19 May 06
2 edits
Originally posted by hey manThere were 8 crusades in the Middle Ages that were a direct result of the Church demanding the reclaimation of the Holy Land, aka Jerusalem. Every one of these was killing in the name of God. Each one was Initiated by the Christians, not the Muslims.
Christians do not cause any problems. Please kindly respect other people's religion. Just because some people do not believe in God doesn't mean that all problems are caused by christians.
Then, there was the Inquisition and the Spanish Inquisition. Do we need specific details or are we all familiar with these?
Lets not forget to mention the constant warring of the Prodestants and Catholics in Ireland.... all actions taking in the name of God...Christians fighting Christians.
More recently we have the Catholic Church hiding child molesters and rapist from dozens of countries, including the US and much of Africa.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Now, do Christians really not cause any problems? I think they do.
Disclaimer - This is in direct response to the above false statement and is in no way meant to claim that all other religions are free of heinous crimes and/or the cause of many problems. There is plenty of evidence to prove they are as well, but that is not the topic of discussion.*
19 May 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou cannot escape the fact that condom use will prevent the spread of HIV. You correctly point out that the church shouldn't have to compromise its stand on the use of contraceptives, however that doesn't mean they are absolved of the consequences of maintaining that doctrine.
You can't be serious. RCC should have compromised its stand (right or wrong) on one front to acquiese to another? That's not even laughable.
Last time I checked, AIDS is overwhelmingly spread via sexual contact, not non-use of condoms. Maybe things have changed since then, but I doubt it.
Apparently the lesser of two evils in this case is to allow millions of people to contract a terminal illness who might otherwise have avoided such unfortunate circumstances. How nice.
-JC
19 May 06
Originally posted by NickstenGod is only in everything if you chose to see it, not the other way about. Personally, I see the flying spaghetti monster in everything I see. It's obvious, of course, isn't it?
Just because the things that happened, did not happen in your time, doesnt mean that it didn't happen.
Have you ever met your great great great great grandfather? Have you seen him? Is there any prove of his existance? Uhm, I dont think so.
I dont understand how people can not believe in God, as God is in everything you can see. Except if you dont want to see Him. Is that the case with you XanthosNZ?
As for Xanthos' grandfather, I imagine that there are records of his existance, also, as Xanthos does, in fact, exist it requires the existance of his grandfather. The existance of humanity does not however, require the existance of god.
20 May 06
Originally posted by Nickstenfiction about fiction ... it doesnt matter to me ... well, it matters ! maybe the people dont follow stupids ideas anymore as " sacred " " inspired by God " " send us by saints , angels , and holly spirits " and a large blah blah blah blah for 2000 years ( and more , including other religions too ) 😀
I think this is a very interresting e-mail that I have received this morning and is only actually intended for Christians, but if you are not one, then still read it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
DR. JAMES KENNEDY AND OTHER AUTHORITIES WANT ALL CHRISTIANS TO KNOW THE TRUTH. I THOUGHT YOU ...[text shortened]... nd let's expose this lie for what it is because the hour is late and much later than we think.
20 May 06
2 edits
Originally posted by KnightWulfeSpain ( Al Andaluz to Muslim world ) was taken in a huge portion by Muslims , in that portion of Europe live together peacefully muslims, christians and jews, obviously the muslims rules but with respect for other beliefs ! And Al Andaluz was the best part of Europe for few centuries ! In 1492 the Catholic Kings took the last muslim reduct - Grenada - and forced to the non-catholics to embrace the " only true Religion " , another option ? to die burned, hanged, and - obviously - after a nice and sacred torture in the name of the Father , the Son, and the Holly Spirit ... as a result the Sephardies Jews mostly scape from Spain , and the Muslims return to North Africa and Arabic territories ...
There were 8 crusades in the Middle Ages that were a direct result of the Church demanding the reclaimation of the Holy Land, aka Jerusalem. Every one of these was killing in the name of God. Each one was Initiated by the Christians, not the Muslims.
Then, there was the Inquisition and the Spanish Inquisition. Do we need specific details or are we all ...[text shortened]... e is plenty of evidence to prove they are as well, but that is not the topic of discussion.*[/i]
The results ? Spain stopped his progress and remained on the Middle Age two hundred years more ... and it was darker than ever ( starting the infamous black spanish legend ) at the same time some nations ( The Dutch culture, & Flemish ) avoiding the mercyless arm of the Religion grew up !!!
We need to learn from the real History my fellas ...
We must promote values on people, but not including religious ideas because they are absurd and completely selfish !!!! Do we need David's stars, holly Crosses, half Moons and the whole religious paraphernalia to be good human beings ???
What has it been the results ??? Wars, cruelties, inequities, well you already know what happens but nobody want to face the real and key question .... CAN WE LIVE WITHOUT RELIGIONS, WE REALLY NEED THEM ??? WE DONT NEED THEM !!!
I hope that step by step this global community in the years for coming will be only one , based on respect and values , living in peace and harmony ... the end !
20 May 06
Originally posted by ChurlantYou know what? I just realized that HIV could be ended completely in around 5 years if everyone in the world only had sex inside of one marriage.
You cannot escape the fact that condom use will prevent the spread of HIV. You correctly point out that the church shouldn't have to compromise its stand on the use of contraceptives, however that doesn't mean they are absolved of the consequences of maintaining that doctrine.
Apparently the lesser of two evils in this case is to allow millions of people ...[text shortened]... inal illness who might otherwise have avoided such unfortunate circumstances. How nice.
-JC
You cannot say that the condom ban kills people without realizing that people usually break another Christian rule (having sex outside marriage) while not using condoms.
20 May 06
Originally posted by CodfishYes, and if your ministers, priest etc could keep it in their pants rather than keeping it in their choir boys that'd set a great example.
You know what? I just realized that HIV could be ended completely in around 5 years if everyone in the world only had sex inside of one marriage.
You cannot say that the condom ban kills people without realizing that people usually break another Christian rule (having sex outside marriage) while not using condoms.
20 May 06
2 edits
Originally posted by Codfishfirst your theory its absurd, the HIV virus who infects a patient could take 10 or more years to produce AIDS, so there will be at least 10 years more with new AIDS patients ... and this is a big problem because these patients are gonna be ignorants of their condition until the full spectrum of the disease develops ( thats the situation in developing countries, in USA or Europe could be different )
You know what? I just realized that HIV could be ended completely in around 5 years if everyone in the world only had sex inside of one marriage.
You cannot say that the condom ban kills people without realizing that people usually break another Christian rule (having sex outside marriage) while not using condoms.
second, if I am not christian and remains single , your rules about sex and marriage dont include me, so with all respect I dont care what you are talking about it ....
20 May 06
Originally posted by PJBadenhorstIf you go his website, you will get an idea of his agenda. Basically, "to defend and implement the biblical principles upon which this country was founded." He has mailings and he is on TV. What distinguishes him from most other TV evangelists is that he is polished. His church is "high church." No clapping, rolling on the floor, shouting, or bad hair. No sir! He's got the robes, the stain glass, the pipe organ and semi-John Kerry looks.
Other than some generic "Fire and Brimstone" how exactly is DR. JAMES KENNEDY refuting these claims?
20 May 06
Originally posted by CodfishYour first statement is wrong. HIV takes longer than five years to even manifest itself in most individuals. HIV is also spread in more ways than sexual contact.
You know what? I just realized that HIV could be ended completely in around 5 years if everyone in the world only had sex inside of one marriage.
You cannot say that the condom ban kills people without realizing that people usually break another Christian rule (having sex outside marriage) while not using condoms.
Your second statement is also incorrect. I can fully realize that people are breaking catholic (not christian) rules at the same time as the church's ban on condoms contributes to the deaths of those (and other) individuals.
-JC
20 May 06
1 edit
Originally posted by ChurlantIn South Africa, the average has been roughly 5 years for full-blown AIDS to develop. I've worked mostly in the rural areas that don't have access to ARV's and there have been cases of less than a 2-year latency period.
Your first statement is wrong. HIV takes longer than five years to even manifest itself in most individuals. HIV is also spread in more ways than sexual contact.
Your second statement is also incorrect. I can fully realize that people are breaking catholic (not christian) rules at the same time as the church's ban on condoms contributes to the deaths of those (and other) individuals.
-JC
I don't know where you get your facts (I think the official WHO figure is more towards 10 years), but it is contingent on many factors, including eating habits, hygiene, access to ARV’s, etc.
As for your second statement, I'm intrigued -- why would a person disregard the church's teaching on abstinence and mutual faithfulness in marriage and then implicitly follow the teaching to disuse condoms?