Mabey i'm not quite understanding your P.O.V
You're saying my belief in God threatens you to a point you feel you need to defend yourself? Why? And what do you mean by "basic understanding"?

I'll try to explain it, by taking religion out of the equation.

I'll use the cliche Rocket Science instead. If one of us, is knowledgeable in Rocket Science, and the other isn't, the argument on either side is not going to be a good one. If I am the one not up on my Rocket Science, you can pretty much slip anything half-truth or flat out lie by me, and I won't catch it.

So, to bring religion back into the picture, For me to be able to bring up decent points, I need to have a knowledge of the religion(or religions) and the holy books that belong to them. I can't make a good argument against something I know nothing about.

To use an example that (I hope) everyone will find absurd, If we are arguing, and you claim that Jesus road a T-Rex to the spot where he was crucified, If I don't have any knowledge of the bible, I can't dispute your claim.

To answer whether a belief in God threatens me, I would say that yes a belief in god threatens me, but it does so more in the actions that come about from a belief in god. 9/11 is the best, recent example of this. The actions of those hijackers were motivated by their religious beliefs. And it is that ugliness that I feel threatened by.

Well put point you make, i now understand where you're coming from. Thank you for helping me understand your p.o.v.

You need to get a handle on your Atheistic apologetics. Paul does not declare that the only thing a person need do is have belief in Jesus to gain membership of the christian community. First of all - you are referencing the book of Romans. A letter written to those who were already christains. Second of all the reference of faith being discussed in the passage you've wrongly chosen to support your position is referencing faith that leads to rightiousness - which follows the discussion he has about no one being rightious. Not one. Obviously you have demonstrated the incapabability to read James, Peter and John, all three of which discuss this topic directly - in order to refute them and support your position. But no surprise there.

As to your second point. Where do you find this idea in the New Testament. Or have you forgotten that you are trying to demonstrate that Hitler was a christian. This question is attempting to prove that he was Jewish.

Why do you bother?

Romans 3

3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

One of the tenants of Christian belief, indeed the definition of a Christian, comes from the Pauline epistiles in regards to faith in Jesus:Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

-Galatians 2:16

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. (see Gen.19:24). 10:14-15

As do we who believe in the God of scripture. The actions of 9/11 come from the standpoint of pretextaul understnding of the Koran. Making a claim and surching for passages out of context to support it. If you examione your posts closer - you are guilty of that which you claim to fear the most. I have no problem with your entring the discussion of the exisrance of God - I have a problem with your presumptions of Christianity, and your misinformed prejudices of what behavior a christain demonstrates. The problem therin is you attribute the actions of those who abuse it (the bible refers to these as wolves in sheep's clothing) as representative of the belief as a whole. Then you attempt to use scripture to support your argument without understanding the context of what you are quoting. This is not demonstrating that you understand Christainity at a level of those you are attempting to refute.

In plain terms - If you want to be a rocket scientist - at least understand how a rocket works. If you keep seeing rockets crash - that only demonstrates that those who built them didn't know what they were doing - not that rockets don't fly. And stop ignoring those who's rockets don't crash because they're not supporting yuor pretext.

Matthew 10 (NT)

10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Being brought up in a Christian Household, I have a decent understanding of the bible.

I have never once said that Christianity is only evil. When we are discussing Hitler and his actions, it isn't the time or the place to talk about everyone else.

From where I am sitting, I am not the one "ignoring whose rockets don't crash" because they don't support me.
There have been a number of people who have asked your opinion on the very things you have asked them for. You rarely, if ever give a real answer.
Like I said to you before, all you have proved is that those we have discussed don't fit your definition of a Christian, but by your own definition, there are no Christians.

What is a "decent understanding" of the bible? Have you read it? Even just the New Testament?
If you haven't - you are basing your understanding on everything else but the source.

Due to the discussion of Hitler - and your stance on his being a Christain, I know for certain you have not read the New Testament.

Therefore...

You have no experience or understanding from "where you're sitting" because it is from the seat of ignorance. And heading off to Wiki to get a definition of Christainity is like writing a book report on the Illiad from the Cliff notes. Your opinion is not your own, but somebody elses, and what evidence do you have that they've done the work for themselves.

And aside from giving a brief overview of what the gospels say about salvation - how do you even know what my definition of Christianity is to determine there isn't anyone who is one?

Read the manuel - then join the discussion. By your own analogy - why should you be allowed an opinion?

A Christian is anyone who wants to be one.

There are no properties that can be measured to objectively state what a Christian is.

What a waste of time to debate.

Have you read the Gospels?

Yes, I spent a lot of time reading different bibles during college for speech training for acting. I even read it through from cover to cover on more then one occasion, I can say that if I ever need to get to sleep . . . .

Shakespeare was more fun . . .

Go ahead and tell me every single variable that determines Christian from non Christian then explain to me how you can objectively analyze them, then determine if they apply to any given person.

Have fun.

I will state for the last time I was raised in a Christian household. Yes I have read the bible, several times in fact.



So, you're going to call me ignorant, but base what I have done, on your definition of a Christian, and Hitler.




I have come to my own understanding of what it is to be a Christian from my time AS a Christian. Again, I was raised (for 18+ years) in a Christian household. That time gives me a good understanding of what it is to be a Christian.




Well, from what you have posted as your definition of a Christian, any rational person can see that by your definition, it would be very difficult for Jesus(IF he truly existed) to be a Christian.



Again, 18+ years as a Christian, I have read the bible, and even now as an Atheist, I would say I understand it more than most Christians out there.

I think when you actually look at things closely you see were free thinkers have done much more good than religious people, for example, Nehru freed India not Ghandi, who was hampering efforts with his fundamental Hinduism.

Shakespeare was boring. I prefered Pinter, Ionesco and Beckett. Besides - college actors butcher Shakespeare so bad, it makes dealing with it unbearable.

But back to the subject at hand. If you've read the gospels you know that "Just wanting to be a Christain" does not make you one. There are numerous accounts of Jesus pointing this out. He tells Nicodemus that one must be born again, That one must believe that Jesus was who he claimed to be, He tells the rich young ruler to sell all that he has and give the money to the poor, then follow him, One has to "pick up their cross" and follow him. Though there is no definitive check list that one must perform, there is a path that one must follow - so it is more than just "wishing" to be a Christian. Which is why there are so many who claim to be christains, or profess to have once been a christain (a biblical impossibility) - yet fall away due to a lack of fullfilled expectations that were due more from presumption than from education.

And I tend to agree with you about arguing the point. Most who post their understanding of what the christain faith is and then proceed to refute it are absolutely correct in their refutation because their presumption about what christainity is in the first place is wrong to begin with. They claim that there are all these contradictions in the bible - never stating what they are, and never haveing read the book to begin with. They show no comprehension of exegesis, and know little or nothing of the intent of the author, the audience to whom the passages they are quoting are intended for, and think that the traditions of today are comprable to the traditions and practices of the first century. How can one argue from a position of ignorance. I don't expect that everyone should believe in what the bible says - I know that more do not believe than do - but if one is going to debate historical christain concepts, they should at least have read the bible. Wouldn't you think?

You've read the bible - and you're attempting to convince me that Hitlers actions were representative of a christain?

Forgive me if I say I don't believe you.

Can you dissprove Gods Exsistence.?
If you understood the bible then you would
not title your self Atheist. You would call yourself more of an agnostic as you once were a
Christian.

The bible is a matter of Faith, which one cannot prove. However many Biblical Scholars and Historians have stated facts regarding the bible along with the prohets,Saints and many witnesses.

Jesus Christ Crucifixtion and death along with his ressurrection are in numerous testimonies from the other New Testament writers, Early Church Leaders, and witnesses. He is the only known prophet out of all the religions in the world to call himself the Son Of God. There is too much evidence in History to refute his existence as a teacher, prophet and the Son of God.

When science can explain medical miracles or phenomenom's then you can question the existence of a God, however science cant and will never prove any mysteries or phenomenoms that occur in this world our God created.

Sally.

Yes, historically Hitler's actions could be considered Xian for the following reasons:
1. It was the Xians who made sure that the Jews were blamed for Jesus death and asked for punishment. Ergo, ghettos, pogroms, etc. That is why many of them chose to live under Muslim rule.
2. Xians sprend their religion in a manner similar to Muslims, by the sword.
3. Xians justified slavery, for example, when MLK asked a Southern Senator to back him in Civil Rights, the Senator stated that he would love to but the bible told him different.


I know that you as an individual Xian are probably a very spiritual and kind person and should not be judged by the past horrors committed in the name of your religion, however that history is there and people will always feel uneasy around fundamentalist Xians.

Hitler Himself justified the extermination of the Jews citing the Bible and Jesus:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before in the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.... When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those (the Jews) by whom to-day this poor people is plundered and exploited. ":

(Adolf Hitler, in his speech on 12 April 1922)