Zone1 What's the nuttiest allegedly Christian religion on the Planet?

[initforme]

Those that infuse the prosperity principle are nutty. Jesus was all about helping the poor. They will enter heaven while the very wealthy wont.

 

[Libby von H]

THis is the WORLD"S TALLEST MIDGET fallacy.

You are calling "Christian' what you offer as farthest from Christian.

 

[Libby von H]

I suspected most anwering would never have heard of Jordan Peterson (despite that says about their stupidity) so I will have to my thing and report it:

"Catholicism is as SANE as you can get." | Jordan Peterson about 1-2 minutes​

 

[ReinyDays]

Bible never said to not feed your neighbor chocolate cake with radioactive poison in it.
This FALLACY is the argument from silence

Radioactive poison is covered in Levitcus ... it's unclean for man to eat ...

7:20 - But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, that pertain unto the Lord, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

7:21 - Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing, as the uncleanness of man, or any unclean beast, or any abominable unclean thing, and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

Emphasis mine ... maybe you should read the Bible before you claim to know what it says ...

 

[onefour1]

Bible never said to not feed your neighbor chocolate cake with radioactive poison in it.
This FALLACY is the argument from silence

The Bible does however say to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

 

[Libby von H]

Classic Fallacy

Who is the world's smartest idiot?
Who is the world's tallest midget ?
Who is the world's strongest weakling?

IF nuttiest has any meaning it must be that the most nuttiest is not Christian at all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Libby von H]

Radioactive poison is covered in Levitcus ... it's unclean for man to eat ...

7:20 - But the soul that eateth of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, that pertain unto the Lord, having his uncleanness upon him, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

7:21 - Moreover the soul that shall touch any unclean thing, as the uncleanness of man, or any unclean beast, or any abominable unclean thing, and eat of the flesh of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.

Emphasis mine ... maybe you should read the Bible before you claim to know what it says ...

I now see a further error in your post...you think 'unclean' means 'sinful' !!!!!!

 

[FredVegbarfuss]

So, out of curiosity, The oldest Abrahamic religious writings (Hebrew in this case) were written nine centuries before 1 AD (or CE, if you prefer). Homo Sapiens (our specific species) have been trotting around this planet for about 315,000 years prior to that.
The question is, why did your deity not "give them the word" to save their souls? He decided all those humans that came prior to the Hebrews weren't worth getting informed? Just chuck them off to hell?
Hinduism is one of the oldest religion still in existence. The oldest religion of all would be the Animist religions, still in existence in tribal areas. Perhaps being the first, their religion would be the right one.

How is it seen that there are earlier people meant who God decided were not worth being informed for their souls to be saved?? That was was not said at all, but the opposite. Modern depictions of hell are not what I would speak of as being reality. Everyone would be without excuse for not looking, earlier people are included, and why say none of them responded to what they were shown and were repenting?? I don't claim that or believe that. There must be some from earlier times that we who would be saved will find have been saved too. The difference since is that the gospel is available and being spread, for much more opportunity to all those reached to respond, along with all that is made known of Christ provided to them. Earlier individuals might have only responded for themselves without a message from them that would have others more likely to come to that than they already were. Abraham would have been pretty unique with effectively spreading faith of the one true God who should be trusted. A few others who were earlier were shown doing that too, still.

 

[kjw47]

Those that infuse the prosperity principle are nutty. Jesus was all about helping the poor. They will enter heaven while the very wealthy wont.

hundreds of trinity religions= a house divided will not stand--misleading billions--They fail this true mark 100%=1Cor 1:10= Unity of thought( all of Gods 1 truth) no division. What don't they understand about no division?

 

[FredVegbarfuss]

hundreds of trinity religions= a house divided will not stand--misleading billions--They fail this true mark 100%=1Cor 1:10= Unity of thought( all of Gods 1 truth) no division. What don't they understand about no division?

Why is it not understood that Jesus came being the incarnation of God, who is Logos, the Word with God who is God (not a god, that is an error not based on the original writing), and from that was to be called the Son of God, and the Spirit of God, the Paraclete, is God? Christian believers are not supposed to believe in more beings who are God, there really is one God, who is one being, the Supreme Being. There is no disagreement and full unity between the Father in heaven, Logos who came in the incarnation as the Son of God, and the Spirit of God, with no division at all, there is still one being, who is God, not more beings.

Be clear about it if you are not Christian and a follower of a certain belief group you could mention. The accusation did not represent what is the real Christian position, that is fully supported in Bible texts.

 

[kjw47]

Why is it not understood that Jesus came being the incarnation of God, who is Logos, the Word with God who is God (not a god, that is an error not based on the original writing), and from that was to be called the Son of God, and the Spirit of God, the Paraclete, is God? Christian believers are not supposed to believe in more beings who are God, there really is one God, who is one being, the Supreme Being. There is no disagreement and full unity between the Father in heaven, Logos who came in the incarnation as the Son of God, and the Spirit of God, with no division at all, there is still one being, who is God, not more beings.

Be clear about it if you are not Christian and a follower of a certain belief group you could mention. The accusation did not represent what is the real Christian position, that is fully supported in Bible texts.

In the Greek lexicons at John 1:1--The true God is called Ton Theon=God. The word is called Theos to show a difference, the only difference possible = god small g. The same occurs at 2 Cor 4:4--The true God called Ton Theon, satan called Theos=god. 100% fact of life= translating works the same at both spots. All trinitarians are being mislead into serving a non existent trinity and breaking Gods #1 commandment daily.

 

[FredVegbarfuss]

In the Greek lexicons at John 1:1--The true God is called Ton Theon=God. The word is called Theos to show a difference, the only difference possible = god small g. The same occurs at 2 Cor 4:4--The true God called Ton Theon, satan called Theos=god. 100% fact of life= translating works the same at both spots. All trinitarians are being mislead into serving a non existent trinity and breaking Gods #1 commandment daily.

The first verse of John establishes some important things. Jesus is referred to as "the Word" who came among us in the flesh, the incarnation, from the Greek word Logos. Jesus Christ the Son of God is Logos come in the incarnation, the definition meaning the "Word" of God. This is one of John's seven names for Jesus, "the Word." The rest of the gospel is John proving this about him from various forms of evidence, with an emphasis on Jesus' miracles.

Those first eighteen verses of John counter many false beliefs. This first verse establishes that the universe had a beginning, contrary to the idea that it is eternal. It states that God has existed from that beginning. Later verses also show that God in fact created all that exists. This verse makes it noticeably clear that this Logos, who came in the incarnation as Jesus, is identical to the Creator, the Word was God.

There is nothing in the original language determining that it means a god. That would in fact be contrary to Bible passages. If you were to believe that, you are then polytheistic. Isaiah 43:10-12, Isaiah 44:6-8, and Isaiah 45:5-6 speak to this, you don't show you know, there in no other god in reality. Jesus is the one God, if you are saying he is another god which he cannot be that is a logical contradiction. Other passages show that he is the same one, which get ignored.

John uses the word “Theos” some 252 times in his writings. Twenty-two of these times it occurs without a definite article. In every place outside of John 1:1 and John 1:18 where the singular form of the word is used (whether it is with or without the article), John uses it to reference the one true God. There are no exceptions, even in the New World Translation. Twenty times the New World Translation translates “Theos” without the definite article as “God” referencing the one true God. (Jn. 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 6:45; 8:54; 9:16, 33; 13:3; 16:30; 19:7; 20:17(2); 1 Jn. 3:2; 4:12; 2 Jn. 3, 9; Rev. 21:7). The only places it is not translated as “God” is in John 1:1 and John 1:18. Thus, overwhelming, in the New World Translation, the word “Theos” without a definite article is believed to be a reference to the one true God. If “Theos” without the article is always translated as God by the New World Translators themselves (except for John 1:1, 18), then the argument that “Theos” should be translated as “a god” because it lacks a definite article fails. Interestingly, in the textual line followed by the New World Translation, John 1:18 has two occurrences of the word “Theos,” both without an article. The New World Translators translated the first usage as “God” and the second as “god.” The inconsistency in the New World Translation cannot be based on the lack of a definite article.

 

[kjw47]

The first verse of John establishes some important things. Jesus is referred to as "the Word" who came among us in the flesh, the incarnation, from the Greek word Logos. Jesus Christ the Son of God is Logos come in the incarnation, the definition meaning the "Word" of God. This is one of John's seven names for Jesus, "the Word." The rest of the gospel is John proving this about him from various forms of evidence, with an emphasis on Jesus' miracles.

Those first eighteen verses of John counter many false beliefs. This first verse establishes that the universe had a beginning, contrary to the idea that it is eternal. It states that God has existed from that beginning. Later verses also show that God in fact created all that exists. This verse makes it noticeably clear that this Logos, who came in the incarnation as Jesus, is identical to the Creator, the Word was God.

There is nothing in the original language determining that it means a god. That would in fact be contrary to Bible passages. If you were to believe that, you are then polytheistic. Isaiah 43:10-12, Isaiah 44:6-8, and Isaiah 45:5-6 speak to this, you don't show you know, there in no other god in reality. Jesus is the one God, if you are saying he is another god which he cannot be that is a logical contradiction. Other passages show that he is the same one, which get ignored.

John uses the word “Theos” some 252 times in his writings. Twenty-two of these times it occurs without a definite article. In every place outside of John 1:1 and John 1:18 where the singular form of the word is used (whether it is with or without the article), John uses it to reference the one true God. There are no exceptions, even in the New World Translation. Twenty times the New World Translation translates “Theos” without the definite article as “God” referencing the one true God. (Jn. 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 6:45; 8:54; 9:16, 33; 13:3; 16:30; 19:7; 20:17(2); 1 Jn. 3:2; 4:12; 2 Jn. 3, 9; Rev. 21:7). The only places it is not translated as “God” is in John 1:1 and John 1:18. Thus, overwhelming, in the New World Translation, the word “Theos” without a definite article is believed to be a reference to the one true God. If “Theos” without the article is always translated as God by the New World Translators themselves (except for John 1:1, 18), then the argument that “Theos” should be translated as “a god” because it lacks a definite article fails. Interestingly, in the textual line followed by the New World Translation, John 1:18 has two occurrences of the word “Theos,” both without an article. The New World Translators translated the first usage as “God” and the second as “god.” The inconsistency in the New World Translation cannot be based on the lack of a definite article.

Yes Jesus is the word, but capitol G God is not given to the word in the Greek lexicons. a god is correct. At minimum 20 translations in history by Greek scholars has a god at John 1:1 to the word. 3 had was divine, 1 has was godlike, godlike is the meaning of small g god.
in 1822 Abner Kneeland a Greek Scholar translated the NT from the same Greek lexicons all use, he compared Greek to English side by side to prove to the world a god is correct.
Of course all those translations were rejected by trinity clergy's because that single grammar error proves them all as false religions.

 

[Blackrook]

Even though I'm Catholic I voted for Catholicism:

Catholics believe the wine and wafer are consecrated by a priest's words, turning them into the literal Body and Blood of Christ.

Catholics believe all forms of artificial birth control is a sin, including onanism and masturbation.

Catholics believe God sent his Son into the world to redeem us from sin.

Catholics believe that twelve fishermen, tax collectors, and other ordinary man founded a Church that's lasted nearly 2,000 years.

Catholics believe one who divorces and remarries lives in the sin of adultery.

Catholics believe that priests and religious should abstain from sex.

Catholics believe Mary is the immaculate conception, ever virgin, and assumed into heaven at the end of her life.

All the Protestant churches have retreated from most of these doctrines.

 

[sealybobo]

What's the nuttiest allegedly Christian religion on the Planet?

Please give at least one paragraph as to WHY you chose as u did

Here's mine:

JWs don't believe in Hell. Well, what did Jesus die to save us from, then? Or what else would He have gone through such torture for? Please explain. The Mormons believe spirits are flying around everywhere in the universe, waiting for people to copulate (in marriage... don't know about fornication??) so as to bring those spirits into a body.. So yeh.. I don't know where they get this (although I can speculate).

The Episcopalians (founded by Henry VIII, mass murderer) are now allowing actively homosexual men to be ministers. Yikes! Whatever happened to homosexuality being a serious (mortal) sin? Or Whatever happened to Go and sin no more?

A teenage computer whiz who used the early-aughts internet to spread awareness of the Catholic faith will become the church's first millennial saint.

Carlo Acutis, who died of leukemia at age 15 in 2006, is already referred to as "God's influencer" and the "patron saint of the internet" for his work cataloging Eucharistic miracles around the world — and soon it will be official.

 

[Failzero]

Unitarian Universalist

 

[FredVegbarfuss]

The first verse of John establishes some important things. Jesus is referred to as "the Word" who came among us in the flesh, the incarnation, from the Greek word Logos. Jesus Christ the Son of God is Logos come in the incarnation, the definition meaning the "Word" of God. This is one of John's seven names for Jesus, "the Word." The rest of the gospel is John proving this about him from various forms of evidence, with an emphasis on Jesus' miracles.

Those first eighteen verses of John counter many false beliefs. This first verse establishes that the universe had a beginning, contrary to the idea that it is eternal. It states that God has existed from that beginning. Later verses also show that God in fact created all that exists. This verse makes it noticeably clear that this Logos, who came in the incarnation as Jesus, is identical to the Creator, the Word was God.

There is nothing in the original language determining that it means a god. That would in fact be contrary to Bible passages. If you were to believe that, you are then polytheistic. Isaiah 43:10-12, Isaiah 44:6-8, and Isaiah 45:5-6 speak to this, you don't show you know, there in no other god in reality. Jesus is the one God, if you are saying he is another god which he cannot be that is a logical contradiction. Other passages show that he is the same one, which get ignored.

John uses the word “Theos” some 252 times in his writings. Twenty-two of these times it occurs without a definite article. In every place outside of John 1:1 and John 1:18 where the singular form of the word is used (whether it is with or without the article), John uses it to reference the one true God. There are no exceptions, even in the New World Translation. Twenty times the New World Translation translates “Theos” without the definite article as “God” referencing the one true God. (Jn. 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 6:45; 8:54; 9:16, 33; 13:3; 16:30; 19:7; 20:17(2); 1 Jn. 3:2; 4:12; 2 Jn. 3, 9; Rev. 21:7). The only places it is not translated as “God” is in John 1:1 and John 1:18. Thus, overwhelming, in the New World Translation, the word “Theos” without a definite article is believed to be a reference to the one true God. If “Theos” without the article is always translated as God by the New World Translators themselves (except for John 1:1, 18), then the argument that “Theos” should be translated as “a god” because it lacks a definite article fails. Interestingly, in the textual line followed by the New World Translation, John 1:18 has two occurrences of the word “Theos,” both without an article. The New World Translators translated the first usage as “God” and the second as “god.” The inconsistency in the New World Translation cannot be based on the lack of a definite article.

Yes Jesus is the word, but capitol G God is not given to the word in the Greek lexicons. a god is correct. At minimum 20 translations in history by Greek scholars has a god at John 1:1 to the word. 3 had was divine, 1 has was godlike, godlike is the meaning of small g god.
in 1822 Abner Kneeland a Greek Scholar translated the NT from the same Greek lexicons all use, he compared Greek to English side by side to prove to the world a god is correct.
Of course all those translations were rejected by trinity clergy's because that single grammar error proves them all as false religions.

You still will just ignore the inconsistencies in your own preferred 'translation' which are being pointed out, and ignore it being pointed out that you are in fact polytheistic, which the Bible is against, with passages shown that you also ignore. There is only one God, who is the only Savior. I believe that, and you don't. I believe what the Bible shows, and you don't. The case is really closed.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The nuttiest religion I was going to vote for is not on the poll, Atheism. (Btw, I'm agnostic)

Generally, Atheists hold a few Gods in high regard, Money, Greed, Violence etc..

If you research the Encyclopedia of Wars, you will discover 93% of all wars documented in mankind's existence were not religious based. Just goes to show how violent atheism is.

So if everyone was nutty and not atheist, the world would be a much safer place.

 

[kjw47]

You still will just ignore the inconsistencies in your own preferred 'translation' which are being pointed out, and ignore it being pointed out that you are in fact polytheistic, which the Bible is against, with passages shown that you also ignore. There is only one God, who is the only Savior. I believe that, and you don't. I believe what the Bible shows, and you don't. The case is really closed.

You don't believe Jesus=John 17:3 where he teaches-the one who sent him= Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.
Or Paul who teaches-1Cor 8:5-6--warns all other gods are false then names only the Father as God.
Jesus again=John 4:22-24-warns all other gods are false then teaches the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth.
I understand the darkness found in your altered and error filled translations causing much confusion.

 

[JohnDB]