Religion - Questions

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Gerry- I don't particularly like my relatives being characterized as a bunch of murderers, especially since they are partly responsible for you to be able to move your sorry ass around at will today without fear of oppression and I doubt like hell if you'd have the guts to say it to my face. 8O

Really, but I'm allowed to post my opinion. .......right? Even if it hurts your feelings or you think it's unjustified or unjust, right.? So what's the problem? I would also have no problem saying it to your face, maybe then you'd "get it".
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Gerry- I don't particularly like my relatives being characterized as a bunch of murderers, especially since they are partly responsible for you to be able to move your sorry ass around at will today without fear of oppression and I doubt like hell if you'd have the guts to say it to my face. 8O
Hey, JLM, you set the rules.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
This thread went full circle and is now turned into a joo bashing thread by our resident Jew Hater......

That should read "one of our resident Jew haters". And just a page earlier people were complaining atheists might hijack the thread by *gasp* posting criticism of religion on topic.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
That should read "one of our resident Jew haters". And just a page earlier people were complaining atheists might hijack the thread by *gasp* posting criticism of religion on topic.
Religion - Questions

We have a number of posters that are well schooled on Religion - I am not - I try going by the big 10 - No not Football


We will have to start with God creating the earth and of course Man/Woman -

We also have to include that God has a Master Plan

Got to have those 2 before we move on to the questions

So the questions are as follows:

God created Man/Woman - So those that are afflicted with a Mental Illness and cannot according to Western Laws be held accountable for such crimes as murder and others - Does God consider that he created these people with these afflictions - do they go to Heaven or Hell?

Does taking a life defending yourself condemn you to Hell?-

As God created Man & Woman - he also created homosexuality - asexual as well - Are they condemned to Hellfire?
God made them did he not?

As a Soldier, taking a life to protect others in War - Are you condemned to hell and brimstone as an aside?

Walking by a person that needs help you keep on moving, the person dies, are you according to the Bible also responsible for their death - So off you go - Brimstone and fire as an added side dish of punishment

Taking revenge on people - does that also constitute a Sin???

Can a person who does not believe in God, go to Heaven?

What about all those born before God revealed himself? Where did they go???? No not Florida, that’s Gods Waiting Room

Capital Punishment? Does God believe in Capital Punishment?

Is our fate decided by God the day we are born?

Was Man/Woman born with Free Will?

Now for those of you that are Atheists, what you believe is your own business. OK - This is not a Thread for bashing Religion.
It asks in my opinion reasonable questions.

The above was what I posted - Questions that I ask myself and others - some I do struggle with - others I do not. And the last of what I posted was a request that this not turn into a Religion bashing thread, regardless of your belief.
Example is Homosexuality - I believe that God made us all, for a purpose in life and that Homosexuality is not a sin. I have had that belief since my late teens. That is one I do not struggle with.

But we have some that look upon Religion as causing everything that is wrong in the world. As you mentioned in an earlier post we would have to talk specifically about those specific areas.

That said I do find that that some take a position that they will tolerate most differences between cultures, ethnic origins, minority Religions within NA - as they have to be seen, how a person, they are seen is quite important to these types, as Tolerant, Heaven Forbid pun intended that they be seen by their circle of friends -co-workers family as Racist or Intolerant and they can be ever so respectful and Tolerant, excepting when the thread is about or involves Christianity. So they are Hypocrites one and all, those that are what I have just described, nothing more, nothing less than Intolerant Hypocrites.

Would you agree or disagree with my last points made in the last paragraph?
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
And the last of what I posted was a request that this not turn into a Religion bashing thread, regardless of your belief.


Yeah, and when people complained that no one was listening to that request, this thread suddenly became about the Holocaust.

That said I do find that that some take a position that they will tolerate most differences between cultures, ethnic origins, minority Religions within NA - as they have to be seen, how a person, they are seen is quite important to these types, as Tolerant, Heaven Forbid pun intended that they be seen by their circle of friends -co-workers family as Racist or Intolerant and they can be ever so respectful and Tolerant, excepting when the thread is about or involves Christianity. So they are Hypocrites one and all, those that are what I have just described, nothing more, nothing less than Intolerant Hypocrites.

Would you agree or disagree with my last points made in the last paragraph?

I'm not really sure what your points are. Are you saying that people put on the appearance of tolerance in public and then display their intolerance (specifically of Christians) on the internet?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Hey, JLM, you set the rules.

I don't know about setting the rules but I sure don't need to take any crap from the likes of someone who thinks it's OK to whistle in the wind while six million Jews get exterminated. When it comes to armed combat I'm not very brave either but I would never denigrate the the ones who take a stand for their country and try to defeat oppression. :smile:
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I don't know about setting the rules but I sure don't need to take any crap from the likes of someone who thinks it's OK to whistle in the wind while six million Jews get exterminated. When it comes to armed combat I'm not very brave either but I would never denigrate the the ones who take a stand for their country and try to defeat oppression. :smile:
You should apply some of that respect to things other people might as feel as strongly about.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Yeah, and when people complained that no one was listening to that request, this thread suddenly became about the Holocaust.
[/FONT]


I'm not really sure what your points are. Are you saying that people put on the appearance of tolerance in public and then display their intolerance (specifically of Christians) on the internet?

My last point was quite clear - Just read it again.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
whistle in the wind while six million Jews get exterminated.
One recent link pointed out that persecution started back in '33 (sketchy proof of that).
Where the **** were all the 'concerned' Nations that nobody showed up for the first 12 (or so) years?
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
My last point was quite clear - Just read it again.

That whole paragraph was a syntactic mess. Figuring out which sentence constitutes a point is quite difficult. Your last sentence was the clearest of them all so I assume this is the last point you were referring to. Unfortunately, that sentence makes no sense out of context as your reasons for calling people hypocrites is contingent on the previous sentences, which are barely coherent. Hence why I asked for clarification.

If I don't know why you think these people are hypocrites how can I agree or disagree with that opinion?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
You should apply some of that respect to things other people might as feel as strongly about.

I think I do.

One recent link pointed out that persecution started back in '33 (sketchy proof of that).
Where the **** were all the 'concerned' Nations that nobody showed up for the first 12 (or so) years?

That doesn't diminish the evil perpetrated by Hitler.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
That doesn't diminish the evil perpetrated by Hitler.
Why does it need embellishment, the truth should be horrible enough that you don't need to spread falsehood and present them as facts.
The vid by Ben Freedman puts many things about those years into question, all the way back to WWI, he isn't a liar yet you most likely reject everything he said because it doesn't agree with 'your version'. Is the book referenced a lie also, if so there should be some proof.

"As far as getting my facts right tell that to the relatives of 6 million dead Jews."

That number is out of date and it was a known lie when first flaunted as the 'truth' When you start bull****ting about one thing it means your other 'facts' should also be checked for accuracy.

Is the book at the link a lie or the truth?
Did Six Million Really Die? (book)
(in part)
[SIZE=+1]A Factual Appraisal Of The 'Holocaust' By The Red Cross[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Jews And The Concentration Camps:[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]No Evidence Of Genocide[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany's concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l'activité du CICR en faveur des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as "Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, "Schutzhäftlinge"), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces" (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, "were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons." (P.74).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and "from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons" (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Red Cross Recipients Were Jews[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] The Report states that "As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. >From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps" (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. "Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews" (Vol. III, p. 83).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]In the course of the war, "The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York" (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, "where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto" (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, "'The Committee's delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich ... These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit" (Vol. I, p . 642).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded "in sending anything whatsoever to Russia" (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their "liberation" by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]No Evidence Of Genocide[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: "In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 ... In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp ..." (Vol. III, p. 83).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against "the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies" (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) - Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. "Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged" (Vol. III, p. 594).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Not All Were Interned[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the "aid given to the Jewish section of the free population," and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the "thoroughness" of the supposed "extermination programme", and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing "every single Jew he could lay his hands on."[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann's assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that "A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market" (Vol. I, p. 646).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. "The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries" (Vol. I, p. 645).[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. "Until March 1944," says the. Red Cross Report, "Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary" (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States "to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary," and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that "The Government of the United States ... now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave" (Vol. I, p . 649). [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]Biedermann agreed that in the nineteen instances that "Did Six Million Really Die?" quoted from the Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas (this includes the above material), it did so accurately. [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] A quote from Charles Biedermann (a delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Director of the Red Cross' International Tracing Service) under oath at the Zündel Trial (February 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1988). [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]The above is chapter nine from the book "Did Six Million Really Die?" [/SIZE]
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
That whole paragraph was a syntactic mess. Figuring out which sentence constitutes a point is quite difficult. Your last sentence was the clearest of them all so I assume this is the last point you were referring to. Unfortunately, that sentence makes no sense out of context as your reasons for calling people hypocrites is contingent on the previous sentences, which are barely coherent. Hence why I asked for clarification.

If I don't know why you think these people are hypocrites how can I agree or disagree with that opinion?


That said I do find that that some take a position that they will tolerate most differences between cultures, ethnic origins, minority Religions within NA - as they have to be seen, how a person, they are seen is quite important to these types, as Tolerant, Heaven Forbid pun intended that they be seen by their circle of friends -co-workers family as Racist or Intolerant and they can be ever so respectful and Tolerant, excepting when the thread is about or involves Christianity. So they are Hypocrites one and all, those that are what I have just described, nothing more, nothing less than Intolerant Hypocrites.

OK -A long run on sentence indeed - Hope this clarifies it?

Many people will tolerate and be quite vocal on protecting/tolerating a Minority Religion based upon ethnic origin -
shall we say Hindu, Sikh, Muslim etc

These very same people take the opposite actions with regards to Christianity- That makes them hypocrites and does Racism also apply. Yes I would say it does.

They like to be seen as tolerant and evenhanded by their circle, respectfully of differences, excepting Christianity. That make them hypocrites

Then we have the ones that blame the ills of the world on Christianity.

In some cases yes and in others they would be incorrect. But to lay all of those ills at the door of Christianity is pure intolerance and hatred.

I have talked with a number of Ethnic minorities about racism - The common thread running thru their encounters was they had more encounters of racist attitudes from other ethnic minorities ( immigrants in the last generation - under 20 years or less - recent arrivals - 5-10 years in Canada) - but few from Christians, in particular, ones that have lived their lives in Canada.

Just my opinion is all.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
Many people will tolerate and be quite vocal on protecting/tolerating a Minority Religion based upon ethnic origin -
shall we say Hindu, Sikh, Muslim etc

These very same people take the opposite actions with regards to Christianity- That makes them hypocrites and does Racism also apply. Yes I would say it does.

How exactly is this racist?

Though I wouldn't say it's necessarily hypocritical. Hypocrisy is to express a belief while actually believing the opposite. They might believe Christianity is as awful as they say it is and that all those other religions are fine and lovely.

They like to be seen as tolerant and evenhanded by their circle, respectfully of differences, excepting Christianity. That make them hypocrites

If they want to look tolerant of all religions except Christianity that's not hypocritical so long as they are inwardly tolerant of all religions except Christianity.

Then we have the ones that blame the ills of the world on Christianity.

In some cases yes and in others they would be incorrect. But to lay all of those ills at the door of Christianity is pure intolerance and hatred.

Hatred maybe, but probably not intolerance. It's ignorant mostly and their bias against Christianity will make them believe things about it easily without much reflection. So ignorance and gullibility.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
211
63
In the bush near Sudbury
In most cases - it isn't about Christianity - or Judiasm, Islam, Buddhism or even atheism for that matter. It's about the narrow-minded people who use those banners as rocks instead of shields - who use them for gain instead of comfort - who use them as Law instead of for guidance. When you have a thousand and one sects who each covet their own favoured interpretation of a Bible passage as unbreakable law and damn anyone else who does, how does one even take it seriously?
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
Why does it need embellishment, the truth should be horrible enough that you don't need to spread falsehood and present them as facts.
The vid by Ben Freedman puts many things about those years into question, all the way back to WWI, he isn't a liar yet you most likely reject everything he said because it doesn't agree with 'your version'. Is the book referenced a lie also, if so there should be some proof.

And while you are at it you can read up on another guy like your Ben Freedman

James Keegstra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does it really matter if it was 6 million or 5.93 million?
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
And while you are at it you can read up on another guy like your Ben Freedman

James Keegstra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does it really matter if it was 6 million or 5.93 million?
How does that compare to Mr. Freedman,? They are either facts or they are not, which is it? If they are facts and the speech is from 1961 then for 50 years there has been an intention cover-up of the facts and the lie is the official truth. That's not really a trait that should be admired.
Where are you getting the 5.93 from or is that not really important? More flat-out bull****.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
[QUOTE=Corduroy;1411910]

I am an utter failure at using quotes, my apologies, I mess it up every time

These very same people take the opposite actions with regards to Christianity- That makes them hypocrites and does Racism also apply. Yes I would say it does.How exactly is this racist?

Point - I stand corrected - Thank you, poor choice of words on my part - If they with this opinion of Christianity, harass, deny employment, refuse to rent an apartment etc - Then it would meet the standards of discrimination would it not?


In some cases yes and in others they would be incorrect. But to lay all of those ills at the door of Christianity is pure intolerance and hatred.

Hatred maybe, but probably not intolerance. It's ignorant mostly and their bias against Christianity will make them believe things about it easily without much reflection. So ignorance and gullibility.

Point And I do agree with your statement but I also consider these persons to be intolerant.

lack of toleration; unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.
Just my opinion.