Christian view of Abraham?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can't even bear the thought of reading through your post.

I'm done.

If you need a god to get your through life, then more power to you, Chris Addict.

I have my evidence. I rely on historians. I'm not foolish in thinking that there's a god who will save my soul if I abide by some silly guidelines. I would rather practice self-management.

Good luck to you, and may your god find you during the end of days.

If not, I'll see you in hell.

I guess atheist OP is throwing in the towel on the thread she started....

wrong person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can't even bear the thought of reading through your post.

I'm done.

If you need a god to get your through life, then more power to you, Chris Addict.

I have my evidence. I rely on historians. I'm not foolish in thinking that there's a god who will save my soul if I abide by some silly guidelines. I would rather practice self-management.

Good luck to you, and may your god find you during the end of days.

If not, I'll see you in hell.

I guess atheist OP is throwing in the towel on the thread she started....

not OP

But there really is no sense in fighting ignorance in adults, especially if historical evidence and scientific studies are purposely overlooked.

why bother?

Fairy tales are fun for kids - and in this case, for adults, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I didn't say he was a follower. I said he was a contemporary - as in alive during that time.
different meaning, wordsmith

And the council decided which books to use in order to solidify a Christian framework revolving around ONE God. So there were missing chapters, which you call the earlier "Q" gospel. So until these books are found, we're left with the four gospels. I hardly think that four men are proof that Jesus existed.

You still don't understand that Christianity was monotheistic from the very beginning, do you? You can wordsmith this till you're blue in the face, and talk about how Nicea "established" monotheism (your earlier post) or how Nicea suppisefly "solidified a framework around one God" (your post above). Unfortunately, it's clear from your obvious confusion, in your post above, about basic historical facts involving the role of the Q gospel and Nicea's role in authenticating gospels, that youre still very confused about these very basic facts of history (without even bringing faith into it).

Let me be kind in saying that you're a bit slow.

Of course Christianity was monotheistic - for purposes of control, honey bun. However, I've said - again and again and again (b/c you and your kind have had difficulty in absorbing this fact) that Christianity stems from a polytheistic culture. It was a way of picking and choosing a god. A god was chosen, given powers (all from pagan gods), and no one questioned their new god.

I'm tired of giving evidence to support my claims - only to return to find some ridiculous counterargument that has no strong backing.

Love your god, sweetie.

I will love my husband and kids. I will work hard to improve humanity. I will live a happy life. But I will not be controlled by an ancient text about some prophet who was born of a virgin and "sacrificed" to open up the heavens for us.

If that makes me a bad person, so be it.

I'm good!

Nope. You totally screwed up about Nicaea, and the recent reposting of your original post, unfortunately for you, demonstrates this as a fact.

No amount of your patronizing insults, and no amount of trying to reword your oopsie, will change your own history, i.e. that you majorly screwed up this key bit of ancient history. Your knowledge of ancient and modern religion is limited to reading one Joseph Campbell book maybe 10 years ago, and you've forgotten even most of that.

So own it! instead of digging yourself in further, why not own your mistake, like a mature adult?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't lost track of this thread. It's too much.

Btw, I'm the OP. And I am not an atheist. I believe in God.

You're the Muslim poster, starting another thread to attack Christianity? Allrighty, then!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The roots of Christianity and Judaism are in ancient Semitic religions. These were polytheistic, the belief and worship of many gods. They progressed at some point to henotheism, the belief in many gods but the worship of only one, often a tribal god. For the ancient Jews, this was Yahweh. Over time, the worship of this one god evolved into a belief in only one God. This is where Judaism was at the time of Christ. Atheist PP, I think you agree with all this.

According to mainstream views, Jesus and all his followers were monotheistic. Jesus was simply God come down to earth, not a separate God.

But you seem to see Jesus (or perhaps his followers) as somehow re-establishing the polytheistic roots of ancient Judaism, with Jesus as a separate god to be adored alongside the now established Jewish God. And somehow, they established a third more elusive god to be worshipped as well, the Holy Spirit.

Your thesis appears to be that the Council of Nicea pronounced Christianity a firmly monotheistic religion with a triune God because it is easier to control people with a monotheistic religion than with a polytheistic religion. I must say, you completely lose me here--where is the evidence that monotheistic religions are inherently more given to controlling the masses (I think this is your contention) than polytheistic religions?

And BTW, I don't think any of the Christian PPs here feel they are "controlled by an ancient text."

This is a pretty good recap of Smug Non-Christian's (SNC) historical and theological mistakes. It probably makes a good end to this thread.

As PP said, SNC's arguments make little sense because
- Christianity didn't re-establish polytheism, to the contrary, Christianity was monotheistic from the very start, and Jesus was God come down to earth.
- Therefore, Nicaea had no role in reestablishing monotheism. Nicaea had other important legacies, but given that SNC can't be bothered to read the few paras above, it doesn't seem worth listing them.
- The argument that it's easier to "control" people with a monotheistic god vs. many gods is indeed baffling and unsupported by any evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I can't even bear the thought of reading through your post.

I'm done.

If you need a god to get your through life, then more power to you, Chris Addict.

I have my evidence. I rely on historians. I'm not foolish in thinking that there's a god who will save my soul if I abide by some silly guidelines. I would rather practice self-management.

Good luck to you, and may your god find you during the end of days.

If not, I'll see you in hell.

That was the saddest post ever.

PP "can't even bear" to read a few paragraphs that explain her ignorance of key historical facts (moreover, the historical explanation was gentle, so kudos to the PP who wrote it). No mention of faith here, just elemental history -- still, she "can't even bear" to improve her knowledge.

Clearly, knowledge would make it harder to hate.

She's determined to continue hating. She stokes the hate with ugly insults about Chris Addicts, foolish believers, silly guidelines, and hell.

PP is what's wrong with the country. It's not just the ignorant faithful, it's the ignorant atheists too. It's all people who are determined to be ignorant in their hatred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can't even bear the thought of reading through your post.

I'm done.

If you need a god to get your through life, then more power to you, Chris Addict.

I have my evidence. I rely on historians. I'm not foolish in thinking that there's a god who will save my soul if I abide by some silly guidelines. I would rather practice self-management.

Good luck to you, and may your god find you during the end of days.

If not, I'll see you in hell.

That was the saddest post ever.

PP "can't even bear" to read a few paragraphs that explain her ignorance of key historical facts (moreover, the historical explanation was gentle, so kudos to the PP who wrote it). No mention of faith here, just elemental history -- still, she "can't even bear" to improve her knowledge.

Clearly, knowledge would make it harder to hate.

She's determined to continue hating. She stokes the hate with ugly insults about Chris Addicts, foolish believers, silly guidelines, and hell.

PP is what's wrong with the country. It's not just the ignorant faithful, it's the ignorant atheists too. It's all people who are determined to be ignorant in their hatred.

And people who write about them as if they care when they really just want to make people different from them look sad and foolish and silly and ignorant and ugly and hateful and sad and foolish and ....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I can't even bear the thought of reading through your post.

I'm done.

If you need a god to get your through life, then more power to you, Chris Addict.

I have my evidence. I rely on historians. I'm not foolish in thinking that there's a god who will save my soul if I abide by some silly guidelines. I would rather practice self-management.

Good luck to you, and may your god find you during the end of days.

If not, I'll see you in hell.

That was the saddest post ever.

PP "can't even bear" to read a few paragraphs that explain her ignorance of key historical facts (moreover, the historical explanation was gentle, so kudos to the PP who wrote it). No mention of faith here, just elemental history -- still, she "can't even bear" to improve her knowledge.

Clearly, knowledge would make it harder to hate.

She's determined to continue hating. She stokes the hate with ugly insults about Chris Addicts, foolish believers, silly guidelines, and hell.

PP is what's wrong with the country. It's not just the ignorant faithful, it's the ignorant atheists too. It's all people who are determined to be ignorant in their hatred.

And people who write about them as if they care when they really just want to make people different from them look sad and foolish and silly and ignorant and ugly and hateful and sad and foolish and ....

Huh? Not sure who you're responding to.

Hatred is bad. Valuing ignorance over knowledge is bad. Cultivating your hate by preserving your ignorance is bad. What more is there to say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the gospel came after Abraham, Abraham did not accept Jesus as Savior. So what is the Christian view on him?

really, no one in the Old Testament could accept Jesus as their savior. What are you getting at?

I'm still so confused

[Anonymous]

I am Christian of strong faith.

I also cannot get behind Abraham all set to slay his son on an altar. God wants us to use free will, my dude, WTH were you thinking?? Respectfully, I think Abraham was not all there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am Christian of strong faith.

I also cannot get behind Abraham all set to slay his son on an altar. God wants us to use free will, my dude, WTH were you thinking?? Respectfully, I think Abraham was not all there.

Thank you. I am a new poster. I can’t get over “cosmic child abuse” or however an earlier poster described it. What type of loving parent would teach a child to disobey his strongest and noblest instincts (protection of your own)? And then build a religion and make that the proof of the importance of faith? Faith doesn’t ask you to do bad things. It lets you live the humblest and best life you can. I am not Christian and so maybe my worldview has no resonance on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't lost track of this thread. It's too much.

Btw, I'm the OP. And I am not an atheist. I believe in God.

You're the Muslim poster, starting another thread to attack Christianity? Allrighty, then!

Could also be the Trump-supporting-Jew-Who-Hates-Christians. She and the Muslim-Who-Hates Christians are equally angry and equally ignorant.

As an aside, and because this thread is worthless and somebody else is already doing the heavy lifting about Nicea: do we think other religions actually teach such BS about Christianity, or are these posters simply idiots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the gospel came after Abraham, Abraham did not accept Jesus as Savior. So what is the Christian view on him?

really, no one in the Old Testament could accept Jesus as their savior. What are you getting at?

I'm still so confused

Why on earth did you bump a thread that’s three years old? Because bashing Christianity during Advent is a DCUM “tradition” and you’ve learned the hard way that the Horus-Mithras stuff is easily shot down?

[Anonymous]

Akhenaton, the ancient Egyptian Faroe is the 1st recorded monotheist
But so what? I prefer the natural view of the world of the pagans