My Photo
Mobilise this Blog

Google

InvestigateDaily

INVESTIGATEMAGAZINE.TV

Kiwiblog

New Zealand Conservative

InvestigatePodcast

AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] investigatemagazine.com and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« You never know who's watching... | Main | Investigate gets it right...again »

Comments

BammBamm

Is these same Christian do-gooders that are letting Muslims into NZ ...and it will be the Aethists that have to build the gas chambers to deal with them.
Hopefully this time we'll feed a few Christians through as well.

Or, we could just invent a vaccine that makes all Christians lose their faith? Equating faith with an unsustainable delusion ...

fugley

Never have I read such utter rubbish on the internet Ryan !!

Posted by: dad4justice | June 02, 2008 at 12:51 PM

Then you never read your own posts, do you?

Like Ryan, I was once studying for the ministry; gives one a lot of reasons for rejecting faith, I can tell you.

dad4justice

"Like Ryan, I was once studying for the ministry"

Yeah right fugley, pull the other one 'cause it plays jingle bells.

Ryan Sproull

Studying to be a pastor didn't give me reasons to reject faith.

peter

Rich says

"Secular Humanism teaches us that morality is relative; different people at different times view morality differently. It teaches us that we cannot condemn other cultures for their moral codes, just because we have a different perspective."

Yes.

Ryan and fugley - had no idea both of you were studying to join the clergy. The outcome is unsurprising.

ropata

Wow, unfortunately I haven't had much access to the Web lately so I've missed all the fun.

Ryan, secular humanism has pilfered many principles from Christianity but in discarding God it has lost any transcendent reason for upholding those principles, and naturally devolves to the powerful exploiting the weak. The experiment of New Zealand's last 30 years or so, gradually marginalizing Christian ethics and teachings, has made our society more selfish and materialistic.

It is true that implementing a utopian vision by force has historically resulted in slaughter and totalitarian rule by an autocracy that thinks it is God. However the vision I refer to is not a triumphal Reconstructionism but a simple homespun faith in the Creator that spreads organically throughout a culture, where each person in their own small way helps to make this world a better place.

I am glad that you and fugley have had the opportunity to study the Bible, but your experience makes you the exception not the rule. Many very intelligent and sincere people graduate from Bible college with their faith strengthened. I have observed that those who reject Christ usually do it for personal reasons not intellectual ones.

Danyl Mclauchlan

. . . secular humanism has pilfered many principles from Christianity but in discarding God it has lost any transcendent reason for upholding those principles, and naturally devolves to the powerful exploiting the weak.

I'm not a fancy, big city historian but didn't Christian Europe consist of roughly 2000 years of monarchy and feudalism in which the majority of the population were serfs or indentured slaves?

Rick

There are courses in homophobia?

Wow, didn't know it even existed.

Oh yeah And I was a minister once too...


No, I'M sparticus..!

Load of arse.

ropata

I'm no expert either but it seems to me that Christianity was a beneficial influence on a chaotic period of history after the demise of the Roman Empire.

Matthew

"So Protestants aren't Christians?

- don't lump all Christians with Luther.

They turned away from "the Church".

- and your point is? Really you are confusing one thing with another thing and I'll leave you to figure out what you are conflating.

Wait- you don't believe they are Christians because he altered the canon... just like the origional church (there are more than 4 gospels)."

- no there are only four canonical gospels. Therefore the original church did not alter the canon. His attempt to alter the Canon failed anyway. For good measure I hope you know the difference between the books of the Canon and the books of the church, and why that is important without a search engine.

I was saying the Furher believed St Paul was a traitor to Christ.

- and Hitler is wrong. Paul was not a traitor to Jesus. This proves how deceived Hitler was - denying the Word of God to the Son of God.

He didn't attack true Christians- he attacked heretics. How did he know they where heretics? Their beliefs where differant from his. There are many, many precedents. See the Cathars- they were slaughtered to the last man , women and child by the church for heresy.

Eugenics is not explicately antiChristian - it only contradicts YOUR belief.

- oh dear. The absolutist relativist claim makes it relative only for you :)

There were many Christian eugenicists- Teddy Rossevelt for starters.

- read the Bible and you'll find that Eugenics is anti-Christian.

Hitler repeatedly attacked Christianity and St Paul in private- but not God or Jesus once.

- have a read of Dave Hunt's books. Perhaps that'll enlighten you on Hitler.

Given his statements (particularly divine providence and the emphasis on Jews corrupting things) he obviously believed he was cleaning the church of Jewish influence. After all, the surest sign for him the Jews controled something was if someone disagreed with him.

Marxism is atheistic. It is a SUBSECT of communism.

- in agreement with my original point. I appreciate that :)

There have been theistic forms of communism.

- Peter's teatment: hahaha

Communism itself is only the idea that the government should own all industries.

- Peter's treatment #2: hahaha

libertyscott

"The ancient virtues of poverty, chastity, and obedience are universally despised"

What is more utterly disgusting than this? Poverty is a virtue? Oh those lucky starving Africans - the great virtue of poverty.

Chastity - denying yourself, treating your body and sexuality as dirty, disgusting if ever pleasure is gained from touching, enjoying, immersing yourself in passion with another. No, better to live a life without that joy.

Obedience - yes go on, march to your deaths, march to kill the others, follow orders.

Poverty, chastity and obedience were worshipped by the Khmer Rouge, Mao and Stalin.

You can misuse words and claim non belief in ghosts is a religion, you can claim the absence of a belief in the supernatural is an integrated philosophy. It is not. However, to glorify poverty is itself moral turpitude - as Mother Theresa herself did, celebrating suffering.

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ropata

Money, Sex, & Power are the three big temptations of church leadership. The early monks battled these with vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Protestants today are more likely to use the tools of simplicity, fidelity, and servanthood. (1 John 2:16)

ZenTiger

These are not actually virtues when used in this context, although they were often described as virtues. They are "Evangelical Counsels" which has a different meaning to the concept of a virtue.

For example, poverty in this sense is a call to "perfect charity", the willingness to give away ones possessions to help others, and a willingness to renounce the lure of material goods to focus on the humanitarian needs of others.

They were common amongst Monks, who would live a spartan existence, so it's not poverty per se, but after meeting the immediate needs and food and shelter, having the capacity to look for the welfare of others.

My understanding of these counsels is a call to resist the opposites - where one seeks excesses of gratification, material goods, and exalted positions that would result in feeling superiority over fellow man.

To look at it another way, we have the capacity to feed the world, but not the collective will. A little more charity and compassion would be helpful in this regard.

If people want to devote their lives to others, and to contemplating God, in such a selfless way - good on them.

Ropata's point about this was that taking such vows are universally despised . That's a pretty fair assessment of the liberal mindset, who are not content to let others live as they wish, but condemn it and try to make out a person's choice to live like this is something evil.

ZenTiger

These are not actually virtues when used in this context, although they were often described as virtues. They are "Evangelical Counsels" which has a different meaning to the concept of a virtue.

For example, poverty in this sense is a call to "perfect charity", the willingness to give away ones possessions to help others, and a willingness to renounce the lure of material goods to focus on the humanitarian needs of others.

They were common amongst Monks, who would live a spartan existence, so it's not poverty per se, but after meeting the immediate needs and food and shelter, having the capacity to look for the welfare of others.

My understanding of these counsels is a call to resist the opposites - where one seeks excesses of gratification, material goods, and exalted positions that would result in feeling superiority over fellow man.

To look at it another way, we have the capacity to feed the world, but not the collective will. A little more charity and compassion would be helpful in this regard.

If people want to devote their lives to others, and to contemplating God, in such a selfless way - good on them.

Ropata's point about this was that taking such vows are universally despised. That's a pretty fair assessment of the liberal mindset, who are not content to let others live as they wish, but condemn it and try to make out a person's choice to live like this is something evil.

ropata

There is something very weird happening to the comments system today.

The comments to this entry are closed.