[OT] Nation bashing

[AJC]

THE END IS NEAR... quick everyone get out and buy duct tape and pLastic...

[dogscoff]

A Christian would be defined as someone who believes in Christ as the Messiah. I've also heard it said that you have to believe in the resurrection to be a Christian.

Plenty of atheists believe Christ lived, but that he was just a very persuasive mortal man.

Muslims believe in Christ as an important prophet, but not the Messiah. Not sure were Judaism stands on that issue. Hindus/ Sikhs etc aren't stemmed from the same sources, so they probably don't care one way or the other.

Personally, I think you should only be able to claim Christianity if you go to church regularly, or at least pray a lot. I know plenty of people who claim to be Christian but haven't seen the inside of a church since some cousin got married. It doesn't bother me that much since I'm an atheist anyway, but it does seem hypocritical to claim christianity without actually doing anything to prove it.

I've probably just offended someone haven't I? Sorry, just IMO.

[Omega_Prime]

Originally posted by dogscoff:


Personally, I think you should only be able to claim Christianity if you go to church regularly, or at least pray a lot. I know plenty of people who claim to be Christian but haven't seen the inside of a church since some cousin got married.

I've probably just offended someone haven't I? Sorry, just IMO.

Not offended, but Jesus never built a church, according to the Biblical account. In fact, he never once indicated that building a church was a good idea.
In Luke 21 we read,
Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6"As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down."

The point being, it's just a building. It is temporary. It will go away. The final temple is man's body, the very image of God.

So, I think that Jesus would have a different definition of Kristjun (using the middle-eastern transliteration, since the religion is from that region) than you.

What a delima...who to believe. You or Jesus.



Good thing I am Jewish.

[ February 13, 2003, 16:54: Message edited by: Omega_Prime ]

[oleg]

More than that !
"And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly..." Matthew,6

Going to church have nothing to do with Christianity, IMHO.

[dogscoff]

Fair enough, point taken.

[Krsqk]

Jesus said that His church was not a building, but the people. The church is comprised of the people who believe in Jesus as the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic law, and the earlier Messianic promises, and follow his commands and teachings. However, there is a practical need for a meeting place. In the early church days, people met in the homes of fellow believers. Roman persecution drove the church underground (often literally). After the legalization of Christianity, churches once again met in the open. When Constantine married the church and the Roman state, Christianity became somewhat of a fad among the Roman elite, who had previously been steeped in pagan tradition. They saw ornate buildings as a vital part of worship. The tradition of large, ornate church buildings can be traced back to this time. Modern churches generally fall into one of two camps: 1) Size and opulence are the way to go; or 2) Spend enough to get the building you need, and do it well, but not to excess. [edit] I guess there is a third group, the "whatever we can come up with is good enough for God."

A Christian cannot be defined as one who goes to church or one who prays (although a Christian will do these things). A Christian is one who 1) accepts that Jesus died for the sins of the world, fulfilling the law, and for his own sins, individually. They should 2) accept the authority of the Bible over man's word and tradition, and they should 3) try to conform their life to the principles found in the Bible. Many who believe 1) don't accept 2) and live in direct contradiction to 3); according to the Bible, they are still technically Christians, but they don't live out their faith.

[ February 13, 2003, 17:37: Message edited by: Krsqk ]

[Andrés]

First, no one made you guys sell out, if it really happened that way.

But it was made to sound so sweet back then.
Privatizations would give us more efficient services. Relatively small and weak local companies fusioned themselves with large multi-national ones.
Little did we know that all infrastructure and resources of those companies bought below their real price was just being emptied and sent back to the new owners home.

To be fair I must say that this was not only done by American companies but also by many european ones.
The great companies that control the world has grown beyond nationalities and here the “great power from the north” is most times associated with the USA.

Exchange rates were against us, our goods were too expensive and imported goods looked cheap. We were suffering a severe de-industrialization, exporting flour and importing cookies.
But we were too busy with all cheap imported goods we didn't have before that we didn't see it.
“welcome to the 1rst world” they said, and we were stupid enough to believe.

And second, if you have a surplus of food, and people are still going hungry, then you need to look a little closer to home.

If you were an Argentinean producer (assuming most of the producers are still Argentinean) would you gift your production to the poor or export it to high price paying foreign consumers?
Social help by a state that can barely pay the salaries of its own employees is insufficient and inefficient.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Krsqk:
Anarchy is not a functional (functionable?) political structure. Government exists to arbitrate disputes arising from the infringement of one person's freedom on another's. Without a government, anarchy quickly devolves into a "might makes right" system. It also relies on all individuals being unselfish, rational creatures. It does not address, for instance, what should be done with the mentally ill, or those who steal/rape/kill for the pleasure of it (as opposed to need/provocation). If everyone is allowed to do what they wish, no one will have any recourse from injustice other than their personal firearm(s). Not exactly what I would call an ideal society.

That is not anarchy at all. That would fall more under something like the theoretical form of communism (though not quite). Anarchy simply means no laws, no regulations, no government, no leadership at all, no rights, nothing. It is of course impossible, as within minutes someone would take charge. It could very well be the guy with the biggest stick (your might makes right), which would be a despotism. Mob mentality will always win over anarchy.

Originally posted by sven:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wizarc:
Hmm, I thought being a Christian was just believing that you believed in a higher power a.k.a whatever the name is for God in their religion.

So now there is a religious class called Christian like Baptist, Catholic, etc?

Depends on who you ask...

I would tend to think that a christian is anyone who believes in the christian god, ie; Christ. However I know certain christian sects have different definitions, for instance my in-laws are born-agains (or pentecostal or evangelical or whatever the heck it is) and according to their dogma only people of that particular denomination are christian.

I'm not sure exactly what they consider the catholics, lutherans, anglicans and all the other denominations to be - but they sure don't consider them "christian".

---

Again, being Christian means that you believe in the one God (and a very specific one), and that you accept the divinity of Jesus Christ. Pentacostals, Catholics, Protestants, Lutherans, etc. are all Christians, period. Some sects of Christianity wrongly see other sects as not Christian, but they are just misinformed.

Personally, I think you should only be able to claim Christianity if you go to church regularly, or at least pray a lot. I know plenty of people who claim to be Christian but haven't seen the inside of a church since some cousin got married. It doesn't bother me that much since I'm an atheist anyway, but it does seem hypocritical to claim christianity without actually doing anything to prove it.

Being Christian has nothing to do with going to church or not. There are a number of sects of Christianity that explicitly do not agree with church, and so have no churches and do not go to them. But, they are by all means still Christians. What you are talking about is being religious. Many westerners fall into the trap of confusing "Christian" with "religious" because Christianity is so dominant amongst western cultures.

[ February 13, 2003, 20:13: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[primitive]

Andrés,
The rest of the "developed" nations, will have to share the blame with the US for the rape of Argentina.
I apologize.

Making a developing economy fight on equal terms with US/Europe is like pitting the 82nd Airborne against Ceasars Praeorian Guard.

[metro637]

Andres, I don’t know how well traveled you are, but a lot of the problems you are talking about are present here in America. We have unemployment, poverty, homeless, starving, and etc. I don’t want to sound leftist, rightist, or communist, but a lot of that has to do with class struggle. In my opinion, A corporation is only concerned with it’s stockholder’s not country so they could give a damn if people are poor in Argentina or America. It just so happens that other factors are involved. Someone has to be blamed if people are starving, right.
Hypothetically, maybe Argentina blames the U.S., we blame someone else. For example Japan. This keeps allows some to maintain power, gives rise to Nationalism, racism, and host of other isms. Keeps the focus off the real problems and solutions. Certain books by George Bernard Shaw capture these ideals.
A key to a happy successful country/people is the businesses and governments doing things that will make the country stronger in the long run vs. short term goals. The next thing is to set up a situation where the government is forced to be selfless and look out for the interests of the people.
In short, we are all being had by the MAN. You fill in the blanks