... topic drift overflow ...

sear said:
We can further sidestep the squabble about who is Christian, already address by the slogan:
spending 90 minutes in church once a week doesn't make one a Christian any more than spending 90 minutes per week in the garage makes one an Oldsmobile.
There's more to being Christian than claiming the prestige of it.


Wouldn't this depend upon whether they worship a skin color, or practice a theology?


Not sure which is the dominant dynamic here,
- a decline in (or diversification in) religiosity, or
- an improvement in integrity.
Click to expand...

If people think Christ was white, then they know so little about him that their whole religion is pointless.
 
sear said:
:(
George Carlin said we created him (god) in our own image and likeness.

Is it naïve of me to define Christians by their adherence to Christ's teachings, rather than flesh-tone?
Click to expand...

But Christians do not seem to adhere very well.
There not only are historic contradictions like inquisitions, conquistadors, and crusades, but modern racism like murdering over half a million Iraqis over WMD lies.
I do not think the US would have done that to a European country.
 
“Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god?” ― Epicurus(341-270BC)
Rigby5 said:
"But Christians do not seem to adhere very well." R5
Click to expand...
Then why call them Christians? Because THEY claim to be, for the prestige?

I as a conscientious agnostic consider it deeply offensive to grant poseurs credibility regarding their false claims.
If they want the prestige of being Christian, then they should first earn it legitimately.
Mother Theresa may have.
Tomás de Torquemada clearly did not.
 
Rigby5 said:
"If people think Christ was white, then they know so little about him that their whole religion is pointless." R5 #103
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I qualify as a First Amendment absolutist, but I support my countrymen's Constitutionally enumerated right to pick a religion, or not.
There is no stipulation about what or why.
You may be within your Constitutional right to criticize them.
Count yourself lucky you have no Constitutional right to nullify them about it, "pointless" or not.
 
sear said:
I'm not sure I qualify as a First Amendment absolutist, but I support my countrymen's Constitutionally enumerated right to pick a religion, or not.
There is no stipulation about what or why.
You may be within your Constitutional right to criticize them.
Count yourself lucky you have no Constitutional right to nullify them about it, "pointless" or not.
Click to expand...

The problem is they seem more than willing to murder people in fast boats or in the Mideast, so then I suspect it is racism.
With Israel, it also shows religious bigotry, not only about the claim of being the "Chosen People", but the false claims against Islam like how they kill nonbelievers.
 
We blow up fast boats because they are Hispanic.
We blow up Ayatollahs and their wives because they are Persian.
We arm Zionists because they are European.

The Christians are the most hypocritical because Christ was a Palestinian, not a European Zionist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top