I'd be mad if people found out I was a bigot too.Nuck81

So are all bahai consistent defamers like you? Or did your God forget to make that a sin when he revised his standard edition of arbitrary rules? Do you really think, me being apart of a church that has races from all peoples of the world is racist towards people? Lord...

Didn't you get busted for being racist a few weeks ago when you said you preferred a blue eyed blonde haired Jesus?Nuck81

That you think I said that, that you took Tenaka, a person reprehensible by all means for this very post, trying to associate me with Aryan supremecists because i posted a traditional Byzantine Icon (I only said I prefer Byzantine Icons which may vary) tells alot about your character.

Funny thing is, If Jesus was a candidate he wouldn't get the Christian Fundamentalist vote because he is too liberal and not white.Nuck81

The funny thing is that liberals think Jesus was some big government socialist. And funny that you consider Christian fundamentalists racist when they are the ones supporting israel in the middle east where the bahais have a central shrine. You think the Muslims would tolerate you having that? You think Christian fundamentalists who although wrong on alot of their theology don't understand basic ideas and concepts that all men are created equal? The right to freedom of speech? You disgust me.

Advanced mathmatics, a class I just did not get. I tried something I wasn't prepared for and utterly failed at it. Wish I had chosen classics instead.

Jesus Christ is the King over all he doesn't need to run for anything.

I like it when I unbox my own packages or items.

And I never disputed any of those uncontested facts. I contested the fact that you know nothing of their motivations of people who can act in any way they which to be perceived. You acted as you knew one way or the other. Facts are that no one really has any idea if even Jesus wasn't just a conman who went all in. All I'm saying is that the rambling you inserted into this conversation (anything having to do with killing and reasons for being founded) are silly and largely based on nothing. lx_theo

I am not sure that I agree with any of the red statements w/o further elaboration - which happens to be everything that you think is my position. I do not oppose killing under all circumstances. I am not entirely certain that I am convinced that God himself necessarily killed anyone a la Sodom et Gomorrah (as I am also not convinced that the entire Israeli population was enslaved by Egyptians, for instance). I do not believe that God is immoral.

Your move.

Brosephus_Rex

Then lets suppose the bible is right, that God at certain times has killed a number of People, what is wrong with God doing so?

Hahahahahaha... So me saying that morality falsely being proposed to be objective has been used as a excuse to feed superiority complexes being interpreted by you as being founded to kill many (which it has been used for, fyi) is wrong because it was founded by people?

Really, that is actually really funny. You do realize that you have know idea the intentions of the people who made it? Oh, and in case you didn't know. If you're meaning to base something on lies and corruption, you tend to not make extra records that you based it on lies and corruption. So if you actually have proof that none of said founders and that Jesus guy had no inklings or intentions of using the creation of the religion to their advantage personally and such, then feel free to put that forward. Until then, baseless claims that human nature took no part in its creation are not helpful.

lx_theo

I find that experience in the real world works more than mockery of such well believed and thought out things. If you think I will go around killing people then you are sadly mistaken, though if I had no morality I probably would eventually not hesitate. But I can't possibly know that.

But if you think what I said is based on lies and corruption, I think you need to establish this point. Because the gospels here and the acts of the apostles are very important in terms of explaining the origins of Christianity. Quite frankly it is hte reason that Christianity was established by a group of men whom were known as the followers of the Christ who claimed he had risen from the dead. This is not a contested fact within history. No its very much a fact of history that this is how the Christian church originated. We know from the wide spread of early historical sources concerning this (both outside hte bible and inside) that Jesus had Desciples and they were the authorities of the ancient church and their claim at the centre of it as Saint Paul says was the ressurection of Christ. Its hard to imagine that if they just wanted to deceive they could have picked a much easier thing to claim, as this idea quite frankly was unknown to the jews and was anathema to the greeks who thought it useless the ressureciton. This is why Saint Paul says its a stumbling block, why the wisdom of men is nothing like the wisdom of God.

Then again, neither of us actually know how and why it was founded. It could easily have been made up for that purpose, lol.lx_theo

Actually I do know why Christianity was founded. It was founded by a group of men called the apostles who claimed to have seen the risen Christ, along with the other five hundred or so. And their morality was not one comparable like unto islam. So your statement about religions as a whole and their morality is wrong. But no Christianity could not have been fabricated in such a mnner based on those claims. It would have been easier if the apostles did not claim such things. Really it would have.