For True Believers in Their Bibles Being the Literal Word of God.

[ding]

I could care less ding.

It does seem that you could care less. You seem to care a great deal.

I think you meant to say you couldn't care less.

 

[Donald H]

Are you claiming the Bible is the literal word of God?

Yes, absolutely and one of the purposes of this thread is to flush out the backsliders and half-ass believers to say what isn't the liberal word of god. The ding refuses to do that but you could try if you like.

This is not a place to come for those who can't accept that their bibles are the truth, it's a place for complete and true believers to come where they won't have to suffer laughter and derision

 

[irosie91]

Are you claiming the Bible is the literal word of God?

Yes, absolutely and one of the purposes of this thread is to flush out the backsliders and half-ass believers to say what isn't the liberal word of god. The ding refuses to do that but you could try if you like.

This is not a place to come for those who can't accept that their bibles are the truth, it's a place for complete and true believers to come where they won't have to suffer laughter and derision

Surada, any objection to Donald's FLUSH OUT proposal?

 

[Infallible Arbiter]

Are you claiming the Bible is the literal word of God?

Yes, absolutely and one of the purposes of this thread is to flush out the backsliders and half-ass believers to say what isn't the liberal word of god. The ding refuses to do that but you could try if you like.

This is not a place to come for those who can't accept that their bibles are the truth, it's a place for complete and true believers to come where they won't have to suffer laughter and derision

Do you take Romans 11:36 as literal? -
"For out of him and through him and to him are ALL THINGS".

 

[irosie91]

Are you claiming the Bible is the literal word of God?

Yes, absolutely and one of the purposes of this thread is to flush out the backsliders and half-ass believers to say what isn't the liberal word of god. The ding refuses to do that but you could try if you like.

This is not a place to come for those who can't accept that their bibles are the truth, it's a place for complete and true believers to come where they won't have to suffer laughter and derision

Do you take Romans 11:36 as literal? -
"For out of him and through him and to him are ALL THINGS".

WTF does it mean?

 

[surada]

Are you claiming the Bible is the literal word of God?

Yes, absolutely and one of the purposes of this thread is to flush out the backsliders and half-ass believers to say what isn't the liberal word of god. The ding refuses to do that but you could try if you like.

This is not a place to come for those who can't accept that their bibles are the truth, it's a place for complete and true believers to come where they won't have to suffer laughter and derision

Surada, any objection to Donald's FLUSH OUT proposal?

He has a high opinion of hmself as a "flusher".

 

[Donald H]

He has a high opinion of hmself as a "flusher".

This topic has served its purpose of challenging those who consider their bibles as works of fiction to be specific on that which they claim is fiction.

They're proven themselves to be afraid to do that even on the hokiest of bible stories. It could be that they actually have faith that somehow, some way the craziest of bible shit can somehow be reconciled with science.

The challenge still stands intact and undefeated.

 

[.oldschool]

WTF does it mean?

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/433240/jewish/God.htm

 

[ding]

He has a high opinion of hmself as a "flusher".

This topic has served its purpose of challenging those who consider their bibles as works of fiction to be specific on that which they claim is fiction.

They're proven themselves to be afraid to do that even on the hokiest of bible stories. It could be that they actually have faith that somehow, some way the craziest of bible shit can somehow be reconciled with science.

The challenge still stands intact and undefeated.

I believe scripture is inspired by God.

The Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord's Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God's Word and Christ's Body. In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, but as what it really is, the word of God. In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them.

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more. The inspired books teach the truth. Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.

Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is not a written and mute word, but the Word is incarnate and living. If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, open our minds to understand the Scriptures.

In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words. In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression. But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.

• Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
• Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture.
• Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal. The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction". The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem. It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.

It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books. This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.

Paraphrased and excerpted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Table of Contents

 

[surada]

He has a high opinion of hmself as a "flusher".

This topic has served its purpose of challenging those who consider their bibles as works of fiction to be specific on that which they claim is fiction.

They're proven themselves to be afraid to do that even on the hokiest of bible stories. It could be that they actually have faith that somehow, some way the craziest of bible shit can somehow be reconciled with science.

The challenge still stands intact and undefeated.

I believe scripture is inspired by God.

The Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord's Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God's Word and Christ's Body. In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, but as what it really is, the word of God. In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them.

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more. The inspired books teach the truth. Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.

Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is not a written and mute word, but the Word is incarnate and living. If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, open our minds to understand the Scriptures.

In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words. In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression. But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.

• Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
• Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture.
• Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal. The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction". The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem. It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.

It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books. This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.

Paraphrased and excerpted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Table of Contents

Problem is there was NO Ur of the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham. God wouldn't have gotten that wrong.

 

[ding]

He has a high opinion of hmself as a "flusher".

This topic has served its purpose of challenging those who consider their bibles as works of fiction to be specific on that which they claim is fiction.

They're proven themselves to be afraid to do that even on the hokiest of bible stories. It could be that they actually have faith that somehow, some way the craziest of bible shit can somehow be reconciled with science.

The challenge still stands intact and undefeated.

I believe scripture is inspired by God.

The Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord's Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God's Word and Christ's Body. In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, but as what it really is, the word of God. In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them.

God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.

God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more. The inspired books teach the truth. Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.

Still, the Christian faith is not a "religion of the book." Christianity is the religion of the "Word" of God, a word which is not a written and mute word, but the Word is incarnate and living. If the Scriptures are not to remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must, through the Holy Spirit, open our minds to understand the Scriptures.

In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words. In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression. But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.

• Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture". Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
• Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture.
• Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church. The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal. The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God's plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ's victory and also of Christian Baptism. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written "for our instruction". The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, "leading"). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem. It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgement. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.

It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books. This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.

Paraphrased and excerpted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Table of Contents

Problem is there was NO Ur of the Chaldeans in the time of Abraham. God wouldn't have gotten that wrong.

That was already addressed. God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. It's not a history book. In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words. In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression. But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.

Ur of the Chaldees - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[BreezeWood]

Cool story, bro. But usually people who attack a whole class of people have some perceived gripe. So... you've been harmed, haven't you? You can tell me. It's OK. I promise.

Yes, of course I've been harmed throughout my life and in many ways and at many times. Have you?

But I feel confident that I've been able to work through the harm and to be at peace with the world.

You have been harmed too, as has every human being on the planet starting from the age of 0 minutes when the doctor spanked thier bottom.

But we need to limit our discussion to 'emotional' harm to be able to make any sense on this discussion.

I am free of any conditions that could limit my understanding of the god or the bibles.

You are being held captive to being a conditional believer in your bible. Or perhaps not a believer at all? You have so far refused to stipulate what you believe and what you have thrown out as fictional.

Your only purpose on this thread is in your being able to state that which you believe is just bifle bullshit.

Both I and true believers are ready to move on to our non-conditional beliefs. You need to find strength in prayer in order to have the courage to state clearly that which you reject as your god's word as spoken in your bibles.
Do so at your leisure! This thread will be here to recieve you!

As the televangelists would say to you ding: Evil demons go ooooouuuuttttttt!

.

Yes, of course I've been harmed throughout my life and in many ways and at many times. Have you?

.
- doubtful

the one quality bing does posses as that of a christian is being an unconscionable crucifier of innocence and purity - for them being both good and bad is their comfort zone, sinners and desired destiny for eternity. sad but true story.

 

[Donald H]

the one quality bing does posses as that of a christian is being an unconscionable crucifier of innocence and purity - for them being both good and bad is their comfort zone, sinners and desired destiny for eternity. sad but true story.

ding is struggling with his beliefs vs. his belief in his bibles that he has decided to reject. He's trying to pretend that the literal word of god in his bibles needs translation so that it can mean what he wants it to mean.

The purpose of this thread was to sort out the true and unconditional believers from those who refuse to believe their bibles and so need to basically rewrite them to provide a comfort zone for themselves.

Few true and unconditional believers have come forward to speak on the issues raised but at least there have been a few.

There can be no halfway beliefs in the god and their bibles. The god didn't leave anything up for interpretation by those who haven't found comfort and truth in their bibles.

 

[ding]

the one quality bing does posses as that of a christian is being an unconscionable crucifier of innocence and purity - for them being both good and bad is their comfort zone, sinners and desired destiny for eternity. sad but true story.

ding is struggling with his beliefs vs. his belief in his bibles that he has decided to reject. He's trying to pretend that the literal word of god in his bibles needs translation so that it can mean what he wants it to mean.

The purpose of this thread was to sort out the true and unconditional believers from those who refuse to believe their bibles and so need to basically rewrite them to provide a comfort zone for themselves.

Few true and unconditional believers have come forward to speak on the issues raised but at least there have been a few.

There can be no halfway beliefs in the god and their bibles. The god didn't leave anything up for interpretation by those who haven't found comfort and truth in their bibles.

Not at all, Donny. You are struggling to correctly state anyone's beliefs.

 

[ding]

Socialists who seek to subordinate religion will stop at nothing to distort reality.

 

[ding]

Just to confirm, Donald H ... you are a socialist and you would like for religion to perish, right?

I'm not misstating that, am I?

 

[Donald H]

Just to confirm, Donald H ... you are a socialist and you would like for religion to perish, right?

I'm not misstating that, am I?

I am a socialist according to Americans' view of the political spectrum.
In Canada I'm a capitalist government supporter who leans about as far left as the majority of Canadians.

On religions and other superstitious beliefs, I'm of the opinion that they need to be discouraged and left to dying of their own accord. I wouldn't advocate banning religions but I take a stronger position on preventing them from being able to teach lies to children. Teaching children religious lies is child abuse and no socially responsible person should condone that!

That's not to say that christians need to throw out the parts of their biibles that promote child abuse. They should either support it totally or throw it all out!

 

[ding]

Just to confirm, Donald H ... you are a socialist and you would like for religion to perish, right?

I'm not misstating that, am I?

I am a socialist according to Americans' view of the political spectrum.
In Canada I'm a capitalist government supporter who leans about as far left as the majority of Canadians.

On religions and other superstitious beliefs, I'm of the opinion that they need to be discouraged and left to dying of their own accord. I wouldn't advocate banning religions but I take a stronger position on preventing them from being able to teach lies to children. Teaching children religious lies is child abuse and no socially responsible person should condone that!

That's not to say that christians need to throw out the parts of their biibles that promote child abuse. They should either support it totally or throw it all out!

So I didn't misstate anything. Perfect.

You are proving my point that socialists subordinate religion. It's what you guys do.

 

[Donald H]

Just to confirm, Donald H ... you are a socialist and you would like for religion to perish, right?

I'm not misstating that, am I?

I would be a socialist by American standards, but am pretty clode to middle of the road capitalist by Canadian standards. I've never strayed too far from the policy of the Liberal party of Canada.

On religions: I wouldn't support abolishing them. It's more democratic to just allow them to die their own deaths on their own time. On religion's telling lies and teaching children superstitious beliefs, I would take a stronger stance in considering the practice to be illegal. Child abuse just isn't tolerable in a democratic country.

Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life | News

For the fifth year in a row, Canada is ranked the #1 country in the world in 2020 for Quality of Life, according to a global ranking from US News.

dailyhive.com

The top 9 behind Canada are generally more left leaning than Canada. Canada can be improved even more by adopting some of those countries' socialist policies.
I can elaborate if anybody is interested.

 

[ding]

Just to confirm, Donald H ... you are a socialist and you would like for religion to perish, right?

I'm not misstating that, am I?

I would be a socialist by American standards, but am pretty clode to middle of the road capitalist by Canadian standards. I've never strayed too far from the policy of the Liberal party of Canada.

On religions: I wouldn't support abolishing them. It's more democratic to just allow them to die their own deaths on their own time. On religion's telling lies and teaching children superstitious beliefs, I would take a stronger stance in considering the practice to be illegal. Child abuse just isn't tolerable in a democratic country.

Canada ranked #1 country in the world for Quality of Life | News

For the fifth year in a row, Canada is ranked the #1 country in the world in 2020 for Quality of Life, according to a global ranking from US News.

dailyhive.com

The top 9 behind Canada are generally more left leaning than Canada. Canada can be improved even more by adopting some of those countries' socialist policies.
I can elaborate if anybody is interested.

You are just doing what socialists do. It's your religion which is why you attack rival religions.