Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

#401
#401
JZVOL said:
Foreign, local, all over the U.S., we have a coffee shop in Asia where it is illegal to talk about Jesus in public, we plant churches in other cities etc.
Click to expand...

Can you be more specific? What do you mean by planting churches in other cities and what does that coffee shop do that's good and helpful?
 
#402
#402
Tenacious D said:
So, its the length of time, alone?

But now that these other services are in place, and (as some would argue) are meeting these needs both more sufficiently and efficiently, why doesn't the church simply stop doing so? If its as unimportant and insignificant as some allege, I doubt that anyone would notice. Right?
Posted via VolNation
Mobile
Click to expand...


That would leave a pretty big void if the church were to simply step away considering they help millions daily
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#403
#403
bamacheats said:
It's none of my business what someone else does with their money and I've never suggested otherwise. However, when its done under obligation its a tax.

My point is about megachurces, they can't survive. Small community churches are not in that group.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

So that I understand you - didn't you say that unlike taxes, people tithe without receipt of any divimean? What did you intend to imply by this, other than that which seemed self-evident - inferring that this was essentially wasting their money? I think I drew a natural and reasonable conclusion, but am open to your correction.

And what has been used to form the basis of your opinion that megachurches are unsustainable? I'd appreciate knowing more about that, as well.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#404
#404
VOLatile said:
Can you be more specific? What do you mean by planting churches in other cities and what does that coffee shop do that's good and helpful?
Click to expand...

Plant churches as in starting a new smaller community church in other cities.

We have a long-standing relationship with a church we started in Nicaragua where we go down and work in the community build relationships with the people, help the church with various things etc.

As far as the coffee shop being helpful that is kind of difficult because you will be arrested if you talk about Jesus in public.

There are underground churches in that community that we support and "smuggle" Bibles to because they are illegal.

It's not going to street corners and telling people they are going to Hell if that's what you are trying to get at.
 
#405
#405
JZVOL said:
It still goes to the churches "mission" budget to fund trips. I would just rather see it go there than to help get a flat screen for the kids to watch Veggie Tales in HD.
Click to expand...

With all due respect - perhaps it is the church who is both best suited and biblically provided the authority to determine where your tithing is allocated?

Let me be clear: in my opinion, anyone (like yourself) who seeks to aid those in need, for whatever reason or cause, are to be thanked and commended. So I'm more asking why you feel the need to determine the allocation of your tithing, as opposed to entrusting the church to do so?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#406
#406
VolsNSkinsFan said:
That would leave a pretty big void if the church were to simply step away considering they help millions daily
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Understood.

Perhaps one of those who believe that religion is inherently evil can argue the counter-point from here, but I cannot.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#407
#407
Tenacious D said:
With all due respect - perhaps it is the church who is both best suited and biblically provided the authority to determine where your tithing is allocated?

Let me be clear: in my opinion, anyone (like yourself) who seeks to aid those in need, for whatever reason or cause, are to be thanked and commended. So I'm more asking why you feel the need to determine the allocation of your tithing, as opposed to entrusting the church to do so?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I understand that point but if was the pastor(s) making those decisions I would agree. When it's Joe Bussinesman who is not clergy it changes things for me. If I'm wrong I'm wrong...


Because as a church we "vote" on the budget but ultimately the finance committee determines where the money goes.

I feel there were some people who mismanaged the money, were serving self interests and doing things I did not agree with.

Therefore until new members were voted in and the problems were rectified I decided that's what I needed to do.
 
#408
#408
JZVOL said:
I understand that point but if was the pastor(s) making those decisions I would agree. When it's Joe Bussinesman who is not clergy it changes things for me. If I'm wrong I'm wrong...


Because as a church we "vote" on the budget but ultimately the finance committee determines where the money goes.

I feel there were some people who mismanaged the money, were serving self interests and doing things I did not agree with.

Therefore until new members were voted in and the problems were rectified I decided that's what I needed to do.
Click to expand...

I can't fault you for anything with that.

Its curious (though entirely unintentional on my part, and yours) how closely your description matches the feelings of much of the voting populace when it comes to the allocation of their tax dollars.

I don't know what that might mean, nor am smart enough to discern it alone, but its interesting nonetheless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#409
#409
Tenacious D said:
So that I understand you - didn't you say that unlike taxes, people tithe without receipt of any divimean? What did you intend to imply by this, other than that which seemed self-evident - inferring that this was essentially wasting their money? I think I drew a natural and reasonable conclusion, but am open to your correction.
Click to expand...

The only service that a church can provide that a government can't is a relationship with God. That shouldn't require money. But you're still missing the point. People can spend their money at their own discretion. However the difference is when someone spends money at church vs. giving money at church. The difference is motive. Megachurches have a myriad of ways to obligate their members into "giving".

And what has been used to form the basis of your opinion that megachurches are unsustainable? I'd appreciate knowing more about that, as well.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Where's all the megachurches in Europe, Asia, South America, and Australia? The Vatican is all that's left and they are bleeding profusely financially. A citizen can not sustain his family, his government, and his church simultaneously. The government will force support and kick the church to the curb. Southerners have a hard time realizing that because of tunnel vision.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#410
#410
bamacheats said:
Where's all the megachurches in Europe, Asia, South America, and Australia? The Vatican is all that's left and they are bleeding profusely financially. A citizen can not sustain his family, his government, and his church simultaneously. The government will force support and kick the church to the curb. Southerners have a hard time realizing that because of tunnel vision.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Where do you come up with this nonsense?

By Richard Allen
Religion News Service

VATICAN CITY (RNS) The Vatican recorded a $5.2 million deficit for 2009 as investment in communication and building upgrades offset revenues from donations, according to new figures from the Holy See.

The third consecutive deficit was also attributed to a decline in the property market and the global stock market, where the Vatican has significant investment in bonds and shares.

The negative result--$314.7 million in revenue against $319.9 million in expenses--came despite an increase in donations from Catholics worldwide. The Peter's Pence offering, which is collected to support Vatican operations, rose 9 percent, to $82.5 million. Catholics in the U.S., Italy and France were listed as the most prominent donors, with South Korea and Japan also making significant contributions.

The statement said the bulk of the Holy See's costs were spent on Pope Benedict XVI's activities and security, its telecommunications system, restoring monuments and treasure troves and media projects such as Vatican Radio.

The Vatican, which first released financial statements in 1981 to improve transparency amid claims it was making huge profits, was $1.13 million in the red in 2008 and $11.4 million in the red in 2007.

A separate audit of the finances of the Vatican City state reported a $9.8 million loss in 2009, just more than half the deficit of the previous year.

Vatican Reports $5.2 Million Deficit For 2009
Click to expand...

I would say your stubborn anti-religious sentiment has put some quite significant blinders around your eyes.
 
#411
#411
therealUT said:
Where do you come up with this nonsense?



I would say your stubborn anti-religious sentiment has put some quite significant blinders around your eyes.
Click to expand...

Ok. The Vatican has proven time and time again that they are trustworthy, I wholeheartedly believe the accuracy of their "reports".
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#413
#413
bamacheats said:
I am one hell of an ignorant SOB.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

FYP.

Are there any trustworthy sources of information, besides your own deranged mind, in your opinion?

You obviously don't trust any academic citations (Columbia University is actively engaged in brain-washing) or financial reports (which are audited by independent sources, and reported on and published on HuffPo, the NYTs, WSJ, etc.).

You are an uneducated hack.
 
#414
#414
therealUT said:
FYP.

Are there any trustworthy sources of information, besides your own deranged mind, in your opinion?

You obviously don't trust any academic citations (Columbia University is actively engaged in brain-washing) or financial reports (which are audited by independent sources, and reported on and published on HuffPo, the NYTs, WSJ, etc.).

You are an uneducated hack.
Click to expand...

You're not capable of a rational argument because you're emotionally invested in the Vatican. Keep the insults coming and keep feeding the machine.

BTW, independent sources require reports from the Vatican to audit. No way that can be fudged.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#415
#415
bamacheats said:
You're not capable of a rational argument because you're emotionally invested in the Vatican. Keep the insults coming and keep feeding the machine.

BTW, independent sources require reports from the Vatican to audit. No way that can be fudged.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Emotionally invested? I'm agnostic. I am emotionally invested in the truth.

I have, in this thread and the NAACP thread, called out Catholics throughout history for their exploitation of the insane and the murder of dissenters and free-thinkers in Alexandria.

Do you want me to state that the Crusades were wrong? In my opinion, I believe they were. The two major Inquisitions? Heinous.

The stuff you are presenting now? No; and, you fail to support any of your claims with any credible evidence.

I feel no shame, nor restraint, in insulting your absolute lack of intellectual integrity or ability.
 
#418
#418
bamacheats said:
Ok. The Vatican has proven time and time again that they are trustworthy, I wholeheartedly believe the accuracy of their "reports".
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You required a source. He provided it. It seems reasonable that you could specify your reason for rejecting it or leaving it outright unconsidered, right?

Failing that, you're really no better than the bible-thumpers, in that you pick and choose what to accept or reject based on your own personal biases.

As I am certain that you aren't one of those, which part of the cited report do you believe to be incaccurate, exactly?

Once identified, do you believe that the inaccuracy is intentional, and then if so, to serve what purpose?

Name-calling is fun (I do it myself) - but I don't want this guy to think that you've resorted to this as a last resort, and in failing to best him on the facts of the matter at hand.

So, blister him with the keen intellect which we all know you to have, and poke holes in his wafer-thin fascade of misinformation.

I'm rooting for you.
 
Last edited:
#419
#419
therealUT said:
Emotionally invested? I'm agnostic. I am emotionally invested in the truth.

I have, in this thread and the NAACP thread, called out Catholics throughout history for their exploitation of the insane and the murder of dissenters and free-thinkers in Alexandria.

Do you want me to state that the Crusades were wrong? In my opinion, I believe they were. The two major Inquisitions? Heinous.

The stuff you are presenting now? No; and, you fail to support any of your claims with any credible evidence.

I feel no shame, nor restraint, in insulting your absolute lack of intellectual integrity or ability.
Click to expand...

You begin by placing yourself above any emotional attachment - and conclude by perfectly describing it.

Freud?
 
#420
#420
Tenacious D said:
You begin by placing yourself above any emotional attachment - and conclude by perfectly describing it.

Freud?
Click to expand...

I denied that I was emotionally invested in the Catholic Church and/or the Vatican.

I did say I was emotionally invested in the truth.
 
#421
#421
VolsNSkinsFan said:
I'm surprised you two haven't been contacted yet by the History Channel, With all your awesome sources
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

What did I have to respond to? You told me to watch the documentary. I did. You never offered up what was supposed to be unassailable proof (which is what you claimed) in that documentary.
 
#422
#422
You claimed to have watched it. Why don't you go through it line for line and despute each theory.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#423
#423
VolsNSkinsFan said:
You claimed to have watched it. Why don't you go through it line for line and despute each theory.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Waste of time. I believe Jesus is God. IP does not... nothing about the cloth is going to change my mind or his.
 
#424
#424
therealUT said:
You do understand that the story of Umar's destruction is held as dubious by many Western historians, most notably Bernard Lewis, right?
Click to expand...

Lewis is admired in Egypt, Arabia, Turkey and Persia for his generous way of portraying islam.

In some ways I think of him much like I do Howard Zinn but I do agree with Bernard's conjecture that democracy in the mideast (moslem majority countries) may very well lead to governments that will greatly resemble what was found in Nazi Germany, remember Hitler rose to power by democratic means.

There are no shortage of accounts of the brutal manner in which the moslem Arab invaders treated the native Egyptians who were unaware and unprepared for such and invasion.

Some villiages where wholly slaughtered, the only survivors being sent back to Arabia as slaves.

Back to the the comparison between Jesus and Muhammed, it seems people have run with the idea of comparing the history of Christianity and history of islam, conviently leaving out most of the more uncomplementary aspects of the history of islam.

Ever owned or took slaves?


Jesus Christ - NO

Abu al-Qasim Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muttalib Ibn Hashim - Yes, as a matter of fact islam's founder's first converts were his own slaves and while he was living his forces took many many additional slaves.








IPorange said:
Tell me I'm a liar. I know what I've personally seen.
Click to expand...

Funny I've traveled in those circles most of my life and havn't met the sort of people you claim to have met, in what settings di you meet such persons??

In another post you claim the Christians slaughtered the Jews of Alexandria, do you have some historians to cite??

Back to the the comparison between Jesus and Muhammed, it seems people have run with the idea of comparing the history of Christianity and history of islam, conviently leaving out most of the more uncomplementary aspects of the history of islam.

Ever murdered or had others murder people for the sake of military, political or economic power??

Jesus Christ - NO

Abu al-Qasim Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muttalib Ibn Hashim - Yes, during his lifetime islamic forces probably killed hundreds of thousands to satisfy the commands of muhammed.
 
#425
#425
gsvol said:
Lewis is admired in Egypt, Arabia, Turkey and Persia for his generous way of portraying islam.

In some ways I think of him much like I do Howard Zinn but I do agree with Bernard's conjecture that democracy in the mideast (moslem majority countries) may very well lead to governments that will greatly resemble what was found in Nazi Germany, remember Hitler rose to power by democratic means.

There are no shortage of accounts of the brutal manner in which the moslem Arab invaders treated the native Egyptians who were unaware and unprepared for such and invasion.

Some villiages where wholly slaughtered, the only survivors being sent back to Arabia as slaves.

Back to the the comparison between Jesus and Muhammed, it seems people have run with the idea of comparing the history of Christianity and history of islam, conviently leaving out most of the more uncomplementary aspects of the history of islam.

Ever owned or took slaves?


Jesus Christ - NO

Abu al-Qasim Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muttalib Ibn Hashim - Yes, as a matter of fact islam's founder's first converts were his own slaves and while he was living his forces took many many additional slaves.










Funny I've traveled in those circles most of my life and havn't met the sort of people you claim to have met, in what settings di you meet such persons??

In another post you claim the Christians slaughtered the Jews of Alexandria, do you have some historians to cite??

Back to the the comparison between Jesus and Muhammed, it seems people have run with the idea of comparing the history of Christianity and history of islam, conviently leaving out most of the more uncomplementary aspects of the history of islam.

Ever murdered or had others murder people for the sake of military, political or economic power??

Jesus Christ - NO

Abu al-Qasim Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muttalib Ibn Hashim - Yes, during his lifetime islamic forces probably killed hundreds of thousands to satisfy the commands of muhammed.
Click to expand...

I've long awaited making a decision on any particular deity while awaiting an answer to the all-important "slave-owner" question.

I can now move toward.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top