As a Christian, I am constantly amazed by how often I am told I am not a true believer BY OTHER CHRISTIANS!!!

Now, just historically, the Roman Catholic Church is probably the oldest Christian denomination there is and is the largest. It also holds scriptures in original languages and relies on the older texts to form its doctrines. You would therefore assume that it is closest to the church set up by Jesus. Right? Well not according to some. Many YEC's rely on 20th century translations of the Bible that have slightly differing translations and are annotated in such a ways as to guide away from traditional interpretation.

Where does it state in the original Greek text of Genesis that the 6 days of creation were distinct 24 hour periods? It doesn't. Yet, this is a fundament to many Christian groups. It does saay in the Bible how hard you can beat your slaves, but ask any Republican candidate if they believe wholeheartedly in the Bible they all say "Yes, I am a committed Christian". Really?

Why are there so many Christian churches now? Who gave the religious authority to create them all and more importantly, why do they feel they have the right to decry all other denominations as "not true Christians".

And please, don't resort to only being rude about Christians, even though some of us clearly deserve a smack in the face with a reality hammer. Please answer on the psychology of religion too.

(November 10, 2011 at 9:07 am)chadster1976 Wrote: It does saay in the Bible how hard you can beat your slaves, but ask any Republican candidate if they believe wholeheartedly in the Bible they all say "Yes, I am a committed Christian". Really?

Well of course they believe wholeheartedly in the bible, because in most cases they haven't read it.

It is truly astonishing(ok,not really all that astonishing) the number of ex christians here who became that way only after they read the bible.

The catholic church is one of the, if not the, oldest Christian denomination save the Gnostics, Marcionites, Ebonites, etc if I am not mistaken.

As far as the catholic church being the closest to the truth I am not sure I can completely agree there. Catholicism/Christianity had the advantage of piggybacking on the roman empire thanks to Constantine and others. It is also easy to make someone nervous when a clergy, for the most part, controls the religious texts while most others are illiterate.

I am not saying I think the catholic church is some evil tyrant but I do think it has gone through stages of being so throughout history. I am referring more to it's leadership and I don't think it was always done maliciously in fact probably quite often not so. The groups that split off from the Catholic church later did so for different reasons.

Many of them, if I am not mistaken, thought that there was no authority for a pope like figure to exist. There were also various other complaints about traditions being followed that didn't have any biblical precedent etc. The catholic church is not exclusively a Bible based Christian sect either but relies on other religious texts etc. People usually have a huge problem with that because there is a perception that the Bible represents the writings of God's inspired writers such as the apostles.

That of course ignores the fact that the catholic church or the beginnings of the catholic church anyway were responsible for compiling the same book they use but yeah...

As far as the Bible saying it is okay to beat your slaves etc people really do need to recognize that there is a difference between levitical law and the NT times. Now did Jesus intend for his followers to follow the old law after his death? That is disputed I think but even if he did it seems like certain things would be against Jesus character such as the beating of slaves. People are completely free to disagree with me here and I am not a Christian anymore so in some ways it doesn't really matter.

I don't know if that provides any insight and some of this is my own opinion as well so take it all with a grain of salt. By all means do your own research on it and don't take anything I say at face value as I could be wrong.

Yes. The bible does say that if you are raped in the city then you are to be stoned to death as an adulterer. If you are raped in a field, it isn't your fault.
[Apparently, in the city, people would have heard you crying out so it's impossible to be raped in the city]

But, how does any of that account for revisionist Christianity? If you are a fundamentalist, shouldn't you take the word of God that is most likely to be most accurate?

The police know how important it is to get statements from witness early on coz the mind plays tricks otherwise. 2000 years of re-translation is surely gonna do the same in Christianity?

I pointed out this matter in a thread. Doesn't stop me from thinking that all Christian factions are equally wrong :p

If the subject is bullshit, anyone with a mouth has authority to create it. You know there could have been older denominations than RC, but RC had people like this executed at the first oppurtunity. Also, who told you that there were actually scriptures "in the original languages" held by any church, anywhere? As far as the RCC goes (relative to other denominations), they almost absorbed enough paganism to be respectable, but they fell just short of the bar.

(November 10, 2011 at 9:22 am)chadster1976 Wrote: Yes. The bible does say that if you are raped in the city then you are to be stoned to death as an adulterer. If you are raped in a field, it isn't your fault.
[Apparently, in the city, people would have heard you crying out so it's impossible to be raped in the city]

That is why I rape people in fields. You just can't get anything done in a city.

[slaps forehead]

Tssk....

Shoulda known better

Hehe

Yeah Catholics are just as tasty as any other believer. I wouldn't not eat one.

So, nothing better to add other than "you're all wrong now piss off!"?