Mageth

Correct me if I am wrong, but Amos because of your atheist or simply non-Christian presumptions, you miss the point that to be reborn, by the power of God, as a Christian is not compatible with violence and if you think otherwise please make your case.

Amos is a Christian, or I should probably say Catholic Christian, but of a decidedly different flavor than you (and any other I've encountered).

ChristianSkeptic

Mageth: I'm sure Dr. McDougal in the local ER, handy with a defibrillator as well as a Claymore, would disagree with you.

I like your humor. Anyway,my reference was to Jesus who had been dead for a while.

Mageth: No, I'm not aware of anything "supernatural." But if it's true, what went wrong when those people described above became Christians?

They lost faith/trust in God. Earlier I wrote, “The burden we have is to sustain that level of trust, based on knowledge, in God and not loose sight into ourselves or public opinion.”

No one ever stated that being a Christian would be easy

Mageth: Why doesn't god use that "transcendent" power to change those Christians hinduwoman described, then?

The power of God to overcome the path of violence is available to us all, but we must have an open mind to receive it.

Surely, Mageth you would agree that we have to accept some responsibility for our actions and of course the majority of professing Christians in India did not participate in the violence.

Mageth: Is he powerless to do so?

No.

Mageth: Doesn't he care that they're giving his pet religion a bad image?

No.

Mageth: I don't know about forced conversation…

Why not?

Mageth: …So it may not be that way in principle, but in practice (which is what we're discussing here, after all) it often ends that way.

Are you asserting or at least believe that violence conversion is the method that the vast majority or even the majority of Christians of the world have become Christian?

If so they how do you know what you believe is true?

Mageth:… the NT and Christianity most certainly use threats to gain converts:

Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

The One referenced here is the Devil.

Mageth: Rev. 21:8… But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

This passage does not directly deal with converting anyone, but the consequences of rejecting God and embracing sin. Granted it probably has been used as a means to convert people.

The problem atheists have with this passage is that they simply do not like it. For if Christianity is true then the passage is true and therefore they should and must change their minds and way of life (like everybody else).

I think, and I could be wrong, our differences on this issue, Mageth is that you are a slave, no offense intended, to public opinion/the mob/the passion of the moment or simply what is.

I dare ask, should this be the state of affairs? and I ask you Mageth [what good reason do you have to care]?

Mageth

I like your humor. Anyway,my reference was to Jesus who had been dead for a while.

As an atheist, I consider the account of the Resurrection a myth, and I do not think that being a Hebrew Messianic figure has the power to raise one from the dead. Nor does the power of a mythical God.

They lost faith/trust in God.

In your own words, "how do you know what you believe is true?" How do you know they lost faith/trust in God?

No one ever stated that being a Christian would be easy

Since you appear to be committed to the No True Scotsman fallacy, you should perhaps rephrase this "No one ever stated that being a True Christian would be easy." Let me tell you, being an Atheist isn’t always a bowl of cherries either (read more on this below).

The power of God to overcome the path of violence is available to us all, but we must have an open mind to receive it.

Can you explain to me exactly how the power of God affects one's "open" mind to change it to no longer be violent? What I see is more along the lines of people opening their minds to accept a particular philosophy of non-violence. Non-violence is not a path unique to Christianity. Gandhi taught such a philosophy and managed to "infect" a few million people with it without God's power, didn't he? I'm non-violent, for Buddha's sake, and the so-called power of God had nothing to do with it.

In other words, I would rephrase the above as "The power to overcome the path of violence is within us all."

Surely, Mageth you would agree that we have to accept some responsibility for our actions...

Of course, but that’s a bit of a non sequitur. Unless you mean Christianity should accept responsibility for some of the actions people commit in its name.

...and of course the majority of professing Christians in India did not participate in the violence.

I would assume. But that still leaves you with the minority of professing Christians that did, correct? Oh, I forgot, they're not True Christians.

Are you asserting or at least believe that violence conversion is the method that the vast majority or even the majority of Christians of the world have become Christian?

If so they how do you know what you believe is true?

No, I'm not asserting that the majority of Christians have been forced into converting. "Often" doesn't necessarily mean the majority of the time, you know. Most people become Christian because that's the religion of their parents/society. Just like most Hindus are Hindus, and most Moslems are Moslems, because that's the religion of their parents/society.

Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

The One referenced here is the Devil.

You're so wrong on this one. This verse is saying "They who truly fear God, need not fear man." That's straight from Matthew Henry's commentary, BTW. Some translations say "fear Him…", and at least one says "But fear God …" Satan is not referred to as the One (with a capital O). Plus, Satan is never given the power to destroy one's soul.

Do a little studying. Go to here and click on the study helps to the left of the verse for more info, particularly look at the other translations and at the commentaries.

Rev. 21:8… But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

This passage does not directly deal with converting anyone, but the consequences of rejecting God and embracing sin. Granted it probably has been used as a means to convert people.

I didn't say it directly dealt with converting anyone. And "probably" is an understatement; of course the fear of Hell is often used in efforts to convert people (and to keep them converted).

The problem atheists have with this passage is that they simply do not like it. For if Christianity is true then the passage is true and therefore they should and must change their minds and way of life (like everybody else).

If Christianity is true, I must change my mind and way of life? Exactly how is that not a threat?

I don't even consider it a remote possibility that Christianity is true. I don't have a "problem" with this passage, nor do I like or dislike it. You might say I'm indifferent to this passage, as I don't believe in God, Heaven, or Hell.

I think, and I could be wrong, our differences on this issue, Mageth is that you are a slave, no offense intended, to public opinion/the mob/the passion of the moment or simply what is.

Yes, you are most definitely wrong. Ridiculously so, considering that, what, 85% of Americans claim to be theists of some sort, with the majority of those Christians, and my family is extremely Christian (and what you would consider "True" Christians, trust me). My father and brother are ministers, my mother is a Christian, three of my other four other siblings are Christians, and my wife and her family are Christians. Every one of them thinks I'm destined for hell unless I repent from my unbelief.

"Deconverting" from Christianity, becoming, and being an atheist in this environment is absolutely the hardest thing I've ever done in my life. It would be much easier for me to simply give in and once again become a "slave" to the myth of Christianity.

When I became an atheist, I knew exactly one atheist. Not much of a mob, huh?

I dare ask, should this be the state of affairs? and I ask you Mageth [what good reason do you have to care]?

No, it shouldn't be the state of affairs that my family, my society, and people like you trivialize and mischaracterize my atheism by making ignorant judgments such as that I am "a slave, no offense intended, to public opinion/the mob/the passion of the moment or simply what is" and "what good reason do you have to care?" (I’m not really sure what the intention of that last question was…care about what?)

[NOTE: I significantly edited the post above offline during the recent period when I couldn't access the board - I wasn't sure that my post had made it]

Ab_Normal

And what does this have to do with the OP? It was talking about Christianity, not Islam.

It's not whether you, I, or anybody else thinks they are "good consistent Christians" - what matters is that they call themselves Christians. The plethora of Christian denominations makes it pretty clear to me that there is not one definition of Christian. If there is conclusive proof that the local Baptists (that makes 'em Christian, right?) are supporting the NLFT, then we must conclude that some Christians are supporting terrorism.

Amos

Yes I understand but at what cost? And should violence be used to achieve this? Let me suggest to you that in John, which is the Catholic Gospel, Jesus shows us his wounds and then tell us "as I am, so I am sending you." This means that unless we bear the stigmata we should never preach to others because we don't know what we are doing. I strongly disagree with the above and hold that at least all protestants are reborn from carnal desire and not from God. Yes, you may find this hard to accept but that is the reason for the saved- sinner complex that is peculiar to born again Christians. This means that the new saved identity is added to the old sinner identity and this is what creates the turmoil in their minds and at length in their churches. They will have no rest by day or by night and the smoke of their torment is visible throughout the world.

Ronin

~ and this is of a sweet savour unto the Lord.

Family Man

First, ChristianSkeptic, as an atheist I see that passage as nothing but an empty threat that reflects poorly on the religion you espouse.

Second, except for regular visits to church, exactly how do you think your way of life differs from mine?

never been there

#11. Thou shalt not derail thy sister's thread.

happyboy

why does this NOT surprise me? everyone always claims THEIR religion can't POSSIBLY produce such horrific monsters and murderers. let's face it, people: there is no one brand of christianity, and every brand claims it's the real deal. amos is convinced it's catholicism; christianskeptic claims it's his particular brand of protestanism. and so on and so forth. but since God refuses to straighten things out and make it clear which side he favors, for all we know those monstrous individuals in india might actually be in God's good graces.

happyboy

Jack the Bodiless

ChristianSkeptic:

Christianity certainly advocates the killing of unbelievers.

Or do you wish to claim that the Old Testament doesn't count?

In which case, you still have a problem.