Please shut the fuck up promptly.

The Third reich believed in loyalty to state. They hated the idea of a non-governmental force having an influence in the lives of aryans

True

How does it make sense that they would ahdhere to a religion rooted in judaic values, one that proclaims that the savior of the world is a jew?[...]Your idea frankly makes no sense, and to be honest I kind of agree with the conservative that you may just be googling something and copying and pasting the results here.

It is not my idea, it is a historical fact that the Church spread anti-semitic ideas for centuries in Europe, and with good theological reason. I use quotes and facts, i don't go look for "anti-christian arguments" on google/youtube. I don't have anything against "christians" in general, the term "christian" doesn't mean anything anyway, there is a variety of beliefs and doctrines in the christian world and this thread is a good example of it. I *don't* focus on "christians", instead i focus on the Bible, its ideology, and what it leads some christians to believe.

In fact, lets illustrate my claims with a few quotes from this perfect holy scripture:

"22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked.

They all answered, “Crucify him!”

23 “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”

24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”

25 All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”

--> Matthew 27: The Bible portrays the Jews claiming themsleves with pride to be responsible for Jesus' crucifiction, not only that, but their descendant are also responsible. But hey, the jews "said" it themselves so...
This is the kind of rethoric still promoted by christian fundamentalists like Norman and others (Kent Hovind, Steve Anderson, etc)

The thing is, some christians even think that this is really how it happened, that this is all true to the letter, that the Jews and their children are responsible for the murder of their beloved prophet Jesus. If you believe the Bible "From cover to cover" as the expression goes, this is the kind of wicked belief you end up having

There are litteraly hundreds of passages in the New Testament that were used to fuel anti-semitism. Here is a few other Bible quotes spewing hatred

Atc 7: 51,52

“You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.”

Titus 1 : 10,16 -> patronizing Jews again

10 For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. 11 They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain. 12 One of Crete’s own prophets has said it: “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.”[c] 13 This saying is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 14 and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the merely human commands of those who reject the truth. 15 To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. 16 They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good.

Revelation 3: 9 -> again with the accusation that Jews are secretly demon-worshippers, and shall fall at christians' feet

I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.

edit:
source: https://www.biblegateway.com/

All of these verses have been used by the church to fuel hatred.

We can argue the theological validity of it, but it doesn't erase the fact that the Bible has been, once more, used to spread wicked ideology. And some people still have their head so buried into the Bible that they can't even see it. Same with homosexuality, they think that as long as they have scripture with them, they can patronize people and discriminate, and they think they are doing good.

In fact, you even have christian fundamentalists today that support zionism and Jewish settlers in Israel, because they hope that if all the Jews went back to Israel and rebuild their Temple, it will bring the End Times, in wich one third of the Jews will be converted to Christianity and the rest will be slaughtered and then eternally condemned to Hell.

Here is the kind of conversation you end up having if you litteraly believe everything the Bible say:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_BA-KyefPQ

Edited 2/6/2016 00:28:15

Nice try, but your post is irrelevant to our conversation since the Bible was banned in Nazi Germany...

Nice dodge, exept I'm not talking about Nazi Germany, i'm talking the anti-semite propaganda the Church spread for centuries in europe, that prepared the groundgame for Hitler to succeed in his enterprise.

Edited 2/5/2016 23:39:20

I'm not sure why you're talking about that; We were having a nice little discussion about the Nazis before you were in fact the one to "dodge" the subject.

You trying to Divert the subject by completely ignoring most of my post and instead trying to highlight "all these evil, terrible things the new testament says" seems like a copout.

Edited 2/5/2016 23:53:47

i'm talking the anti-semite propaganda the Church spread for centuries in europe, that prepared the groundgame for Hitler to succeed in his enterprise.

But that's like blaming the Rashidun Caliphate for creating, establishing, and popularizing the political notion of an Islamic Caliphate that allowed ISIS to resurrect the idea about 1400 years later.

I'm not sure why you're talking about that; We were having a nice little discussion about the Nazis before you were in fact the one to "dodge" the subject.

Wrong again, go to page 7, the conversation started with me asking Norman this:
"Do you think that this rethoric,* the blaming of all the Jews for the death of Jesus * wich was professed for centuries in Europe, had a role in preparing the groundwork for the Holocaust? Do you think that it can be viewed as bible-inspired antisemitism, or is it harmless and happen to be a Holy Truth?"

To wich he responded...but the Third Reich was an atheist society!

But that's like blaming the Rashidun Caliphate for creating, establishing, and popularizing the political notion of an Islamic Caliphate that allowed ISIS to resurrect the idea about 1400 years later.

Of course not, that's a false equivalent.
The right analogy would be to blame the spread of wahhabism/salafism by countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, wich financed mosques and imams to spread the ideology everywhere in the world, and of course call out the Quran for being the Holy Book on wich the ideology is based.

Always the same pattern. Wicked ideology rooted in man made so-called Holy Books

How the hell does a thread about accepting differences and respecting one another devolve into a argument so quickly?

The purpose of the thread was to start a conversation to argue over. Arguments are a good thing, that's how progress work

This is a video game forum, there is little to no intellectual progress made regardless of these arguements. Peace loving kumbya shit is much more beneficial.

The purpose of the thread was to start a conversation to argue over. Arguments are a good thing, that's how progress work

What you mean is dialect, argument is closed-minded, dialect is open-minded.

What you mean is dialect, argument is closed-minded, dialect is open-minded.

Funny that you try to teach me how to speak english while using words you don't even understand.
A dialect is a language (dialogue is the word you are looking for)

Edited 2/6/2016 01:54:45

I'm giving you building criticism, and you just try and belittle me. I faintly recall that you're a bigoted militant atheist who uses insults as rocket fuel.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/dialectic

I'm sorry Hitchslap, but you just got wrecked by a dictionary.

I believe the Bible cover to cover, but unlike a lot of Christians, I actually understand the damn book. Those verses are explained differently from other translations, sometimes it requires more then one translation to FULLY grasp a verse and its meaning in the entire Bible.

I'm giving you building criticism, and you just try and belittle me

Yeah that was kind of uncalled for i agree. dialectic and dialect are too different things. An argument doesn't have to be close-minded. An argument is an exchange of diverging/opposite views. A dialogue doesn't have to be open-minded, there is just not this notion of diverging views embeded in the definition.


edit: you are calling me out for being rude, but when you know you are wrong, just admit it and move forward, dont link the definition of a different word in hope that i wouldn't notice, that's just wrong

I'm sorry Hitchslap, but you just got wrecked by a dictionary.

lol no. why do you think he gave the definition of dialectic instead of dialect?
https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/dialect

now you can say you're sorry, and mean it ;)

Edited 2/6/2016 02:15:13

Well to be fair on the link you posted for "Dialect" on the origin section it says: "Mid 16th century (denoting the art of investigating the truth of opinions): from French dialecte, or via Latin from Greek dialektos 'discourse, way of speaking', from dialegesthai 'converse with'

Technically he's not wrong and technically you're right. But I apologize for the mistake on my side for not seeing he linked the wrong word.

Technically he is wrong Jai, and there is nothing bad about being wrong, that's the best way of learning. Dialectic, dialect and dialogue all have the same origin, but they have different meaning, that's all. Anyway, that's really not that important

it will bring the End Times, in wich one third of the Jews will be converted to Christianity and the rest will be slaughtered and then eternally condemned to Hell.

Where the f*** did you get that from???

Technically he is wrong Jai, and there is nothing bad about being wrong, that's the best way of learning. Dialectic, dialect and dialogue all have the same origin, but they have different meaning, that's all. Anyway, that's really not that important

Also, if its "not that important" why did you falsely accuse him of misusing the world dialect in the first place?

Edited 2/6/2016 02:41:25

Where the f*** did you get that from???

From crazy christian fundamentalist like Kent Hovind

edit: and of course the crazy Bible verses that backs it

"In the whole land," declares the LORD, "two-thirds will be struck down and perish; yet one-third will be left in it." Zechariah 13:8
for more crazy stuff, read
http://www.gotquestions.org/end-times-Israel.html

why did you falsely accuse him of misusing the world dialect in the first place?

really?

Edited 2/6/2016 02:56:15