What Religion Do You Follow?

[pizzahut451]

sapphi_snake said:

@pizzahut451:

The Church represents the institution. And a religion doesn't have independent existence.

the religion has its message to the world, and the religion is based on that message. In this case, those messages are teachings of Christ.

When did he say that? Did he say it in writing? Or is that what the fanatocs who followed him everywhere said? Did he say he wanted to form a new religion? Or did the fanatics who followed him everywhere wanted to do that?

He said that in the Bible, which was written by his apostles, the people he considerd his borthers. T

They're not taxed for it, so they're harming the economy.

Lots of things are not taxed in, doesnt mean the church is evil like you are pretending to be.

It participates in running the country, something which doesn't happen in a country that calls itself secular.

Russia doesnt persecute the religous minority in that country, which was your point before. You said Christian church is opressing people who dont share their religion, because it runs the law. russia is internationally recognised as a secular country (I even provided a link for that) and thus the church cant make any laws on minorities.

In Saudi Arabia Christians are treated the way the Koran says they should be treated. They don't have equal rights to muslims (they' essentially second class citizens), and that's just regarding Christians and Jews. Atheists or people of non-Abrahamic religions cannot practice their beliefs over there.

Does the Koran says they should treat Christians like that? Mind giving me a direct quote in context saying that? Also, Christinas in Saudi Arabia are still allowed to be christian as long as they dont go agaisnt their law, which doesnt limit their freedom of religion.

They were Muslims (their religion) and they were educated by Muslims. Had they lived in a Chrisitan country they wouldn't have benefited from that education.

Had they lived under the rule of church they woldn't have benifited from the freedom of education the people had in Iberia...BIG diffrence.

They were fanatics, who made up fantastic stories about him (unless he contributed to that also). Don't you know how cults work?

Do you know how fanatics work? Fanatics go around forcing thier ideas on eachother. Jesus was striclty against any kind of violence. His people spreaded his beleifs tro out eastern Europe. As for ''made up stories'' you have absoultely zero evidence to make such a statemnet. I believe all stories of Christ are true, and not a single evidence suggests otherwise.

How could Christians be educated if there were no schools were people could be tought? The only intellectuals in Christian Europe back then were part of the clergy. They were the only ones who had access to education. Everyone else was illiterate, as it was considered that they didn't need to be educated. They were sheep who needed to be guided.

Yet there were edcuated ones who didnt share their knowledge to the public out of fear from church. And yes, there were tons of schhols during the middle ages in europ.e Heck, Christian Byzantine Empire had an established schooling system beginning at the primary level. According to Traditions and Encounters, the founding of the primary education system began in 425 A.D. and "... military personnel usually had at least a primary education ...". The sometimes efficient and often large government of the Empire meant that educated citizens were a must.    

I

Those people already had their own languages and writing styles, which the Christian missionaries destroyed. They also had food and shelter (the Aztecs had larger and better built cities than anything in Europe), and the Europeans brought all the diseases over there (they actually used them as methods to defeat them). And the Christian missionaries were stongly tied to the Conquistadores (who do you think bought them there in the first place), and they actively helped them in their war against the natives by instiganting civil wars and destroying the natives from within. Plus, the Church had a stake in all the riches that were bought back obviously. They considered themselves to be "Christ's soldiers" who's duty was to force Christianity on the world.

Hell no, they didnt. They primary goal was to take as much as land, money and slaves as they can. They didnt give 2 shits about them not being christian. Do you honestly thing, that if the new land was discoverd, bigger than all of Europe, lots of gold and people to posess that has little to no defence at all, the Conquistadores wouldnt try and take that land if the people there wre Christian. Hell, most of wars in Europe were christian country vs. christian country. The convertion to Christianity happend after the vicotrious side was alredy know in the conquest of South America. Colonization and mass murdering happend for whole other reasons than Christianity. But I knwo you'll never want to understand that, simply due to hatered.

And not reply to you? No, that would just not be polite.

No, it wouldn't be. This is a internet debate lol, we are not having a tea part (eeewwww) If you dont know how to respond or just down wanna respondd, than dont do it. You dont have any duty towards me, so it would not be unpolite. Anyway,  this is the last time I am posting in this thread, if I were you, I wouldnt bother posting back. I quoted and debunked your post literally over 20 tiemes by now, and you either 1.) twisted 2) chnaged or 3) removed the topic from our debate. The original point of this debate was, in case you forgot (which you certanly did) was that spreading christianity in China wouldnt be a bad thing for Chinese people. And now look at what we are arguing on. Something completly unrelated on the original matter. You just used a lot of topic chnaging and cherry picking to mock the Christianity, in comprassion to anything. There is absolutely zero chnace this debate will ever end unless I end it here. Im tired of coming back here every day  or so. But a tleast you admited you were wrong on reconquista part, so thats something.

Bye !