[UK] Judge Orders Father To Take His Children To Church

False. That is not the Biblical criteria.

and btw i have read every religious book that is produced in my language as im in constant need of ammo for the religiots that are my family

Let's ask wiki:



They're christian, they just like listening to a pope more than reading a bible.

i was unaware of catholics not following the bible (kind of shocking seeing as they invented it)

A long term ago there was this land called Middle Earth, where men, dwarves, elves, wizards and hobbits battled against the evil armies of Sauron, by destroying the Ring of Power Sauron was finally defeated.

IT WAS IN A BOOK SO IT MUST BE REAL.

i'd love to meet the creatures that indoctrinated you they did a fairly rockin job

and you do realize that satan is part of christianity as well right ?

it blows my mind this is the same Endoq that used to talk about smoking weed all the time in my social ls when they played XI.

got no issues with endoq seems like a funny dude just has a crippling religious disorder

I quit smoking weed about 5 months ago. I'm still the same person though. :P

The difference is that the Catholic peerage are leading them away from what the bible has taught through misinformation, mistranslation and self appointed god hood.
Where does it say to worship idols in bible?
Where does it say to worship popes?
Where does it say worship on a Sunday?
Where does it say to celebrate Easter and Christmas?
Basically they change the rules.
No one really needs to follow a group when it comes to scriptures. Good peers are there to help you understand it, not tell you how it is.
How can someone be true to themselves in their heart if they are being told by others how they should perceive gods word. That's not true faith in god. That's faith in man.
The bible is there to give a message and teachings in life. Whether you accept them or not is up to you. That's the beauty of free will.
This is where the name of religion has been muddied. Religion is supposed to be an individual's journey of understanding.
But it's been used to control people for financial and power hungry means. That's why a lot of people dismiss it. How can something from god cause so much harm right. But the damage has been man made.

Unless you're telling me the bible fell from the sky, and every copy has been published without any alteration on anything (which is not true, since it's been translated at the very least - and translations are subject to interpretation). Reading the bible is just being told by some very old dead people how to perceive "gods words", instead of some living person.

You read the bible, it's up to you how to interpret it. you listen to the pope, it's up to you how you interpret his words. I don't see how your free will is hindered just because you practice it differently.


anyway, that's not even my point. My point is Catholic is a group within the big umbrella of Christianity. Just that they practice differently to protestants, who like to see themselves as the entirety of Christianity nowadays.

You can disagree to their way of practice, but it doesn't stop them from believing the same thing. Just like Extreme Islam is a group of extremist in Islam. They don't represent the entirety, but they're a group within it.


Religion means very different things to different people, and no one should feel like one should overrule the other. You might think it's an individual's journey of understanding. I know someone who believes it in due to the community support he finds in church and the comfort of believing in something that would guide him to good. I personally see it as a very old form of propaganda to control people that plays with superstition.

boosh

The bibles are 2 things.
The history of people at those times.
And gods word. Moses up on the mountain, his appearances before people, jesus' teachings.
Whether you believe if they were man made or not is up to you.
But don't tell others where the messages are supossed to have come from, from the books point of view.
The popes religion is supossed to come from the bible, so how can you not say it doesn't matter who you follow if the pope changes that?
Also self understanding is very different than a peer pressured forced teaching. The latter totally hinders that.

My point is, unless you're telling me the bible fell from the sky in the form of a book, it is man made. Unless you're telling me you open the bible and a mysterious voice start appearing in your head, you are reading something that is man made.

I am not telling others where the words came from. I didn't even suggest anything like that. Even if you believe they are the words of your god, it is recorded by some human who existed thousand of years ago, possibly in a different language. It's up to his or her interpretation of the words, and subsequently up to the translator's interpretation when the text was translated into the language you are reading. This is one fact you can't deny unless you're telling me there's a place on earth that rains bibles in all languages available every so often.

Plus, Catholics don't deny the teachings in the bible, they just believe the sacred roman traditions are equally important.

Again, this isn't really anything to do with the subject I was trying to point out. THEY BOTH LIE UNDERNEATH THE UMBRELLA OF CHRISTIANITY. If you were to quote me to dispute my point, at least put a valid argument on why you think it is not Christianity. If you just want to express how holy is your bible, please don't quote me.

edit: since you edited your reply

it doesn't defeats the statement that both group are practising Christianity. You just don't agree to the way they teach their followers. They are still under the umbrella of christianity. Plus, even within the protestants teaching varies. You can claim you are doing it yourself and you are only practising it within yourself. There are protestants around going to christian church every sunday, taking their kids to christian camps where they are influenced by what they older kids and young adults tell them what the bible says. There are people going around harassing people on the street to go to church and they claim to be christians, not catholics. Would you say they are not christians either?

The people who wrote the bible didn't even know they were writing it. It's a collection of various bits from several authors. Some of those works by those very same people aren't even included because it didn't fit with the narrative the people who compiled it wanted.

But that's okay, the nice thing about religion is you can just take what you want, interpret it however you like and ignore the rest. So we can just say the authors and compilers were inspired by god so the resulting edited and translated text is perfect and holy. Just ignore or misinterpret all those mistakes and contradictions.

Good thing that we sane people don't use it to establish criteria.

Your main point was about the umbrella of Christianity.
Yes I'll agree with you that both groups advertise that they belive in Jesus. But I think it's a world of difference in practice. If you don't practice what you preach/advertise I don't think these groups can be under the same umbrella.
It's saying I belive in the bibles rules but I'm going to follow my own rules. Then tell everyone it's still the bible. Power through deception. Same for some Christian followers too as you've stated.

As for the mistranslations of text by man. Yes again I agree. Even the name 'Jesus' is a mistranslation or false. There is no direct translation of his Hebrew name.

Jesus name

But I don't think the basis of the stories have changed much. Hasn't the Dead Sea scrolls confirmed that. Only a few parts and wording but the messages mainly stay the same.



Got a source to back this up?

I wonder why those ancient prophets are perfectly believable but the modern ones that pop everywhere in the world are actually recognized as lunatics or scammers.

Look. Christianity is a name given to a certain believe. You are a protestant. There are other branches within Christianity. Believe it or not. read it up. that's all I'm saying.

it's like saying i'm not a human because I eat with my left hand, and your mum told you human eat with right hand. Read some text, google something like "difference between protestant and Catholic" you'd find that you're regarded as a protestant. Catholics are also Christian. I know Christians are narrow minded but at least try to research on things before you argue.

If you really want to distinct yourself form Catholics, call yourself a protestant or bible lover or something.

Recent scholarship seems to indicate that he was set up to be the fall guy (unintended pun.) Not going to hunt it down at this hour.

The only requirement for being christian is to believe three impossible things before breakfast. They are:

1, the virgin birth.

2, the resurrection.

3, the holy trinity.

BTW the reason why many christians think that Mormons aren't christian is that they are not trinitarians.

BULL DROPPINGS. We, the Jews, invented the bible.

The catholics rewrote and amended it.

/storms off muttering the horned Moses indeed.

Oh look. the Jesus Cult can't even agree with one another, let alone anyone else.

I'm shocked.

*lights up the conspiracy signal in the sky*

*** please, I'm lighting the conspiracy menorah.

you summoned?

Havnt mentioned my religion. As in a loyalty to a group.
I was using 'I' as an example. Sorry if I implied otherwise.
And I've agreed with you. They are advertised the same thus the blanket term. Was just saying that blanket term misleads those who aren't educated on the vast difference that's all. And as such,(current representation of those groups) the differences being so vast in practice. To the point of not even sticking to the material that term means and that they are supposedly to follow, that personally I don't agree with that blanket term.
But I can see your point and agree christianity means follower of Christ. The agendas of the groups don't wholely support the term is all.

What have you got against the LA smog?

(way late)

Protestants engaged in the No True Scotsman fallacy. Gee, that's new... no, wait, I take it back. I'm pretty sure Gutenberg was hearing that nonsense even though he lived a century before the Reformation.

Anyhow, what does this have anything to do with a judge imposing a sentence sought by neither party in a divorce proceeding? Also, I'm not nearly as familiar with UK law as US law, but don't they have similar separation of church and state, quite in spite of the Anglican Church?

My apologies for that derailment. Yeah back to the subject.