Exactly. Kevin Hovind is crazy. 90% of Christians haven't even heard of him.

Pls, if your going to try to slam Biblical interpretations, at least try slamming Biblibal interpretations that are taken seriously by the core Christian community, and not outcasts of questionable sanity.

ghay people make me think there checking me out.

In a few points in my life i punched gay people for checking me out. also telling them to leave, dont care dont reply.


ghay people make me sick

Exactly. Kevin Hovind is crazy. 90% of Christians haven't even heard of him.

Pls, if your going to try to slam Biblical interpretations, at least try slamming Biblibal interpretations that are taken seriously by the core Christian community, and not outcasts of questionable sanity.

sorry i hadn't time to edit before your post, i'll just copy/past it

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

here is the time line:

There will be a mass return of Jews to the land of Israel (Deuteronomy 30:3; Isaiah 43:6; Ezekiel 34:11-13; 36:24; 37:1-14).

The Antichrist will make a 7-year covenant of "peace" with Israel (Isaiah 28:18; Daniel 9:27).

The temple will be rebuilt in Jerusalem (Daniel 9:27; Matthew 24:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4; Revelation 11:1).

The Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel, and worldwide persecution of Israel will result (Daniel 9:27; 12:1, 11; Zechariah 11:16; Matthew 24:15, 21; Revelation 12:13). Israel will be invaded (Ezekiel chapters 38-39).

Israel will finally recognize Jesus as their Messiah (Zechariah 12:10). Israel will be regenerated, restored, and regathered (Jeremiah 33:8; Ezekiel 11:17; Romans 11:26).

Also, i never said it was mainstream christian beliefs, that's not my argument. My argument is crazy holy books lead people to believe crazy thing. And btw in the US people who believe that are not an "outcast" group, its mostly evangelicals. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted Cruz believed in this shit

Wow... Hitchslap, your ignorance of what "mainstream Christian beliefs" are, is astounding.

oh well...my bad for ever thinking that you were here for anything else than trolling

Wrong again, go to page 7, the conversation started with me asking Norman this:[/quote
"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?"

Sure, that makes sense. Just like in all discussions, the conversation you were having with someone else three days ago on an unrelated topic is automatically relevant to ours...

For some reason you think that it's necessary to address this discussion you were having with some other dude three days ago rather than my post from earlier today, which doesn't make much sense to me to be honest. Like I said, it seems like a cop out.

But hey, maybe you're planning to address my post in three days while you're discussing the new Image restrictions with fizzer.

Edited 2/6/2016 05:48:32

Sure, that makes sense. Just like in all discussions, the conversation you were having with someone else three days ago on an unrelated topic is automatically relevant to ours...

Oh... i think there have been a misunderstanding, did you think we were having a private conversation? just the two of us?

Don't be naive, and read the whole thread if you want to understand everything people said on it and actually follow the conversation.

I have already addressed your post. Its funny that you think i didn't. But if you want to go over a specific point that you think i didn't adress, please do ask/tell.

We're not having a private conversation, but we're having a thread of discussion between the two of us in a public thread. That had evolved into something rather different by yesterday when you decided that for some reason, instead of addressing my post, you were going to quote it and then go off on some rant about all these evil verses in the new testament to avoid having to talk about hitler anymore.

Your logic doesn't really make much sense. Sure, you were discussing that with someone else three days ago, but that doesn't automatically make it relevant to the current topic from now.

In fact, what it seems like to me is that you're not interested in discussing the current topic anymore, which is totally fine, but don't try to switch the topic all of a sudden to something you were discussing with someone else three days ago. Just say that you're no interested in discussing this topic anymore.

Don't try to say again that this is somehow on topic please. I'm just working off of what you said yesterday, which amounts to that your not interested in discussing Nazi Germany anymore.

Nice dodge, exept I'm not talking about Nazi Germany, i'm talking the anti-semite propaganda the Church spread for centuries in europe

Just to be clear, i'm not arguing that Hitler didn't persecuted religions. Hitler in fact persecuted every ideology that he saw as a danger to the establishment of his own ideology. He wanted to eradicate political catholicism and anyother religious organization that had power.

A lot of the nazis wanted to start a pagan cult or what they called "positive christianity", where the bible and the cross would be replaced by Mein Kampf and the swastica, worshipping Hitler as the new messiah, and the aryan people as the chosen people, mixing Nazi ideology with christian ideology.

Hitler probably wanted to establish a state religion, much like we have in North Korea atm.In fact, Himmmler himslef was fascinated with germanic paganism, and didn't allow atheists into the SS because their "refusal to acknowledge higher powers" would be a "potential source of indiscipline" (wikipedia).

You have to understand that just because someone doesn't belong to an identified organized religion, it doesn't mean that this someone is an atheist. And by the way, atheism is not an ideology, so lets stop with the bullshit.

Edited 2/6/2016 17:32:17

In fact, what it seems like to me is that you're not interested in discussing the current topic anymore

The topic was not Nazi germany to begin with, i was always talking about the Bible. It became Nazi Germany when Norman tried to frame the Third Reich as an atheistic society, wich is complete bullshit, and that was the only thing i was arguing. But the topic was always the Bible.

By the way, you still haven't said what in your post i haven't adressed, so just stop playing games and say what you want to say already.

Atheism is a ideology, it's one that denies any and all higher beings. Cut your bullshit Frenchie.

Atheism is the disbelief in deities or divinities. Thats it. There isn't any belief system or doctrine tied to it

saying atheism is an ideology is like saying believing in a god is in itself an ideology, wich it is not.

A ideology is a system of ideals and ideas. Atheism has one main idea, and depending on the scientist worshipping prick in charge a few more.

Now you can have atheistic ideologies of course. Secular Humanism would be one of them for example, but atheism alone is just not.

edit: if you want to call the disbelief in a god an idea, i'm fine with it, but does an idea alone constitute an ideology?

Edited 2/6/2016 15:23:20

@Imperator

Also, i'd like to make something clear. I am not obligated to comment every sentence that every one makes on this thread. That would be stupid. I only comment the passages that i disagree with the most, i see no point in commenting on statement that i have no problem with, or that doesn't contradict my positions.

So unless you have a direct question to me, that i didn't answer, or that you made a specific point contradicting one of mine, you have no right to cry about me not adressing everything you said. This is not how a conversation/debate work. And if you feel that one of your point have not been adressed, or if you think that there is still unclear answers, all you have to do is directly pointing them to me so that i can adress them. It is not my job to go over everything you said and try to guess what point of mine is still unclear to you

edit: so i'm gonna repeat my direct question that you in fact didn't adress
What point in your post do you feel i haven't adressed, and wish me to do so?

Edited 2/6/2016 15:57:17

I was referring to the post I made on 2/5/2016 13:54:44 on page 10 of this thread.

It's moot now since you posted earlier today clarifying that
you basically agreed with everything in said post, but yesterday you were trying to ignore the contents of that post with the exception of a tiny part where I mentioned that Christianity originated in judaism and thus it's logically impossible that the nazis followed christianity.

You quoted this small point at the end of my post which really had very little do with the contents of the rest of my post, and used it to go of on a 10-paragraph rant about how europeans are so racist and that they can use the wicked, wicked new testament to justify this racism.

Like I said, earlier today, you posted this:

Just to be clear, i'm not arguing that Hitler didn't persecuted religions. Hitler in fact persecuted every ideology that he saw as a danger to the establishment of his own ideology. He wanted to eradicate political catholicism and anyother religious organization that had power.

A lot of the nazis wanted to start a pagan cult or what they called "positive christianity", where the bible and the cross would be replaced by Mein Kampf and the swastica, worshipping Hitler as the new messiah, and the aryan people as the chosen people, mixing Nazi ideology with christian ideology.

Hitler probably wanted to establish a state religion, much like we have in North Korea atm.In fact, Himmmler himslef was fascinated with germanic paganism, and didn't allow atheists into the SS because their "refusal to acknowledge higher powers" would be a "potential source of indiscipline".

You have to understand that just because someone doesn't belong to an identified organized religion, it doesn't mean that this someone is an atheist. And by the way, atheism is not an ideology, so lets stop with the bullshit.

Which is much more relevant to what we've been discussing than your "Europeans are so racist" rant.

Atheism IS an ideology. From wikipedia:

Ideology, in the Althusserian sense, is "the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence". It can be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's beliefs, goals, expectations, and motivations.

That is, an ideology which in it's most basic form, describes the belief that there is no God. This is distinct from several similar positions such as the lack of a belief in a god, or not knowing.


Several countries, especially socialist ones like the USSR in times past, or present-day china and north korea, promote state atheism. In many of these cases, religion was meant to be replaced by loyalty to the state and reverence of their leaders. This doesn't mean that they are not atheist societies, it just means that they've used the state as a tool to build that atheist society.

Fundamentally, positive christianity is an atheistic ideology, like state atheism, rather than a religion like other forms of chrisitanity. The only reason it had to be called positive christianty instead of atheism is that at the time, protestants and catholics made up around 99% of germanys population, and it would have been a functionally suicidal move for the nazis to outright ban chrisitanity. There would have been revolution, not the 80% approval rating hitler enjoyed.

yesterday you were trying to ignore the contents of that post with the exception of a tiny part where I mentioned that Christianity originated in judaism and thus it's logically impossible that the nazis followed christianity.

I wasn't trying to "ignore" it. I didn't comment on it because i had no reason to. It is a historical fact, and i have no problem with facts. None of it contradicted anything i had previously said. So really saying that i was "ignoring" it or "avoiding it" is very disingenuous.

Actually the Nazi, with the positive christianity, tried to make christians deny the semitic origin of the bible and of christ.

You quoted this small point at the end of my post which really had very little do with the contents of the rest of my post, and used it to go of on a 10-paragraph rant about how europeans are so racist and that they can use the wicked, wicked new testament to justify this racism.

Not what i said. My initial point was that the Church used the Bible to spread anti semitic ideology, wich helped Hitler succeed in his enterprise (edit: and there is actually an argument to be made about Hitler's catholic background and education, and his antisemitic ideology) . This was always my point throughout the conversation. And it is still my point. I only responded to Norman false satement branding the Third Reigh an atheist society, but other than that, the bible ideology was alway the topic, not Nazi Germany.

edit:[

your "Europeans are so racist" rant

Complete strawman, i never said that]

religion was meant to be replaced by loyalty to the state and reverence of their leaders

yes, stalinism, like Nazism, wanted to replace the established religions by a "religion of the state", where the leader of the state is to be worshipped. In the case of USSR, this stalinism ideology was evidently and openly atheistic, but "atheistic" was a characteristic of the ideology, not the ideology itself. In the case of Nazism, that's just not true, they wanted to use religious beliefs to form a new religion that would put the state and Hitler in the center of it, but the belief in god was never prohibited, on the contrary since Hitler wanted to frame himself as a new messiah doing God's work.(and Hitler actually never renounced his catholicism)

Atheism IS an ideology.
[wikipedia: an ideology is] a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's beliefs, goals, expectations, and motivations.

Can you clarify what are the "set of ideas", the "goals", "expectations", and "motivations" that are tied to the sentence "i don't believe in a god" please?

And if i tell you "i believe in a god", can you tell me what is the goals, motivations, and set of ideas that i abide by?

wikipedia: "Although some atheists have adopted secular philosophies (eg. humanism and skepticism),there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

edit: tipo

Edited 2/6/2016 18:47:43