|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/07/2008 10:38:27 AM · #226 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by goc:
this is waaay over the top and exaggerated in my humble opinion, or was it meant to be funny ? |
I interpreted it as satire. Surely it wasn't intended to be taken seriously? |
Sadly, he appears to be very serious. |
|
|
|
05/07/2008 02:24:44 PM · #227 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by goc:
this is waaay over the top and exaggerated in my humble opinion, or was it meant to be funny ? |
I interpreted it as satire. Surely it wasn't intended to be taken seriously? |
Sadly, he appears to be very serious. |
Only as much as you atheists sadly appear to be serious! :[ I consistently answer atheist diatribes...in kind! If you don't want a heated discussion, then don't be heated!
Also, don't accuse me of believing in "blind faith" if you don't want to be accused of the same. You all consistently appear to believe that only those things which can be proved with the five senses or some scientifically agreed-upon tool is to be considered fact.
"Five senses=Fact!" "Verification by 'agreed-upon-tool'=Fact!" Both of these are suppositions "agreed upon" by mutual "blind faith!"
To believe that God exists is an act of faith! (I have always declared this openly and loudly!) However, to believe that there is no god is equally an act of faith! I can't prove He is! You can't prove He isn't! (However, if you are ever able to show me Jesus' dead body, then I would have to consider being an atheist!) :}
Polar Opposites! Same "Blind Faith!"
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008 02:39:21 PM · #228 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by goc:
this is waaay over the top and exaggerated in my humble opinion, or was it meant to be funny ? |
I interpreted it as satire. Surely it wasn't intended to be taken seriously? |
Sadly, he appears to be very serious. |
Only as much as you atheists sadly appear to be serious! :[ I consistently answer atheist diatribes...in kind! If you don't want a heated discussion, then don't be heated!
Also, don't accuse me of believing in "blind faith" if you don't want to be accused of the same. You all consistently appear to believe that only those things which can be proved with the five senses or some scientifically agreed-upon tool is to be considered fact.
"Five senses=Fact!" "Verification by 'agreed-upon-tool'=Fact!" Both of these are suppositions "agreed upon" by mutual "blind faith!"
To believe that God exists is an act of faith! (I have always declared this openly and loudly!) However, to believe that there is no god is equally an act of faith! I can't prove He is! You can't prove He isn't! (However, if you are ever able to show me Jesus' dead body, then I would have to consider being an atheist!) :}
Polar Opposites! Same "Blind Faith!" |
I'm not an athiest.
My observation is that your shrill sometimes incoherent rambling does more to drive people away then to bring them together. If you want people to see the light, stop banging them over the head with the lantern.
Your message is being rejected not by the merits of the message but rather the obtuseness of the messenger.
To quote St. Francis of Assisi, âPreach the gospel every day, use words if necessary.â
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008 03:50:24 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
To believe that God exists is an act of faith! (I have always declared this openly and loudly!) However, to believe that there is no god is equally an act of faith! I can't prove He is! You can't prove He isn't! (However, if you are ever able to show me Jesus' dead body, then I would have to consider being an atheist!) :}
Polar Opposites! Same "Blind Faith!" |
So, someone produces the body of christ and you'll become an atheist. Stan, you just proved to us all that your faith is based on nothing but what others have told you. YOU ARE THE REAL ATHEIST HERE STAN and you didn't even know it. |
|
|
|
05/07/2008 04:27:37 PM · #230 |
Presentation means nothing...no matter who says that it does! Message means everything...no matter who says that I have no right to speak it.
Most of my life I have presented the Gospel in the manner that most here believe that I should. It is only the past few years that I have finally become bold!
Whether I present Truth in a socially-acceptable way or in the manner you now oppose, it makes no difference! I am always rejected because my message offends more consistently than my presentation, and I will not compromise my message!
No, Sir! My faith is not based on hearsay because a mere body would prove nothing me. (It could never be proven.) The statement was mere hyperbole showing in kind that all atheistic suppositions, statements, and assertions are merely hearsay and believing what they have always been told.
They have an atheistic world view merely because they wish to have this world view. I have proven repeatedly that Truth will never believed by an atheist until there is a change of heart because the Truth I preach bounces off them for they can't see it and their truth bounces off me because I won't receive it.
I will never confess to being an atheist in the worldly sense of the term, but I do confess to being an atheist of the atheists themselves. I reject the god of atheism which is themselves.
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008 05:28:43 PM · #231 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
I am always rejected because my message offends more consistently than my presentation, and I will not compromise my message! |
If you're consistently rejected, why do you persist with the same approach?
I'll try a metaphor here, (as you're so liberal with metaphors yourself) - If you consider your job to be 'selling' the idea of Christianity, but you admit your sales approach isn't working, not to mention the other Christians in this thread who are telling you these methods aren't working, then perhaps, like any salesman, it's time to take a step back and reconsider your tactics?
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008 06:05:53 PM · #232 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
I am always rejected because my message offends more consistently than my presentation, and I will not compromise my message! |
Stan, as nicely as I can say it, it is definitely your presentation that is offensive.
I know we've had similar "conversations" before, and I know exactly what you think of my opinion, but until you first earn the respect of those that you are "warning" they don't give a rat's tail what you have to say. And, you earn respect by being respectful, which, IMO you are not being. You continue to hammer away at these people and you seem to have forgotten the directive from Jesus, himself.
Originally posted by Mark 12:29 - 31:
The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' 31The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'There is no commandment greater than these." |
Stan, I don't feel Christ's love in your posts, nor do I see anything regarding that, and I AM a CHRISTIAN. IF I can't see it, and I'm looking for it, how do you expect those who hate everything associated with Christianity to see/feel it?
|
|
|
|
05/07/2008 09:02:49 PM · #233 |
Originally posted by karmat:
IF I can't see it, and I'm looking for it, how do you expect those who hate everything associated with Christianity to see/feel it? |
I would simply caution that this is a mischaracterization of what most atheists/humanists/secularists/nothingists feel. None of the posts from the opposing side here display hate for Christianity, and speaking for myself, I don't "hate everything associated with Christianity". I see a lot of reaction to what amounts to bad ideas presented even worse, but I don't see hate so much. |
|
|
|
05/07/2008 10:48:13 PM · #234 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by karmat:
IF I can't see it, and I'm looking for it, how do you expect those who hate everything associated with Christianity to see/feel it? |
I would simply caution that this is a mischaracterization of what most atheists/humanists/secularists/nothingists feel. None of the posts from the opposing side here display hate for Christianity, and speaking for myself, I don't "hate everything associated with Christianity". I see a lot of reaction to what amounts to bad ideas presented even worse, but I don't see hate so much. |
If the description doesn't fit, then it probably isn't you I'm referring to. :) Or so I've been told.
And, to be perfectly honest, there is a whole language in the "Christian world," jokingly called Christian-ese. I suspected stan would understand what I was driving at.
Probably a better way to address it, would have been to acknowledge that the persistent pounding, and threats of eternal damnation, doesn't seem to be reaching those in the intended audience. Rather, it seems to be pushing them further away, and they don't seem to have a lot of respect for what you are saying or how you are saying it.
I may address more tomorrow, but my little girl is ready for bed now, so I don't really have time to go further. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 01:33:03 AM · #235 |
Originally posted by karmat:
Probably a better way to address it, would have been to acknowledge that the persistent pounding, and threats of eternal damnation, doesn't seem to be reaching those in the intended audience. Rather, it seems to be pushing them further away, and they don't seem to have a lot of respect for what you are saying or how you are saying it. |
I think your choice of words here is, perhaps unintentionally, quite succinct. We -- the collective unbelievers and not-quite-measuring-up believers -- are, quite literally Stan's intended audience. That is, our role in this little psychodrama is to observe Stan's performance of his faith, a performance that the aim of which can't actually be conversion -- since he freely acknowledges that in this regard it is spectacularly unsuccessful -- but must actually rather be self-serving. The reason that believers and unbelievers are skeptical of ostentatious displays of religiosity is that they are almost always cover for less divine intentions, cloaking either a deep and troubled doubt on the part of the performer, or simply a base motivation for self-aggrandizement. Stan doesn't really want the scales to fall from the unbelievers' eyes, or the more temperate Christians to join him in his ravings. For without the rest of us to berate, chastise, and admonish how would he know that he is special and we are not.
All that said, one must admit that Stan's pinched dogma and abrasive approach are indeed much more true to the traditional beliefs and style of the Christian tradition, than are those of its modern day "Enlightenment tainted" adherents. If his style, manner, and beliefs seem crude, untutored, and even nonsensical it is only because modern Christian faith has had to change and adapt its historical beliefs, practice, and approach to match the improved moral, intellectual, and scientific understandings of humanity in the modern age. His beliefs and methods are no longer acceptable to most, simply because -- despite medieval claims to walking, talking, and receiving guidance from the most perfect moral being ever to have graced the Earth -- the average modern human is a more educated, rational, experienced, compassionate, and empathetic creature than his historical counterparts. Consequently the average modern human is a more moral creature as well. Granted enough time - perhaps a couple thousand more years - mankind might even reach the point where it could be considered worthy and noble in the aggregate, despite all the desperate attempts by those like Stan to keep us firmly mired in our ignorant, barbaric, hateful, and oppressive pasts.
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 01:33:32. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 01:58:11 AM · #236 |
With all due respect to my brother and my sister, The Gospel is NOT for sale. (I wasn't asking advice...I was giving facts.)
The LORD doesn't always want you to "feel the love". He wants you to feel uncomfortable when it is time to "clean up the act within the church."
Even the 1960's "Flower Children" with their mantra, "The Age of Aquarius" (the opinion of the writer of the song appeared to indicate that the beginning of "the age of Aquarius" would mark the end of "the age of Pisces"/the time of the Christian church, since the fish symbolized Christianity. Some of Jesus' greatest miracles involved fish) declared their tacit/unwitting belief that the following letter was addressed to today's church. (The Laodicean Church is eschatologically the last church of recorded Time.)
Revelation 3:14-22, NLT âWrite this letter to the angel of the church in Laodicea. This is the message from the one who is the Amenâthe faithful and true witness, the beginning of Godâs new creation: 'I know all the things you do, that you are neither hot nor cold. I wish that you were one or the other! But since you are like lukewarm water, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth!' Look! I stand at the door and knock. If you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in, and we will share a meal together as friends.â
God has NEVER called Preachers to earn the respect of the people to whom they preached. His Respect is all that is needed. Popularity is not the call of God,...Lack of favor with humans never indicates lack of favor with God. REAL Preachers are most often identified by rejection, not acceptance. Jesus died on the cross proving this point. Jeremiah; John, the Baptist; and all the original apostles, except John, the Beloved; were killed as well.
Luke 6:25-27, KJV, "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you, for so did their fathers to the false prophets. But I say unto you which hear, 'Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you'..." It's sad, but true. We don't need a revival within popular, world-friendly christianity. We need a revival of The Word of God!
Cool, shutterpuppy, you got it...almost. II Timothy 3:7, KJV, "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." I Corinthians 1:21, KJV, "For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 02:00:08. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 04:53:02 AM · #237 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
Only as much as you atheists sadly appear to be serious! :[ I consistently answer atheist diatribes...in kind! If you don't want a heated discussion, then don't be heated!
Here is the real reason Stan is acting this way. He is pissed off that in his thread that he created trying to persuade atheists that there is a God they made fun of him and called him insane. Plain and simple it pissed him off. I know you are a good man. Nobody faults you for being angry. I allowed the atheists to make me angry with the name calling and sarcasm. We just can't allow ourselves to be baited. That being said I want to thank you for being true to your convictions and if nothing else you have instructed Christians regarding a number of Biblical truths (ie God does not call us to be popular or to seek the respect of others if it compromises our convictions)
Originally posted by karmat:
IF I can't see it, and I'm looking for it, how do you expect those who hate everything associated with Christianity to see/feel it?
Originally posted by Louis:
I would simply caution that this is a mischaracterization of what most atheists/humanists/secularists/nothingists feel. None of the posts from the opposing side here display hate for Christianity, and speaking for myself, I don't "hate everything associated with Christianity". I see a lot of reaction to what amounts to bad ideas presented even worse, but I don't see hate so much.
Really Louis? You belong to the atheist/humanist/secularist/nothingist Church to know what each of these individuals feels. You guys hold meetings? I was an atheist once as were many Christians and I don't remember allowing anyone to speak for me and my beliefs or feelings when I was. That was the whole point: Not allowing anyone to speak for me as I was a reasoned rational individual and I, not others, I knew there was no God because I was too smart to believe in fairy tales. I attended no meetings or asked anyones advice or read any books to support my position. Why would I have to convince myself by reading other peoples crap what I already knew because I was a rational and reasoned person. You don't hate Christianity: that I will agree with, you hate not being right or not considered right or losing in any argument wether it be religion or anything else would be my guess. I don't believe for a minute that you actually take offense at stan or any other Christian for their belief that you may be going to Hell unless you get saved. You take offense at others not believing as you do because that implies that you are wrong.
Originally posted by Shutterpuppy:
All that said, one must admit that Stan's pinched dogma and abrasive approach are indeed much more true to the traditional beliefs and style of the Christian tradition, than are those of its modern day "Enlightenment tainted" adherents. If his style, manner, and beliefs seem crude, untutored, and even nonsensical it is only because modern Christian faith has had to change and adapt its historical beliefs, practice, and approach to match the improved moral, intellectual, and scientific understandings of humanity in the modern age. His beliefs and methods are no longer acceptable to most, simply because -- despite medieval claims to walking, talking, and receiving guidance from the most perfect moral being ever to have graced the Earth -- the average modern human is a more educated, rational, experienced, compassionate, and empathetic creature than his historical counterparts. Consequently the average modern human is a more moral creature as well. Granted enough time - perhaps a couple thousand more years - mankind might even reach the point where it could be considered worthy and noble in the aggregate, despite all the desperate attempts by those like Stan to keep us firmly mired in our ignorant, barbaric, hateful, and oppressive pasts.
Again, Really? And all of this awesome progress that the average modern human has made has not lead to all of us educated, rational, experienced, compassionate, and empathetic people to come to the concusion that there is no God. Well truthfully maybe alot of us did at one time but have CHANGED OUR MINDS? We DECIDED to be ignorant, barbaric, hateful, and oppressive. No friend when you decide to seek the truth by opening up your mind to the fact that you don't know everything through science and reason and actually pray to the God you don't think exists (as I did: see the science and theology II thread) then God will reveal himself to you in no uncertain terms. We DECIDE to follow our creator as we are his "creatures" as YOU put it. You have to get this through your head: man is barbaric, hateful and oppressive and a whole host of other negative things and that your only way out of this body of sin and death is a savior that God has sent to die for all of our barbarism, hatefulness, and oppressiveness, and a whole host of other sins. He stands ready to forgive and to carry the burden of our wrong deeds so that we can have eternal salvation and be in the presence of a Holy God. The only requirement is that when you pray you must have it firmly in your heart that if God does reveal himself to you that you will want to follow and worship him. Open your heart up and try my experiment and see what happens. Don't look at this as proselytizing as it is not. It is an experiment, a personal one which only you will be able to see the results of. If you really want to know the truth and you would worship God if he were the truth then he WILL reveal himself to you. Reread my posts in science and theology II. I did not want to believe in God... I wanted to know the truth so being the fair minded rational person I am and even then realizing that my five senses were limited I gave it a shot and it was the best decision I have ever made. Seek the truth and not what you want to believe. You won't be dissapointed.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
Would like to meet more people who are Christian on DPC. Any out there? I've met a lot of atheist and social liberals. Where are all the Christians?
Originally posted by dahved:
I'm here, too...better late than never to chime in. We now return you to your regularly-expected discussion that may or may not relate to the original post...
I am happy to see that the original purpose of the thread is not totally being ignored. I'm very glad to meet you! |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 06:08:13 AM · #238 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Nothing anyone believes offends me, Louis, not even if they believe terrible things will happen to me - as long as they don't intend to cause those things to happen, I couldn't care less. |
But that's because your god and will "take care of it" at a later date so why worry about it? :P
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 06:09:47.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2008 06:08:20 AM · #239 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
The LORD doesn't always want you to "feel the love". He wants you to feel uncomfortable when it is time to "clean up the act within the church." |
Well the 'LORD', with all due respect, can keep his distance from me. Pass on the message next time you're talking to him. k, thanks. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 08:41:39 AM · #240 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by jhonan:
Originally posted by goc:
this is waaay over the top and exaggerated in my humble opinion, or was it meant to be funny ? |
I interpreted it as satire. Surely it wasn't intended to be taken seriously? |
Sadly, he appears to be very serious. |
Only as much as you atheists sadly appear to be serious! :[ I consistently answer atheist diatribes...in kind! If you don't want a heated discussion, then don't be heated!
Also, don't accuse me of believing in "blind faith" if you don't want to be accused of the same. You all consistently appear to believe that only those things which can be proved with the five senses or some scientifically agreed-upon tool is to be considered fact.
"Five senses=Fact!" "Verification by 'agreed-upon-tool'=Fact!" Both of these are suppositions "agreed upon" by mutual "blind faith!"
To believe that God exists is an act of faith! (I have always declared this openly and loudly!) However, to believe that there is no god is equally an act of faith! I can't prove He is! You can't prove He isn't! (However, if you are ever able to show me Jesus' dead body, then I would have to consider being an atheist!) :}
Polar Opposites! Same "Blind Faith!" |
I rarely chime in on the atheist/theist threads here because I prefer to pursue these discussions in more appropriate forums but I just can't let this slide. It seems to be a common misconception that theists have that it takes faith to not believe in your God but it takes no more faith to not believe in your God than it does not to believe in Zeus, Lakshmi, invisable unicorns or that there are fairies at the bottom of my garden. To me as an atheist these are all the same, just myths that some people choose to believe. Believing in fairies doesn't make them real, it just makes the believer happy on some level to believe in them. There are thousands of gods and other mythical creatures...I lack belief in all of them equally I'm not singling yours out for special treatment so don't take it personally. I don't need science to disprove fairies to know they don't exist.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2008 10:27:59 AM · #241 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
You take offense at others not believing as you do because that implies that you are wrong. |
I find it interesting that most of the posts you and others are capable of are simple ad hominem arguments like this, instead of well-reasoned replies of substance pertaining to the issues at hand. Though revealing, it's rather tiresome. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 10:43:36 AM · #242 |
Dponlyme wrote;
Really Louis? You belong to the atheist/humanist/secularist/nothingist Church to know what each of these individuals feels. You guys hold meetings? I was an atheist once as were many Christians and I don't remember allowing anyone to speak for me and my beliefs or feelings when I was. That was the whole point: Not allowing anyone to speak for me as I was a reasoned rational individual and I, not others, I knew there was no God because I was too smart to believe in fairy tales. I attended no meetings or asked anyones advice or read any books to support my position. Why would I have to convince myself by reading other peoples crap what I already knew because I was a rational and reasoned person. You don't hate Christianity: that I will agree with, you hate not being right or not considered right or losing in any argument wether it be religion or anything else would be my guess. I don't believe for a minute that you actually take offense at stan or any other Christian for their belief that you may be going to Hell unless you get saved. You take offense at others not believing as you do because that implies that you are wrong.
I'm not speaking for Louis here, this is my opinion.
First, DO NOT try to make atheism a church by adding that word in the paragraph above. Atheism is NOT a religion and stop referring to it as such. You do yourself no good by doing so.
Secondly, You say you didn't allow anyone to speak for you when you were an atheist but allow a book written by 20 or so authors that took centuries to complete, dictate how you live your life.
Thirdly, you say, 'I attended no meetings or asked anyones advice or read any books to support my position.' Your error, not ours. Now that you are a religionist you indeed do read other people's crap and believe it. Do you see something wrong here? You chose to believe what suited you at the time, and i'm willing to bet you will have another change of mind in the future. You have the choice of so many gods today that you could probably change your beliefs every two weeks and and never run out of gods to choose from.
Fouth, the rest of that paragraph is a personal attack on Louis and I'll let him address that. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 11:26:47 AM · #243 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
With all due respect to my brother and my sister . . . [rambling, mostly incoherent diatribe about how God doesn't want his messengers to be popular, and that the fact that so many people - believers and nonbelievers - are turned off by Stan's style of discourse just proves how much better of a Christian he is than all the rest.] |
So let me get this straight: You have a message that is the most important thing any of us could hear, and upon which the listener's very eternal state depends, but God doesn't want you to convey that message in a way that might actually make people receptive to it? (Mysterious ways, indeed.)
Originally posted by 777STAN:
Cool, shutterpuppy, you got it...almost. II Timothy 3:7, KJV, "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." I Corinthians 1:21, KJV, "For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." |
Well, this is foolish, I'll give you that.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
And all of this awesome progress that the average modern human has made has not lead to all of us educated, rational, experienced, compassionate, and empathetic people to come to the concusion that there is no God. Well truthfully maybe alot of us did at one time but have CHANGED OUR MINDS? We DECIDED to be ignorant, barbaric, hateful, and oppressive. No friend when you decide to seek the truth by opening up your mind to the fact that you don't know everything through science and reason and actually pray to the God you don't think exists (as I did: see the science and theology II thread) then God will reveal himself to you in no uncertain terms. |
Here you get the situation precisely reversed - science, scientific inquiry, and reason are the very things that allow me to gleefully admit that I "don't know everything." As I've argued before, this is the strength of science (defined in the broadest sense), not it's weakness. Rather it is you, Stan, and the other more strident members of the "saved" that insist upon making extravagant claims to truth. It is you who profess to know, if not everything, then the ultimate and end truth of our existence. Science and reason says "we don't know, but we would like to find out so let's investigate and see what we find." Religion says "we already know all that is worth knowing, so there is no reason to investigate anything." (And in fact is often actively hostile to investigation due to the - very justified - fear that the increase of human knowledge will undermine religious belief.)
You want me to read your postings in the science and theology thread (which I have), but don't appear to have read mine in turn. If you had, you would know that I come from a religious background - and not a "lukewarm" background, either. I have read the Bible (several versions in fact). I've also read the Qur'an and the Hadith, the Torah and the Talmud, the Tao Te Ching, the Gnostic Gospels, a handful of Hindu Sutras, and several Buddhist texts. I continue to read all of these and seek out more. To study religion is to study humanity. As other, better writers have said before me, "religion is the human race's first attempt to explain the world." It is humanity's first attempt to "know." (Which of course is not to say that it is humanity's best attempt.)
My own "letting Go of God" came about because I was never satisfied with the answers that I received - in the holy texts, from the pulpits and supposed arbiters of "God's divine omniscience," or indeed from my own heartfelt and earnest prayers. I realized that a desire to believe did not equal evidence in support of my belief. Once I accepted the possibility that there might not be a God, it freed me to approach the questions of life, the universe, and everything with open, unfettered eyes. To examine the evidence of the scientists and the reason of the philosophers without a preconceived inclination to an answer. This freedom continues to allow me to reexamine and adjust my thinking and inclinations if new or better evidence comes along.
I do not begrudge you your belief. What you want to believe is your business. But if you want to take that belief "on the road" as it were - to insert that belief out into the marketplace of ideas, or insist that social and political policy should be based upon that belief, or publicly condemn and chastise those who do not share in your belief, well then you, Stan, and the rest must be willing to cope with the consequences of that decision. When your private faith becomes a public affair you should not be surprised when the "public" responds.
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 12:55:55. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 02:20:10 PM · #244 |
When a thread is entitled 'Calling all Christians' I am a little puzzled as to why people who are clearly not Christians, and are open that they are not even receptive to the idea, should come in to the thread and state why they think Christians (or particular individuals) are wrong. I guess we are all different but if there was a thread on Horror films or even TV Soaps, both of which I dislike, I can't imagine why I would even go onto that thread ?? Knowing that I don't like the shows and am not going to start liking them what would be the point ?
While I will readily say that I don't agree with the approach of some members representing the Christian viewpoint, do those of you who feel you represent the non-Christian viewpoint really think that you have presented your side in a better manner ? Has either side come across as particularly gracious ? and who ever opened this into a debate anyway ? It was supposedly a chance for Christians to say hello to each other . .
I suggested a number of pages ago that this thread be locked - and to be honest I'm still of that opinion. I'm not quite sure why there can't be Christian threads here on DPC, but they do seem to repeatedly get hijacked . . .
|
|
|
|
05/08/2008 02:38:14 PM · #245 |
| I don't support Christianity either, however that is my personal choice as is it theirs, so I have avoided replying here until now. To answer your question, I don't see much point in people coming into this thread onto to cause trouble, but I guess it takes all kinds. Some people genuinely hate Christians and don't think they should have a soap box. I could swing that way but I really try to keep to myself on such things. :) |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 02:38:19 PM · #246 |
Originally posted by Jedusi:
When a thread is entitled 'Calling all Christians' I am a little puzzled as to why people who are clearly not Christians, and are open that they are not even receptive to the idea, should come in to the thread and state why they think Christians (or particular individuals) are wrong. |
Not "wrong"; the ideas presented are debatable. If this thread had not quickly turned into a manic diatribe, then had not fallen apart in a messy attempt to proselytize, but had remained a "I'm also in the club how about that" kind of thing, I suspect you wouldn't have heard a peep from the opposition.
As stated in a similar thread by a chastising SC, posts do not exist in a vacuum. Whatever is said is open to rebuttal and debate, particularly when hostile posts crop up, however removed from rational discourse they may be. Re-read the last paragraph of shutterpuppy's latest reply. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 03:07:24 PM · #247 |
Originally posted by Jedusi:
When a thread is entitled 'Calling all Christians' I am a little puzzled as to why people who are clearly not Christians, and are open that they are not even receptive to the idea, should come in to the thread and state why they think Christians (or particular individuals) are wrong. |
First, I might posit that the motivations for non-Christians to enter and comment in a thread entitled "Calling all Christians" might be similar to the motivations of the OP of this thread to enter and comment in a thread entitled "Calling all Atheists and Agnostics." I'm just say'n.
But beyond that, and as Louis has already done, I would refer you to my post above for a response. When it was just a thread for Christians to "say hi" I stayed away and even admonished one or two of my fellow freethinkers to do the same. When it became a thread devoted to calling out those of un- or insufficient belief, I take that as an invitation to enter a sphere of public discourse (which this thread is) to engage in a debate in which I have both an intellectual and personal interest.
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 15:10:22. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 03:42:15 PM · #248 |
It amazes me how these exact threads ALWAYS bring out the absolute best in people. (all sides and angles included)
Kinda like our own little Middle East...
Quite similar but only a little less extreme and without all the bullets. Good stuff.
Message edited by author 2008-05-08 15:50:36. |
|
|
|
05/08/2008 04:34:53 PM · #249 |
I've read these posts with interest, amusement, and a certain amount of sadness.
I'm not a Christian, but I do believe in a God similar to what Christians call their own, but he (or she) is more tailored to my beliefs.
I pretty much do not necessarily believe that Jesus is/was the son of God, nor do I really feel that I have sufficient info to make an informed decision.
I do believe that Jesus walked the earth as a good man, and that he tried to show us, and teach us, much.......and in a gentle, kind, and loving manner.
What I do feel, and believe, is that man or son of God, Jesus himself would be mortified at the idolatry/diety that has been bestowed upon him when what he was really trying to do was to teach us how to live with, and love each other, and ourselves.
I also do not believe in any God that would have had people killing each other in His name, or that one believer would be any more "right" in the way that he celebrates, and worships, the God of his/her understanding.
Whatever YOU want to believe, or not, is just fine with me because the relationship I have with my God is between me and him (or her), and that relationship certainly has me understanding that I'm supposed to do my best to be good and decent to you....I fall short from time to time, but I do try......even if it makes me frustrated at my failures.
Faith/belief is a very personal matter, and it never ceases to amaze me why some people think they have any right to tell anyone else what, who, or how to believe.
It's kinda funny, but it took me a long time to realize that as soon as I respected, and understood, others' right to have faith and belief in their own way, the more comfortable and at peace I am with my own.
|
|
|
|
05/08/2008 05:33:56 PM · #250 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I've read these posts with interest, amusement, and a certain amount of sadness.
I'm not a Christian, but I do believe in a God similar to what Christians call their own, but he (or she) is more tailored to my beliefs.
I pretty much do not necessarily believe that Jesus is/was the son of God, nor do I really feel that I have sufficient info to make an informed decision.
I do believe that Jesus walked the earth as a good man, and that he tried to show us, and teach us, much.......and in a gentle, kind, and loving manner.
What I do feel, and believe, is that man or son of God, Jesus himself would be mortified at the idolatry/diety that has been bestowed upon him when what he was really trying to do was to teach us how to live with, and love each other, and ourselves.
I also do not believe in any God that would have had people killing each other in His name, or that one believer would be any more "right" in the way that he celebrates, and worships, the God of his/her understanding.
Whatever YOU want to believe, or not, is just fine with me because the relationship I have with my God is between me and him (or her), and that relationship certainly has me understanding that I'm supposed to do my best to be good and decent to you....I fall short from time to time, but I do try......even if it makes me frustrated at my failures.
Faith/belief is a very personal matter, and it never ceases to amaze me why some people think they have any right to tell anyone else what, who, or how to believe.
It's kinda funny, but it took me a long time to realize that as soon as I respected, and understood, others' right to have faith and belief in their own way, the more comfortable and at peace I am with my own. |
You do understand that the old testament was tailered/modified to represent what the authors wanted you to believe, after the supposed birth of JC? They modified those prophecies after he was born, not before. The coming of christ wasn't known before his birth, only hundreds of years after his death were the prophecies refined to accommodate todays belief system to include JC. In the old testament christ is referred to as the messiah, not the son of a god. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 05:57:23 AM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/13/2025 05:57:23 AM EDT.
|
