, I'm getting more and more sane >:D
Why don't you retards create your Freddie religion, and wear a T-Shirt with Freddie's face. And people will think you are crazy!
[/QUOTE]
I'm not crazy, If anything, I'm getting more and more sane >:D
you religious people should buy a brain and start thinking logically and wake up and see through the bullshit lies. We are just animals and thats a FACT. Human is 99% genetically like an ape, hard to get this into your head?
Interesting points again Sir GH...I was well aware of most of your points. I've taken several classes on Judaism and Christianity. If I'm not mistaken I believe there was a council held among "elders" of the church in the late first Century where they assembled texts that combined the Tanakh with the new "scriptures."
The interpretation of any scripture, even the question of what Translation of the Bible is most accurate? Either way, that's usually where a lot of the fighting begins. Its sad, that a lot of my brothers and sisters in faith can't step out of their carnality and look at things from an eternal perspective.
There is a lot of good that Christians are doing in this world...AIDS relief, and missionary work in Africa, India, even in their homeland by looking after the poor, the homeless, widows, and the broken-hearted. But somehow, its overshadowed by its controversies.
I can't say that my faith has been shaken by this at all, if anything; you've reminded me of several perspectives that have dimmed in my mind. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for," and "Faith without works is dead." Honestly that's where the struggle is...striving to "walk by faith." To believe even though I may not always see him. I've seen more than enough to know he's there, and that he is very much alive and involved in what's going on. I still believe. It was good to have such an intellectually stimulating discussion with you, SirGH. I look forward to talking with you again...Peace...:)
The interpretation of any scripture, even the question of what Translation of the Bible is most accurate? Either way, that's usually where a lot of the fighting begins. Its sad, that a lot of my brothers and sisters in faith can't step out of their carnality and look at things from an eternal perspective.
There is a lot of good that Christians are doing in this world...AIDS relief, and missionary work in Africa, India, even in their homeland by looking after the poor, the homeless, widows, and the broken-hearted. But somehow, its overshadowed by its controversies.
I can't say that my faith has been shaken by this at all, if anything; you've reminded me of several perspectives that have dimmed in my mind. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for," and "Faith without works is dead." Honestly that's where the struggle is...striving to "walk by faith." To believe even though I may not always see him. I've seen more than enough to know he's there, and that he is very much alive and involved in what's going on. I still believe. It was good to have such an intellectually stimulating discussion with you, SirGH. I look forward to talking with you again...Peace...:)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]redspecial85 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]There is a lot of good that Christians are doing in this world...AIDS relief, and missionary work in Africa, India, even in their homeland by looking after the poor, the homeless, widows, and the broken-hearted. But somehow, its overshadowed by its controversies.[/QUOTE]
This is very true. Funny how most of the core Christian philosophies are left-wing, from a political perspective... but it's the ultra-conservative ones who have the loudest voices and get the most attention. It's pretty unfortunate.
Careful with praising the missionaries... they are very often told not to lift a finger until they've converted whoever they're supposed to be helping.
[QUOTE]"Faith without works is dead."[/QUOTE]
Ah yes... good 'ol James strikes again! Quality wisdom there.
[QUOTE]It was good to have such an intellectually stimulating discussion with you, SirGH. I look forward to talking with you again...Peace...:)[/QUOTE]
Same goes to you.. :)
This is very true. Funny how most of the core Christian philosophies are left-wing, from a political perspective... but it's the ultra-conservative ones who have the loudest voices and get the most attention. It's pretty unfortunate.
Careful with praising the missionaries... they are very often told not to lift a finger until they've converted whoever they're supposed to be helping.
[QUOTE]"Faith without works is dead."[/QUOTE]
Ah yes... good 'ol James strikes again! Quality wisdom there.
[QUOTE]It was good to have such an intellectually stimulating discussion with you, SirGH. I look forward to talking with you again...Peace...:)[/QUOTE]
Same goes to you.. :)
Jesus is Freddie's bitch, he sucks Freddie's cock on a regular basis in heaven
amen
amen