Why are churches overwhelmingly conservative? (salaries, enemies, Pelosi, regime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That may have been added at a later date, not part of Pauls original writtings.
How do you know this? Let me stop. It's hard for me to take these threads seriously knowing that religion is complete nonsense. Nobody knows who wrote any part of it, when they wrote it, who translated it, where any of those people were and what there agenda was. If this jesus character depicted in the bible did exist at one point, he had nothing to do with the writing of this ridiculous book and certainly wasn't supernatural.
How do you know this? Let me stop. It's hard for me to take these threads seriously knowing that religion is complete nonsense. Nobody knows who wrote any part of it, when they wrote it, who translated it, where any of those people were and what there agenda was. If this jesus character depicted in the bible did exist at one point, he had nothing to do with the writing of this ridiculous book and certainly wasn't supernatural.
Biblical scholars have investigated and know quite a bit about this, to be fair.
How do you know this? Let me stop. It's hard for me to take these threads seriously knowing that religion is complete nonsense. Nobody knows who wrote any part of it, when they wrote it, who translated it, where any of those people were and what there agenda was. If this jesus character depicted in the bible did exist at one point, he had nothing to do with the writing of this ridiculous book and certainly wasn't supernatural.
I agree with some of what you say. For the most part various old manuscripts have additions depending on when they are dated. Translation is also a huge factor, as is understanding the culture of those days.
I don't pay attention to a lot of it other than the portions about loving others, that should be the key take away.
Its the way the Bible tells them to be. God's word is unwavering and there is no exception to it. Just because the rest of the world has decided that its ok to embrace homosexuality, loose women, loose morals, sex in the mainstream, dosnt mean that God now also supports those things/
You also have to consider the meaning of the word you are using. Conservative has a totaly diffrent meaning now than it did 50-75 years ago. What would be considered "conservative" now, would have just been the norm back then
How do you know this? Let me stop. It's hard for me to take these threads seriously knowing that religion is complete nonsense. Nobody knows who wrote any part of it, when they wrote it, who translated it, where any of those people were and what there agenda was. If this jesus character depicted in the bible did exist at one point, he had nothing to do with the writing of this ridiculous book and certainly wasn't supernatural.
Do we have to go through this with you for the 100th time?
Jesus had no political affiliation. His Apostles were first confused by this, but later realized that he had no political affiliation or aspirations, and that his kingdom was not on earth.
Perhaps you need to read the Bible and understand this. After that, read some actual scientific literature as well so that you can understand the fallacious nature of global warming.
"Those who will not read have no advantage over those who cannot read".
I agree with some of what you say. For the most part various old manuscripts have additions depending on when they are dated. Translation is also a huge factor, as is understanding the culture of those days.
I don't pay attention to a lot of it other than the portions about loving others, that should be the key take away.
If you can just cherrypick the parts you like, what validity does the book really have? Why claim that you follow it's teaching when you really only follow those scriptures that support your personal beliefs? If we all followed the golden rule and treated each other well, we'd be far better off then cherrypicking from a book full of nonsense.
Jesus was an authoritarian in the highest degree. Him and "his father" are perfect examples of "love me or die" types. Sure you have "free will" to reject Jesus if you want...at the barrel of a gun. The whole Christian message boils down to "accept me or burn in hell forever and ever." What kind of message of love is that? You're "free" to reject god's "love" to burn in a terrorist hellhole for all mankind.
Now the followers of an authoritarian god makes for more authoritarians. Using their god as an example it makes perfect sense that his followers would want to oppress people for their gender, suppress political ideologies, censor free speech, curb pornography, lock people up for the victimless crime of smoking pot, etc.
If you read the OT and examine what supposedly happens to nonbelievers at the end of the NT, you see god doesn't like dissent and freethinking. Religion tends to be authoritarian and it follows logically that their followers would spill over that mindset into politics.
When the Roman Empire fell, there were many well-educated sons of patrician families who now had no Senate in which to participate. Once Constantine had his convenient pre-battle vision and became a Christian, these men moved naturally into the early church, bringing their patriarchal beliefs with them; the church quickly became a business/political entity.
Women and Gnostics were booted out of positions of authority and branded as heretics. Saul came along long after Christ, and is another who claimed to have a vision that led him to Christianity. Oddly, people in the early church who remembered Jesus himself had their writings tossed when the Bible was first compiled, and Saul (whose teachings are often contrary to what we find in the Four Gospels) became Paul, taking the nascent church to Rome and echoing the Roman patriarchy. Historically you are quite correct in stating that Roman authoritarianism and class consciousness became an integral part of politics and economics in the Roman Church.
You see, if you read the book you would know it is full of different accounts from different people. People see things differently from each other and they also see things differently over generations.
But you equate the book with a fairy tale with the likes of The Little Train that could or something along those lines.
That's just not the case even if you're not religious.
What percentage of the population do you think could read and write from about 50 B.C. - 1800 A.D.?
It's not a very large percentage which would mean the writers of the bible would more than likely be more educated than the rest of their group.
"The liberal soul shall be made fat, and he that watereth will himself be watered." Jesus
Now, we know that Christ wasn't using the word in a modern political sense, but he darn sure meant it to be taken as it's defined in any dictionary:
[quote] liberal: 1) favoring social progress and democratic reform; *2) tolerant; free from prejudice; *3) generous, bountiful; *4) ample, plentiful;*5) broad; not limited. [end quote]
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
