Eljay,

You obsessively insist with this 'trick' question of yours.

It becomes clear with this insistence of yours, that you insinuate that there is a definitive 'RIGHT CHRISTIAN' !!! Characterized by (surprise of all surprises) YOUR OPINION, BELIEF, DOGMA, DEFINITION!!! Of course you're going to tell us that it isn't yours, but rather that of a number of other 'personal' individuals whom over the history of christianity have given their particular PERSONAL opinion, belief, dogma of what they consider to be 'the ultimate definition' of chrisitianity, or what it is to be the 'RIGHT KIND OF CHRISTIAN'.

So here is a half answer/question to you Eljay:

OF THE VAST NUMBER OF DEFINITIONS OUT THERE, WHOSE PERSONAL OPINION, BELIEF, DOGMA, INTERPRETATION, AND DEFINITION
OF CHRISTIANITY HAVE YOU ADOPTED AS YOUR OWN, AND WHICH YOU INSINUATE IS 'SUPERIOR' TO ALL OTHERS???

Catholicism
Western Schism
East-West Schism
Protestant Reformation
Theology of Martin Luther
Theology of Ulrich Zwingli
Theology of John Calvin
English Reformation (under HenryVIII, what emerged was a state church that considered itself both "Reformed" and "Catholic" but not "Roman" (and stayed away from the title "Protestant")

Counter-Reformation
The Council of Trent
Revivalism
Restorationism
Modern Eastern Orthodoxy
Liberal Christianity
Christian Fundamentalism
Ecumenism (Catholic or Protestant???)

This represents just a short list of all the different 'individual' currents of ideology and dogma of the same christian family.

To exclude catholics as christian, or catholicism from christianity, is a gross sign of denial, hypocracy or ignorance. It is more often than not the school of thought of christian fundamentalists.

Lastly, you raise in your previous post, the point about addressing 'chrisitian fundamentalism/extrmism', as though we shouldn't, or as though it were unfair?!?!?

Well Eljay, it has to do with owning up!!! Being responsible!!! Very distinct from being guilty, as some might think, being responsible of our 'own' thought/word/action paradigms is an essential part of 'INTEGRITY'.

As long as we are dealing with this 'FUNAMENTALIST/EXTREMISM issue from our own North American, USA, mostly CULTURALLY christian mentality, 'CHRISTIAN fundamentalism/extremism' is the only religious fundamentalism which concerns us. It is (our) North American extremism, which most directly and organically correlates with other fundamentalist/extremisms around the globe.

To keep denying that essential fact is to participate actively in the perpetuation of divisive, violent, and extreme hating of others, our so-called neighbors, whom Jesus only asked to '... love thy neighbor as you would yourself...'

So which 'individual' definition of christian do you subscribe to Eljay???

The thread is not really pecific to Chrisianity, it's about any religious extremism when it comes to the violence and ignorances that relgion embraces...and who is saying you don't know your own beliefs? If anything I assume you have some things to deny about it tho~..lol...I take it you voted for the Dippic twice and think Sarah Palin is sane...now THAT'S extreme.

I think they get stuck in the "NOT ME (or NOT MY CHURCH)" mode....cherrypicking to fit and defend their own beliefs even if it defies historical fact...I could find a KKK member who'd swear he's a "True Christian" and other Christians who do not support his Klan cannot possible be "True Christians"...another example of religiosity's cryptic belief system that allows denial for their damage to humanity...denial by the numbers.

There is no possible dialogue the moment one insinuates, suggests, question or claims outright that Catholics are not christians.

Delusion and deceit is not exclusively the tar of protestant fundamentalists, but all fundamentalists are possessed by that disease.

Fundamentalists don't seem to realize one bit that at the end of the day, their diseased dogma only has room for one christian standing!

The ONE with the 'RIGHT TRUTH', this personal and individual interpretation of the definitive version of EVERYTHING!!!

Eljay, you obviously are not bigotted, shallow and manipulative, but your question: 'what is ons's definition of a true christian?' is bigotted, shallow, and leads to a losing battle, especially when you claim that the largest body of christians, CATHOLICS, in your personal and individual opinion, are not christian unless they meet YOUR PERSONAL AND INDIVIDUAL FUNDAMENTALIST SOURCED INTERPRETATION of what is a christian!!!

I do not defend catholics or other religious denomination, but the christian house is burning, and the pyromaniacs are christians themselves, lighting up other christian dwellings!!!


Sort that one out first and then get to this 'general religious debate'.

It would be tremendously inappropriate for non-christians to get involved in this millennia old christian battle for primitive and barbaric 'word of god' control.

"I remain convinced of Hitlers not having been a Christian. If anything - he was a Darwanist. He was also an Occultist. Two other things you won't find in the definition of Christainity."

STILL with the denials...and you offer no links or references...of course I've already seen the revisionist's writings on that matter.

Hitler was absolutley considered a Christian and had the support of the Christians to commit murder.. .and now you say Catholics are not "Christian"??? And then it got weird...

http://www.davidmacd.com/catholic/are_catholics_christian.htm

But I have been amused as people scurry to defend their past afilliations with death and destruction from their religion...very amusing...

I remain ignorant as to whether "Hitler was a Christian" during his reign. To me, to answer that question I would need access to an honest expression of his personal thoughts on such topics as the Bible, the Christian 'God', Jesus, and the idea of 'Jesus as Savior'.

If even a few of the claims being made about him here are true, then its obvious that his worldview was influenced by Christianity, and that he used Christianity.



While I don't completely agree with Voileazur's statements - I agree with the sentiment behind his response to this statement. Portions of modern Christian religion encourages hostility towards Muslims and towards gays, which some would say is an 'un-Christian' attitude. I think V. is making a valid point. Just because the 'loving Christians' don't agree with such hostility, doesn't make that hostility any less a product of the modern Christian religion.

Further, since when do Christian judge whether a person is a Christian based on their actions? I thought that acceptance of Jesus as your Savior was the key criteria?

Making this determination based on people actions seems a bit convenient to me. Hypothetically, if some portions of Christian belief encourage such 'un-Christian' behavior - then anybody who is making this designation based on behavior would never see and acknowledge the connection - when confronted with the evidence of such a connection, they would always have the option of washing their hands of the consequences of the beliefs by disowning the person on the basis of their behavior.

Eljay, your personal views of what constitutes a (deserving) christian, even when you use your personal 'expert' interpretive skills of the bible as some sort of subjective authority for your position, doesn't change the fact that it is your personal opinion and interpretation. Another version of the 'god on my side' perverse way of ONE deciding what is right and wrong for ALL.

It is keeping a certain group locked into the old 'By choice or by birth' endless battle.
Or the infamous 'MY bible scriptures interpretation is right and yours is wrong' childish battle!!! Leading to insane notion that Catholics are not christians in some bible 'experts' eyes.

At that rate, the CHOSEN will be NONE!!! ... for the ONE whom might end up winning the 'I'M RIGHT, THEY'RE WRONG' ego contest, will be flushed for having judged all others!!!

Hitler was a catholic. Hitler was a christian. Hitler became radical in his christian views, then fundamentalist in his christian views, and finally, outright insane in his christian views!!! Supported throughout, by heavyweights of the christian church of the time.

And this bring US straight back to the heart of the topic.

What is your opinion 'the god virus'?

Since you and I agree on religious fundamentalism, and the general destruction it has on society at large, and surely you wouldn't be one to conveniently exclude christianity has having its own fringe of religious fundamentalists, it would be pertinent, given the topic of this thread, to hear your views on Dr. Darrel Ray's book.

Hello Eljay, and let me wish you and yours the happiest of Christmas holidays!!!

Insulting people's intelligence?!?!?! Me!?!?!? Now! Now! Now! Eljay! You should know better than to go there!!!

Let me use a simple example to demonstrate where the insult to intelligence, if such was made, lies.
Since we are in the heart of Christmas Holidays, with all the family gatherings that we will all be plunged into, let me use the family as the perfect metaphor to clarify this 'state of belonging' with which you appear to have a serious issue.

Here goes the metaphor:

Two young couples meet in the local park of a new suburb where they have both recently bought their first homes. Among other things, they women discover that they are both pregnant with their first child and are both planning to have more children in the future.

Time passes, life is good, and our two families are spotted at the park again, as they have been doing for years, along with backyard family barbecues, camping trips, and a variety of other activities neighborhood families share together.

Paying attention to the discussion, though, all is not as well as it might have first appeared.

Mother 'B', is telling couple 'A', the latest episode of their '2' child. At 17, '2' child is purging his second jail term for drug trafficking, car jacking, and 7-Eleven store hold-ups.

In his early years, '2' was an exemplary young child. Without warning, somewhere in early adolescence, '2' started showing signs of minor delinquency. Escalating into full blown crime, laced with aggressive, rebellious and abusive conduct towards all.

'... I just don't know what happened!!!...', Keeps repeating Mother 'B'.
'... It is like I don't know him. It is as though he is not our son!!! ...'

'2' no longer behaves according to the family's values and principles. '2' doesn't live up to what a 'good' family member should be.

You get it Eljay?!?!?! Regardless of whether or not you live up to the 'subjective' ideal that 'family values' impose, '2' IS STILL THE SECOND CHILD OF THAT FAMILY. He still carries the name, is he's still an integral part of the fabric of that family.

Be ashamed of him all you wish, talk of disowning him all day long, '2' is still the delinquent son of that family.

Like it or not, that's what this family MUST OWN UP TO!!!

Likewise, that is what you and your christian family MUST OWN UP TO!!!

Excommunication from a family, biological, christian or otherwise, based on one's 'bad behavior', is not only cowardly and hypocritical, it is totally contrary to the most basic christian values.

It is time for all of us to put down our Pharisee's 'good behavior' checklists, and not only take responsibility for, but fully embrace the black sheeps in our respective families. That is the first lesson Jesus, whom you claim to serve, taught us all!!!

Now, the insult to anyone intelligence would be to keep peddling the 'good little christian morality checklist', like Mao's 'redbook', to arbitrarily judge who's 'in' the club! That is the insult to christians' intelligence IMO Eljay!!!

Not that again Eljay?!?!?!

Hitler was baptized and raised in the most thorough of Christian tradition and faith.

Like you Eljay, he developed his own interpretation of what a GOOD CHRISTIAN was, and devoted his whole life to it. What he ended up concluding was that the catholic church failed him and his people, protestants only deserved his utmost contempt, and JESUS counted on him to deliver the real fight!!!

Hitler showed every sign of a devout christian youth, turned christian militant, turned fundamentalist, and the rest is history.

Was Hiltler sane and balanced in his view of christianity, Jesus, Jews, himself, his nation, etc.???

Like all fundamentalists, he started out posting a mildly paranoid neurotiuc behavior. For just the right number of fundamentalists (the leaders), when this behavior not only goes unchecked, but is instead encouraged by a shared mass neurosis, the dormant neurosis turns rapidly into a a dangerous phychosis.

So if it will make you happy Eljay, Hitler progressively became, in hte last quarter of his lifetime, a dangerously psychotic fundamentlist christian of a church of one.

But a christian he sure was. Your personal meaning and interpretation of christian, however true it may for you, is totally irrelevant.

The point 'middleearthing' is making, is one worth discussing and mastering: 'fundamentally :), FUNDAMENTALISM IS LATENTLY DANGEROUS, whether in the hands of religious, political, social or individual entities.

Sorry, but I wouldn't bring this to light if it were not true. Here are some observations from Hitler's life and reign:

"Hitler’s involvement with the Church:

a) Hitler was baptized as Roman Catholic during infancy in Austria.

b) As Hitler approached boyhood he attended a monastery school. (On his way to school young Adolf daily observed a stone arch which was carved with the monastery’s coat of arms bearing a swastika.)

c) Hitler was a communicant and an altar boy in the Catholic Church.

d) As a young man he was confirmed as a “soldier of Christ.” His most ardent goal at the time was to become a priest. Hitler writes of his love for the church and clergy: “I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.” -Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

e) Hitler was NEVER excommunicated nor condemned by his church. Matter of fact the Church felt he was JUST and “avenging for God” in attacking the Jews for they deemed the Semites the killers of Jesus.

f) Hitler, Franco and Mussolini were given VETO power over whom the pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain and Italy. In turn they surtaxed the Catholics and gave the money to the Vatican. Hitler wrote a speech in which he talks about this alliance, this is an excerpt: “The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is hostile to religion is a lie.” Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party

g) Hitler worked CLOSELY with Pope Pius in converting Germanic society and supporting the church. The Church absorbed Nazi ideals and preached them as part of their sermons in turn Hitler placed Catholic teachings in public education. This photo depicts Hitler with Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, the papal nuncio in Berlin. It was taken On April 20, 1939, when Orsenigo celebrated Hitler’s birthday. The celebrations were initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) and became a tradition.

Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send “warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany with “fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars.” (If you would like to know more about the secret dealings of Hitler and the Pope I recommend you get a book titled: Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, by John Cornwell)

h) Due to Hitler’s involvement with the Church he began enacting doctrines of the Church as law. He outlawed all abortion, raged a death war on all homosexuals, and demanded corporal punishment in schools and home. Many times Hitler addressed the church and promised that Germany would implement its teachings: “The National Socialist State professes its allegiance to positive Christianity. It will be its honest endeavor to protect both the great Christian Confessions in their rights, to secure them from interference with their doctrines (Lehren), and in their duties to constitute a harmony with the views and the exigencies of the State of today.” –Adolf Hitler, on 26 June 1934, to Catholic bishops to assure them that he would take action against the new pagan propaganda “Providence has caused me to be Catholic, and I know therefore how to handle this Church.” -Adolf Hitler, reportedly to have said in Berlin in 1936 on the enmity of the Catholic Church to National Socialism

How Christianity was the catalyst of the Holocaust:

Hitler’s anti-Semitism grew out of his Christian education. Austria and Germany were majorly Christian during his time and they held the belief that Jews were an inferior status to Aryan Christians. The Christians blamed the Jews for the killing of Jesus. Jewish hatred did not actually spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests and Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years. The Protestant leader, Martin Luther, himself, held a livid hatred for Jews and their Jewish religion. In his book, “On the Jews and their Lies,” Luther set the standard for Jewish hatred in Protestant Germany up until World War 2. Hitler expressed a great admiration for Martin Luther constantly quoting his works and beliefs.

Now, you must remember before Hitler rose to Chancellor of Germany the country was in a deep economic depression due to the Versailles treaty. The Versailles treaty demanded that Germans made financial reparations for the previous war and Germany simply was not self sufficient enough in order to pay the debt. Hitler was the leader that raised Germany out of the depression and brought them back to a world recognized power. Due to his annulment of the financial woes of the Germanic people he became their redeemer and they anointed him as the leader of the German Reich Christian Church in 1933. This placed him in power of the German Christian Socialist movement which legislates their political and religious agendas. It united all denominations, mainly the Protestant/Catholic and Lutheran people to instill faith in a national Christianity.



How the Nazi Regime converted the people:

a) In the 1920s, Hitler’s German Workers’ Party (pre Nazi term) adopted a “Programme” with twenty-five points (the Nazi version of a constitution). In point twenty-four, their intent clearly demonstrates, from the very beginning, their stand in favor of a “positive” Christianity: “We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession...”

b) The Nazi regime started a youth movement which preached its agenda to impressionable children. Hitler backed up the notion that all people need faith and religious education: “By helping to raise man above the level of bestial vegetation, faith contributes in reality to the securing and safeguarding of his existence. Take away from present-day mankind its education-based, religious- dogmatic principles-- or, practically speaking, ethical-moral principles-- by abolishing this religious education, but without replacing it by an equivalent, and the result will be a grave shock to the foundations of their existence.” – Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

c) The Nazi regime began to control schools insisting that Christianity was taught.

d) The Nazi regime included anti-Semitic Christian writings in textbooks and they were not removed from Christian doctrines until 1961.

e) The Nazi regime having full blown power over the people began to forcibly convert all its military.

f) The Nazi regime forced the German soldiers to wear religious symbols such as the swastika and they placed religious sayings on military gear. An example here is this German army belt buckle (I believe my Opa had one) which reads “Gott Mit Uns”. For those of you who do not speak German it is translated as “God With Us”.

g) The German troops were often forced to get sprinkled with holy water and listen to a sermon by a Catholic priest before going out on a maneuver.

h) The Nazis created a secret service called the “SS Reich” that would act as spies on the dealings of other citizens. If anyone was suspected of heresy (Going not only against the Socialist party but CHURCH DOCTRINE) they would be prosecuted

Quotes from Hitler:

More, a lot more.....at

http://www.evilbible.com/hitler_was_christian.htm

I was reading Republican Gemorrah (sp?) and they discussed that Sarah Palin's church believes that Satan had sex with Eve and begat Cain (the Third Wave, I think it is called) and therefore all people with high intelligence are actually descended from Satan. Is this accurate?

although along the lines of your thread name....


There are many forms of christianity cause people can't agree most the time and they think what they think is correct no matter what proof or evidence the other has for his/her side.

But i've pondered on the same question i meen there's
baptist
catholics
7th day adventist
pentacostal
church of christ
and so on, but it all boils down to people's interpretations of the bible. In my eyes it's work of the devil. He blinds us to certain things causeing these different denominations. Thus resulting in us not being united together in the lord's name. It's easier for him to screw with us having us seperated like this. Cause just debation over the bible with most people causes anger and frustration and both those are sins. He does this cause he knows if we all united he then has lost.

Revisionist writings....I posted a Harvard study earlier, find it or you can choose to believe some writer at the Columbus Dispatch revisonist's views to fit your truthiness...that write picked just from the Salem Witch Trials no the whole period...egads.

“30,000 to 50,000 killed during the 400 years from 1400 to 1800 — a large number but no Holocaust. And it wasn't all a burning time. Witches were hanged, strangled, and beheaded as well. Witch-hunting was not woman-hunting: At least 20 percent of all suspected witches were male. Midwives were not especially targeted; nor were witches liquidated as obstacles to professionalized medicine and mechanistic science.”

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0056.html

More...

Hitler Was a Christian

The Holocaust was caused by Christian fundamentalism:

"History is currently being distorted by the millions of Christians who lie to have us believe that the Holocaust was not a Christian deed."

http://www.evilbible.com/hitler_was_christian.htm

~~~~

Msharmony...who's pressuring you to keep it private? Not me, I am only pointing out that the extremists of your religion are the problem...and have been forever a thorn in the side of humanity and a roadblock to human progress, e.g. denying evolution is absurd with what we now know.....not sure you read the OP....?

You decide based on what is true for you. There is no absolute truth.

I'm still scratching my head as to why the Bible never mentioned Dinosaurs?

to say you are vebose would be an understatement...
I don't think you understand the words "religion, faith, science".
But hey, I'm just basing that on your usage here. I could be wrong.
Doesn't really matter to this discussion. Also, before you comment that I'm wrong on something, perhaps you should actually read it first.

Radioactive isotopes decay at a steady rate, regardless of the enviroment, unless that enviroment is actively inputting or releasing radiation that effects the isotope in question. This would be why it is relied upon to date things.
Also, radiactive decay is by no means the only way to date very old things. The different ways correspond to a high degree. Astrological data would be another way.

No, I never said "science can take a rock and make life out of it". What I said is that one can put the elements thought to be on the primordial Earth into a closed container, add energy such as electricity, and you get self-replicating organic molecules. Molecules that over time via natural selection become more complex. You had a question about how do we know what was on the primordial Earth. No doubt you missed that answer too, so here it is again. It is no big extrapolation to take what is still in the comets and asteroids and infer that those things that are there now, were on the Earth then. Please don't make me go into why this is so. In any case, it shouldn't really matter what one puts in the container, as long as nothing alive is. If all that's added is energy and you get self-replicating molecules where none were before, your speech about "abiogenisis" et.al., is just wrong.
This experiment is easy to do. YOU can even do it. It's been done at least since the 70's. I'm sure you can find it on the internet SOMEWHERE. Try college websites. I'd look it up for you but I have a job and I have to see a woman about a vagina. I barely have the time for this.
And yes, sorry Eljay but vaginas are more important to me than proving something to you.

You want to look up downsydrome(sp?) for extra info in the DNA code.

Laters...

No what you are talking about is first principles. The big bang does jive with first principles, but its completely unimportant when discussing the theory of evolution.

Potassium Argon dating.

http://id-archserve.ucsb.edu/anth3/courseware/Chronology/09_Potassium_Argon_Dating.html

Its whats for dinner.

Alright Eljay, calm down. Your writing belies your charged emotional state. Which makes your points difficult to discern through the typos, ect....

So, if I understand you correctly, you do agree that because of observation and mathematics, we know for a certainty the decay rates of various radioactive isotopes. What you disagree with is the ability to determine the amount of original element vs. the element it changes into after decay, in the wild, as it were. Is this correct? Because, in the wild, it isn't a closed system?
uh..huh...
Well, I'd say something buried in rock was a pretty closed system.
And since our methods of radioactive dating corresponds to other methods of dating, such as astronomical observation, I think we've got a fairly good handle on the whole dating the world thing.

But hey, you're still free to say God just made it that way.

If I recall correctly, you made 3 points on why evolution is not correct.

1. Noone has ever shown that life comes from lifelessness. I've told you of an experiment that's been done dozens of times that shows that self-replicating organic molecules can be created easily. Molecules that become more and more complex over time, via natural selection. Created using some very basic stuff.

2. DNA never adds information. I've told you of a fairly common and well known case that proves that's not true.

3. The world isn't old enough for evolution to have occured. We know that it is.

Honestly, Eljay, if you haven't got anything else, why do you persist? Seriously, why?

You want to believe that God did it, fine. I've got no beef w/ that belief. I don't believe it myself, but in that, I can't prove God didn't do it, either.

But you can't use science to prove evolution doesn't work and the world isn't as old as it is. You just can't. It'll never work.

indeed.

Richard Dawkins has written a number of books. Only one discusses God. His other books are about evolution and biology. He does discuss a couple of ideas about how life may have began, but for the most part it's just the cold, hard facts. So, again I say read them and understand tham before you attempt to knock them.



I see. So, I'm supposed to take you word for it. You just declear yourself to be correct be fiat. Well, that's not good enough. How about you give a creditable sorce or two to back up your points?