Comments by "ncwordman" (@ncwordman) on "MAGA Evangelical Delusions Get BRUTALLY Fact-Checked" video.

The fact check and reality check was the whole video. I don't know what to tell you.
4
Keep in mind, not even the majority of Christians are m@g@. 74 million people voted for him in 2020. 2021 census showed 210 million Christians, out of our country's 332 million total population. So if all his base were Christians, that's still barely one-third of their total.
3
Absolutely factual.
3
Yes, but he left out how some Christians view Jesus as God. So that would be totally different than him just being a prophet. There are many other differences too, if you're curious to look it up.
3
That is NOT why it's printed on the money. You obviously have the internet. Why can't you look things up?
2
Not all Christians are doing that. Stop assuming, and look up some facts. Know what you're talking about before you speak.
1
It is not the same God. First, some (many?) Christians believe Jesus is God. Islam believes Jesus was just a prophet. A prophet isn't God. There are many other examples. Look it up.
1
@KaMaAh-hv4id Christianity isn't dying. Out of the U.S. population of 332 million people, 210 million of them are Christians. And just FYI, only 74 million people voted Republican in 2020. So two-thirds of Christians aren't m@g@. The OP already said they don't want Christianity to be imposed, and neither do I.
1
Only 7% of wars were caused by religion. Honestly, does no one look up things anymore?
1
Jesus quoted it regularly. And it's part of the Christian Bible.
1
@evadd2 So? You said you shouldn't quote the OT in the name of Jesus? What happened to that?
1
@evadd2 "If you are quoting the Old you are more Jesus." What does that even mean? And how does it match with your OP: "Quoting old testament in the name of Jesus....too stup--"? Jesus was Jewish. Yes. But what he taught, and stick with me here, was what later called Christianity. So he was a Christian, just not by the name. Is that your point? That he wasn't called a Christian? Of course he wasn't! But he taught what would be called Christianity! And the name didn't come about because "you are basically Jewish in his sect." It was originally a mocking term for people who said "Christ" over and over and over.
1
@evadd2 I totally agree about Paul. Not many people see that. Means you have insight. I am very impressed by you. As for what is written being his or not: We don't know that; there isn't even proof of his existence. So that argument holds no value. Jesus is what's in the text, because that's all we know for sure. "Reform Judaism" is tricky. He wanted to add to it, continue it, reform it, essentially, as long as that's what you mean: but not end it. His reformation IS Christianity, since it's what he taught (in the text). So it's totally "a Jesus driven thing." It's pointless to claim otherwise.
1
The Torah is just the first five books, the so called books of Moses. The Tanakh is the whole thing, which Christians call the Old Testament. Jesus expanded on Judaism in his teachings. He was not just a Jew, in the religious sense. And since Christianity was based on what he taught, it existed before it was a religion.
1
@AkonFenty1992 The term "separation of church and state" was in that letter. The meaning is in the first amendment. So it is in the constitution, whether or not you know it.
1
@AkonFenty1992 "Where does it specifically say in the Constitution "separation of Church and state"? In those exact words. It isn't there." See my original comment. I thought you were a troll, and this confirms. You're asking a question I already answered. Typical.
1
@melchiorvonsternberg844 You believe we aren't still the equivalent of backwoods half-apes? Don't kid yourself. The only reason you know about storms and floods, etc., is because some more intelligent people figured it out long ago. Everything you wrote there can be said about us. Oh, and nothing is simple. It only appears to be when you stop studying it at a simple level. If you were to go deeper, you would see the complexity. This is true of everything.
1
@melchiorvonsternberg844 I'm old enough to not know what Generation X is. And I certainly don't care to know. I got bigger fish to fry. I don't know where you were going with all that. You might have come up an answer sufficient enough for you, as to why you're here. But so have people for millennia. And? So? Nothing is simple: That's the bottom line.
1
@melchiorvonsternberg844 haha! Okay. I don't have a donkey. I know the Bible though, and I'm not a believer. I'm a thinker and a writer. So sloppy thinking doesn't cut it with me. But have good day, sir.
1
Says someone who never read the whole thing. I can confidently state that, based on your one simple-sentence explanation of a 66-book compilation. Or am I wrong? Tell me you read the whole thing, cover-to-cover, maybe even multiple times to make sure you understood it as an adulthood?
1
He left out the part about how some Christians believe Jesus is God, which is totally different than believing he is just a prophet. The religions are different in many other ways. Look it up if you're curious.
1
@LegendMkr7 Okay, my guy, maybe I'm confused by your triple negative. Let's look at it: "I am not surprised that the reporter didn't know that the God from the Old and New Testament isn't the same one that told Muhammad he was a prophet and started Islam." I put the negatives in bold. It gets hard to follow your point, when you use so many, and have parenthetical phrases on top of that. At least separate the parenthetical phrases with commas. It's hard for me to even edit it. So are you saying "the God from the Old and New Testament IS the same one from Islam"?
1
@LegendMkr7 I'm just trying to understand what you're saying. You assume too much: first about the reporter, then about me. The reporter is from the Good Liars, and they always use the approach of street epistemology. So he likely did know. But then you assumed about me too, where I'm just trying to make sense of what you're saying. I give up on trying to do that, because you still haven't clarified anything. Islam is different from Christianity. Allah is different from Yahweh. Very, very different. They use some of the same names, but the characters are different: Jesus was not a prophet in Christianity; he wasn't even mentioned in the Tanakh; but some Christians believe he is Yahweh. Yahweh of the Tanakh evolved into the Christian God, for which there is no name really. There are many other examples of the differences, which you can look up for yourself.
1
I'm sure whomever is responsible for banning books, should they happen upon this comment of yours, will take it into consideration, given your erudite, air-tight logic.
1
@KaMaAh-hv4id You sure? The No True Scotsman fallacy is an attempt to defend a generalization by denying the validity of any counterexamples given. By changing the definition of who or what belongs to a group or category, the speaker can conveniently dismiss any example that proves the generalization doesn’t hold. That's not what happened in the OP. Right? Just because someone says there are "fake this-and-that," doesn't make it an example of No True Scotsman. You just want to dismiss what they wrote, without thinking. You didn't even write a complete sentence. Try thinking next time.
1
He's not right. Some (many?) Christians believe Jesus is God. Since Islam sees Jesus as just a prophet, he can't be God. There are many other examples. Look them up if you're curious.
1
People don't need religion to keep them obtuse.
1
@janemorrison8577 Thank you so much for the first intellectual comment I've seen written here about this subject. You actually spent reading and learning this. You aren't accusing anyone, but pointing to facts. Very well done!
1
You first. :)
1
In 1955 Eisenhower made it part of the pledge of allegiance, and put it on all the money.
1
Don'cha hate it when the "divel" is made up?
1
@-everythingsRosie Copy and paste? I'd be happy if you learned something. But you missed the main point. In the Civil War, it was used on SOME coins. It wasn't a national thing, though. That didn't happen until 1955. Eisenhower actually passed a law that required it on ALL forms of money. 1954 was the year "One nation under God" was added to the pledge. Look things up. Learn. It is not hard. Now, why don't you look up why he did that.
1
Out of the U.S. population of 332 million people, 210 million are Christian. So I don't know where you got you the idea of "falling membership in churches," but Christians are two-thirds of our population. And "every week," really? And "never one church" but "many"? You are more fulla cowpies than a bovine bakery.
1
It's okay to not understand. The stories in the Bible aren't medieval or fairy tales. But, yes, religion should be kept out of government, as per the 1st amendment.
1
Jesus repeatedly said to "tell no one," when his apostles spoke of his holy nature. He also didn't refer to Yahweh as God, but as Father (or Abba in the native Aramaic). He said Heaven was not a place, and no one had ever been there; it was actually within each of us. And you reached that state of being, when you were born again. And you were born again when you were sorry for bad things you had done, and tried to never to do it again, AND by learning the gospel (or good news) which was this: Loving others is the only way to make you feel better about your interactions with them. So, to answer, it's "the one who keeps it in his pocket," and ministers not with holy words, but by helping others.
1
You realize "everything" means everything. Moses absolutely didn't kill everything in his path. Also, you'd have to be seriously obtuse to take the Bible literally, when you're not even a believer.
1
Why can't you use punctuation? Do you want to be seen as illiterate?
1
@darkclawgreatonenas You need punctuation. Period. Get it? Otherwise it's a stream of unintelligible balderdash. I couldn't read what they wrote. Period.
1
@darkclawgreatonenas I agree with your first reply. But punctuation is not a "me" problem. It was invented in the 5th century BC. It has been around for as long as some of the oldest known civilizations. That's not a "me" thing. It's a civilization thing. So, they might as well be grunting and brachiating.
1
Since Christianity is the world's largest religion (look it up), then sure, it has probably caused more death than any other religion. However all religions combined amount to only 7% of wars. So the vast majority of deaths has little to nothing to do with religion. And the main cause of death in history is infectious diseases.
1
Nothing is ever simple. When you find yourself assuming that it is, remind yourself that it isn't. It's just that you haven't looked deeper, thought more about it. You stopped on a simple level, which is why you assume it's simple.
1
@iancampbell1316 Ha! Okay, your thinking isn't anywhere near done. You need to show how religion doesn't fit those definitions. You did not do that. Further, that will be complicated because religion is individual in people's lives, not homogeneous. Since there are 210 million Christians in the U.S. alone, you'll have to demonstrate it over a majority of them. I'll go easy on you and accept 100 million verified demonstrations (by name) of how they (individually) do not fit those copy/pasted definitions. And no: "All religion has doctrine one must follow in order to be a true believer and receive the promised reward. No religion allows it's followers to have a say in any part of how the religion is practiced. You either accept it or you are not a part of it." That isn't factual. I can prove it because I'm an exception, and one exception negates your claim of "ALL." See? So much more complicated than you're considering. And that's because you stopped (again) on a simple explanation. Everything is complicated, except to the simple people.
1
You *read" it, then, before "rending" it? Cover-to-cover? Maybe multiple times, to make sure you understood it as an adult? I gather from your single-sentence comment that you also looked into the history of it? So you know about the J document, P document, etc., and the final redacting? Yeah? You know how the first few books in that J document were 500 years before the redacted version, before Judaism began? You've studied Hebrew to understand the OT, and Greek for NT, to make sure you're not depending on a butchered English translation? Surely. And you've noted the differences in the OT and NT, the different writers in each single book, of the 66-book compilation? And you know how those wars started pretty much with Constantine in 300 C.E.? Which seems to imply that the Bible was around before people justified their wars because of it, and was a tool used by the Romans and others. Right? And there was slavery apart from the Bible, having nothing to do with it, not to mention greed.
1
@FernandoPerez-wb1re Slavery happened back then. The Tanakh isn't just a holy book, but a book of record. Mentioning doesn't mean justifying it. Otherwise, your mentioning it here would justify it. See how silly that is? Also, some punctuation would really help in reading all of that. The point is: You assume you know the Bible, when you obviously don't. That's okay, since no one knows everything. But don't pretend you do. That's just sad.
1
@diegoalves598 Jesus taught from the Old Testament. When the rich young ruler asked him what he should do, Jesus first told him to follow the commandments (Luke 18:20). Where in the Bible does it say no one should abide by the OT laws? That's absurd.
1
Reading books is like aerobic exercise for the intellect. While a strong mind doesn't guarantee decency or morality, it does help a person think though things. Just as people who don't have some sort of aerobic exercise tend to be lazy, because it's hard to get out and do stuff, so too does refusing to read make it easier to not think things through. And that unwillingness or inability to stop and think can very easily lead to a great deal of indecency and immorality.
1
Jesus didn't hate anyone. And don't assume all Christians are m@g@. They are not.
1
@larstueschjth2658 "Many Christians are ohhh soooo 'open' to others beliefs!" About as open as anyone else. Do you not realize that you are showing how closed you are to their beliefs? Does it not dawn on you at all?
1