Jesus the Messiah, part God.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Philokalia"]
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]
There is no reasonable sense ot be made of this. We've already discussed this ourselves. Logical inference could be used, but inference is a weak form of logical thought and could be used to reach most any conclusion.
You've already tried and failed to distinguish person-hoods from essences in your previous posts here, so why you keep banging this particular drum seems absurd to me, especially when you personally accept the "mystery" of it all.
tenaka2
Actually we only half discussed these and all you showed is that you can't comprehend basic terms. You don't even know what a person is, perhaps because you insert a naturalistic understanding that there is no such thing as the person, the psyche, the whatever but that you didn't even give consideration to it shows that you just don't want to understand it. Like the muslims. Besides you haven't demonstrated anything illogical about the trinity, because you don't want to understand it.
There is no getting around that the trinity is never mentioned in the bible, if it was central to the religion and god and the bible is gods word it would be very obvious and explicit.
Indeed. It is not mentioned at all, and all evidence within the Bible points to the opposite. He's just using his blind faith to ignore the facts, no matter how much is stacked against him. It's sad.
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]Indeed. It is not mentioned at all, and all evidence within the Bible points to the opposite. He's just using his blind faith to ignore the facts, no matter how much is stacked against him. It's sad.There is no getting around that the trinity is never mentioned in the bible, if it was central to the religion and god and the bible is gods word it would be very obvious and explicit.
ShadowsDemon
Not really - the duality between Jesus and God is mentioned in the bible several times. I can't understand why trinity deniers forget these parts of the bible, when they lie to say the bible does not ever directly relate Jesus to God.
The bible also has passages that suggest differences between Jesus and God, so the cause of this issue is the contradictory nature of the bible: It lets people cherry-pick the bits they like while ignoring those bits that differ with their view.
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ He died but resurrected remember.LastRambo341Again, God cannot "die". Resurrect means that you died and then become alive. When he "died", how was the world running? How can an immortal being "die"? Unless He allowed Himself to die.
However, even if you still persist that he rose from the dead, that doesn't prove that he is God because according to Acts 2:24, Romans 10:9, 1Cor 15:15, Acts 2:3132, Acts 3:15, Acts 3:26, Acts 4:10, Acts 5:30, Acts 10:4041, Acts 13:30, Acts 13:34, Acts 13:37, Acts 17:3031, 1Cor 6:14, 2Cor 4:14, Gal 1:1, Eph 1:20, Col 2:12, 1Thess 1:10, Heb 13:20, 1Pet 1:3,and 1Pet 1:21 it was GOD who rose JESUS from the deadLastRambo341The father is God as well, that isn't a contradiction.
[QUOTE="Bane_09"][QUOTE="Blood-Scribe"]
So yes, you're going to have to find a better example if you want to represent the trinity in terms of formal logic (lol).
FelipeInside
I don't get why religious people try to justify their beliefs with bad logic, it just makes them look stupid
I don't get why Atheists people try to justify that there is no god with bad logic. See what I did there?You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
I don't get why Atheists people try to justify that there is no god with bad logic. See what I did there?[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bane_09"]
I don't get why religious people try to justify their beliefs with bad logic, it just makes them look stupid
Bane_09
You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
What do you mean by logic. You can prove that God exists by careful reading analysis and through basic Biblical understanding. But if you are looking for a photograph of him (an instrument that was made in the last few hundred years), then no. Even during the Biblical era God is a person that was not seen with mortal eyes. This is not how God works.
Indeed. It is not mentioned at all, and all evidence within the Bible points to the opposite. He's just using his blind faith to ignore the facts, no matter how much is stacked against him. It's sad.[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
There is no getting around that the trinity is never mentioned in the bible, if it was central to the religion and god and the bible is gods word it would be very obvious and explicit.
RationalAtheist
Not really - the duality between Jesus and God is mentioned in the bible several times. I can't understand why trinity deniers forget these parts of the bible, when they lie to say the bible does not ever directly relate Jesus to God.
The bible also has passages that suggest differences between Jesus and God, so the cause of this issue is the contradictory nature of the bible: It lets people cherry-pick the bits they like while ignoring those bits that differ with their view.
Even if correct that still impiles a duality, not a trinity, a rather large gap.
[QUOTE="LastRambo341"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ He died but resurrected remember.The-ApostleAgain, God cannot "die". Resurrect means that you died and then become alive. When he "died", how was the world running? How can an immortal being "die"? Unless He allowed Himself to die. But the moment God "dies", the whole world will collapse because he is not controlling it anymore. Again, God cannot "die" because he is immortal. If us human beings can die, then how can we differentiate ourselves from God? :? Are you saying that we can be God?
Even if correct that still impiles a duality, not a trinity, a rather large gap.
tenaka2
What do you mean "even if correct"?
The bible does infer some concepts of trinity too, for example in Matthew 29:19 and Luke 1:35.
you think time is finite?[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]
I don't accept the concept of eternity.
tenaka2
Of course. Time had a start, therefore it cannot be infinite.
Really? When did time start and how do you know this?
Indeed. It is not mentioned at all, and all evidence within the Bible points to the opposite. He's just using his blind faith to ignore the facts, no matter how much is stacked against him. It's sad.[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
There is no getting around that the trinity is never mentioned in the bible, if it was central to the religion and god and the bible is gods word it would be very obvious and explicit.
RationalAtheist
Not really - the duality between Jesus and God is mentioned in the bible several times. I can't understand why trinity deniers forget these parts of the bible, when they lie to say the bible does not ever directly relate Jesus to God.
The bible also has passages that suggest differences between Jesus and God, so the cause of this issue is the contradictory nature of the bible: It lets people cherry-pick the bits they like while ignoring those bits that differ with their view.
Yeah, people don't know how to take it literally or figuratively, and use either one to their own advantage when it suits them.you think time is finite?[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]
I don't accept the concept of eternity.
tenaka2
Of course. Time had a start, therefore it cannot be infinite.
god i hate metaphysics[QUOTE="LastRambo341"][QUOTE="champion837"] Are you saying that you don't think he is the Son of God either? He said that he is Alpha and Omega, and is one with God, and much more. That sounds like God to me.champion837"Son of God" is just a title Book of Romans 8:14 "For those who are lead by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" The bible said there are other sons of God such as Adam, for example in Luke 3:38, "Kenan was the son of Enosh. Enosh was the son of Seth. Seth was the son of Adam. Adam was the son of God." So, anyone who is pious, anyone who is lead by spirit of God is dubbed as "Son of God", not the literal sense. You're quoting Revelations 1: 11 about the whole "I am Alpha and Omega". Alpha and Omega and the first and last in what? He wasnt the first in this world, Adam was. He wasn't the last either as John 16: 12-14 says that the Spirit of truth shall come and show true things to come. Alpha and Omega refer that in the law of God, Jesus is that because his rules has to be followed. As well as back in Moses' time, he was Alpha and Omega. For Solomon, for Abraham etc. That is not an unambiguous statement stating that Jesus claimed divinity. And even if you truly feel that is claiming divinity, there are many verses in the Bible where it states Jesus doing human activities. "A title", is that a yes or a no? "Book of Romans 8:14 For those who are lead by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" John 3:16 says his "only begotten son" "Alpha and Omega and the first and last in what? He wasnt the first in this world, Adam was." So he made it up? I don't understand, are you doubting what he said about himself? What you are saying isn't clear to me. "There are many verses in the Bible where it states Jesus doing human activities." Yes, because he was a human, but that doesn't mean that you can ignore all of the verses that are about his divinity.
- Meaning that he is not literally a son
- John 3:16's word "begotten" has been confirmed by Christian scholars of the highest eminants who are backed by 50 co-operating Christian denominations that it is a fabrication and corruption. If you want proof: The authors of RSV, that is, "thirty-two scholars, assisted by an Advisory Board of fifty representatives of the cooperating denominations," after praising the King James Version as "the noblest monument of English prose" acknowledge the following facts: "Yet the King James Version has grave defects. By the middle of the nineteenth century , the development of Biblical studies and the discovery of many manuscripts more ancient than those upon which the King James Version was based, made it manifest that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for revision of the English translation ... "Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the BEST JUDGMENT of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text. In the 1951 version, the word "begotten" of John 3:16,18 was considered as an addition and was taken out. But, in the following revision, in 1971, this correction is considered as a distortion, the surgery was reversed and the word "begotten" replanted again.
God cannot beget. Begetting is an animal act and belong to the lowest animal functions of sex. The moment God begets, he's not God. Because only humans can beget.
- Alpha and Omega is misunderstood
- No one can be a God and a human at the same tim, there is no logical sense. God has no limitations but a man does. How can you have limitations and no limitations at the same time? There are no unambiguous statements where Jesus himself say "I am God" or "Worship me"
I don't get why Atheists people try to justify that there is no god with bad logic. See what I did there?[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bane_09"]
I don't get why religious people try to justify their beliefs with bad logic, it just makes them look stupid
Bane_09
You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)
[QUOTE="Bane_09"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] I don't get why Atheists people try to justify that there is no god with bad logic. See what I did there?FelipeInside
You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bane_09"]
You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
wis3boi
You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
No one can say a God exists with 100% confidence, and no one can say a God doesn't exist either. That's fact. No one knows the truth. Now, depends on how each person takes the world around them, they can decide to believe in one (religious) or not believe in one (atheists). I am aware that most Atheists also don't believe in the afterlife. They think that when a person dies, there is nothing beyond, it's just black darkness. I believe in resurrection, but more as in recycling. Everything in the Universe gets recycled, re-used, so why not human beings?
[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)FelipeInside
You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
No one can say a God exists with 100% confidence, and no one can say a God doesn't exist either. That's fact. No one knows the truth. Now, depends on how each person takes the world around them, they can decide to believe in one (religious) or not believe in one (atheists). I am aware that most Atheists also don't believe in the afterlife. They think that when a person dies, there is nothing beyond, it's just black darkness. I believe in resurrection, but more as in recycling. Everything in the Universe gets recycled, re-used, so why not human beings? Well we do get recycled. There's no evidence there's anything to it other than an energy recycling though. I don't really care what a person believes so long as they note reality and don't try to use their beliefs to subvert reality or to say otherwise in an official manner. I believe in things with no evidence but I fully admit they are without evidence and I'm fully aware that they're not for everyone, so much so that I doubt there's a single person here who knows what I believe in.You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="Bane_09"]
You can't logically prove god exists....but good luck trying. It will be amusing to read
wis3boi
You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
It's only the crazies that feel they need to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat that do that sort of stuff.[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="FelipeInside"] You can't logically prove that God DOESN'T exist. See, goes both ways but ur one of those obvious Atheists who think they are right and everyone else is wrong. I don't bother with that kind, I like to have conversations with ones that consider every angle and respect other people's views (like Wisboi here)ShadowsDemon
You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
It's only the crazies that feel they need to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat that do that sort of stuff.and here it's half the population
It's only the crazies that feel they need to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat that do that sort of stuff.[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]
You have to be more specific thoguh when this discusion comes up and you have to be more aware of the majority athiest position.
Correct in not being to prove 'god' exists, but this term is so vague is almost worthless....what god? What kind?
I can say with near complete confidence a personal god does not exist. I can also say that a deistic god could exist. The other issue is, if for whatever reason we found out about one existing (either type) still leaves massive wholes in finding out more about existence as a whole. That's why the default position is non-belief, because there is zero reason to suggest either type of god beign exists until there is a reason to warrent that belief. Until then, people will follow whatever stories they happened to be brought up with.
Most non-believers are comfortable with the answer of "I don't know" when talking about the cosmos and existence. Many theists on the other hand seems to love making the claim they know all about it with certainty. That's one of the big gripes of people like me. You're an aussie, right Felipe? Be glad australia is a rather largely non-theist nation....in the US, fundies just crawl out of the woodwork...at least you have the pleasure of allowing non-theists into your politics :lol:
wis3boi
and here it's half the population
Damn :/ I don't know a single religious person here in Australia who would do that...
[QUOTE="LastRambo341"][QUOTE="The-Apostle"] Unless He allowed Himself to die.The-ApostleBut the moment God "dies", the whole world will collapse because he is not controlling it anymore. Again, God cannot "die" because he is immortal. If us human beings can die, then how can we differentiate ourselves from God? :? Are you saying that we can be God? Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us. are you joking about or you for real?
Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us. are you joking about or you for real? fvck. lol.[QUOTE="The-Apostle"][QUOTE="LastRambo341"] But the moment God "dies", the whole world will collapse because he is not controlling it anymore. Again, God cannot "die" because he is immortal. If us human beings can die, then how can we differentiate ourselves from God? :? Are you saying that we can be God?GrayF0X786
Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us.The-ApostleI dunno....I mean if that is true wouldn't it make more sense if it was sooner?
[QUOTE="GrayF0X786"]Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us.FMAB_GTOI dunno....I mean if that is true wouldn't it make more sense if it was sooner? Astagfirilah i never said that!
I dunno....I mean if that is true wouldn't it make more sense if it was sooner? Astagfirilah i never said that! It is GS screwing things up again X_X I know you wont say that. let me edit it.[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"][QUOTE="GrayF0X786"]Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us.GrayF0X786
[QUOTE="GrayF0X786"]Astagfirilah i never said that! It is GS screwing things up again X_X I know you wont say that. let me edit it. i knew that lol[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"] I dunno....I mean if that is true wouldn't it make more sense if it was sooner?FMAB_GTO
Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us. are you joking about or you for real? What he said was true. Jesus was God in the flesh.[QUOTE="The-Apostle"][QUOTE="LastRambo341"] But the moment God "dies", the whole world will collapse because he is not controlling it anymore. Again, God cannot "die" because he is immortal. If us human beings can die, then how can we differentiate ourselves from God? :? Are you saying that we can be God?GrayF0X786
[QUOTE="GrayF0X786"]are you joking about or you for real? What he said was true. Jesus was God in the flesh. wasn't god able to just forgive us for this " original sin " you are talking about without becoming human and what you are saying he became and did ?[QUOTE="The-Apostle"] Not really. Jesus was fully man and fully God. God in the flesh. The only way for God to save us and give us the grace of eternal life was to come down to earth as His Son, die for our sins and raise from the dead. No one else had that power. When He rose that was how we got the Holy Spirit, which dwells within us.champion837
[QUOTE="champion837"][QUOTE="GrayF0X786"] are you joking about or you for real?MAZ85What he said was true. Jesus was God in the flesh. wasn't god able to just forgive us for this " original sin " you are talking about without becoming human and what you are saying he became and did ? People sin, so God came down to forgive them , it is as simple as that, wow.
Oh great, Christian vs. Muslim theological debate. It's like watching kids argue about which is the best power ranger.MannyDelgadoNone of them. TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES FTW !!!
Oh great, Christian vs. Muslim theological debate. It's like watching kids argue about which is the best power ranger.MannyDelgadoUm, no it isn't.
[QUOTE="MannyDelgado"]Oh great, Christian vs. Muslim theological debate. It's like watching kids argue about which is the best power ranger.FelipeInsideNone of them. TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES FTW !!! :P Good on ya for setting the mood back to normal
[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"] It's only the crazies that feel they need to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat that do that sort of stuff.ShadowsDemon
and here it's half the population
Damn :/ I don't know a single religious person here in Australia who would do that...It;s not uncommon to see mega-churches here that look like football stadiums and have rock concerts about jesus, being saved, the horrors of hell, and how terrible gay people are. And all this is tax-free.
Proof.
Damn :/ I don't know a single religious person here in Australia who would do that...[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]
and here it's half the population
wis3boi
It;s not uncommon to see mega-churches here that look like football stadiums and have rock concerts about jesus, being saved, the horrors of hell, and how terrible gay people are. And all this is tax-free.
Proof.
Yeah I've seen the photos and video. Over there it's more of a marketing thing (money grabber) than real Religion. BUT I guess it the stupid people that fall for it.
[QUOTE="wis3boi"]
[QUOTE="ShadowsDemon"] Damn :/ I don't know a single religious person here in Australia who would do that...FelipeInside
It;s not uncommon to see mega-churches here that look like football stadiums and have rock concerts about jesus, being saved, the horrors of hell, and how terrible gay people are. And all this is tax-free.
Proof.
Yeah I've seen the photos and video. Over there it's more of a marketing thing (money grabber) than real Religion. BUT I guess it the stupid people that fall for it.
it's not really a minority, its close to half the US population that lives like this. That's roughly 140-150 million people. Yes it is part marketing, but the congregations actually believe everything that's taught in these places. In the full documentary with Dawkins when he visited some of these churches, the kids were openly being taught racism and told thing sthat give them a superiority complex. It really makes me ashamed to say I hail from this country
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]
[QUOTE="wis3boi"]
It;s not uncommon to see mega-churches here that look like football stadiums and have rock concerts about jesus, being saved, the horrors of hell, and how terrible gay people are. And all this is tax-free.
Proof.
wis3boi
Yeah I've seen the photos and video. Over there it's more of a marketing thing (money grabber) than real Religion. BUT I guess it the stupid people that fall for it.
it's not really a minority, its close to half the US population that lives like this. That's roughly 140-150 million people. Yes it is part marketing, but the congregations actually believe everything that's taught in these places. In the full documentary with Dawkins when he visited some of these churches, the kids were openly being taught racism and told thing sthat give them a superiority complex. It really makes me ashamed to say I hail from this country
That's really sad. There is nothing wrong with teaching Religion, but not racism or hating gays, cause that's not what Real Religion teaches. For example I don't agree with Homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I go out with signs saying kill all gays.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment