Celtic Heroes

On the Bible: You are not taking those verses out of context with the verses around them(well you might be, I didn't really check). You are taking those verses out of context with the rest of the Bible. Show me where the apostles said that we could not eat unclean food. Or where they were making sacrifices. Or where they were executing gay people. Or adulterers. These were the men who knew Jesus best. Not only that, but when Jesus died, He took away the need to sacrifice animals and to keep "clean". I'm not making that up as an excuse either. The Old Testament Law was a law for a nation. Just like America has a law, Israel had a law. The punishing of certain things were the punishments for breaking that law. The principles are still there, but the same punishments are not.

On different branches of Christianity: I believe when I mentioned the importance in discerning the difference between Catholics, Mormens, Protestants, etc. someone said that it was not really important. This is absolutely not true. If you are going to say that Christianity is what oppressed galileo and Newton, you have to be specific. For instance, Newton himself actually believed in God. Many of the great scientists did. It's not right that these things should be pinned on Christians(I use this name for lack of a better word) as a whole. Take Nazi Germany. Because of that, the German stereotype for a long time was...well...that they were Jew-hating Nazi's. And that stereotype outlasted the fact. Not only that, it was not even totally true during that era. Many Germans fought in the Allied Army. I'm sure others spied for us. Others, helped Jews escape the country. And I'm sure that others who did none of this, did not agree with the government. You can't take a whole (insert word that means a group of people) and lump them all together.

Lastly, I am ready to debate what makes a Christian. If then you will stop calling every person who claims to be a Christian a Christian, I will be thankful.

On the Bible: You are not taking those verses out of context with the verses around them(well you might be, I didn't really check). You are taking those verses out of context with the rest of the Bible. Show me where the apostles said that we could not eat unclean food. Or where they were making sacrifices. Or where they were executing gay people. Or adulterers. These were the men who knew Jesus best. Not only that, but when Jesus died, He took away the need to sacrifice animals and to keep "clean". I'm not making that up as an excuse either. The Old Testament Law was a law for a nation. Just like America has a law, Israel had a law. The punishing of certain things were the punishments for breaking that law. The principles are still there, but the same punishments are not.

On different branches of Christianity: I believe when I mentioned the importance in discerning the difference between Catholics, Mormens, Protestants, etc. someone said that it was not really important. This is absolutely not true. If you are going to say that Christianity is what oppressed galileo and Newton, you have to be specific. For instance, Newton himself actually believed in God. Many of the great scientists did. It's not right that these things should be pinned on Christians(I use this name for lack of a better word) as a whole. Take Nazi Germany. Because of that, the German stereotype for a long time was...well...that they were Jew-hating Nazi's. And that stereotype outlasted the fact. Not only that, it was not even totally true during that era. Many Germans fought in the Allied Army. I'm sure others spied for us. Others, helped Jews escape the country. And I'm sure that others who did none of this, did not agree with the government. You can't take a whole (insert word that means a group of people) and lump them all together.

Lastly, I am ready to debate what makes a Christian. If then you will stop calling every person who claims to be a Christian a Christian, I will be thankful.

Solumbum you are un-intelligent, christian is nothing but a label, it doesn't mean anything.

On the Bible: You are not taking those verses out of context with the verses around them(well you might be, I didn't really check). You are taking those verses out of context with the rest of the Bible. Show me where the apostles said that we could not eat unclean food. Or where they were making sacrifices. Or where they were executing gay people. Or adulterers. These were the men who knew Jesus best. Not only that, but when Jesus died, He took away the need to sacrifice animals and to keep "clean". I'm not making that up as an excuse either. The Old Testament Law was a law for a nation. Just like America has a law, Israel had a law. The punishing of certain things were the punishments for breaking that law. The principles are still there, but the same punishments are not.

On different branches of Christianity: I believe when I mentioned the importance in discerning the difference between Catholics, Mormens, Protestants, etc. someone said that it was not really important. This is absolutely not true. If you are going to say that Christianity is what oppressed galileo and Newton, you have to be specific. For instance, Newton himself actually believed in God. Many of the great scientists did. It's not right that these things should be pinned on Christians(I use this name for lack of a better word) as a whole. Take Nazi Germany. Because of that, the German stereotype for a long time was...well...that they were Jew-hating Nazi's. And that stereotype outlasted the fact. Not only that, it was not even totally true during that era. Many Germans fought in the Allied Army. I'm sure others spied for us. Others, helped Jews escape the country. And I'm sure that others who did none of this, did not agree with the government. You can't take a whole (insert word that means a group of people) and lump them all together.

Lastly, I am ready to debate what makes a Christian. If then you will stop calling every person who claims to be a Christian a Christian, I will be thankful.

Solumbum you are un-intelligent, christian is nothing but a label, it doesn't mean anything.

Actually it means "little Christ". I believe it first came into use in Antioch to describe the early believers. As many who claim to be Christians are not believers and are this not representative of Christ, the word Christian should not be used to describe them/lump all who claim to be a Christian together.

"The right thing" is relative to one's own perception.

For example, Catholics follow the bible but through the pope. It is actually logical in a way. Although subject to abuse and personal gain, the idea is that the bible is a metaphorical document in which only god has the true interpretation. Since it would be chaos for everyone to have their own interpretation, someone thought there must be some connection between god and us in order to lead us toward the right interpretation. Thus, the pope was "found," allowing Catholics to still follow the bible but through an intermediary. They are still Christians but with a different way to "react" to the bible.

Of course the entirety of such logic can be questioned, and indeed it has as we see many different groups following the same bible in their own way. However, there is no proof for any individual one and, as mentioned in my earlier argument, there is no solid proof for any one religion.

"The right thing" is relative to one's own perception.

For example, Catholics follow the bible but through the pope. It is actually logical in a way. Although subject to abuse and personal gain, the idea is that the bible is a metaphorical document in which only god has the true interpretation. Since it would be chaos for everyone to have their own interpretation, someone thought there must be some connection between god and us in order to lead us toward the right interpretation. Thus, the pope was "found," allowing Catholics to still follow the bible but through an intermediary. They are still Christians but with a different way to "react" to the bible.

Of course the entirety of such logic can be questioned, and indeed it has as we see many different groups following the same bible in their own way. However, there is no proof for any individual one and, as mentioned in my earlier argument, there is no solid proof for any one religion.

First of all, Jesus was our "intermediary". There is no need for another one. Now don't get me wrong. There are some things in the Bible which are "gray areas". Such as eschatology, etc. But there are other things that are necessary. For instance, if you think you can get to heaven on your own righteousness, you better think again. You would have to be perfect. Literally perfect. From when you were born to when you died. Even evil thoughts would count. If you have committed one sin, you are too unclean to come before God as God is pure. Now fortunately, God did create a way for us to go to heaven. He made it so that by accepting Jesus as savior and Lord, when God looked at our "record" He would only see the righteousness of Jesus.

The reason the Catholic Church system isn't right is because it is unbiblical. You cannot come to heaven in any way through your own works. Am I disagreeing with someone being a teacher of the Word of God? No! But you cannot come to heaven by works. Also, the "saints" should not be worshipped. FYI, you do know that Mary was not a virgin when she died right? Pray to God. No where in the New Testament say that the apostles were to be worshipped.