Why is it always Atheists vs Christians?

[Unkotare]

How many millions of christians bitched about, and tried to stop construction of, a muslim community center being built on privately owned property in NYC a few years ago? .

People were not opposing that 'in the name of Christianity.'

Really?.

Yes, really. A lot of people -Christians, Jews, and even atheists - opposed that building because of what had only recently happened there. You are making assumptions based on the fact that the majority of people in this country happen to be Christians.

 

[Underhill]

Most ignorant atheists think that christianity sprung from Constantine.

I've never heard any atheist say that.

But any history of the church has to include the guy. He and his council essentially gave you your bible. Prior to that there was no bible as you have today. Just various books. Some of which were included, some were not.

And while I love getting a laugh out of revisionist history, he didn't just make it legal to be a christian. He made it illegal to be anything else.

 

[Underhill]

This is why it's always going to be us vs them.

Christians view opposition to a christian monument in a government owned public park as "trying to take their rights".

The truth is their monument is trying to take away our rights by tying the government to their religion.

How many millions of christians bitched about, and tried to stop construction of, a muslim community center being built on privately owned property in NYC a few years ago? And yet they fail to see the log in their own eye.

If I were to see someone actually infringing on the rights of christians I would fight that tooth and nail. But if I were a betting man, I'd bet they would throw me under the bus if someone were to be infringing my rights.

The government don't own anything. It belongs to the public and in America 80 percent believe in God. You do not have a right to not be offended.

Of course the government owns land. 80% may believe in god, but not the same god. And I never said I had the right to not be offended.

Answer this, if you don't believe in God, then why do you fear him?

I'm not afraid of god. But his followers sometimes scare the shit out of me.

 

[koshergrl]

No, the government holds land IN TRUST for the people.

 

[Glensather]

Christianity comes from Christ and the disciples. Christ and the disciples did not create the Roman Catholic church. The Roman Catholic church was created when a caesar became Christian. Hence a pope is born.

Christianity existed before the Catholic Church, and the Catholic church does not represent the core of Christianity. It just represents the one flavor...that of the Roman caesars.

I've heard it argued that Peter was the first Pope, so there is a precedent for saying that the Roman Catholic Church was the first official church of Christianity.

But if you go by the texts, the first "church" of Christianity was wherever Jesus happened to be. A church doesn't have to be a church to be considered a church.

Most ignorant atheists think that christianity sprung from Constantine.

I've never heard that before. Now, Constantine did help out Christianity through the Edict of Milan, which basically required you to treat Christians benevolently. Afterward he kind of went a bit extreme and adopted a "Convert or Die" policy.

Sometimes everything he did went completely against the religion he was promoting, but he did help grow Christianity's numbers.

No, the government holds land IN TRUST for the people.

Yeah, but how long until the government holds land for itself? When you have just the CONCEPT of "Eminent Domain", then you have a problem.

 

[koshergrl]

Christ referenced the church during his life, and there were no popes then.

I don't argue that the Catholic church isn't a part of the church....but most anti-Christians have only a fuzzy concept of what the church is, and from whence it came. They seem to think that there was no church when Christ died, until the Pope rose up and declared himself head of the church in Rome...and that all churches today are nothing but bastard branches of it. They can't get past seeing the church as a building, and a set of rules...when that isn't the church at all. The church is THE SAVED. It doesn't matter where they meet or what they call their local groups or what their doctrine is. Unless you are having a discussion specifically about the Catholic church, THE CHURCH is just the saved...be they Mormon, or Baptist, or Catholic, or whatever. If they're saved, God recognizes them as a part of the church. And people were granted salvation for hundreds of years before the Catholic Church arrived on the scene.

 

[Glensather]

That's probably because the Catholic Church has done its best to convince people that any branches off are bastardized from them.

 

[koshergrl]

Of course.

 

[koshergrl]

But that was happening even during Paul's time...the New Testament is filled with admonitions to the different and large churches that sprung up overnight in the wake of Christ.

 

[Glensather]

But that was happening even during Paul's time...the New Testament is filled with admonitions to the different and large churches that sprung up overnight in the wake of Christ.

Very true.
I remember attending a church not too long ago out of respect for one of my coworkers (it was their wedding). It was a Church of God, which also claims to be the first church ever, claiming to have been invented in the 1st Century AD as a unifier of many separate churches. They claim the Catholic Church sprung from them.

I think it's all semantics, personally. I don't believe, but if I did, why worry about all these denominations and whatnot? Christ said this would happen, so wouldn't the best thing be to just pick one closest to you and attend that one?

Granted, I'm speaking from a mostly Protestant viewpoint, so I only have secondhand knowledge of how churches like Catholics or Mormons work.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Like I said. We aren't having a conversation. You want to assign alternate meanings and post garbage, feel free.

We were. You just decided to say "you're an idiot" and start holding your breath. The fact remains you asked me for proof of a claim I never made. If you're going to clam up like a petulant child because you're not getting your way I have a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old at home I can go to for that.

There is an unfortunate stereotype that religion makes people hostile and irrational. You may want to make an effort not to further it.

The stereotype exists only in your mind, and separate from reality.

It's called "bigotry".

Right. It's a stereotype that I made up.

You should take a page from foxfyre's book. There's a Christian who is capable of civil discourse.

 

[koshergrl]

I don't see the point of wasting huge swathes of time trying to convert those who seek only to belittle and defame Christians, and the church.

We all have different gifts. Mine is my ability to recognize and point out bigoted scum. Foxy's is to befriend them. We have different jobs, and neither of us works for you, so what you think of it is irrelevant.

 

[Underhill]

No, the government holds land IN TRUST for the people.

I couldn't care less. It's the governments land. And the people do not have a right to post their religious message on it.

You have the freedom to put your message all over private land. And with the number of churches out there, I don't know why you would need to plaster your message on government land.

Clearly it is an attempt to thwart the constitution.

 

[The Irish Ram]

How many millions of christians bitched about, and tried to stop construction of, a muslim community center being built on privately owned property in NYC a few years ago? .

People were not opposing that 'in the name of Christianity.'

Really?

I believe that you are being obtuse in that on purpose. It was very much the churches and the Christians opposing that move. For the most part, atheists and non-Christian religious people simply did not care.

Of course, you have another counter to that though – atheists were the ones spearheading the opposition for the display of the ‘cross’ from the rubble in a privately funded museum because, well, I can’t really tell what for. The opposition made no sense. At least the Christians had somewhat of an underlying reason – Islamic radicals DID kill a LOT of people taking those buildings out.

Really, in essence, we have an example where the opposition to religion was essentially all over the place, not just with Christians but with others as well and all were essentially equal in this.

I believe Unk is correct. As a Christian, I opposed the Muslims setting up shop on the rubble they were responsible for, for strictly patriotic reasons.
I didn't oppose their religion as much as their shoving our noses in it.

 

[Underhill]

Christ referenced the church during his life, and there were no popes then.

There was also no resurrection, no bible and thus no real salvation message. The church Jesus reffered to was not a church at all. He uses the term ecclesia, which is what the romans used to govern when they took over a new area. It was a government body or council. So church is actually a misinterpretation.

That is where your entire argument falls apart. The protestant reformation came about as a result of wide spread printing of the bible. Prior to that the bible was the domain of the Catholics, Greek Orthodox and other clergy with very few people having any clue what the book actually said.

There were some small early churches but I've seen no evidence that they persisted in any numbers past the first or second century.

So you have 100 years of early church, then the scene is dominated by Catholics and a few other large sects. The protestants are virtually non existent until 1400 years later.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

I don't see the point of wasting huge swathes of time trying to convert those who seek only to belittle and defame Christians, and the church.

We all have different gifts. Mine is my ability to recognize and point out bigoted scum. Foxy's is to befriend them. We have different jobs, and neither of us works for you, so what you think of it is irrelevant.

Foxfyre most definitely has a gift. Your arrogance allows you to believe that you have one as well. But if your gift serves to increase your sense of self worth, then I guess it is worth something after all.

If you took about a tenth of the time you spend belittling those who are not of the Christian faith or do not share your world view exactly and instead make an honest evaluation of the input I've given in the Religion forum, you would know that belittling Christianity is far from the only thing I seek. It's a simple question of perception. Foxfyre can probably recognize that while you probably cannot.

 

[Underhill]

People were not opposing that 'in the name of Christianity.'

Really?

I believe that you are being obtuse in that on purpose. It was very much the churches and the Christians opposing that move. For the most part, atheists and non-Christian religious people simply did not care.

Of course, you have another counter to that though – atheists were the ones spearheading the opposition for the display of the ‘cross’ from the rubble in a privately funded museum because, well, I can’t really tell what for. The opposition made no sense. At least the Christians had somewhat of an underlying reason – Islamic radicals DID kill a LOT of people taking those buildings out.

Really, in essence, we have an example where the opposition to religion was essentially all over the place, not just with Christians but with others as well and all were essentially equal in this.

I believe Unk is correct. As a Christian, I opposed the Muslims setting up shop on the rubble they were responsible for, for strictly patriotic reasons.
I didn't oppose their religion as much as their shoving our noses in it.

So, it's okay for your religious institution to shove our nose in it but not theirs?

But you are right. It is different. I'm talking about government land. The same government who is specifically not allowed to establish a state religion. And christians seem intent on putting their monuments on that land.

So this is a constitutional issue. Where the other is just your feelings getting hurt by a bunch of people who happen to worship the same god as a bunch of criminals they never met...

 

[Uncensored2008]

So, it's okay for your religious institution to shove our nose in it but not theirs?

I know this is complicated, but let's try, shall we?

On 9/11/2001 - Islamic Jihadists, on behalf of the religion of Islam, attacked the United States and killed 3,000 Americans. The main battle was at the WTC in New York.

A tradition, since the time of the Warlord Muhammad is for Islamic warriors to erect a Mosque to their god Allah, at the sites of great victories of Islam over the infidels.

The Ground Zero Mosque is pissing in the face of America and of the victims on 9/11. Naturally the democrats LOVE IT. It is a shrine to the defeat of America at the hands of Islam. Naturally, the democrats LOVE IT. The Mosque is used to show that Allah now controls the land and that the defending infidels are vanquished, and must acknowledge Allah as the victor, for how else would the warriors of Islam be able to erect a victory Mosque?

But you are right. It is different. I'm talking about government land. The same government who is specifically not allowed to establish a state religion. And christians seem intent on putting their monuments on that land.

So, a creche at Christmas establishes a state religion?

Do you Obamunists ever listen to yourselves? Drooling lunatics..

So this is a constitutional issue. Where the other is just your feelings getting hurt by a bunch of people who happen to worship the same god as a bunch of criminals they never met...

Funny, none of you Obamunists ever read the entire amendment.

{Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. }

It's you seeking to violate the constitution.

A creche on public land does me no harm, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. My mind is not so weak that the mere presence compels me to worship. No more than Indian artifacts in a Museum cause me to fall to me knees and worship Shiva.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

{Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. }

This is a valid point. It would seem to me that most leftists would have no problem with free speech, free press, and peaceful assembly (as long as it's secular) to be allowed in a public venue while religious expression would be considered by them as unconstitutional, when the 1st Amendment clearly includes free exercise within the same context as the rest.

Then again, I'm one of the few non-religious Americans who doesn't really feel threatened by reasonable religious expression in a public venue. My Quaker family history may have influenced that posture.

 

[Underhill]

So, it's okay for your religious institution to shove our nose in it but not theirs?

I know this is complicated, but let's try, shall we?

On 9/11/2001 - Islamic Jihadists, on behalf of the religion of Islam, attacked the United States and killed 3,000 Americans. The main battle was at the WTC in New York.

A tradition, since the time of the Warlord Muhammad is for Islamic warriors to erect a Mosque to their god Allah, at the sites of great victories of Islam over the infidels.

The Ground Zero Mosque is pissing in the face of America and of the victims on 9/11. Naturally the democrats LOVE IT. It is a shrine to the defeat of America at the hands of Islam. Naturally, the democrats LOVE IT. The Mosque is used to show that Allah now controls the land and that the defending infidels are vanquished, and must acknowledge Allah as the victor, for how else would the warriors of Islam be able to erect a victory Mosque?

Right, except that the plans for the community center were on the table long before 9-11. And the two were not related in any way, shape or sound.

Other than that, sure.

So, a creche at Christmas establishes a state religion?

That is not all this is about. It's about any number of things from crosses to manger scenes.

And I don't are if it establishes a religion. It ties your religion to our government.

Do you Obamunists ever listen to yourselves? Drooling lunatics..

Funny, none of you Obamunists ever read the entire amendment.

{Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. }

Exactly. Free exercise does not grant you the right to do anything you want anywhere you want. You have the right to do whatever you like on your property.

Answer me this. Why do you feel the need to put your religious symbols on government buildings or property?

It's not about compelling anyone. It's about promoting one belief system over others on government land. And if that isn't establishing state religion it's damn close.