Very Disturbing Christian Website

[iambecomelife]

My 2 cents here. I'll be boring and say that I can see both points of view here. For me the problem is mainly this. It is not what is being said but rather the volume and constant non-stop discussion on ones religion. Most of the time it has been on my faith, beliefs, and religion. However of recent it has been directed more so at Christianity and on this forum there appears to be a heck of a lot more Christians than there are Muslims hence the vocal outcry of complaints which have degenerated into animosity and at times personal attacks.

Do we have to hack apart each others religion or faith on a daily basis? I think not. We could all excercise a little self restraint. I'm sure most here would complain if all I posted here was page after page of extolling my religion and proselytizing. I could only imagine the outcry and with good reason. A little self-moderation would go a long way. :)
Yes, exactly. Another way to say "Keep thy religions to thyself". Where you do not bother others, others are not bothered by you.

And I still don't get this. It's OK to try to convince people that Atheism is the truth, but evangelizing in the name of a religion amounts to "Pollution" and must be stopped? Maybe someone can explain the distinction.

[Skybird]

My 2 cents here. I'll be boring and say that I can see both points of view here. For me the problem is mainly this. It is not what is being said but rather the volume and constant non-stop discussion on ones religion. Most of the time it has been on my faith, beliefs, and religion. However of recent it has been directed more so at Christianity and on this forum there appears to be a heck of a lot more Christians than there are Muslims hence the vocal outcry of complaints which have degenerated into animosity and at times personal attacks.

Do we have to hack apart each others religion or faith on a daily basis? I think not. We could all excercise a little self restraint. I'm sure most here would complain if all I posted here was page after page of extolling my religion and proselytizing. I could only imagine the outcry and with good reason. A little self-moderation would go a long way. :)
Yes, exactly. Another way to say "Keep thy religions to thyself". Where you do not bother others, others are not bothered by you.

And I still don't get this. It's OK to try to convince people that Atheism is the truth, but evangelizing in the name of a religion amounts to "Pollution" and must be stopped? Maybe someone can explain the distinction.
Nobody tried to convince you or anyone else of atheism. that would be a most absurd intention in itself anyway, because atheism is not an idea - it is the absence of (theistic) ideas - not more. It's just that you already feel attacked when somebody insists he does not want to hear about your relgious belief , and that you should keep it were it belongs: with yourself, privately.

When somebody tells you he wants to live with less noise from you and tells you to reduce the volume of your rock'n roll music, this does not mean he tells you you should listen to his own jazz. He just tells you he does not want to need to listen to your own music. So reduce the volume of your radio so that nobody must care for your listening habits anymore, or use headphones. when you cause the noise, you are responsible to reduce the noise. You have no right whatever to demand others to change their lives and live with your noise.

In other words: keep thy religion to thyself.

[iambecomelife]

My 2 cents here. I'll be boring and say that I can see both points of view here. For me the problem is mainly this. It is not what is being said but rather the volume and constant non-stop discussion on ones religion. Most of the time it has been on my faith, beliefs, and religion. However of recent it has been directed more so at Christianity and on this forum there appears to be a heck of a lot more Christians than there are Muslims hence the vocal outcry of complaints which have degenerated into animosity and at times personal attacks.

Do we have to hack apart each others religion or faith on a daily basis? I think not. We could all excercise a little self restraint. I'm sure most here would complain if all I posted here was page after page of extolling my religion and proselytizing. I could only imagine the outcry and with good reason. A little self-moderation would go a long way. :)
Yes, exactly. Another way to say "Keep thy religions to thyself". Where you do not bother others, others are not bothered by you.

And I still don't get this. It's OK to try to convince people that Atheism is the truth, but evangelizing in the name of a religion amounts to "Pollution" and must be stopped? Maybe someone can explain the distinction.
Nobody tried to convince you or anyone else of atheism. that would be a most absurd intention in itself anyway, because atheism is not an idea - it is the absence of (theistic) ideas - not more. It's just that you already feel attacked when somebody insists he does not want to hear about your relgious belief , and that you should keep it were it belongs: with yourself, privately.

When somebody tells you he wants to live with less noise from you and tells you to reduce the volume of your rock'n roll music, this does not mean he tells you you should listen to his own jazz. He just tells you he does not want to need to listen to your own music. So reduce the volume of your radio so that nobody must care for your listening habits anymore, or use headphones. when you cause the noise, you are responsible to reduce the noise. You have no right whatever to demand others to change their lives and live with your noise.

In other words: keep thy religion to thyself.

I'd love to know whether most Atheists think that the same principle applies to those who try to convert religious believers to Atheism. Perhaps this principle is just a one way street, with religous believers expected not to share their beliefs?

[Skybird]

Stop worrying about atheist and leave them alone with your pro-theistic sermon or anti-atheistic slogans. Then they will not need worry about you and leave you alone, too. I personally, for example, don't give a damn for what you believe, and why, and how, I am not interested and do not care wether you practice voodoo or dance around golden statues or read in the Bible. I also do not respect your religion - but as long as you do not confront me with your religion or try to change the society I live in according to your religious views, I would not tell you that and leave you alone. Just when you constantly reserve the right to argue against me not sharing your believe, and try to give me a bad name when not sharing your camp, and forcing me to need to listen to you, and try to poish an agenda to spread your relgion into the society I live in and that bases on a constitution that separates state and church - then you force me to worry about you.

Keep within your borders, and live in peace with your neighbours. Step over the borderlines, and face your angry neighbours.

Without any tresspassing - no counterreaction.

[Platapus]

In all my years wandering on this earth, I have never met an atheist who tried to "convert" a religious person to atheism.

Most atheists I know just want to be left alone without people trying to "save" them.

[bradclark1]

And I still don't get this. It's OK to try to convince people that Atheism is the truth, but evangelizing in the name of a religion amounts to "Pollution" and must be stopped? Maybe someone can explain the distinction.
Ones a pain in the arse and the other isn't.

[iambecomelife]

In all my years wandering on this earth, I have never met an atheist who tried to "convert" a religious person to atheism.

Most atheists I know just want to be left alone without people trying to "save" them.

http://www.blasphemychallenge.com/

Atheists "not trying to convert" people?

[iambecomelife]

And I still don't get this. It's OK to try to convince people that Atheism is the truth, but evangelizing in the name of a religion amounts to "Pollution" and must be stopped? Maybe someone can explain the distinction.
Ones a pain in the arse and the other isn't.

Huh? That standard seems to be unworkable because some people will consider atheistic arguments to be irritating, while others find religious arguments irritating. Simply asserting that you don't like the other side's arguments doesn't really get us anywhere.

[bradclark1]

Huh? That standard seems to be unworkable because some people will consider atheistic arguments to be irritating, while others find religious arguments irritating. Simply asserting that you don't like the other side's arguments doesn't really get us anywhere.
I've never heard of atheists coming to your house all the time trying to convert you or try to get you to come to their house of atheism.

[iambecomelife]

Stop worrying about atheist and leave them alone with your pro-theistic sermon or anti-atheistic slogans. Then they will not need worry about you and leave you alone, too. I personally, for example, don't give a damn for what you believe, and why, and how, I am not interested and do not care wether you practice voodoo or dance around golden statues or read in the Bible. I also do not respect your religion - but as long as you do not confront me with your religion or try to change the society I live in according to your religious views, I would not tell you that and leave you alone. Just when you constantly reserve the right to argue against me not sharing your believe, and try to give me a bad name when not sharing your camp, and forcing me to need to listen to you, and try to poish an agenda to spread your relgion into the society I live in and that bases on a constitution that separates state and church - then you force me to worry about you.

Keep within your borders, and live in peace with your neighbours. Step over the borderlines, and face your angry neighbours.

Without any tresspassing - no counterreaction.

And the exact same could be said about atheists who try to promote anti-religious arguments under any circumstances. Once again we've gotten nowhere - unless people are willing to say that there's one standard of behavior believers must adhere to, and another standard for atheists. What I'm looking for is more comprehensive arguments about why atheists should be free to evangelize, but religious people should not.

[joegrundman]

being stopped in the street by people wanting to discuss Christianity, or hand you christian literature, is just a part of life in the free world - it doesn't bother me at all, but it's something that happens often when walking through any given town centre. And this in God-hating Europe, which so many of you Americans get into an irrational tizzy about.

How often have you been stopped in the street, in Europe or the US, by someone trying to discuss atheism and hand you atheist literature? Be honest now.

Finding a silly anti-religious gimmick on the internet to prove your point that there is a vast atheist conspiracy trying to draw you from the good word is foolish and demonstrates nothing much but how stressed you have become. It's not like there aren't equally foolish christian sites on the internet

[iambecomelife]

being stopped in the street by people wanting to discuss Christianity, or hand you christian literature, is just a part of life in the free world - it doesn't bother me at all, but it's something that happens often when walking through any given town centre. And this in God-hating Europe, which so many of you Americans get into an irrational tizzy about.

How often have you been stopped in the street, in Europe or the US, by someone trying to discuss atheism and hand you atheist literature? Be honest now.

Finding a silly anti-religious gimmick on the internet to prove your point that there is a vast atheist conspiracy trying to draw you from the good word is foolish and demonstrates nothing much but how stressed you have become. It's not like there aren't equally foolish christian sites on the internet

Never been stopped in the street. I HAVE been accosted by an Atheist teacher in High School who tried to dissuade me from applying to a religious college. But I suppose to some atheists that does not count as "evangelizing" and is perfectly OK. "One rule for me and another for thee".

You are assigning motives to my most recent posts. When did I say that I seek to prove the existence of a "vast atheist conspiracy?" If you can find a post to that effect, step right up and show it to me. Please don't be shy.

[Platapus]

This only proves that there are annoying people on both sides. Does not prove anything more. Religion does not have a patent on annoying people.

My beliefs are personal and I really really really wish other people would respect that.

It is the lack of respect by trying to push their agenda (religious or atheist) that annoys me.

Especially when someone claims the "right" to proselytize.

It is not a right, it is just being rude.

[joegrundman]

Oh don't you be shy! It is a theme that has perfused your many recent posts.

And this idea that it's one rule for them but not for you is nonsense! Christians have a cultural prerogative to proselytise, and they do so with alacrity!

You've never been stopped in the streets by either Christians or athiests? Maybe christians don't do that in america. I didn't know. Well it's normal behaviour in europe, i assure you - and for me it's no problem. I don't have anything against christianity.

Maybe your teacher had specific reasons why he didn't think you should go to a religious college, and it is a teacher's prerogative to advise as they believe they should, and it's yours to take it on board or not. This is not the same thing at all.

In addition, to go to a non- specifically- christian college is not to be converted to atheism (or didn't you know...?:o ) There in fact many happily christian students and professors at regular colleges and universities all over the western world. you know they even have churches on campus - with many differend denominations provided for.

It is possible that your teacher had misgivings about the effect that a narrowly religious education might have on the mind of a promising student, and believed you would do better with a more rounded education. I presume you chose to ignore the advice and went ahead anyway, and do not regret your decision. In which case good for you.

Point being - this is not the same thing IABL

Please, relax a little. The world's not out to get you!

[joegrundman]

Especially when someone claims the "right" to proselytize.

It is not a right, it is just being rude.

sure they have the right! You can ignore it, can't you? It's just part of the background noise

[Skybird]

Iambecomelife,

dammit, slowly you are killing my nerves. I want nothing from you just to leave me and people like me alone and not shoving what you call your religion into other people's and society's throats. I don't care a bit wether you believe me or not, and where in the past I made some remarks on atheism and relgion, I did not tell anybody to just believe me, and do like me, and think like me, whereas religious communities do this all the time. I have no other agenda than believers leaving me alone, and not trying to change society according to their religion. And eventually I say why I consider relgion to be stupid - but again, where I argue against religion, I do not try to evangelioze others of my "religion". I attack relgiojn whwre religion attacks society, because I do not want to live in a world and country dominated by such things like religions, especially not when they are fundamentalistic.

And while you may think that now I do with the following quote that I have used repeatedly in the past two or three years, note that it says NOT to believe, but to see and test yourself, and base your views on empirical experience. A person following that advise will not try to evangelize others, and where that person evangelizes, it does so in necessary violation of that advise. But argue with the thought of that advise, if you see any reason in trying to falsify it:

Do not put faith in traditions, even though they
have been accepted for long generations and
in many countries. Do not believe a thing because
many repeat it. Do not accept a thing on
the authority of one or another of the sages of
old, nor on the ground of statements as found
in the books. Never believe anything because
probability is in its favour. Do not believe in
that which you yourselves have imagined,
thinking that a god has inspired it. Believe
nothing merely on the authority of the teachers
or the priests. After examination, believe that
which you have tested for yourself and found
reasonable, which is in conformity with your
well being and that of others.

Buddha

Again, I do not try to turn you or anyone into a Buddhist, I am not interested at all in such a thing. To me, it is just healthy, straight, sound reason, and good advise to base my life and decision-making on. In the end, what is said here is a call for most explicit empirism. You can follow that advise, or stick with your own views, it is totally uninzeresting for me as long as you do not bother others, or society, with your beliefs.

Missionising is disgusting, and illogical. It means somebody is arrogant enough to take it upon him to speak and do and act in place of the superior omnipotent deity he claims be existent. As if such wonderful super-beings that religions' gods always seem to be would be in need of a little ant to make HIS case known! and where it wold be needed indeed, such a deity cannot be much bigger than the ant himself.

[iambecomelife]

Oh don't you be shy! It is a theme that has perfused your many recent posts.

And this idea that it's one rule for them but not for you is nonsense! Christians have a cultural prerogative to proselytise, and they do so with alacrity!

You've never been stopped in the streets by either Christians or athiests? Maybe christians don't do that in america. I didn't know. Well it's normal behaviour in europe, i assure you - and for me it's no problem. I don't have anything against christianity.

Maybe your teacher had specific reasons why he didn't think you should go to a religious college, and it is a teacher's prerogative to advise as they believe they should, and it's yours to take it on board or not. This is not the same thing at all.

In addition, to go to a non- specifically- christian college is not to be converted to atheism (or didn't you know...?:o ) There in fact many happily christian students and professors at regular colleges and universities all over the western world. you know they even have churches on campus - with many differend denominations provided for.

You misunderstood - to be honest I have been approached by a Christian once in college, but not by an atheist. In my opinion if he had the University's permission to be there - fine. If not, then he had no right to trespass. What I do NOT support is some broad right to be free from opinions that disturb you (not that you are necessarily advocating this).

It is possible that your teacher had misgivings about the effect that a narrowly religious education might have on the mind of a promising student, and believed you would do better with a more rounded education. I presume you chose to ignore the advice and went ahead anyway, and do not regret your decision. In which case good for you.

Point being - this is not the same thing IABL

Please, relax a little. The world's not out to get you!

So you defend my teacher's actions. Not surprising. Suppose it had been reversed and it was an atheist student being urged to attend a Christian seminary - can you honestly say it wouldn't bother you, or would you be talking about "fundies" spreading their "pollution", as Skybird and his kind put it? Seriously - if you think that Christians should be restricted from evangelizing but atheists should be allowed to do the same thing, just come out and say it so that we can know where everyone stands.

Again - tell me where I posted that atheists are engaged in a vast conspiracy against Christians. Anyone who's been paying attention notices how I distinguish between principled atheists like Christopher Hitchens and those who are just anti-Christian.

[Skybird]

and then a vocabulary thing, the "pollution". What I mean is the German term "Verursacher-Prinzip". The three dictionaries I checked translates that as "polluter pays principle". That simple. One could also say: you break, so you fix it. You are too loud with the radio, so you have to turn it silent. A real pollution rleigons only becomes where it is pressed into children's mind when they are not ripe enough to form opinions themselves, which I consider to be child-abuse, and where rlegions aggressively try to impose themsleves onto public life and subjugate the rules of secular societies.

[Iceman]

This thread is an invaluable tool in teaching young believers in Christ a great deal.

Indeed, Christ came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.They that are whole have no need for a physician.He that is unholy let him be unholy still.

This thread is the how do you say..the perfect example of Christ's teaching warning..."Warning" ...not to cast your pearls before the swine lest they simply trample them under foot.

It was said to the apostles who were sent out by Christ...when you come into a house let your peace rest upon it and if it does not it will return to you and you were to shake the dust from your feet as a curse upon that house...that it would be worse for that house than what happened to Sodom and Gommorrah.

I will never apoligize for spreading the good news that there is hope for a person beyond this life and in this life ,that the way was opened by the very Son of God and can never be closed by any human...mens souls are the harvest...and the command by my Lord Jesus Christ is.

Mark 16
[15] And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
[16] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
[17] And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
[18] They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.


Indeed the signs spoken of here will mark a true believer...not a church or name of a church..or a religion...the power is in the very name of Jesus Christ.

Salvation comes by no other name in heaven or earth and fear not them which kill the body but after that can do no more.

but this is the condemnation that men loved darkness rather than the light and killed the light.

Peace be upon Subsim and it's members. :)

Matthew 18
[11] For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

[Skybird]

^:dead:

Believers proud of their "religiosity" must be amongst the greatest comedians in the world. But in being self-righteous zealots who nevertheless reject the greatest present their god has ever given to them - a brain with the potential to light the world by the terms of reason - they prove to be the greatest sinners of all, locked in self-imposed darkness of mind and trapped between never-checked, never proven hear-say and and a self-centered desire to define the very nature of the còsmos themselves, make it revolve around themselves and effectively demanding their deities to be the way they have designed them all by themselves. Because this is what sin really is about: to reject the light of reality, to separate oneself from the very essence and nature of existence and life itself, and - in a theistic terminology - ro reject what God has given man in potential and capacity, in order to not needing to face responsibility for himself which would come with that present, and live in an infantile dreamworld instead, filled with miracles and wonder and friendly fairy-tales were the good man is rewarded and the bad man drives to hell, and where the good old father cares for your life and you must not decide and be responsible, for the good old man is telling you what to do and where to go and when to sleep and when to eat and when to piss and when to kill and when to die.

Self-induced mental spastic paralysis.

And I and many others are demanded and expected to need to accept being offensively approached by such comedians who reserve the right, despite their own serious handicaps, to lecture about abracadabra, and their victims are needed to politely listen - or even take the effort to chase them away while such missionaries are sticking their nose into other people's business unwanted, uninvited, undemanded? Sometimes I think law should allow to shoot every missionary right in place, like in some nations intrusion of private property also allows to use a weapon to stop the intruder. Because an intrusion such arrogant behavior is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTSwau9fwM

Keep thy religion to thyself. Speak to your deity in the stillness of your room. Listen to your deity resting all alone in the centre of your heart. Don't try to make your private business the world's business. World doesn't mind, doesn't care and does not wish to bother.

when you get invited to a party, feel free to go there. when you are not invited, better don't ask to get invited - it is considered to be unpolite behavior - even if the other is avoiding confrontation or is polite enough not to reject you.

[trekchu]

^:dead:

*post*


What he said.


Also: Has anyone thought of the possibility that such agressive behaviour is pushing some people even farther from religion than the religious content itself?

I mean whenever the Jehovas Whitnesses ring on my door at 8:00 on a Saturday ( which happens from time to time ) it makes me hate them a tinsy bit more. The "Comedians" claim that society becomes more secular by the day, have they ever asked themselves why?

[bradclark1]

Also: Has anyone thought of the possibility that such agressive behaviour is pushing some people even farther from religion than the religious content itself?

Thats the way it is for me. I'll never argue or belittle someone for there religious beliefs. Thats between them and their god but please don't try to invade my house preaching. Last set was so pushy and I tried to be curteous but they wouldn't stop. I ended up telling them to ******* off and slammed the door in their face.

[August]

Also: Has anyone thought of the possibility that such agressive behaviour is pushing some people even farther from religion than the religious content itself?
Thats the way it is for me. I'll never argue or belittle someone for there religious beliefs. Thats between them and their god but please don't try to invade my house preaching. Last set was so pushy and I tried to be curteous but they wouldn't stop. I ended up telling them to ******* off and slammed the door in their face.

I tell them i'm a Druid and that i have been washed in the blood of a tree, then I ask them if i can write 666 on their foreheads with a permanent marker in homage to Satan. They tend not to come back after that...

[August]

Keep thy religion to thyself. Speak to your deity in the stillness of your room. Listen to your deity resting all alone in the centre of your heart. Don't try to make your private business the world's business. World doesn't mind, doesn't care and does not wish to bother.

How about if they say no? You gonna shoot them?

[Tchocky]

Crucifixion works a lot better for that kind of thing.

[antikristuseke]

Also: Has anyone thought of the possibility that such agressive behaviour is pushing some people even farther from religion than the religious content itself?
Thats the way it is for me. I'll never argue or belittle someone for there religious beliefs. Thats between them and their god but please don't try to invade my house preaching. Last set was so pushy and I tried to be curteous but they wouldn't stop. I ended up telling them to ******* off and slammed the door in their face.

I tell them i'm a Druid and that i have been washed in the blood of a tree, then I ask them if i can write 666 on their foreheads with a permanent marker in homage to Satan. They tend not to come back after that...

Ran some of them off at gunpoint, they didnt return after that. Was actualy a replica only capable of firing blanks and not loaded with those either. Maybe i shouldnt have enjoyed them runing away in a panic but even thinking of it makes me giggle.

[Iceman]

^:dead:

Believers proud of their "religiosity" must be amongst the greatest comedians in the world. But in being self-righteous zealots who nevertheless reject the greatest present their god has ever given to them - a brain with the potential to light the world by the terms of reason - they prove to be the greatest sinners of all, locked in self-imposed darkness of mind and trapped between never-checked, never proven hear-say and and a self-centered desire to define the very nature of the còsmos themselves, make it revolve around themselves and effectively demanding their deities to be the way they have designed them all by themselves. Because this is what sin really is about: to reject the light of reality, to separate oneself from the very essence and nature of existence and life itself, and - in a theistic terminology - ro reject what God has given man in potential and capacity, in order to not needing to face responsibility for himself which would come with that present, and live in an infantile dreamworld instead, filled with miracles and wonder and friendly fairy-tales were the good man is rewarded and the bad man drives to hell, and where the good old father cares for your life and you must not decide and be responsible, for the good old man is telling you what to do and where to go and when to sleep and when to eat and when to piss and when to kill and when to die.

Self-induced mental spastic paralysis.

And I and many others are demanded and expected to need to accept being offensively approached by such comedians who reserve the right, despite their own serious handicaps, to lecture about abracadabra, and their victims are needed to politely listen - or even take the effort to chase them away while such missionaries are sticking their nose into other people's business unwanted, uninvited, undemanded? Sometimes I think law should allow to shoot every missionary right in place, like in some nations intrusion of private property also allows to use a weapon to stop the intruder. Because an intrusion such arrogant behavior is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atTSwau9fwM

Keep thy religion to thyself. Speak to your deity in the stillness of your room. Listen to your deity resting all alone in the centre of your heart. Don't try to make your private business the world's business. World doesn't mind, doesn't care and does not wish to bother.

when you get invited to a party, feel free to go there. when you are not invited, better don't ask to get invited - it is considered to be unpolite behavior - even if the other is avoiding confrontation or is polite enough not to reject you.
Skybird again with the much speaking of words ...void of love.. sounding just like that loud off tune instrument in the band...we still Love ya. :) Big Hugs for Skybird...

[geetrue]

I know all Christians are not alike ... I wonder if all atheist are alike ...

Well, are they?

and if they are ... why are they so afraid of a little piece of paper with an invitation to know Jesus?

I've handed out 6,000 tracts in the last ten years or so ... I am both an introverted person that reads a lot, studies the bible, surf the web, live alone, eat alone and an extroverted person, ex-radio newsman, ex-sailboat salesman, ex-time share salesman for a cruise ship, creative, friendly, willing to discuss life and the option of eternal life for those that believe.

I tend to stay away from arguements, especially in person. "wisdom that comes from above is willing to yield" St James 3:15

One girl at Taco Bell said, "what do I do now"? after I had given her an invitation to know Jesus as her Lord and saviour. I told her find a good bible based church and get into the Word.

Another girl I handed a tract to was about 14. I caught her sitting on the bench at a bus stop. She said, "I haven't done anything wrong, yet" That made me laugh.

Another young attractive girl in shorts and a halter top said, "Oh you don't know how important this is to me" I said that's nice mam and moved on before I sinned in looking at her ample bosum.

One man gave the tract back to me and said, "I don't drink anymore"

Most of the people that react to an invitation to accept Jesus as their Lord and saviour have just had a loved one pass away and they wonder where they went.

Some people just plain need that little piece of paper at that paticular point in time, accident, health related, lost loved one. The meaning of eternal life gets more serious the older you are.

Revival is still going on channel 365 God TV 7pm eastern time every night or go to www.freshfire.ca (http://www.freshfire.ca) live revival outpouring Todd Bentley online.

But then again all Christians don't agree that this is a real revival ...

Check it out and let me know.

Peace

[antikristuseke]

I know all Christians are not alike ... I wonder if all atheist are alike ...

Well, are they?No

and if they are ... why are they so afraid of a little piece of paper with an invitation to know Jesus?Afraid? I'd wager they are just annoyed by it. Thats how I feel anyway. I dont want anyone pushing their religion on me, I understand that those people mean well, but their paphlets and preaching are not appreaciated by people of no faith.

I've handed out 6,000 tracts in the last ten years or so ... I am both an introverted person that reads a lot, studies the bible, surf the web, live alone, eat alone and an extroverted person, ex-radio newsman, ex-sailboat salesman, ex-time share salesman for a cruise ship, creative, friendly, willing to discuss life and the option of eternal life for those that believe.

I tend to stay away from arguements, especially in person. "wisdom that comes from above is willing to yield" St James 3:15

One girl at Taco Bell said, "what do I do now"? after I had given her an invitation to know Jesus as her Lord and saviour. I told her find a good bible based church and get into the Word.

Another girl I handed a tract to was about 14. I caught her sitting on the bench at a bus stop. She said, "I haven't done anything wrong, yet" That made me laugh.

Another young attractive girl in shorts and a halter top said, "Oh you don't know how important this is to me" I said that's nice mam and moved on before I sinned in looking at her ample bosum.

One man gave the tract back to me and said, "I don't drink anymore"

Most of the people that react to an invitation to accept Jesus as their Lord and saviour have just had a loved one pass away and they wonder where they went.

Some people just plain need that little piece of paper at that paticular point in time, accident, health related, lost loved one. The meaning of eternal life gets more serious the older you are.

Revival is still going on channel 365 God TV 7pm eastern time every night or go to www.freshfire.ca (http://www.freshfire.ca) live revival outpouring Todd Bentley online.

But then again all Christians don't agree that this is a real revival ...

Check it out and let me know.

Peace

Peace upon you aswell.

[trekchu]

*words*


Once again What he said. It's not so much fear as rather the pure annoyance you feel despiute having told them repeatedly to **** off.

[Skybird]

and if they are ... why are they so afraid of a little piece of paper with an invitation to know Jesus?


"Afraid"? Hardly. "Annoyed" is closer to the thruth. For we see too often how churches are pushing for public influence, and especially in America: fundamentalists ignoring the constitutional separation of religion and state and trying to press fundamentalist teachings into local school's curriculum and try to drive opposing teachings out (of course, the Darwin-creationism-debate must be mentioned here). It is annoyance for not being left with the choice to search and find, but being actively sought for. It is annoyance over relgions, wether it be Islam or chgristian fundaemntalism or official churches, demanding more than what is theirs, and trying to rewrite constitutional organisations of state and society.

these thing sare not as extreme over here as it seems to be the case in America. Over here, fundam,entalists are not an important group of voters, and their sects are minorities, but we have the churches and the use of public taxes for theirn interests. We aldo do not have huge organisations of atheists, mas there seem to be in America, judging by googling the internet, at least there are no German pendants I am aware of.

I did not distribute leaflets as you did, and why should I? But I taught meditation, mostly a combination of Japanese Zen (Chinese Chan) and Tibetan Kum Nye, which is something like Tai chi, just easier to learn and practice for Westerners, and I did so for several years, without depending on any cultural or religious symbology, but making pragmatic use of the reasonable helps and thoughts that can be found in the teachings of Buddha as well as Jesus (although you must expect that I interpret him totally different than you do, and I need to expect that you take the bible possibly as literal as Iceman does - else I see no reason in why you should want to distribute leaflets). I did not actively approach people, and I also made no business of it (did it for free) - but after an intial start from a clinical context, people came to me. Nobody can accuse me of actively missionizing. I neither actively approach foreign people, nor do I try to influence them to join a certain ideology. what I did was essentially what I always did and would jhave done anyway - no matter if there were people jopining me or not. In other words: I did not preach, but set an example by meditating anyway, and leaving the decision to others wether they want to try that out and see where it leads them, or not. I did not held speeches, but I answered questions if they were raised. So, I am in perfect conformity with what I demand others to do as well, and am in conformity with the reason why I criticise religions and cults and sects: respect the freedom of others, and not actively chase them, or try to convince them. If you set an example and it is convincing for others, and if they are able to make their own experiences from following that example by free choice, and they like what they experience, then people will come all by themselves, and nobody must lecture them or convince or evangelize them. And certainly I must not make their brains spinning by endlessly talking and holding speeches, and lectures. All that leads to exactly the opposite of what is man's most natural right of birth: to ask his own questions, to check them himself, to find out himself, and to assess himself what the worth of it is that he has experienced.

I do not go after every old man I occasionally see at a street corner, where he stands and just holds up his Christian leaflets, for the most they are from the "Der Wachturm" organisation here. Point is, he also does not go after me. But repeatedly I confronted Muslim street stands, for two reasons: first they were telling lies about Islam to deceive the people, second they were actively approaching people by not just being there on display, but trying to engage them in talking and hanging in pairs on them to make them stop walking - or even start public demonstration-like speeches via megaphone. If they have claim to have the right to harass pedestrians, then i claim the right to confront them and turn them down, for I do not walk in the town centre because I want to need to listen to Islamic propaganda.

I also am convinced that needing to search, to choose a direction at crossroads, and to be in doubt, is most essential part of every human's path through life, without this risik - which also is a freedom - nothing solid and valuable can be won. Man should not believe pre-produced solutions - he should find answers himself. It is often said in Asian traditions that you cannot find a master as long as you are not ready for him. From my own life I can confirm that this is true. Man must not be given answers and solutions on a silver plate. Answers without questions, will mislead the person in most cases, do harm, will confuse him and set him on wrong paths. He must learn to ask the correct questions. then the answers come all by themselves. But this is an independance that no religion and no cult and no sect accepts - because it means loss of earthly power over man.

Also, you are right, not all atheists are the same, true. Communism is an atheistic ideology, in that it knows no theistic deities. Capitalism is atheistic that it is a 100% materialistic ideology, and where there is materialism, there is no room for any non-materialistic thinking, wether it be relgion or philosophy. But not every atheist is a communist or a capitalist. Atheism is not an ideology in itself. It is the absence and/or rejection of another class of ideologies: theistic ideologies, traditions whose thinking depends on believing in the existence of theistic deities. Not more and not less atheism means. I find it almost absurd that Google tells me that atheistic organisations seem to have been founded in America. Maybe that is because there is so much polarizing, and there is so much extremism in america, regarding these things. If fundamentalism is said to form up - varying with the source you read - 20-40% of voters potential, and according communities form an according part of the population, than this is resulting in a social power and influence that explains why part of those who want to not share these communities and do wish to defend soeciety and state aginst these have organised themselves in accoridng organisations, too. But to me, building organisations on the basis of rejecting certain classes of ideolgy is somewhat absurd. One cannot missionize in the name of atheism, since atheism is not an ideology with a content of itself, as I said it just means by definition the absence of certain other ideologies wothout putting anything in their place by itself. Where religious zealots accuse it to do that missionizing nevertheless, they seem to project their own flaws onto others, while they do not see them in themselves.

[Schroeder]

Another girl I handed a tract to was about 14. I caught her sitting on the bench at a bus stop. She said, "I haven't done anything wrong, yet" That made me laugh.
Why are you approaching minors? Where there no adults around?


Another young attractive girl in shorts and a halter top said, "Oh you don't know how important this is to me" I said that's nice mam and moved on before I sinned in looking at her ample bosum.


Sorry but you did sin by looking at her bosom. Or how do you know it was ample?;)


Do you really belief that all those nature people in the jungles of South America or Africa whose women are usually topless are living in sin? They have never heard of your belife.

The female body was formed to attract the attention of men. And by your belief it was shaped by the will of God wasn't it?

So if God doesn't want us to look at women why did he made them attractive to men? To torture us?

Sorry, but I really don't see any sense in that especially since science has found out that the male brain is programmed on looking at women. The first moment your brain realises that a woman is standing in front of you, you either have a look at her bosom or at her botto. That's a fact. They have tested it with sensors monitoring the eyes of test persons. There's nothing you can do about it's done automatically they said. But they didn't tell whether those test persons where religious. Maybe religious brains are differently programmed.

What's making having fun with bodies evil in your opinion anyway? Right the Bible tells you so. But did you never question why this might have been written down?
I think this was just a rule to make sure that unmarried girls didn't become pregnant. By the time the Bible was written this could have been disastrous for the girl and the baby since the unmarried man could always have ran away leaving them behind without any support.

Nowadays women don't have to become pregnant any more and even if they should and the guy runs away without careing there are social systems (at least here in Germany I'm not sure about the US) that would support a young mother and her baby rather than condemning them both.

But old religious rules can't be changed and so human bodies are still evil...

Sorry, but in my opinion that can't be true.
Of course if you want to live that way feel free to do so.
But please don't try to convince others especially not minors whose minds can still be easily manipulated by outsiders.
If you really have to convince others then please chose adults. There should be enough around.

[iambecomelife]

^:dead:

Sometimes I think law should allow to shoot every missionary right in place

Skybird wants to shoot all missionaries? Been there, done that. People have died for their religious beliefs before, are dying for them now, and will again. He talks about comedy - the only comedy is those who think these threats scare anyone.

I guess we can speculate what his reaction would be if I'd mused about shooting all atheists but then again, the most hilarious thing about Skybird is the absence of any sense of irony.

Sometimes people ask Christians about their faith without any invitation. Skybird & co would have them either lie about their faith or refuse to talk about it simply to suit HIS PERSONAL PREFERENCES.

[Skybird]

Your reply from three days behind gives me the very strong conviction that the lack of sense of irony is with you - and the lack of complete reference to what I said, too (for example "to stay away from parties were you are not invited, but to feel free to go where you have been invited indeed - problem is missionizing zealots all too often do not stay away even if not wanted). and the killing being done in the past: for the most, missionaries survived their attempt to take it it upon thmeselves to speak in the name of their deities. much more killing was done against those native civilisations in South America and Africa (for examples) and those heretics ineurope who did not wish to join some zealot'S theistic wisdoms and dogma or belonged to another church.

Thanks for illustrating perfectly by your latest reply two more reasons why I become so bitterly determined NOT to tolerate such self-revolving thinking, and not to nice-talk about it.

He already gave the perfect answer in my place, and that includes his attack against atheism :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5cXWElb-GE

Can't say it any better myself.

[iambecomelife]

Your reply from three days behind gives me the very strong conviction that the lack of sense of irony is with you - and the lack of complete reference to what I said, too (for example "to stay away from parties were you are not invited, but to feel free to go where you have been invited indeed - problem is missionizing zealots all too often do not stay away even if not wanted). and the killing being done in the past: for the most, missionaries survived their attempt to take it it upon thmeselves to speak in the name of their deities. much more killing was done against those native civilisations in South America and Africa (for examples) and those heretics ineurope who did not wish to join some zealot'S theistic wisdoms and dogma or belonged to another church.

Thanks for illustrating perfectly by your latest reply two more reasons why I become so bitterly determined NOT to tolerate such self-revolving thinking, and not to nice-talk about it.

He already gave the perfect answer in my place, and that includes his attack against atheism :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5cXWElb-GE

Can't say it any better myself.

More empty threats. "Not going to tolerate it!":rotfl: Maybe he should put his money where his mouth is.

Seriously - imagine Skybird's howls of outrage if someone had suggested shooting atheists. But they're "missionizing zealots", so that's okay. And SOME religious entities committed atrocities in the past, so, hey, it's all good. As opposed to atheistic regimes with their squeaky-clean hands. :up:

[antikristuseke]

iambecomelife, please stop trolling.
But just in case you are being serious try reading Skybirds posts again as you seem to have missed his point.

[iambecomelife]

and if they are ... why are they so afraid of a little piece of paper with an invitation to know Jesus?


Man must not be given answers and solutions on a silver plate.

Exactly. That's why God (or the Big Bang or whatever) gave us SKYBIRD! He'll tell us when we can and can't share religion, he'll spew up "Zen" quotes while whining about Christianity, and he'll preach about how violent religion is while saying that Christians should be shot. What would we do without this moral beacon?

[iambecomelife]

iambecomelife, please stop trolling.
But just in case you are being serious try reading Skybirds posts again as you seem to have missed his point.

I prefer to think of it as complimenting people on their moral insights. It's all relative - don't you know?

And what's this - he's whining about my "three day late" response? He'd better hurry up and apply for moderator privileges (or shoot me, or something). For someone who lectures about the evils of religious oppression he SURE is interested in controlling others. This genius had better run off to Wikipedia and look up irony again.

[SUBMAN1]

iambecomelife, please stop trolling.
But just in case you are being serious try reading Skybirds posts again as you seem to have missed his point.He is no where near trolling. He is simply using SB's same arguments against him. It's actually quite entertaining! :up: :D

-S

[iambecomelife]

iambecomelife, please stop trolling.
But just in case you are being serious try reading Skybirds posts again as you seem to have missed his point.He is no where near trolling. He is simply using SB's same arguments against him. It's actually quite entertaining! :up: :D

-S

I do not mean to troll at all. I have no problem with peaceful faiths. I have no problem with peaceful atheists. In fact, the atheist teacher I mentioned some days earlier was one of my favorite instructors. However, it's worth noting he was one of my favorites because he was NOT the type of person you would find musing about shooting religious believers. Conversely, if I heard a Christian talking about shooting anyone for not being religious enough I would be sure to report him to the authorities ASAP assuming he was serious - if not I would call him on it for sure. Whereas certain people on this forum seem to think that violence & silencing of beliefs is perfectly fine as long as it's directed at the groups they don't like (notwithstanding their preaching about "intolerance").:roll: Me, I like to concern myself with little things like RECIPROCITY - suppose there comes a day when my religion is not dominant? Would I want someone threatening me?

[SUBMAN1]

I do not mean to troll at all. I have no problem with peaceful faiths. I have no problem with peaceful atheists. In fact, the atheist teacher I mentioned some days earlier was one of my favorite instructors. However, it's worth noting he was one of my favorites because he was NOT the type of person you would find musing about shooting religious believers. Conversely, if I heard a Christian talking about shooting anyone for not being religious enough I would be sure to report him to the authorities ASAP assuming he was serious - if not I would call him on it for sure. Whereas certain people on this forum seem to think that violence & silencing of beliefs is perfectly fine as long as it's directed at the groups they don't like (notwithstanding their preaching about "intolerance").:roll: Me, I like to concern myself with little things like RECIPROCITY - suppose there comes a day when my religion is not dominant? Would I want someone threatening me?I hear ya and agree 100%.

What is that old saying that applies here? Here it is:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
-S

[Foxtrot]

I posted here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=852514&postcount=131) about the Jesus lovin' sect of sickos. Now it seems that the Court wants to return those teenage moms/kids (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052200548.html?hpid=topnews) back to the ranch. The reason of this decision: It will cost around $21 mil (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-polygamycosts_20tex.ART.State.Edition2.46685af.htm l) to care those kids.

So much for the "civilized west" :nope:

[August]

I posted here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=852514&postcount=131) about the Jesus lovin' sect of sickos. Now it seems that the Court wants to return those teenage moms/kids (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052200548.html?hpid=topnews) back to the ranch. The reason of this decision: It will cost around $21 mil (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-polygamycosts_20tex.ART.State.Edition2.46685af.htm l) to care those kids.

So much for the "civilized west" :nope:


That is not the reason. Texas law says that the state can remove children from their families without a court hearing only if they are in immediate danger. Obviously with relevations that the initial call reporting abuse was faked that is not the case.

Our laws are for everyone, even a "Jesus lovin' sect of sickos" whether you like it or not.

[iambecomelife]

I posted here (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=852514&postcount=131) about the Jesus lovin' sect of sickos. Now it seems that the Court wants to return those teenage moms/kids (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052200548.html?hpid=topnews) back to the ranch. The reason of this decision: It will cost around $21 mil (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-polygamycosts_20tex.ART.State.Edition2.46685af.htm l) to care those kids.

So much for the "civilized west" :nope:


Any wrongdoing IMO is a reflection of individual peoples' flaws, and to an extent the flaws of some religious teachings - not an allegory of "the West" as a whole.