Celtic Heroes

RoyalNinja, are you thinking at all before replying? You are becoming absolutely out of control with these replies that are basically only placeholders for more replies. Ancenstry.com is a site that will give you information regarding your ancestors farther back than 500 years. That is simply one site. If you do not have the time to reply (since you say you are a teenager I assume you have homework) there is no reason to reply. This thread will most likely be here for years maybe even months to come. I do not mean to hurt your feelings, but doing things such as bashing religions is something I've learned is not good.

Also, I hope everyone remembers that Christian is not synonymous with follower of Christ. Christian is merely a title that sadly anyone can use.

Miracles do happen since you've forgotten that Jesus is still alive in Heaven.

Just curious if you are in royals "Christian" camp of demonic possession and casting demons into pigs and such. Are you or do you discount that aspect of the bible?

Christian means little Christ. It was first used I believe in Antioch(not sure though) to describe believers in Christ. It kinda is synonymous with followers of Christ, but what u are tryin to say is that it is used improperly. And actually Christianity kinda developed the second after Jesus died. If u want to call that 1500 years, you can. Also there has never been a time in history(I don't think; could be mistaken on this one, but I don't think so. And for bring up the dark ages as there were some Christians then too).

Certain people here (not me) claim roman Catholics aren't Christian. Which is laughable - I think the same thing when they are baptist and that's barely 400 years old.

Plus3 said ]

What is christian though? If not a self imposed label to try to justify our own personal beliefs and to instil a sense of order to the mad world in which we inhabit?

It's pretty hilarious to have these cults pop up 1500 years after the fact never existing in the interim and then call themselves true Christians while Catholics aren't even though they are arguably about the oldest Christian sect there is lol.

Christianity starts right after Jesus died. Roman catholics. After beating up Jesus and seeing what happened after he died(read the bible if you don't know what happened), the romans believed and made their own "Christian" religion.
So basically, your wrong.

You are the one saying Catholics, as in the roman catholic church, aren't cristian not me lol. Baptist cults didn't start untill 1600 - 1500 years after the bible was compiled.

And the above is priceless we have two highly religious people or more who can't even agree on simple facts. That should be a clue It is all bs.[/quote]

That's funny because there are plenty of people who disagree about evolution. Misinformation can happen anywhere. Doesn't mean it wrong. I can say that a cookie jar is empty. Some else can say its full. Doesn't mean there is no cookie jar

Christian means little Christ. It was first used I believe in Antioch(not sure though) to describe believers in Christ. It kinda is synonymous with followers of Christ, but what u are tryin to say is that it is used improperly. And actually Christianity kinda developed the second after Jesus died. If u want to call that 1500 years, you can. Also there has never been a time in history(I don't think; could be mistaken on this one, but I don't think so. And for bring up the dark ages as there were some Christians then too).

Certain people here (not me) claim roman Catholics aren't Christian. Which is laughable - I think the same thing when they are baptist and that's barely 400 years old.

Facepalm. I don't care when the name "baptists" came about about; its the beliefs that matter. Do you believe in God? Do you believe that Jesus died on the cross for you? Do you want Him to save you? Have you asked Him to save you? Do you want to serve Him? Do you believe that you are saved by grace through faith, and not of works? Was it by any work you did that got you into heaven? Or was it all God's grace? If you can answer all these questions yes(besides the next to last one), you are probably saved. If you answer them no(except the next to last one) then you are probably not saved.

Christianity starts right after Jesus died. Roman catholics. After beating up Jesus and seeing what happened after he died(read the bible if you don't know what happened), the romans believed and made their own "Christian" religion.
So basically, your wrong.

You are the one saying Catholics, as in the roman catholic church, aren't cristian not me lol. Baptist cults didn't start untill 1600 - 1500 years after the bible was compiled.

And the above is priceless we have two highly religious people or more who can't even agree on simple facts. That should be a clue It is all bs.

That's funny because there are plenty of people who disagree about evolution. Misinformation can happen anywhere. Doesn't mean it wrong. I can say that a cookie jar is empty. Some else can say its full. Doesn't mean there is no cookie jar

First off facts are independent of belief. Disbelieving in the sun dosent make it dissapear for the rest of us no matter how demented your thoughts become. The only people who disagree with evolution are butt hurt over thier fables being disproven. There is no scientific debate - no contrary evidence and mountains of supporting evidence.

Second if you are in the camp of calling Catholics not Christian who exactly were Christians from 100 ad to 1600?

Christian means little Christ. It was first used I believe in Antioch(not sure though) to describe believers in Christ. It kinda is synonymous with followers of Christ, but what u are tryin to say is that it is used improperly. And actually Christianity kinda developed the second after Jesus died. If u want to call that 1500 years, you can. Also there has never been a time in history(I don't think; could be mistaken on this one, but I don't think so. And for bring up the dark ages as there were some Christians then too).

Certain people here (not me) claim roman Catholics aren't Christian. Which is laughable - I think the same thing when they are baptist and that's barely 400 years old.

Facepalm. I don't care when the name "baptists" came about about; its the beliefs that matter. Do you believe in God? Do you believe that Jesus died on the cross for you? Do you want Him to save you? Have you asked Him to save you? Do you want to serve Him? Do you believe that you are saved by grace through faith, and not of works? Was it by any work you did that got you into heaven? Or was it all God's grace? If you can answer all these questions yes(besides the next to last one), you are probably saved. If you answer them no(except the next to last one) then you are probably not saved.

I was about to ask you the same of the FSM. His noodly appendages bring nothing but love and a sweet basil tomato sauce.

You do realize that there were people who did not agree with the Catholics and so were torchered and killed during that time? Read foxes book of martrys and you will figure it out.

Also no, facts are seperation from belief. That's why I like to say: I believe in science while you believe in evolution. Creationism is fact.

Also mocking my beliefs is not going to get me to "come to my senses"(sarcasm). You said that baptists were new. That may be true;it may not be. I don't know. But the belief behind it is not new.

Abortion is not baby killing.

And yes, there are stable records for the 1500s so some people do know what their ancestors were doing 500 years ago.

Ermmm... Yes, abortion is taking a baby's life . They are actually alive inside a persons belly. Sounds illogical, but that's how babies are born, not from a tree.

Sure, there are records from that time, but there are also records from the Bible. Thanks for backing up my points.

No, a baby is alive. A foetus is not; at least within a period of time when it is simply a cluster of cells.

Characteristics of life:
1) Organisation
2) Energy use and metabolism
3) Response to environmental stimuli
4) Regulation and homeostasis
5) Growth and development
6) Potential to reproduce
7) Potential to adapt and evolve

A foetus within a period of time does not "pass" the characteristics. A baby, whilst not exactly capable of reproduction, does pass the characteristics.

Now I will agree that at a certain time, a foetus is considered alive. However, at an early enough period it is not and the law takes this into consideration.

The bible is a solid stream of metaphors mixed with potential half truths without any verifiable details. Records that Plus3's family have are most likely marriage documents, estate documents, emigration/immigration documents, census data, etc. Those are evidence that do not have play on words, metaphors, half truths, and other such nonsense.

I happened to also trace back some of my family heritage and an example I would use would be a travel record aboard a ship. There are other people who had ancestors on the ship, there are still materials intact from the ship, etc etc. With such evidence, I can conclude that my ancestors were in fact at a certain location at a certain time doing certain activities.

Now, even with all this said, to focus on one person's family is foolish. We could say Catholics did this and Europeans did that and I would agree that my Catholic European ancestors were somewhat foolish but I make different choices than them.

And the above is priceless we have two highly religious people or more who can't even agree on simple facts. That should be a clue It is all bs.

You are saying science is also "bs", since there is debate all of the time.

Also, highly religious? You will call anyone "highly religious", but I doubt you would call anyone a scientist. You act as if reprimanding for use of false facts is not a part of science, either.

Also no, facts are seperation from belief. That's why I like to say: I believe in science while you believe in evolution. Creationism is fact.

Everything is a belief and nothing is certain. However...

Science leads to probable certainty. Science supports evolution. Science does not support creationism.

Now, you may doubt evolution and the Big Bang. This is acceptable; doubt is very good. However, outright denial in favour of something with less to almost no evidence is foolish. The same scientific method that brings us technology, medicine, knowledge, and progress supports evolution and the Big Bang.

Furthermore, it is really annoying to see the constant incorrect assumptions in regards to such scientific ideas and then the simple ending of "therefore god," which seems almost like fear of the unknown. No one has yet to show any evidence of creationism or god and the one attempt was a bunch of links that each led to one person who would present non empirical ideas and then strut around as if they as a one person source without any support actually won against numerous other sources consisting of multiple people and peer reviewed conclusions.

I am sorry but religion just is not the answer.

An idea that never changes can never be an answer.