Church is Evil!
Options
mikeymoe
Members Posts: 203 ✭✭
Churches prey on the weak of our society. Using mind games and fear to extort money and loyalty from lost souls lookin for exceptance and love. Your relationship with ? is just that...YOUR relationship.
Comments
-
meh....tell me something i dont kno
but. church can be good for sum ppl. givin them a sense of belonging. bein apart of somthing. community type ? ............. -
meh....tell me something i dont kno
but. church can be good for sum ppl. givin them a sense of belonging. bein apart of somthing. community type ? .............
That doesn't always = good. You could say the same thing about the KKK or Neo-? Skinheads. -
Churches prey on the weak of our society. Using mind games and fear to extort money and loyalty from lost souls lookin for exceptance and love. Your relationship with ? is just that...YOUR relationship.
That church you described does sound pretty bad. I would steer clear of places like that if I were you.
PEACE -
you just went to the wrong church
-
Yeah, you have to find the right church. I would say going to no church at all is probably better than going to a bad church. Still, the Bible does say we as believers in ? shouldn't forsake gathering together and helping each other to walk the right path. So, while you are correct that your relationship with ? is YOUR relationship with ? , it is also correct to build similar relationships with other members of ? 's flock.
-
There are no real churches. church = ecclesia (greek)= called out assembly. The most genuine and last real church was the Ebionite community. A church is supposed to be a 24/7 community thing; not a once or three times a week place you visit that is contained in a building.There is nothing called out or assembled about the so-called Christian church. If a real church popped up the modern false church would call it a cult. I would say the fundamental flaw would be the modern false churches failure to recognixe that you cant get good fruit from a bad tree (catholic/greek othodox fallacy) and the Mark forgery.
-
There are no real churches. church = ecclesia (greek)= called out assembly. The most genuine and last real church was the Ebionite community. A church is supposed to be a 24/7 community thing; not a once or three times a week place you visit that is contained in a building.There is nothing called out or assembled about the so-called Christian church. If a real church popped up the modern false church would call it a cult. I would say the fundamental flaw would be the modern false churches failure to recognixe that you cant get good fruit from a bad tree (catholic/greek othodox fallacy) and the Mark forgery.
This isn't exactly true. There are several religious based communities in both this country and abroad, the quakers for example. Not to mention that many modern churches are community institutions and are staffed and have events going pretty much at all times. I'm also not sure what point you're trying to make with the "called out assembly" argument. A "called out assembly" is nothing more than a group of people gathered for a purpose. As it has always been used church is literally a group of people gathered for a spiritual or social purpose. How is a modern church service not representative of that? -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »This isn't exactly true. There are several religious based communities in both this country and abroad, the quakers for example. Not to mention that many modern churches are community institutions and are staffed and have events going pretty much at all times. I'm also not sure what point you're trying to make with the "called out assembly" argument. A "called out assembly" is nothing more than a group of people gathered for a purpose. As it has always been used church is literally a group of people gathered for a spiritual or social purpose. How is a modern church service not representative of that?
the kind of folks you mentioned 9QUAKERS0 are the closest to it in the realm of Christianity. one of my main points is that the original concept of "church" and "christian" are not relative. moreover, the fruits tell of the roots as far as modern chuches go. it is not a 24/7 thing. it is not an actual community. im not saying euphemistic community or rhetorical or symbolic. the called out assembly thing was meant to be literal AND for messianic hebrews (by blood or conversion). reference the ebionites. -
the kind of folks you mentioned 9QUAKERS0 are the closest to it in the realm of Christianity. one of my main points is that the original concept of "church" and "christian" are not relative. moreover, the fruits tell of the roots as far as modern chuches go. it is not a 24/7 thing. it is not an actual community. im not saying euphemistic community or rhetorical or symbolic. the called out assembly thing was meant to be literal AND for messianic hebrews (by blood or conversion). reference the ebionites.
I see what you're saying, and maybe I'm taking you out of context, but it seems like you're attacking the modern church because it's not what it was hundreds of years ago. Everything you're saying might be true, but just because most modern churches aren't 24/7 all inclusive communities doesn't make them "bad trees." Not to mention that even now, churches do play the central role in a lot of communities especially in smaller populated areas. Hell, even in america there are lots of small rural towns where all community business in addition to religious affairs are handled in the church. That is not so different from what you're talking about. It's not so easy to have that kind of thing in a place like NYC. However, even in the city, there are churches that act as cornerstones for he communities that surround them. Anyway, I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't see how the modern church not fitting the exact definition of the greek root of their namesake makes them "bad trees" or "false churches." -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »I see what you're saying, and maybe I'm taking you out of context, but it seems like you're attacking the modern church because it's not what it was hundreds of years ago. Everything you're saying might be true, but just because most modern churches aren't 24/7 all inclusive communities doesn't make them "bad trees." Not to mention that even now, churches do play the central role in a lot of communities especially in smaller populated areas. Hell, even in america there are lots of small rural towns where all community business in addition to religious affairs are handled in the church. That is not so different from what you're talking about. It's not so easy to have that kind of thing in a place like NYC. However, even in the city, there are churches that act as cornerstones for he communities that surround them. Anyway, I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't see how the modern church not fitting the exact definition of the greek root of their namesake makes them "bad trees" or "false churches."
well, the false church thung is obvious...if something does not embody the qualities it is defined by then it is a "false" version. im pretty sure there are good people or bad people alike involved in the false church so that designation really (as i use it) has nothing to do with the individual parishoner in detail per se. in that same framework, without condemning or justifying the individual, the institution of the modern church is a bad tree because of the fruit it bears (mixed good and bad0 and because its roots are in fallow ground(Greek orthodox/roman Catholicism). -
well, the false church thung is obvious...if something does not embody the qualities it is defined by then it is a "false" version. im pretty sure there are good people or bad people alike involved in the false church so that designation really (as i use it) has nothing to do with the individual parishoner in detail per se. in that same framework, without condemning or justifying the individual, the institution of the modern church is a bad tree because of the fruit it bears (mixed good and bad0 and because its roots are in fallow ground(Greek orthodox/roman Catholicism).
Sorry, but that doesn't make the modern church false. Words are dynamic. Very few things maintain the same definition of hundreds of years. When you say something is a false representative, you are saying that that object is pretending to be something it's not. The modern church is not pretending to be anything but the modern church. Saying that the modern church is a false church because it does not mirror the original roots of the world "church" is like saying a person named Christopher is a false person because their name means "Christ like" yet they aren't perfect like Christ was.
As for the modern church being a "bad tree," you may have a point, but you might as well call every institution that has ever had any human participation a "bad tree" because no organization has ever produced all good fruit. I'm pretty sure you'd agree that the religious structure during the biblical times fits the proper word for "church." However, it was that same institution that produced the Pharisees and they were most definitely bad fruit. Today's churches are no worse than churches in the past in that respect. You can't seriously believe that everyone in the past who was associated with a church came out righteous.
