A Question from a Christian

[Philly Fillet]

Well, let’s see, I can name a few {times Xianity has Changed}–
1. The Catholic Church changed its belief of a Geocentric Universe, and apologized to Galileo for persecuting him, after his death.
2. The reformation
3. Some Churches now allow their leadership to be openly gay.
4. Christians acknowledge the Crusades were wrong.
5. Most Christians (not I) accept evolution as God’s method of Creation.
6. Views on women have changed.
7. Christians established the Republics that allowed non-Christians, such as yourself to thrive.
And the very fact that there are so many denominations would suggest that Christians have different beliefs about the theologies that are in the Bible. And for the most part – again not always – the different denominations respect the beliefs of the others and do not condemn them for their beliefs.

1. They apologized about 200 years after (correct me if i'm wrong here) killing him. What about Capernicus?
2. One man that said, "ein minuten, bitte...i want to choose when sex results in children..."etc... (which is ignoring the rest of the Thesis of Luther, but so what.)
3. While most of them still hate fags, or accept them into their congregation in the hopes that they can be changed through prayer or laying on of hands, or whichever splinter sect you're going to. And am i missing something here, or don't pastors and ministers typically "start" their congregation? (saving for those who "take over" a congregation.) So if i were a Gay man with adequate seminary schooling, and i started a congregation...wouldn't they have to be willing to have a Gay minister? Regardless of what scripture says?
4. Not all. In fact (and this could just be the christians i personally know, but i've known a lot...): a whole lot of 'em seem to think the crusades were, if unfortunate, rather justified. Maybe a bit overdone, but justified none the less.
5. Not all. In fact (and this could just be the christians i personally know, but i've known a lot...): a reasonable some (not a lot) will admit there is a strong amount of evidence for it, and concede it's possibility. They still, for the most part, don't believe evolution happen(ed/s).
6. Slowly. And not by much. In fact (and this could just be the christians i personally know, but i've known a lot...): Most men over the age of 30(ish) have rather "traditional" views of the female role. You know: Stay at home, raise babies, cook, clean, and sexing their husbands. Did i, yet again, miss something, or aren't those basic ideas in christianity?
7. If you are referring to the United States of America being founded by Christians...I might start laughing. Here's why:

"I cannot conceive otherwise than that He, the Infinite Father, expects or requires no worship or praise from us, but that He is even infinitely above it." --- Benjamin Franklin, from "Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion", Nov. 20, 1728

"What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because suspected of heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the stake, the axe, the halter and the guillotine." --- John Adams, letter to John Taylor

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." --- James Madison, "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

[No documents as revered? That is either terribly biased, or terribly ignorant, or both. There is also the Koran, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tarvunti, the Tao, the Book of Marvin, and the Principia Discoria. Get over yourself.]

The Bible has been bought more, given more, translated more, read more, taught more, and respected more than all of the above. Between 2.5 Billion and 6 Billion copies sold according to Business week. Get over those facts.

Chairman Mao might be able to boast that he's more popular, according to wikipedia...er...Business week:

the Little Red Book (Quotations from Chairman Mao) Quotations from Mao Zedong; collected by the PLA Daily of the People's Liberation Army and signed by Lin Biao Chinese
& 50 languages 1966 800 million[5] to 6.5 billion[6]

Bible [1] (Koine Greek τὰ Βίβλια) Traditional Judaeo-Christian view: Revelation or Inspiration by God[2] to various authors Hebrew, Koine Greek, Aramaic 70 BC- 105 BC,

Further information: dating of the Bible

2.5[3] to 6 billion

By the by, this comes from a Deist of sorts. And i don't mean Pastafaria.

[ET, the Extra Terrestrial]

Fascinating thread. Excellent discussion on both sides. I love these fora.

*bookmarks topic*

[PirateFishWorshipper]

The amazing thing to me, a Pastafarian, is that you would waste this much time typing something that long just to prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist. Ah, you silly Christians! I have absolutely nothing against you, but you do say the silliest things. Oh well. Since there is no changing your mind, I may as well look into this matter. I am now studying Christians and their behavior, and why they do not think of us as equals. I'll see if I can find help for you.

[elijah]

There nothing more illogical about most fundamentalist chrisitian errors that most fundamentalist athiest folly like the ones that claim not to discriminate against people of particular religious beliefs while simulanteously explicitly mocking them.

[thelastpirate]

1. They apologized about 200 years after (correct me if i'm wrong here) killing him. What about Capernicus?

You are wrong. Galileo was put under fairly comfortable house arrest and allowed to continue publishing. In fact, his work had earlier been recieved favourably by the Pope until his axe-man, Cardinal Bellarmine, studied it.

Copernicus was not prosecuted, and his work was not criticised by the catholic church until after his death

However, both Galileo and Copernicus were forced to include a prologue to their heliocentric theories which stated that what followed was a only mathematical model to explain and predict observed phenomena and not intended as a statement of fact. This prepetuated the idea that science can only 'save the phenomena' as opposed to describing absolute fact, and was damaging to the reputation of astronomy.

[black bart]

1. They apologized about 200 years after (correct me if i'm wrong here) killing him. What about Capernicus?

You are wrong. Galileo was put under fairly comfortable house arrest and allowed to continue publishing. In fact, his work had earlier been recieved favourably by the Pope until his axe-man, Cardinal Bellarmine, studied it.

Copernicus was not prosecuted, and his work was not criticised by the catholic church until after his death

However, both Galileo and Copernicus were forced to include a prologue to their heliocentric theories which stated that what followed was a only mathematical model to explain and predict observed phenomena and not intended as a statement of fact. This prepetuated the idea that science can only 'save the phenomena' as opposed to describing absolute fact, and was damaging to the reputation of astronomy.

Did you know that you can still go and see Galileo's finger, preserved in a jar and on display at the Museo di Storia del Scienza in Italy:



I cannot help but think it represents a final gesture to the church.

[ET, the Extra Terrestrial]

1. They apologized about 200 years after (correct me if i'm wrong here) killing him. What about Capernicus?

You are wrong. Galileo was put under fairly comfortable house arrest and allowed to continue publishing. In fact, his work had earlier been recieved favourably by the Pope until his axe-man, Cardinal Bellarmine, studied it.

Copernicus was not prosecuted, and his work was not criticised by the catholic church until after his death

However, both Galileo and Copernicus were forced to include a prologue to their heliocentric theories which stated that what followed was a only mathematical model to explain and predict observed phenomena and not intended as a statement of fact. This prepetuated the idea that science can only 'save the phenomena' as opposed to describing absolute fact, and was damaging to the reputation of astronomy.

Did you know that you can still go and see Galileo's finger, preserved in a jar and on display at the Museo di Storia del Scienza in Italy:



I cannot help but think it represents a final gesture to the church.

[Philly Fillet]

There nothing more illogical about most fundamentalist chrisitian errors that most fundamentalist athiest folly like the ones that claim not to discriminate against people of particular religious beliefs while simulanteously explicitly mocking them.

fair enough. but let us not conclude that discrimination is inherently wrong. the word means to separate, or to segregate. i think we would both agree that neither of us wants to be lumped in together with the other in public or private opinion. So there is a definite distinction for me, between a person's Religious Beliefs[1], and a person's Religious Beliefs[2]. [1] is the collected body of law, scripture, tenants, habits, diet, theosophy and theogeny that fall under the label(s) of that religion's name. [2] is the individuals own aberrant variation of those beliefs.

let us also not conclude that mocking is the same as discriminating.

and finally, let us not conclude that the injustices perpetuated by your Religion[1] are somehow equal or less than the fact that you get mocked by a few atheists, regardless of your Religion[2].

And, Again, For The Record: I am a deist, not an atheist or a pastafarian. Yet I still mock you. Weird.

Maybe it's just you.

[Elvalia]

Ah, Philly Fillet, I'm not sure if you knew this already, but elijah's not your average opponent. He thinks that we're vampires. Be careful when you try to argue with that one, mmk? Trolls are happy when people try to argue with them.

But, by all means, have some fun!

[elijah]

Your obviously confused since I would never be party to concluding that discrimination is inheriently wrong(though in this instance it is). My point was that FSMist are wrong to claim they do not hold malice and promote the oppression of distinct religious peoples since their employment of derisive mockies reenforce the unjust dicrimination of those to which the verbage inferentially alludes.

[ET, the Extra Terrestrial]

Oh, yeah? Well nobody likes you 'cause your mom dresses you funny! So there!

[thelastpirate]

Your obviously confused since I would never be party to concluding that discrimination is inheriently wrong(though in this instance it is). My point was that FSMist are wrong to claim they do not hold malice and promote the oppression of distinct religious peoples since their employment of derisive mockies reenforce the unjust dicrimination of those to which the verbage inferentially alludes.

Again, are you really trying to equate the use of the word "pastafarian" with "opression", "derisive mockery" and "malice"?

The very fact that you use the word "inferentially" shows that you realise that in this case the offense is definitely in the eye of the beholder.

[Tigger_the_Wing]

I have no desire to mock, deride satirise or even consider his alleged reilgious beliefs. They are of no concern to me. I prefer to mock him for his obfuscatory syllogisms and subsequent constructions of sorites arguments.

[ET, the Extra Terrestrial]

I have no desire to mock, deride satirise or even consider his alleged reilgious beliefs. They are of no concern to me. I prefer to mock him for his obfuscatory syllogisms and subsequent constructions of sorites arguments.

I just mock him for fun.

[Tigger_the_Wing]

So do I, but it is more fun to have a peculiar reason!