|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 11:45:13 GMT -5
But that's the Catholic Church, not Christianity.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Jun 15, 2005 12:02:02 GMT -5
The catholic church , the orthodox and the copts were christianity the first 1500 years
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 12:10:07 GMT -5
Unfortunately, yes. But they were just denominational successors of the true Christianity, the kind that Jesus taught and the no-bullshit kind that many crave today. I don't think a few popular churches could ever represent the spirit of true Christianity simply because they had all the institutional religious power for a couple of eras.
But that's a different thread altogether. My point is that intolerance of Jews has a much deeper past than the founding of Christianity.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Jun 15, 2005 12:23:10 GMT -5
unfortunately??
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 12:30:30 GMT -5
The form organized religion took in the Roman and Middle Ages is unfortunate. People couldn't decide or interpret the Bible for themselves. They did what the church told them to do, which is totally against biblical teachings.
For instance, if the Catholic church didn't like Jews, the common people didn't like Jews either. If the church told the common people to worship Mary more than Jesus, they would worship Mary more than Jesus. If the church told the common people to pray to saints instead of to Jesus, they would pray to saints instead of Jesus. If the church told the common people to ask the priests for forgiveness instead of Christ for forgiveness, the common people would follow suit. It was a form of control. And quite paganistic and unbiblical control, at that. But that's the roll of the dice.
|
|
|
Post by lurker4now on Jun 15, 2005 13:05:25 GMT -5
The form organized religion took in the Roman and Middle Ages is unfortunate. People couldn't decide or interpret the Bible for themselves. They did what the church told them to do, which is totally against biblical teachings. For instance, if the Catholic church didn't like Jews, the common people didn't like Jews either. If the church told the common people to worship Mary more than Jesus, they would worship Mary more than Jesus. If the church told the common people to pray to saints instead of to Jesus, they would pray to saints instead of Jesus. If the church told the common people to ask the priests for forgiveness instead of Christ for forgiveness, the common people would follow suit. It was a form of control. And quite paganistic and unbiblical control, at that. But that's the roll of the dice. i dont know if you know what your saying.if it was not organized religion there would be no bible also you are contradicting yourself.this line here "if the Catholic church didn't like Jews, the common people didn't like Jews either." you did say that that hatred of jews is more ancient.i didnt disagree but i did say that anti semitism especailly in europe has its roots in the chruch.so that setence if rather confusing. (btw mike i hope you dont go all ape this is just a discussion)
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Jun 15, 2005 13:12:51 GMT -5
So you think the church apostatized for 1500 years, and then Luther (Or the reformer you prefer) came and restored christianity to a pure form?
Do you realize how much that sounds like Islam or Mormonism?
Do you think all the christians who died went to hell for 1500 years? Or that there were, lets call them proto-protestants secretly worshipping in caves or something like that?
The Catholic Church and Orthodox churchers dont begin its message by claiming that they came into existence due to a previous failure or corruption. Protestantism, as well as Islam, do make this negative claim for their origins. The Catholic Church never asserts that God's plan failed and He had to fix it.
A Protestant (or other pseudo-Christian) denomination will argue that Gods plan failed, and then it failed again, and again, and so on. But finally in the year XXXX (whenever that denomination was founded), God finally got it right. They make God out to be quite the bumbler, actually. Thats offensive and blasphemous.
You do know Jesus said the gates of Hell would never prevail against his church, if christianity was corrupted all that time then it did prevail and it would make Jesus a lier.
How can you trust the bible when the catholic church decided the canon? who knows, maybe those evil catholics put bad evil books in the new testament, Luther didnt like Saint James and removed it from his german translation. Remember the church came before the bible, the church amde the bible, the idea that true christianity consists in interpreting the bible by yourself is ridiculous.
People couldnt interpret the bible for themselves because most people couldnt read, and there were not many bibles before Gutenberg. Whats wrong with people obeying the church? Jesus gave authority to the apostles and said menacing things of those who dont listen to them, he also gave them the power to forgive sins.
|
|
|
Post by lurker4now on Jun 15, 2005 13:15:45 GMT -5
hey guys lets start a new thread this doesnt have to do with the subject now
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 13:23:15 GMT -5
i dont know if you know what your saying.if it was not organized religion there would be no bible True. And if it weren't for Constantine, who wasn't exactly a very righteous man, Christianity wouldn't have gotten very far. However, that doesn't excuse idolatrous teachings or sanctioned inquisitions against minority groups that don't conform to the church's teachings. also you are contradicting yourself.this line here "if the Catholic church didn't like Jews, the common people didn't like Jews either." you did say that that hatred of jews is more ancient.i didnt disagree but i did say that anti semitism especailly in europe has its roots in the chruch.so that setence if rather confusing. My argument is that anti-Semitism in GENERAL did not begin with the church. That's all. You're right, though, I'm sure the church didn't help its spread in Europe. (btw mike i hope you dont go all ape this is just a discussion) Not at all, my points are only two: 1.) That anti-Jewish sentiment has much deeper roots than the traditional founding of Christianity. I think that's pretty obvious, considering even the earliest Israelites had enemies all around them in the form of Philistines, Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, Canaanites, the list goes on. Let's face it: ancient peoples didn't like the biblical Israelites very much. 2.) That denominations are seldom representative of the true spirit of Christianity, which surely does not condone such religious divisiveness. I don't think it's fair to blame Christianity for anti-Semitism. The church may have condoned and spread such anti-Semitism, but that's not Christianity, that's the church.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 13:29:26 GMT -5
You are right on many points, Educate. But the only person who can forgive sins is Christ. That's made very clear in scripture. The early church only decided canon, they didn't WRITE the New Testament, merely translated it from the Greek. And I'm not some yackity yack "Catholics are evil" Protestant. I follow no such denomination. But if you want to tell me the Bible condones the cult of Mary, inquisitions, saint intercessors, you are the blasphemer, not me.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Jun 15, 2005 13:38:01 GMT -5
lets make another thread, in the philosophy, religion forum, right?
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 13:38:48 GMT -5
lets make another thread, in the philisophy, religion forum, right? You can if you want. But I really don't have much more to say about it.
|
|
|
Post by Educate Me on Jun 15, 2005 13:43:29 GMT -5
Yes, I would say add : Jesus told the apostles, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’"
And say that praying to saints is a first century practice, and the individed church professed in the creed to believe in communion of saints, that doesnt mean, they are dead they cant listen to us.
I dont really have a lot more to say, lets end this here, we all choose what to believe.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on Jun 15, 2005 13:45:14 GMT -5
Yes, I would say add : Jesus told the apostles, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’" And say that praying to saints is a first century practice, and the individed church professed in the creed to believe in communion of saints, that doesnt mean, they are dead they cant listen to us. I dont really have a lot more to say, lets end this here, we all choose what to believe. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Jun 15, 2005 13:59:45 GMT -5
You guys are getting way off topic. Returning to the subject of "Who Is the World's Most Hated Group," Jewish shock-jock Howard Stern had this very debate with his black co-hostess, Robyn Quivers. Stern said that blacks are pretty hated--whereupon Quivers said, "Yeah, but no one ever hated blacks enough to round them all up and kill them in factories." Stern, laughing, said, "Okay, okay! You're right. You win." That argument says it all.
P.S.--Strictly speaking, blacks are not a universal group. Jews, contrariwise, are a "wandering people," found in literally every nation on Earth. This in itself sets Jews up as the most "universally-hated," since no other group is as "international". Heck, even Stalin used the euphemism "rootless cosmopolitans" when he carried out purges against the Jews. [Gypsies would be the closest sociological group to Jews in this sense--but Gypsies typically don't amass political power: They have no ties to banking, hence no real power; and if you look at the world's top companies, you'll find an overwhelming number of CEO's with Jewish surnames (out of all proportion to their numbers in society), but you won't find a Gypsy name on a single list. So, though they're hated, they're seen as pests--not as a "force of potential menace". Sadly, Jews hold this distinction . . . and if you believe their own Bible, they've held this distinction in nearly every country that they've ever been in. A Jewish friend of mine once quipped, "With a track-record like that, maybe it's time for Jews to wonder if it's something THEY'RE doing."
P.P.S.--One Jewish journalist said that Israel was important for Jews because they're sick of "living in other people's countries". To me, that's the biggest defense for the existence of Israel--a home for this embattled people for the next time there's a democratic, grass-roots uprising against them. It can only be hoped that now that they have their own nation--after thousands of years--that it'll change what appears to be their typical cycle: Enter nation > handful of Jews take over nation's banking and money supply > piss off common people > common people rally behind a tyrant > small, honest Jews are persecuted for crimes committed by only a handful of men > handful of financiers escape > regular Jews left behind to be killed.
|
|