Forced to be Christian

[OnlyAmbrose]

I ask again, how are "biblical christians" different from christians?

In the context he used it in I'm going to assume that when he says "biblical Christians" he means Christians who agree more or less with his interpretation of the Bible.

[CrazyAnglican]

Fortunately, history is also full of people that saved their families, saved their culture, and passed on a great heritage by going underground and faking the mainstream. Some of those people were my ancestors, and I personally am glad that they were not martyrs. However, I will not forget what so-called Christians did to them.

Yeah, yeah, and the Iraqis pulled infants out of their hospital incubators and threw them on the floor killing them, according to testimony before the US Congress. Too bad it turned out to be false testimony by a daughter of Kuwaiti royalty.

Sorry, not buying it.

Are we noticing something here? Your argument can be used to refute your own stance. Not well, mind you, and it doesn't do that great a job against anyone else's either. We're not talking about the testimony of a single person here. People who escape from N. Korea; journalists who risk their lives going into that country to document the atrocities; and many others have shown this to be true. If you merely choose to be ignorant of the suffering of others as long as it's not at the hands of anyone claiming to be Christian, there is little that anyone can do but show how contradictory that position is.

A former member of the N. Korean Communist Party tells about the situation in N. Korea only five years ago and you "don't buy it". Not even going to look into it are you? It's just a lie?

You just made MTG's statement about you look absolutely prophetic. There is proof that an atrocity is happening under your nose, and since it's by communists against Christians among others you can't be bothered? Where is the outrage? Where is the love of humanity and each person's dignity? Are Christians not worthy of the same rights merely because of what they might have done five hundred years ago, Which incidentally was about the same as everyone else was doing. North Korea is still in the dark ages with regard to treatment of their people. Why are you not publicly decrying the North Korean government?

Instead you want to hold Christians responsible for a supposed five hundred year old act that no living Christian had any part in. Nice.

Thanks, you just let the Allied leadership and the Christians off the hook for anti-semitism and apathy. If you, in an era with literally tons of information at your fingertips, can brush off an atrocity happening right now, then perhaps any rumor that would reach them was just too horrific to accept as a fact. There were no spy sattelites, and it was very hard to get a reconnaisance plane that far into German territory. By contrast journalists have risked their lives and died in the attempt to get this information about North Korean atrocities out to the public.

[CrazyAnglican]

Here is some of the evidence to support the existence of this atrocity, in North Korea, that mpjh "dosen't buy":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/feb/01/northkorea
http://www.advfn.com/news_Eyewitnesses- ... 47216.html

Torture, ill-treatment and prison conditions
Despite some changes in the law, the political and sometimes arbitrary use of imprisonment, torture and capital punishment continues. Punishments reportedly tend to depend on the age, gender and experiences of repatriated North Koreans. Women and children have received sentences as light as two weeks in a detention centre, but longer sentences of several months in labour camps are also common. The consequences of repatriation are reportedly most severe for pregnant women, who suffer forced abortions under poor medical conditions, and those who confess to meeting with South Koreans or missionaries. Summary executions and long sentences of hard labour are still enforced, though authorities are apparently wary of prisoners falling ill and dying on their watch. Those who seem close to death are released, often only to die the next week.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset ... 006en.html

[mpjh]

Catholicism, was developed by the Romans, in the sense of, "if ya can't beat 'em, join 'em." Saying they are Christian, does not make them Christian any more than Bill clinton saying "I did not sleep with that woman" makes him faithful to his wife. Christianity began in 33A.D. and is not bound to any living man alive today.

Right on...I can run around yelling that I'm pink all day long, but fact remains that I'm not.

OK, so Catholics are not Christians, is that correct?

Yea mate, Catholics are pretty far from Biblical Christians. The Roman Catholic church is probably one of the most evil empires in existence.

OK, everyone, especially crazy, seems to want to talk for you. Do you want to talk for yourself. Can you tell us why the "Roman Catholic church is probably one of the most evil empires in existence?"

[CrazyAnglican]

Excellent indicator that the OP would rather change the subject than look at the evidence that is becoming increasingly uncomfortable.

[mpjh]

Nope, just wanted to see if you and your Christian censors would try and shut the poor guy up just for speaking what he believes to be the truth. Besides, you interrupted our conversation and changed the subject.

[CrazyAnglican]

Merely brought it back to the issue at hand. So, you still deny the atrocities done by communists in China and North Korea?

[mpjh]

I think you have another thread going on that. This thread's op is about the forced conversion of Jews to Christianity. One of the posters in this thread claims that the Catholic church, the chief persecutors of Jews during the period in question, is not a christian church. So he is much more on topic than you.

Besides I have already responded to your propaganda about China and Korea. If you want to continue to troll and repeat yourself again, I will deal with that according.ly.

[CrazyAnglican]

Besides I have already responded to your propaganda about China and Korea. If you want to continue to troll and repeat yourself again, I will deal with that according.ly.

Threats, tsk tsk.

Very well, I certainly believe that the perpetrators of the situation you referred to were Christian, and disagree with the respondent about the definition of CHristian. I do, however, restate that this was an act perpetrated in Mideval Europe and most other institutions acted in the same way.

[mpjh]

Not a threat. You are repeating yourself. You have nothing new to say. You are interrupting another conversation to troll. Continue and I will report your conduct.

[mpjh]

Cowboyz, you made a claim that Catholics were not christians before we were rudely interrupted. Why do you claim that Catholics are not christians?

[Martin Ronne]

Cowboyz, you made a claim that Catholics were not christians before we were rudely interrupted. Why do you claim that Catholics are not christians?

I'll answer for him since he answered for me.



There are some Catholics, as I believe I remember cowboyz saying, that are indeed Christian. However, the system of Catholisism it's self strays quite a bit from Christianity in many respects. To give an example, the first comandmant. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. The Catholic church teaches their congregations to pray to Mary and Joseph and any other saint which they have named over the past 1600 years. But how would the congregation know that this is wrong, considering that in the Catholic tradition, (and this is what sparked the birth of the Luthern church,) you do not own a bible, you go to church and the priest will read it TO you and then tell you what it means.

I've got more to say, but I'm tired and have to hit the hey. I'll be back tomorrow though

[muy_thaiguy]

Not a threat. You are repeating yourself. You have nothing new to say. You are interrupting another conversation to troll. Continue and I will report your conduct.

His conduct, in comparison to yours, is actually quite appropriate, all things considered. Many historical facts have been presented, and even cited to show you wrong and misguided on several things. However, you are getting annoyed by this and only continue to ask Cowboyz why he thinks Catholics aren't Christian simply because there is a chance he might agree with you on something. You threaten (yes, threaten) CA only because he has presented evidence that pretty much kill your misconceived perceptions and very narrow minded views of religion, atheism, Communism, and secularism. Not to mention your narrow mindedness when it comes to history, as you can only focus on the bad of religion and completely ignore pretty much everything else that disagrees with your view (despite it being historical fact) and calling it "anti-communist propaganda," which is nothing but a poor (to say the very least) attempt at denying the deaths of millions in far more recent years (and even currently) then something that happened 500 years ago.

[Martin Ronne]

well said

[OnlyAmbrose]

Cowboyz, you made a claim that Catholics were not christians before we were rudely interrupted. Why do you claim that Catholics are not christians?

I'll answer for him since he answered for me.



There are some Catholics, as I believe I remember cowboyz saying, that are indeed Christian. However, the system of Catholisism it's self strays quite a bit from Christianity in many respects. To give an example, the first comandmant. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. The Catholic church teaches their congregations to pray to Mary and Joseph and any other saint which they have named over the past 1600 years. But how would the congregation know that this is wrong, considering that in the Catholic tradition, (and this is what sparked the birth of the Luthern church,) you do not own a bible, you go to church and the priest will read it TO you and then tell you what it means.

I've got more to say, but I'm tired and have to hit the hey. I'll be back tomorrow though

1) Mary and Joseph are not gods and there is nothing in the Bible which would indicate to me that I should not pray to them and plenty of things which might indicate that I should.

2) I own several bibles, thank you.

3) It's peachy keen that you think that your interpretation of the Bible is the correct one, but I'm not so presumptuous as to say that I would know better than an organization which has existed since the time of the apostles.

[Martin Ronne]

Sorry that's the classic catholic tradition things have changed of late.

I never said they are gods, but praying to them takes the focus of of god him self. Also there is nothing in the Bible that would suggest praying to them.

The Catholic church has not existed since the time of Christ, Christianity has. The Catholic church came about 400 years after Christ. Now am I one of those idiots that says, "wasn't the bible written 400 years after Christ?" No, the Bible was finnished by John (the deciple) about 70 years after Christ while in exile on the isle of patmos (or however you spell it).


So much for going to bed.

[CrazyAnglican]

My take on reverencing the saints (and OA and MTG can certainly correct me on this) is that it's kind of like asking a friend or family member to help you out with regard to going to God. You are asking a blessed soul to intercede on your behalf. It's different than belief in Christ and acceptance of him as your saviour, in that it is merely asking a friend to help rather than asking for them to perform a miracle for you.

[OnlyAmbrose]

Sorry that's the classic catholic tradition things have changed of late.

I never said they are gods, but praying to them takes the focus of of god him self. Also there is nothing in the Bible that would suggest praying to them.

The Catholic church has not existed since the time of Christ, Christianity has. The Catholic church came about 400 years after Christ. Now am I one of those idiots that says, "wasn't the bible written 400 years after Christ?" No, the Bible was finnished by John (the deciple) about 70 years after Christ while in exile on the isle of patmos (or however you spell it).


So much for going to bed.

This is completely off topic, so I would like to invite you to the Jesus Freaks Clan where we discuss these sorts of things at length quite a bit.

[Martin Ronne]

I'll be sure to apply.

[CrazyAnglican]

Hey another Jesus Freak, thanks to the OP.

And...um..er. Yes I think Roman Catholics are Christian. They were one of the expressions of Christianity that had part in the councils of Nicea as the five seats of Christianity at the time were Jerusalem. Rome, Antioc, Alexandria, and I forgot the fifth.

[muy_thaiguy]

Hey another Jesus Freak, thanks to the OP.

And...um..er. Yes I think Roman Catholics are Christian. They were one of the expressions of Christianity that had part in the councils of Nicea as the five seats of Christianity at the time were Jerusalem. Rome, Antioc, Alexandria, and I forgot the fifth.

The major ones, yes. In total though, about 1800 attendees (Bishops) were at the First Council, though you may mean Eusebius of Caesarea.

[CrazyAnglican]

Thanks, I was just talking about the five cities with the biggest Christian populace. Eusebius was a in attendane although I think the main controversy centered aroung Aryus and Anastasius (sp?). the whole question of the divinity of Christ eventually lead to the Great Schism in which "and the Son" was added to the Nicean Creed which was the last straw for the Easter Orthodox Churches as it had read "Which proceeds from the Father" before that. The Philioquy was added to help put down the Aryan heresy (wasn't sucessfully done as you and I know that today as Islam), but the Western Church did it unilaterally which was a no-no.

[mpjh]

Poor cowboyz, never got to speak for himself. Did you good christians put the Jesus squeeze on him?

[muy_thaiguy]

Thanks, I was just talking about the five cities with the biggest Christian populace. Eusebius was a in attendane although I think the main controversy centered aroung Aryus and Anastasius (sp?). the whole question of the divinity of Christ eventually lead to the Great Schism in which "and the Son" was added to the Nicean Creed which was the last straw for the Easter Orthodox Churches as it had read "Which proceeds from the Father" before that. The Philioquy was added to help put down the Aryan heresy (wasn't sucessfully done as you and I know that today as Islam), but the Western Church did it unilaterally which was a no-no.

The first part, you are thinking of Arianism (considered heresy by many of the Bishops as heresy) and a few other matters. The second part didn't happen until 400 years later at the 2nd Council of Nicea, which lead to the Great Schism between Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.

[CrazyAnglican]

Yeah, that's what I understand to be true. If was confusing in my relation of it, sorry.

Poor cowboyz, never got to speak for himself. Did you good christians put the Jesus squeeze on him?

I haven't talked to Cowboyz at all. I'm sure he'll be on if has anything further to post.




I'm just trying to remain on topic.