anyone else confused by black christians?

[Rarely-Wrong Liggins]

Last time i checked it kinda had somethin to do wit a land "god promised our people" right? Or am i wrong? Lemme know.

You're only proving me right.

Now, let me ask you this; what's the purpose for influencing people? For brainwashing them as you say? Indoctrinating them? For a lark? For shyts and giggles?

What's the end game? What's to gain from it? You can try to wiggle out of it all you wish but you can't.

Let's look at it from an evolutionary standpoint then. The apes science says we evolved from didn't have a religion. They weren't peaceful either. They fought over land and resources. We as an advanced species have just found an easier way to get to the end game.

So yes, religion is a convenient scapegoat to mask human and savage nature. I've explained it on a micro level and a macro level. I've explained it from a theist point of view and a scientific point of view. Not much more I can do.

 

[marcuz]

Again wit da scapegoat.

Dere's dis lil thing called influence. And wit influence, it has da power to make people do/react to things a certain way. Now add supernatural additives to dat influence. If i've been told since birth dat anybody who doesn't believe in da deity i do and/or follow da customs i do...then dey are evil and da things dey do in THEIR culture is evil. Now multiply dat by millions. Put power/weapons in their hands and tell em those same people who you were told were "blasphemous savages" since birth are da enemy. What do you think's goin to happen? lol i mean hell look at today. You've got mufukkas in da gubment trynna dictate what a woman can do wit their own bodies because of some "moral" a.k.a. relgious belief system. So cmon already wit dis shyt breh.

lol and oh goin back to your "land and resources" deflection.....what do you think is behind some of those riffs...especially ova dere in da middle east over land was about? Last time i checked it kinda had somethin to do wit a land "god promised our people" right? Or am i wrong? Lemme know.

Really need to dead dat scapegoat angle mah nikka.

man, you broke it down sexy

 

[King Sun]

what's foolish about it? are they not men of god? do they not read their psalms nightly before lights out?

you asking for proof and data but at the same time you're just saying "I know for a fact they are christian" statements without giving out the same proof or facts you're seeking

 

[marcuz]

i've been told since birth dat anybody who doesn't believe in da deity i do and/or follow da customs i do...then dey are evil and da things dey do in THEIR culture is evil. Now multiply dat by millions. Put power/weapons in their hands and tell em those same people who you were told were "blasphemous savages" since birth are da enemy.

 

[Rarely-Wrong Liggins]

OG, name one war or conflict that was not fought over land or resources.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

show me some sources because i'd like to know how they measure it. even solely religious wars hover at ~20%. not including political wars that were also fueled by religious beliefs.

so yeah, educate me bruh.

Amazon.com: Encyclopedia of Wars - 3 Volume of Set (Fact on File Library of World History) (9780816028511): Charles Phillips, Alan Axelrod: Books

They measure it by what the goals of each conflict were, how the conflicts originated, the 'key' players, and a few other criteria.

 

[Ninjaz In Paris]

I hate these threads...

 

[marcuz]

you asking for proof and data but at the same time you're just saying "I know for a fact they are christian" statements without giving out the same proof or facts you're seeking

just going off his own chart, how do you think it breaks down?

are we going to pretend like most black of those christians aren't black? or like that 10% of muslims aren't also blacks? we going to act like gang bangers are mostly atheist/agnostic and not nikkas that clench the bible behind bars?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I hate these threads...

All this from a 3-minute portion of a comedian's act that offended someone's beliefs.

 

[marcuz]

Amazon.com: Encyclopedia of Wars - 3 Volume of Set (Fact on File Library of World History) (9780816028511): Charles Phillips, Alan Axelrod: Books

They measure it by what the goals of each conflict were, how the conflicts originated, the 'key' players, and a few other criteria.

300 dollars

where's the ebook files

 

[marcuz]

When did I say that?

you said that shyt like 6 pages back. said people 'must be doing something wrong' to question their beliefs

 

[Rarely-Wrong Liggins]

you said that shyt like 6 pages back. said people 'must be doing something wrong' to question their beliefs

That's not what I said.

 

[marcuz]

OG, name one war or conflict that was not fought over land or resources.

bruh, is what he's saying that above your level of comprehension? look at how the overly religious are raised to treat others. they're raised to believe they're weird, they're foreign; something is wrong with them. like he said, amplify that shyt by the millions. you think it's just based off resources and not the ideological differences?

 

[OG_StankBrefs]

You're only proving me right.

Now, let me ask you this; what's the purpose for influencing people? For brainwashing them as you say? Indoctrinating them? For a lark? For shyts and giggles?

What's the end game? What's to gain from it? You can try to wiggle out of it all you wish but you can't.

Let's look at it from an evolutionary standpoint then. The apes science says we evolved from didn't have a religion. They weren't peaceful either. They fought over land and resources. We as an advanced species have just found an easier way to get to the end game.

So yes, religion is a convenient scapegoat to mask human and savage nature. You can try to wiggle out of it anyway you see fit, but you can't. I've explained it on a micro level and a macro level. I've explained it from a theist point of view and a scientific point of view. Not much more I can do.

What you can do is simply stop trynna dismiss it as just a scapegoat and acknowlege it's part in mankind's violent history. Christians have abused, oppressed, enslaved, insulted, tormented, tortured, and killed people in da name of God for centuries, on da basis of a theologically defensible reading of da Bible. Religion allows folks to imagine dat their concerns are moral when dey are really highly immoral thus pressin unnecessary and appallin sufferin onto other innocent human beings. I mean you got muslims trynna kidnap n kill people for depictin Muhammad as a fukkin cartoon breh.

Da stakes of people's religious differences are immensely higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or politics cuzzo. So nah, I can't accept da simple notion of religion somehow just bein a cloak for man's savage nature....and dat's it. Nah

 

[Rarely-Wrong Liggins]

they're raised to believe they're weird, they're foreign; something is wrong with them.

Kind of like that race thing right?

What you can do is simply stop trynna dismiss it as just a scapegoat and acknowlege it's part in mankind's violent history. Christians have abused, oppressed, enslaved, insulted, tormented, tortured, and killed people in da name of God for centuries, on da basis of a theologically defensible reading of da Bible. Religion allows folks to imagine dat their concerns are moral when dey are really highly immoral thus pressin unnecessary and appallin sufferin onto other innocent human beings. I mean you got muslims trynna kidnap n kill people for depictin Muhammad as a fukkin cartoon breh.

Da stakes of people's religious differences are immensely higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or politics cuzzo. So nah, I can't accept da simple notion of religion somehow just bein a cloak for man's savage nature....and dat's it. Nah

You don't have to accept it. But that's just the way it is. You strip away religion from the equation you still have a violent species separated by whatever preconceived differences conjured up in their minds to justify their aggression. You're just stuck on the one that's closest to your heart.

Agree to disagree.