Would the world be a better place if there were fewer Christians?
While hard to deny, its pretty clear people want to dismiss what Christianity did for even just this great country.
We don't see Buddhist community centers, Egyptian hospitals, or many non Christian food pantries, or at the very least they pale in comparison.
I am observing the need to deny many truths and stretch the truth of others. No one denies where a first cup of tea was made, (several jumps there to make the point as well), or that Egyptians practiced medicine. That isn't the claim... The point is, Christianity (even the two opposing sides... Catholicism and Protestantism), has helped to make this country great... look no further than the examples given. The same has NOT been given by Egyptians, or Buddhists....
People also sure like to say things.... and miss the points, by stating random, non applicable facts that aren't germane to the points being made here. I wish people would look at the points themselves, instead of who is posting it, and feeding the need to in disagreement with them at all costs...
By the way, this is to myself first...if my friend said something that was wrong, or missed the point, I would let them know.... or at least not try to support a lesser argument or one that isn't working.Why do you mention "this country?" This is how I reexplained my question:
And:
My question concerned peace, and the entire world, and the consequences for world peace of Buddhism being the dominant religion instead of Christianity.True PEACE begins in the heart where a person comes to KNOW that all humans are created in and carry the image of their Creator. Looking past the obvious blaring faults and into the soul can empower us to accept, uplift, understand and help each other grow into world PEACE.
Shalah,
I like those thoughts and ideas, if more did those things that would be a much better world, no matter what their worldview or religion. I also think all are created in the image of their Creator. My main problem is with those that want to go after or hurt, or limit freedoms of particular groups for what turn out to be poor reasons. As if there would ever be any good reasons for that kind of evil. Thanks for those great ideas and thoughts.You will be on-board with removing irrational beliefs that teach garbage then. Awesome! I take it you now reject the Majikal Super Being you call "god" ?
Good for you. Finally.
You do know it is against the Hubpages' TOS to use this many personas in the forum - right?Are you a Hubpages owner or employee directly affiliated with hubpages that you can "threaten terms of service"? Make false claims about accounts can you?
So, please clarify once again for the record, why we should be "frightened here"? I have removed over 200 hubs so far, because of that. Why are you so interested in other hubpages members personal information and accounts? What should we be scared of? Are you plotting something? Or are you alluding to something you have done in the past, to others? If something bad happens can we reasonably hold you culpable?Just pointing out the rules. I know you guys are a big fan of that.
You can do whatever you like - hold me culpable for anything you want - you have no moral compass, so it wouldn't surprise me.
Don't blame you for your fear. This is what your beliefs teach you. I do feel sorry for you - attacking and arguing and fighting and accusing from behind a fake user name (or many apparently.)
Good for you.
Very brave.
I never said I had fear. Should I be afraid? Why should I have fear? Better safe than sorry and I take your language seriously. I think it is reasonable to have a level of professionalism here without being in fear or in an environment conducive to fear, is that an unreasonable expectation here?
Alas, wisdom learned the hard way after being lifted out of the religious pig sty [God hates it] by the only ONE WHO is able to open our eyes to see past what appears obvious. Hard lesson to learn to see that HIS GLORY shines through everyone if we will ask HIM TO SHOW US.
Thank you Shalah for the breath of fresh air, it is a welcomed refreshing breeze, that wafts the hellion de jour away. I considered your advice and looked and found nothing there...
perhaps you didn't look through HIS eyes and to do that one has to take the time to really develop a relationship with HIM.
we see through fog until that REAL fresh breath blows it all away.
it has taken me years and i've walked or well been on this planet 60--the first 55 of which my eyes were filled with distortions and everyone else's faults but since I have come to KNOW that YESHUA washed my sins away---how can i possibly be so arrogant as to suggest HIS handiwork is 'wrong'----HE is still working on all of us imperfect vessels
am i 'wrong' because i'm not yet finished....
and does anyone else really think they can mold me into what HE destined better than HE can?
If you consider nations whose religious population is smaller than ours, or whose rights to speak are greater than ours and their apparent lower crime rate it really makes you wonder: Does any form of Christianity really make this country great? Sweden and Australia, how I love you guys.
Yes, Christianity made this country great. That is hard to deny. Things are changing however, that is true.
My answer is no.
I don't know how anyone could dream of a peaceful world by just eliminating one religion. There is discrimination amongst Christians too, as there is disparity between Hindus belonging to different castes. Add to that the low tolerance between people belonging to different faiths, and we have one massive 'un'secular mess.
People will forever be engaged in conflict; it is human nature to resolve differences through disputes. Should a section of the crowd stand out, another group will find reasons to contend their beliefs. And, it isn't religions alone that lead to war. Racism, sexual orientation disputes, gender bias, economic disparity etc. are reasons that form the tip of the berg.
Christianity influences just one part of the globe (maybe a majority, but still only one part). The rest couldn't be least bothered about what happens to the Christians. They'll keep fighting their own domestic battles, inventing new reasons to do the same and prove themselves superior.
Should there be fewer Christians, another inane excuse (other than religious belief) will crop up and another fight will ensue.Silver, I tend to agree with most of what you said, and you bring up a great point. You say,
"And, it isn't religions alone that lead to war. Racism, sexual orientation disputes, gender bias, economic disparity etc. are reasons that form the tip of the berg."
This is true, and very obvious but needs to be stated every once in a while. I think people know this to be true, both obviously and intuitively, but like to blame things on religions that teach the opposite sometimes. In fairness, there are some religions, at least one big one that in its very scriptures from their main prophet, do encourage war and killing. In that case, it would make sense to say that religion causes war when it does.Well oceansnsunsets, I've seen so many forums focussing on how religions encourage discrimination, when there are several other factors that lead to disputes.
I think everyone needs a reminder in kind to not forget that most religions aren't blind propaganda that promote violence.
"And, it isn't religions alone that lead to war. Racism, sexual orientation disputes, gender bias, economic disparity etc. are reasons that form the tip of the berg."
Many of these are fueled by religious teachings, Racism (many call themselves God's people whether it be the Arian Nation, or some other religion whose major populace is of a particular nationality, middle eastern (mostly muslims, Jews, what have you), there are even Bible verses that talk about keeping slaves (who should be enslaved is up to interpretation). Sexism is also religiously promoted, gender bias is also religiously promoted... in fact none of these issues have a place in the secular world and are not backed by any nonreligious traditions. Atheism is also not a promoter of it because frankly, atheism isn't a group it's a word used to describe someone that doesn't believe in God, you can't really group us together. Science is neutral towards these issues because all it is is a tool for finding answers, it can be used just like any tool, but the seekers are usually always doing so to find the truth and nothing more. Human's in general can do good or bad but when they are a part of an organization to promote a general set of standards the implications can be disastrous and the means can be seen as pure evil.
The Crusades is a war of religions, one against another. WW1 and 2 are wars fought much like Manifest Destiny happened in America, only difference is the European Christians won and they can make what they did for God or good.... even if there was racism involved.
Great points.
I personally don't have a problem with many religions. But the reason that Christianity is one of the mainly problematic religions is the Great Commission. While there may be a few level-headed, well-mannered people who could easily "shine by example," instead of forcing their Christian laws and such on people who don't believe the same as them, there are many more who push the "Good news" onto people, whether it be in law-making, or trying to force Christianity on their own children or anyone other 'heathen" who "must know Christ" lest they go to "Hell," shunning those with differing views. Because of this mandate, there will always be some unbalance of peace. It won't sit well with certain overly zealous people to keep to themselves about it, nor let there governing authority be "Godless people," when often it's the religious people who seem to act "Godless" more often.Which part of the planet do Christians force people to convert??SHOW ME THE PROOF!Muslims force christians to convert in Iran,Libya and Pakistan.The kidnap christian girls in egypt to marry them off to muslims,same in northern Nigeria.Buddhist dislike christianity.Koreans and Vietnamese in the US can tell you plenty of stories.I am yet to see or hear christians behaeding non christians for not accepting christ the way it happens to christian converts in Somalia
You do make some good points. But the thing is, people here in America don't see that, they only see the history (or "history") of Christianity that they hear from other people.
Not during our lifetime, but the world has watched the rise of Christianity, just as it will someday see its fall, just like Ra, Isis, Zeus, Neptune and thousands of other gods throughout history. Will the world be a better place? That depends whether another religion takes its place.
- SirDentposted 13 years ago
0If all Christians were removed from the Earth, peace would break out such as the world has never known. This peace will last for three and a half years.
3 and a half years of peace would be worth it.
Really? What do you think would come after? Three and a half years of war like the world has never known.
I know what you think would come after it...
But the fact that you think that the absence of every Christian in the world would cause global peace for even a day kinda says something.
Besides I'm sure that if a Satan existed he would be quite aware of the law of Unintended consequences and would be as omnipotent as God. Are you saying that "Evil" (Satan) can lead to "good" (peace)? Because the overwhelming majority of Christians in this thread disagree with the necessary opposite that "Good" can lead to "Evil". An interesting point that would fun to discuss... if you were open minded enough to have that discussion...You kinda forget that the second largest religion on this planet is Islam and If christianity was removed,there would be no obstacle to the establishment of the world wide islamic caliphate muslims so often dream of.An like the buddhists of afghanistan,buddhism would be swept off the face o0f this planet along with christianity.Are you ready to cover your head and face 40 lashe for not doing so?Sleep with your boyfriend and get buried upto the breast as every one throws stones at you.Paradise on Earth Isay!
That assumes that in the absense of Christianity that people would just have to find another religion...
Which kinda leads to the conclusion that it is religion you believe in rather than Christianity...
If I wasn't a Christian then I would likely not have any religious affiliation... to think that I would just "turn Muslim" doesn't say much for personal convictions does it?Speculation and hate-mongering. Why didn't Christianity rule the world when it had the chance? Why didn't Islam? Why didn't Communism? Why didn't any other empire in history manage to take over the whole world? Why did Christianity crumble into countless denominations? Why is Islam equally divided into denominations? I'm guessing that it's because dogma doesn't reflect truth, it exists merely to serve vested interests, and eventually, people get tired of being oppressed by someone else's dogma so they invent their own. The way Christianity sprang from reinterpretations of Christ.
Your argument seems to indicate that Buddhism is more tolerant and less war-like than Western religions. I don't think that's a bad thing. Seems to be doing a better job at being a religion, and a worse job at being a justification for violence and conquest.Just because Christianity were Gone wouldn't mean Islam would be able to move in it would mean that we would be more secular, even as Buddhists. Many Buddhists are practicing pacifists, but America whether Christian or Secular or Buddhist, is not, China is mostly "Buddhist" so was Japan. You saw how Passive they were.
Irreligious or Buddhist and their track record is?.....
I recommend you research the subject of wars committed in the name of Buddhism. There are a few instances where Buddhist doctrine was used in defense of violence. Now compare the amount of material available on this topic with the amount of material available on the subject of wars committed in the name of Christianity.
If anything, such research is a very powerful argument in favor of Buddhism over either Western religion or atheist political/national/ethnic doctrines, at least as far as violence and intolerance goes.Nevertheless Buddhism is overwhelmingly followed, probably more so than Christianity. And their track record is? Wars committed in the name of Christianity? Exactly what were those?
Well, living in the information age and having the internet and not to mention you probably have at least ONE library in your city you could look stuff up in to see if what anyone is saying is nonsense and call them on it. But if you have to ask, you probably aren't as smart as I hoped.
There was one Buddhist Uprising in south Vietnam.... that's so far all I could find yesterday... but I will update you as soon as I find more.
As far as Christian wars? Many, here is a list:
Thirty Years War:Protestant and Catholics
French Wars of Religion: Protestant and Catholics
Second Sudanese Civil War: Islam and Christian
Crusades: Islam and Christian (started by the Christians to get an area they claimed was theirs)
Lebanese Civil War: Sunni, Shiite and Christian
The Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa
I could list more, but these are apparently wars initiated by Christians for one purpose or another
In the Middle Ages, religion played a major role in driving antisemitism. Though not part of Roman Catholic dogma, many Christians, including members of the clergy, have held the Jewish people collectively responsible for killing Jesus.
As well as many others involving other religions.
Other than my previous comment most of my comments about war and religion are not specific to Christianity nor war. Just unjust violence and death in the name of any God in general.
Really??Christianity is the only religion that has been able to counter the millitant force of Islam.If you think secularism can survive Islam the way christianity has just look at France and slowly by slowly Australia.If It wasn't for Genghis Khan,the Chinese would be Muslim.Read your History,The present territories of Central Asia,Afghanistan upto the upper caspian were Buddhist.The Islamic Caliphate wiped buddhism off the map and were advancing into India and China when Genghis Khan came into the picture.While Christiantiy also lost a lot to Islam,the Crusades stopped Muslim advancement into Europe and if it wasn't for the British interfering with the wars between the Russians and the Ottomans,Turkey today would be a christian nation as it was before 1453. Buddhisim cannot survive the Islamic onslaught that would come if Christians left.Atheists would be hanged
Nonsense.
Islam is just a few years behind Christianity. They will get with the program eventually.
Where do you live in France exactly? SHOW ME THE PROOF THAT YOU CAN FORETELL THE FUTURE!
If Christians simply starting thinking properly and became atheist - they would equally reject islam.
Read your history books. Atheism is replacing irrational beliefs all through the educated world. Let me guess - homeschooled?
Yes, Pol Pot MAO Stalin and Enver Hoxha tried to replacing belief and 60-100 million human beings were killed. Can you read history books?
Oh please!I do not need to live in France to know what is going on there.I just have to visit.Which I did at a power plant.I went to the ghettos surronding Paris which no tourist ever thinks of Going.And Marsellies too.Open your eyes!
LOLOLove it when a sock puppet religionist who has never been to France tells me to open my eyes!
This is why your religion causes so many wars.
Been to Trenton or Miami?
If the indigenous people of North and South American had been able to repel the Europeans, they would have said the same thing about Christians.
I've made the same arguments myself. However, I would keep in mind that the world today is not the same as the world when the Ottoman Turks were marching across Asia and Europe. Not only is religion itself different, but the two worlds the religions mainly inhabit have also changed a great deal.
But remember that the One who ultimately decides who goes where and how things will shake out is God!
You kinda forget that the second largest religion on this planet is Islam and If christianity was removed,there would be no obstacle to the establishment of the world wide islamic caliphate muslims so often dream of.An like the buddhists of afghanistan,buddhism would be swept off the face o0f this planet along with christianity.Are you ready to cover your head and face 40 lashe for not doing so?Sleep with your boyfriend and get buried upto the breast as every one throws stones at you.Paradise on Earth Isay!
Don't kid yourself sweetie pie. Trust me–most atheists are even more wary of Islam than they are of Christianity.
So–we can get rid of that as a reason to believe in Jesus.Oh and I think there is this Draw Muhammad day as proof of this. A Challenge to all Islamic Militants, for that stupid evil law of if you create an effigy of Muhammad you should be put to death.
O:-< This is my text version of Muhammad.@Mark,we are talking about if christians left this planet right.Now there are only 600 million more christians than muslims.How many Atheists are there?How would they stop the Islamic tide from sweeping the world as it is trying to do right now by mass emigrating to Europe,ethic cleansing of Christians in the middle East and Church bombings in Africa?Face the facts,If Christianity left.The Islamic Caliphate would take its place very very quickly.It has begun in Europe,the most secular of places and the secular liberals are welcoming them with open arms.I really hope we leave and leave all of you in the hands of mohammed's fanatics for beheading
So what you are saying is that if these millions of Christians became atheists they would not fight against Islam?
Your reasoning is faulty.
Face the facts and stop speaking nonsense.His reasoning is slightly but not entirely faulty. The truth is (and there are any number of non-Christian publications that have talked about this) that Islam in Europe is different than Islam in America. Many European countries were colonial powers (in the true sense, where they conquered and subjugated countries that became their colonies, not like the US that colonialized the world through media) and have an obligation, sometimes legally written in, to accept refugees from their former colonies, many of which are muslim. The muslims arrive in (France/Belgium/etc) where they don't fit in. It's not just that their culture is so different, they don't speak the language and are usually kept at the bottom of the economic ladder. This only intensifies the natural human tendency to group together with people "like you" and segregate themselves from a society that doesn't understand them. Mistrust grows on both sides, and another natural tendency, to make the place you go to more like the place you've been, gets magnified until they want to recreate some kind of romanticized idea of what "things used to be like." There is little assimilation in Europe, and that makes the situation ripe for the extremists.
In the US, by contrast, assimilation runs fairly high. Although there are certainly cases of North African and Middle Eastern Muslim culture in the news (arranged marriages, honor killings) they are still relatively rare. What is more common is for Muslim families in America to take on more American traits. Sometimes it means leaving the faith, as it does in Christianity, but not always. They do speak the dominant language, they get jobs, they hold political office.
Islam is growing in both places, but it seems more militant in tolerant Europe.
If all the Christians in the world became atheists, many would still fight Islam if they felt the need. But the priorities would be different. If, during the march of the Ottoman Turks across Asia and Europe, the Christians had suddenly decided that they needed to be atheists, history would probably have been very different.Your argument makes no sense whatsoever. In fact - I am shocked at your lack of understanding.
I live in France and you are telling me what it is like in the country I live in?
It is simply a matter of numbers. Once the population reaches around 10% of the general population - their voice becomes heard.
In the USA - it is the atheists that have reached critical mass, and you are starting to hear them for the first time. In France - it is now the Islamists that have reached around 10% and we are starting to hear them.
Fortunately, France has a decent education system and except for the poorer immigrants (who also have a colonial chip on their shoulder) - we educate them out of their religion.
I doubt the same will be the case in the USA. Let's see what happens when the US population reaches 10% Islamists huh?
I think you are in for a rocky ride when they start wanting quotes from the Quran up in public buildings.
I assume you get your "news" from Conservative Christian news sources as it is so very, very badly twisted.
Have you decided to show the masses of contemporary evidence for the existence of God Jr yet?I didn't know you live in France! No, I don't try to tell people what it's like where they live. I sometimes repeat things that I've heard (more on that later) but I'm often enough being told by people what it's like for me when at best they only knowledge they have is something they heard somewhere. If I've been incorrect, I apologize.
Here in America there are places where the Islamists are heard loud and clear. Dearborn and NYC are miles apart in more than one way, and I don't doubt that I don't have the whole story about either of them, the there are news stories about peoples experiences with Muslims in both those places.
Good luck! If "education" has not squashed religion by now, it never will. Even in France.
Yes, we are. The fact is that in many places (including Indianapolis, which I live in a suburb of) the Muslims have started making demands. Nothing yet about Arabic quotes on public buildings, but the airport did put in foot washing stations for Muslims to use before prayer, which caused no small controversy. In some schools, Muslims demand that their children be allowed out of class at certain times for prayer, which is controversial in itself but even more so because no other group (no other group, I'm not just talking about Christians) receives that kind of attention.
Humphrey Bogart's butler used to like to go to China every year. A friend of Bogart's said, "I assume you like the coastal, tourist cities like Shanghai?" The butler replied, "Yes, you do assume!"
Deciding that you can prove the negative is not the same as winning the argument, Mark.
BTW - although I'm sure you're smart enough to get it, just so there's not confusion I will give a more direct answer to your question which would be, "Yes! As long as NBC, CNN and PBS have all come out as conservative Christian news sources while I wasn't looking..."
That's harsh. Where's the love of Christ in the end of that statement?
What about the Christians who are being persecuted and put to death in the Middle East? Do you not believe this is happening? It is. Gerald may see the situation as a little more dire than it actually is, but it's not because of the loving, brotherly rhetoric coming out of the Middle East.
I agree that the last sentence was harsh and unnecessary. But the rest of his statement expresses real concerns that not only Christians hold but also many secular people in Europe and even here in America.The Muslim expansion into Europe that led to the Crusades is no different from the Western imperialism that led to the expansion in North and South America, Africa, Australia and elsewhere hundreds of years later. The only difference is that the Europeans were not significantly behind the Muslims in terms of population and progress so they were able to mount an offensive and fight back successfully. By the time Western imperialists turned their attention to the New World, they were so far in advance the end result was certain.
The Christians in Europe felt threatened by the Muslims, became militant and went on the offensive. The Muslims in the Middle East today feel threatened by Western imperialism (which they often equate with Christianity), become militant, and go on the offensive. I don't see the difference between Christian crusaders in the middle ages and modern militant Muslims.
The problem isn't with religion, per se, the problem is with dogmas (religious doctrine, political philosophies, etc.) that create divisions between people: once that division is created, you have created a justification for war. Religion, political philosophies, science (eugenics), etc., are used to justify atrocities in the name of expanding your own in-group. This has been repeated over and over again countless times. European Christians felt the need to "Christianize" and modernize the natives; both Christians and Muslims try to encourage or force people to convert to their religion to 'save the souls' of people who are not already a part of it (religious imperialism); Communists need to overthrow capitalist regimes that support serfdom in the interest of a small minority at the top; etc., etc. These political philosophies and religious doctrines then become an excuse for ethnic cleansing and you have genocides like the Holocaust, Armenians, etc.
As long as people maintain dogmas that divide groups of people into in-groups and out-groups, we will continue to have blood-shed. As long as there is a single person who does not accept your personal dogmas, you will be in conflict with them. Religion and political philosophy have simply taken the place of primitive tribalism. If you advocate any philosophy that creates an 'us' and a 'them' you can expect war.You make a lot of good points and I don't disagree with most of what you wrote. There is, however, one big point that is not taken into account. Maybe it is, and you just don't think it's valid, which I could see from what you wrote. That point is: although many times "in-groups" and "out-groups" are definitely created from a sense of tribalism, there are times when there are serious questions of what is right and what is true, and it is the quest for that answer that creates the tribal element, not the other way around. That is by no means to say that everyone within the "in-group" is behaving in accordance with the truth as the group understands it, sometimes many or even all of the group are behaving in a way that is at odds with the philosophy that was instrumental in founding it. But it certainly is true that sometimes you're looking at something much, much bigger than a mere dogma.
The problem is the fact that 'groups', delineated by their respective dogmas, exist. Why can't we sit down together and agree on what is objectively good and what is objectively true in terms of our present knowledge as human beings living on this planet without bringing in hypothetical (from the perspective of everyone who is not in a particular group) entities and postulating hypothetical dimensions? There will be conflict with or without dogma, to be sure, but the dogma only serves to obfuscate, complicate, and intensify differences between groups behind a wall of irrational beliefs (from the perspective of anyone not in the group). What point does a religious doctrine serve? Imagine that all of the Christians and Muslims suddenly stopped believing the literal truth of their religions and were forced to confront one another's humanity instead of cloistering themselves behind a comfortable wall of faith that casts the other group as the spawn of Satan? Stripped of religion, all I see is one group of people attempting to manipulate and control another group of people who are violently lashing out at the interference. Both groups feel threatened. One wishes that the other wasn't interfering with its desire to take over and control everything, the other wishes that it could be the one taking over and controlling. To be honest, I don't see how religion plays a part in the conflict at all beyond providing a powerful rhetoric for creating and sustaining violence. Two religions of love trying to destroy each other. That's the way it looks to outsiders. You'll have to forgive our skepticism.
Well, you're talking to someone who, based on experience, believes that God literally exists and that Jesus literally came down to die for me and take away my sins. Your points about seeing the humanity in others and conflict existing whether there is religion or not are certainly true. But God is not hypothetical.
When a man points a gun at another man, that is not hypothetical to either man. When a man is starving and another man has food to eat, that is not hypothetical.
When a man says that he believes in God, his god is hypothetical to the other man. It doesn't matter what you believe. I have no reason to share your belief.
If All the Christians in the world were replaced by say both Buddhists and nonbelievers then Islam would still be in the same place and no closer to anything.
So how did France go from having 0% muslims to 10% in just 50 years.Same to the Netherlands.No religion ethincally cleanses like Islam.Albania was a christian Nation until the 1500s.It is 70% muslim today.Turkey was the centre of Eastern Orthodox Church.After killing a million Armenians in 1918,It is 99% muslim today.The Buddhist tenents of peace and love wouldn't stand up to the jihadist agenda of islam just like 700 years ago the Buddhists of Afghanistan,Indonesia,Uzbekistan,Tajikistan,Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan were completely wiped out from the map and do not exist today .Even in the Middle East,Chistians still formed 20% of the population until 1979.Like I mentioned,buddhism was only saved by Genghis khan..Only Christianity has ever given Islam a taste of their own medicine to this day.
The rise of Islam in France is mostly to do with immigration from former colonies. Don't worry - they are coming to Amerika.
Perhaps, but sometimes numbers have little to do with influence...
I don't dispute your history, it's true. Islam in the past advanced at the point of the sword and that was taught in their religion.
The real question is if Jesus would have wanted us to "give Islam a taste of its own medicine." The way Christianity changed the world, contrary to what many modern atheists want to assert, was by being peaceful and showing a better alternative to the world than what they knew. Remember that Jesus walked the Earth during the time of the Roman occupation of Israel (they had even renamed it Syria Palestine as a jab at the Jews) and many people wanted to form an army and boot the Romans out. People were literally expecting that He would be crowned the earthly king of Israel and start an armed rebellion. But He didn't.
Though it is the second largest religion on the planet behin chritianity I would say for certain that Islam has a lot more influence on the world. Most christians are only christians nominally - they were baptised but do not practice, the same people still tick boxes to say they are christian but they are a lot less christian than people like yourself GERALD.
lol, Sir Dent.... and they will think they were so right all along. People will be saying..."see...we told yo so."
Not sure if it is the beginning...haven't found the other end. Each end brings a new beginning, and the doorways to other realities are always open. It is a never ending journey, and the strings which come from this universe, via the black holes lead to other dimensions, which have their own black holes. It is a never ending process, and is evidence of the idea that what we perceive to be the beginning, was not the beginning at all.
One not need find the other end to know there is a beginning, as seen in an expanding universe. Sometimes the end is just the end. We don't have any reason for believing there would be a new beginning, other than it makes sense it would be a hope or desire of people perhaps.
Observing that people spread smallpox, in the way it is spread, is not something that actually weighs in on the teachings of Christianity or what Christ teaches. This very obvious fact goes without saying, but some here are trying to pretend that the cause and effect can actually be blamed on Christianity being a bad thing. In fact, in an effort to do a good thing or things, are being used as pawns against Christianity now. It doesn't follow, and isn't logical.
OMG, dude. Did you read anything that any one of us typed? NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. Again, NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. Is that at least clear at this point? Melissa is a Christian, man... so please, open your mind to the fact that you are NOT understanding what's going on here.
You're missing the point... And there's absolutely nothing no one can say apparently to help you understand the point, because either you don't want to understand it, or you can't.
That sentence is a fragment; it doesn't really make any sense, and I'm trying to understanding what you're trying to say.
Or rather, you can't comprehend the points being made, thus you are believing that we are saying something that we aren't saying at all...This is unbelievable.
I have debated very strong atheists before, that don't use this level of dishonesty, and want a win for fair reasons.
You can believe what you like about me and that I really don't get your points, but that is only true if it is true. I find your views to be incredibly unfair and illogical.
Good will always be good, and bad will always be bad. Doing good things are a good thing, even if an accident happens. If in a race for breast cancer, if someone gets really hurt, you would be blaming breast cancer awareness for that accident, if you are going to be consistent with that poor thinking. I can't try harder than I have. I am done, and hope that you see how your poor arguments don't serve you well and hurt the climate on these forums.
Even if you have other anti Christians (Yes I remember you saying you are a Christian, and anti christian both earlier in this thread) backing you or approving of you because you side with them, I hope that in the future you want people siding with you because you have better arguments. Its discouraging to just have spent this much time, and gotten no where and also be told that I don't get it...... amazing.LoL, still believing what you want to believe. That's cool if it makes your life easier.
It is clearly true that you don't understand the points because your responses indicate that you aren't reading the same things that I am writing. This is clear to anyone who reads your responses, I'm sure.
Why, tell me what those views are, and I'll tell you what you're not understanding that I'm saying.
In a black in white world, yea, sure.
The fact is though, that you and Phoenix are perpetuating the same level of thinking. I'm on the negative side, you are on the positive. I don't agree with every point that Melissa makes. We are two different people, and certainly not in cahoots. However, if such a thing were to happen in a Breast cancer race, there are people there to tend to them, usually. And those people racing weren't force to do so, or trying to impose a religion or system of thought on anyone, so it is of a different nature and not a valid analogy.
I will continue to have conversation with people who actually read what I write in it's entirety and understand the point that I am making. I'm sorry that you can't. See ya around.
LoL, when did I say that I am a Christian? Melissa is a Christian. Not me. I'm non-religious. We got nowhere because you saw points being made that weren't actually being made. At least not by me. I try to speak for Melissa at times, and I could be wrong about what she's saying, but I know that my points were clearly expressed through my words, and that you could not understand them because you had your mind made up already about what I was saying or what point I was making. Whether you choose to continue the conversation really doesn't matter to me. I'll continue to converse with people who actually read what I write, instead of making false inferences that have nothing to do with what I said.
I like to have conversations, and unlike you, have no need to bow out, because my goal isn't to "win" which is so childish, but to get a point across. Believe what you like. Whatever makes you feel better.You have yet to make a fair point in this portion of the debate, a thousand words.
I shared my experience with other atheists that don't act in the ways I see here, just sharing that there are a few out there that attempt to debate above board, and you said in response to that,
"LoL, still believing what you want to believe. That's cool if it makes your life easier."
That makes no sense as a response to that.You said that I was being dishonest, i.e., you are still believing what you want to. If you don't know what I'm saying ok. But to call me dishonest is an unfair judgment based upon false ideas of what you believe that I'm saying instead of what I'm actually saying. So again, you can believe what you want to believe. I know what points you are making. I don't disagree with some of them. However, you seem uninterested in understanding my points, because your responses seem to only consist of what you believe that I'm saying, not what I'm actually saying. There's nothing I can do about that. So you "win," I suppose.
In fairness, what points did I miss, I will try and answer those.
It almost seems to me, that unless I concede that your points are good ones, that you keep accusing me of not understanding them or something. I have shown what I disagree with and why, and you don't really respond to those things either. In my speaking of debating with what seems to be honest atheists sometimes, doesn't mean you are dishonest. I don't throw that term around lightly, and won't ever make an accusation like that if its not more than clear how.
I observe what seems to be that if I don't fully get your points and thus agree, that I am not getting your points somehow. Can you show me how you said something, but I took it to mean something otherwise, so I can address it and see if I did that?They dont have a point. They are trying to assess culpability to a belief system based on an incidental disease.
I have a toothache. Its seventh day Adventists fault because they also have cavities and they gave me some food yesterday- now concede my point!You make some great and obvious points, in a lot shorter version than I do, plus that was kind of funny!
Those seventh day adventists, if only they hadn't been giving out food, someone somewhere might not have gotten the flu, because they might have had flu germs and coughed at the soup kitchen!! I knew their world view was shaky at best!
Its rather clear, and logically follows, that the world would be a better place with less Seventh Day Adventists that tried to give away food to the needy, and more of another world view that did more personal meditation!
It may seem that way, but you are mistaken. I am always open to being wrong, or my logic being faulty, and what have you. I even correct myself during an argument, which you will see if you read further up, and take valid criticisms from people, including Christians, as Vector 7 could tell you.
I can't make the effort to respond to what you've said until your responses actually have something to do with what I said. You are disagreeing with what you think I'm saying. Not what I'm actually saying.
You said: "I have debated very strong atheists before, that don't use this level of dishonesty." There's not much else to be inferred from that.
I intend to. That'll be a separate post.I let myself get drawn into arguments. Sometimes, everybody is right and that makes everybody wrong, if you catch my drift. Sometimes you have to just walk away.
BTW - I haven't singled you out to say this to. I hope you don't feel like I'm picking on you because in spite of our past disagreements I actually think you're a nice person and intelligent.
My goal isn't for you to agree. You simply have to respond to what I'm actually saying. I can agree to disagree with people, as I have done before.
I'll repeat some of the things that I already said. Before I do that however, I would like to make a point.
I think that it is just as erroneous to blame Christianity itself on the spread of smallpox as it is to say it is the cause of the spread of schools, hospitals, charities, etc.
None of these are actually of Christian origin, and could have been spread by a different group. It just so happens that Christianity was the religion of the society that was doing the spreading. So while I am agreeing with you on the small pox thing, you have to apply the same logic to the "positives" you are trying to point out, as well. It's one of those all or nothing situations. You can't just accept the good and ignore the bad. The same way that schools and the rest were brought to the Americas, is the same way that Smallpox, the Plague, and other smaller diseases were brought to the Americas. By Christian people, or at least people from a Christian society, following certain specific or implied Christian mandates, but not a direct result of the religion itself.
But, because you are trying to argue what Christianity has done, as if it is from the religion itself, which is what it seems you are implying, correct me if I'm wrong, then I will approach small pox and other diseases in the same manner.
Small pox killed millions of Native Americans, partly as a result of "good, bible following Christians" sharing the "good news" of Christ. Sharing the faith is a Christian mandate. Fact. So, in order to please God, Christians do it. Fact.
The Native Americans did not have small pox, or any of the other devastating diseases before Mission work and colonizaton. Fact.
Missionaries carried small pox, and were themselves mostly immune to it, or at least had the necessary antibodies to fight it. Fact.
The Native Americans would not have been infected at this point in time, when they were without the ability to fend the diseases off if not for the mission work and colonization. Very likely.
Had people waited longer to go to the Americas, knowing they had dangerous diseases with them, is it possible that the Native Americans would still be in large numbers today? It's very likely.
So, Christians following Christian principles was one of the reasons, intentionally or unintentionally is irrelevant, small pox was introduced to Native Americans.
Now if you say "no," you will also have to say no to the rest.
It is not valid to form a list, then say "Christianity done it," but then to say "but you can't blame Christianity" on something else on the list of what was a result of Christian society because it's not a positive. The spread of small pox was just as much a "result of Christianity" as anything on your list, if that's the road you wish to take. Otherwise, it all just happened to be spread by Christians because that was the dominant religion of the time.
Of course I believe it is all certainly more complicated than this, but that's another discussion entirely.
That is the only point being made. At least by me.I think everybody needs to calm down. It's entirely possible that everybody is understanding each other pretty well, but that the points of view are so entirely opposed that an agreement will never be reached. I've had some fairly intense conversations with A Thousand Words, and although we are poles apart on some things, I've never felt like she was trying to force me to capitulate. Sometimes you just need to know that you will not agree with some people and treat them respectfully. Most of the time they will return the favor. Not always, there are people who will disrespect you, sometimes actively and aggressively, because you are a Christian. And then is when you need to commit it to the Lord in prayer.
I am not upset, and my point is that I actually care that people are making good or bad points for themselves, not just in response to me.
You bring up fair points about people being poles apart on issues, and ways to deal with those things. I am actually trying to encourage all of us to do what I think the best thing is to do in these situations. Some ideas are just better than others, but not for the saying so, but because they stand on their own without tactics being applied. This makes some feel like people are fighting, or just "going at it.." and some are not up for real debate, especially if they can never ever be wrong, and just dislike immensely, another person for showing errors. I have been on that side of things, I know its not fun, but its a challenge to face my own problems head on when I do. (Not speaking of A thousand words here... she had some fair points, and was much fairer than some at times.)
Good ideas win, bad ideas don't. Ideas matter, and people form worldviews and live and work out things from those worldviews. Life is precious and flying by. Encouraging better for all is good, and facing our own bad views if we hold them and judge others with them, is a good thing to face head on. Fun? Nope...this isn't for weaklings, and I say all of this to myself first.I don't disagree with anything you've said, it's just that I watched you and PheonixV and Melissa Barrett and others go around and around on these points for a long time, and wondered when the debate actually ended. There comes a point where it doesn't serve Jesus to keep going, and you have to let it go. I had to learn that the hard way.
Again, don't get me wrong. I think we should state our point of view, I certainly do.
The Native American's were going to get smallpox introduced into their area at some point in history. Whatever people spread diseases for whatever reason, their held worldview, or directives say from some queen or king lol, cannot be blamed as being the cause of death.
So what about all the rest of the missionaries for over the last 2000 years that went all over the world and DIDN'T spread disease in doing so.....? That makes it a good thing, right? (In keeping with the reasoning shown here by Melissa and Juice and A thousand words..) Oh, but its me that isn't getting their points. Perhaps if I concede or go away, they can just win.... As long as I am making better points to counter theirs, its just that I am not getting it.... alright then.To be completely honest if the spreading of disease to indigenous peoples by missionaries had stopped then this would be a non-issue... but it hasn't.
There are examples of this still happening in my lifetime and yours. It still results in death... and all recent examples I can find are Christian missionaries. Yet missionary activity is still being supported.
So you don't think anything should be done about this?Yes, an epidemiological study should be done so that the missionaries know what they will probably be dealing with if they make contact with peoples who've never seen outsiders before.
Sounds a bit glib, but the real question underlying the entire conversation is whether missionaries should be going out and spreading the Gospel. The Bible makes it clear that people are going to hell if they don't know Jesus. That message is offensive to a lot of people, and rightly so if you want to do your own thing, but if Jesus truly is Lord of you life, then sometimes He calls people to go to these groups and spread the word about Him.
Missionary work is a good thing... Christian missionary work is also a good thing...
However it comes with risks... you don't acknowledge that good things can come with bad things then they always will. If you don't acknowledge those risks and act to fix them then the neglect inherent in turning a blind cheek negates the good intentions.Melissa says, "Missionary work is a good thing... Christian missionary work is also a good thing...
However it comes with risks... you don't acknowledge that good things can come with bad things then they always will. If you don't acknowledge those risks and act to fix them then the neglect inherent in turning a blind cheek negates the good intentions."
I agree with the first part, and will discuss the second. I agree it comes with risks, and that seems obvious to me, and even comes with risks to those going in obedience to the teachings. They could catch new diseases too, but that is besides the point.
It is when you started the sentence with, "If you don't acknowledge", that I don't understand. How has anyone ever turned a blind cheek to what happened to those people long ago?I have to take issue with this - how is a bigoted fool being given power over others in any way a good thing ?
Is it a good thing to inject foreign belief systems into other cultures, when it clearly causes division and friction.*Shrugs* Food... clean water and health care are good things regardless of who is providing them.
*Smiles* Same thing goes for you that goes for what'shername and her sock puppet...
You've got to acknowledge both the good and bad honestly or you are as bad as them.
Love ya pandamostly it was trade that brought these things to other places, and then they were still short-changed on the deal. Missionaries followed these developments when places were 'opened up' already. Mostly missionaries brought teachers - mainly to teach theri religion and the language of their 'flocks' new masters.
I very much do - and the trivial face of the good is totally outweighed by the harm and betrayal of the process, and this is beyond doubt from the historical record of christianity.
The issue is not with the missionary work, the issue lies in the wording of your post. Missionaries are not all bigoted fools, and missionaries are not usually given power over anybody. Actually if you look at Christian missionary work specifically you will find that they are heavily persecuted, many are jailed and many are killed. I don't really think that is having control :p
A good thing about telling people in foreign countries about different belief systems is not the injection of religious belief, but the injection of knowledge. To show people in countries that destroy critical thinking (communist countries) that there are other methods of thinking, not just the forced method that they are used to. Do you think it is wrong to provide oppressed people with new knowledge as well as clean water and health care?
That's true. We as Christians do need to take the risks not only to ourselves but also to the peoples we evangelize into account when sending missionaries out.
calynbana wrote:
Current scientific theories propose a beginning. Whether it is the beginning of this Universe, or the beginning of a multiverse. I believe the Universe has a beginning because that is where science, logic, and religion all agree at this point in time.
Of course it is up to each individual to decide what they believe.
___________________________________________________________
I think a beginning is the most sound belief. Whether its multiverse or not. I think that infinity or eternity are concepts that cannot exist spatially or temporally by their own nature. Unless "now" exists forever.Eternity is very different from infinity, I mean to believe in God is to believe in eternity. Although I agree that these terms cannot be applied to the natural world.
Well, I have to agree with your assessment on the concepts.
I became interested in you and Chasuk discussion and didnt mean to butt in. I find this subject more interesting than the others.
I was just thinking...that maybe time is not linear or non linear, but the expression of some paradox or fractal that gives the appearance or gives us the perception of what we belief time to be. I currently have a headache so, that probably wasnt very clear, so I will take a break and pick this back up if you guys are around. What I am suggesting simply is a "set" of "eternity". or a set of infinity, but its a paradox of some kind. Aspirin time, BBLFor using alternate accounts, and looking back over this thread, we are pretty amazing huh? lol
The quick logging in and out over and over is getting tiresome though lol.You have multiple accounts? Who else are you? :p
Calynbana, I only have one account, but Melissa and Motown are having fun accusing Phoenixv and I of being the same person, and going against TOS. So that was me joking about it. I only have one account, and HubPages knows it, and that is enough for me. People say all kinds of things. I should have been more clear it was a joke.
Honestly, I am not following I think I have an idea of what you are proposing but I do not want to make any assumptions lol I will wait for you to return :p
Thank you Sir! bout at least and hour or maybe tomorrow, a headache is definitely no place to start in a discussion like this lol.
The world would be a better place if there were more Christians who actually follow the teachings of Christ and no pseudo-christians who stand on the street corners shoving their undying "love" for their "lord and savior" down everyone else's throats for fun and profit.
" Would the world be a better place "
If an argument is posited that "doing nothing" would make the world a better place, it can not be attributed to anyone specific. It could exclude some, but doing nothing cannot be attributed to anyone in particular. Unfortunately to "make an effort to make the world a better place has intrinsic problems. But is the only way that " a better world could be attributed to anyone in particular.
People in the bleachers doing nothing don't win games. Only the players win or lose games. But it comes with penalty flags, of course, loss of downs and missed field goals.
You cant pat yourself on the back because you did nothing as if it accomplished anything more than doing nothing does.But what constitutes a time for actions to be taken and nothing to be done? This is inherently the problem more than anything else.
It is better sometimes to sit back and do nothing when there is NO NEED Or WANT for you to do something, even though your strong feelings may tell you otherwise.
The only necessary action for anyone to take is to help people who want to be helped and how they want to be helped, not how you want to help them by forcing what YOU believe to be civility on them. All the rest leads to problems. But history's always doomed to repeat itself.
There's a scene in the second Pocahontas movie where I think it was accurately illustrated. She had been invited to a dinner party. She got made up with lighter foundation to make her look less colored. She got her hair done and wore the dresses that English women wore. She got to the dinner, and all was well until she saw a bear tied up with a chain. They were baiting it, mocking it, and torturing it for no good reason. She got angry. And all the "etiquette" and the like went out the window when she went to save the bear from being the men's play toy, giving a good show to the royalty. She said boldly something to the effect of "it is not me who is a savage." I think she made a good point.
The Native Americans didn't want or ask the Europeans to come and settle in their land that they lived in happily. They didn't ask for all their technologies and whatever else. That was forced on them through colonization, as well as every other country that was colonized. What they did worked for them. People's mistake is assuming that what they think is better for them is better for everyone else. That's false.
It is the lust for power that does real damage in this world. Also, delusions of grandeur, and superhero complexes. I may not have existed had colonization never occurred. But if it's means there would be millions more Native Americans alive today, so be it!
For Melissa....speaking of quotes, here are some.... worth remembering...
Chasuk said,
"I hate to say anything that might give succor to our argumentive foes, but the smallpox thing probably never happened. It was suggested, but we have absolutely no historical evidence that it actually occurred."
Melissa responded with,
"*Smiles* I posted that way back... and even if it did happen then the spread of smallpox as a result was statistically small... and if it did happen it was the result of the army not a specific religion."
Page 50I think you meant to post another quote maybe?
That one doesn't say anything about 17 million people dead or how I think that it didn't happen.
How pathetic of an attempt to find anything to back up your lie.I already did that I reminded you of the two differing conversations, that you also remember. So take the one, the 17 million, then that one I just posted.
I can observe some confusion there. You NEED me to be a liar, but that will never make me one. You see, if i lie its too easy for you! lol
I don't lie, and if you perceived a lie about how I find incongruence with those conversations, then how is that on me? What exactly did i say, since we are finding quotes, that you say I am lying about? No offense, I can't just take your word, but you can take mine, I have no reason to lie. Thats cheating, which I hate.
For Melissa, I am still asking what your thoughts on this exchange are. Can we take those comments, as they look?
They look like I never said that infected blankets were the cause for spreading small pox...
what does it look like to you?Chasuk said,
"I hate to say anything that might give succor to our argumentive foes, but the smallpox thing probably never happened. It was suggested, but we have absolutely no historical evidence that it actually occurred."
Melissa responded with,
"*Smiles* I posted that way back... and even if it did happen then the spread of smallpox as a result was statistically small... and if it did happen it was the result of the army not a specific religion."
I post it again to keep it in front of us... I don't think its about blankets either.. but, it looks like he is saying, and that you are agreeing, that smallpox thing didn't happen. That is the core of your argument. You smile and claimed to have said it first, which I took at face value. So did people die from that or not? What are we to think based on even just this exchange here?Nice selective pasting and cutting there for your lie...
It was a three person conversation not a two person conversation... you know that as you had to be looking at the post when you did your cut and paste... how convenient that you left off the part that proved you are a liar...
j-u-i-c-e wrote:
"So where were we? Oh yea Christianity brought the world 500 years of schools, colleges, hospitals, charities and parts of our Justice system. "
You forgot booze and blankets infected with smallpox. But I guess you probably wouldn't know about that, since it's historical, and not ideological.
Chasuk wrote:
I hate to say anything that might give succor to our argumentive foes, but the smallpox thing probably never happened. It was suggested, but we have absolutely no historical evidence that it actually occurred.
MelissaBarrett wrote:
*Smiles* I posted that way back... and even if it did happen then the spread of smallpox as a result was statistically small... and if it did happen it was the result of the army not a specific religion.
So tell me how your selective cutting and pasting was anything but an intentional way to avoid admitting to your lie? You are implying that i never said that small pox happened and you are a liar for doing so when you OBVIOUSLY had to read the conversation to know what to eliminate.Those were to COMPLETE posts, not selective cut and pastes!! Now who is lying for what appears to be some audience...this is just too weird. Here it is again...I put them together only into one post, to remind you.
Chasuk said,
"I hate to say anything that might give succor to our argumentive foes, but the smallpox thing probably never happened. It was suggested, but we have absolutely no historical evidence that it actually occurred."
Melissa responded with,
"*Smiles* I posted that way back... and even if it did happen then the spread of smallpox as a result was statistically small... and if it did happen it was the result of the army not a specific religion."To remind you, Chasuk had just come in out from being gone from the conversation for a bit. I didn't lie. Show where I lied instead of just saying it over and over. It is beginning to feel a little big hysterical.
I am curious what that was about...that post from you wasn't that long ago, it was this thread, not today but just prior.
The selective cut and pasting something that I am not sure there is a reason for, is from juice. You So need me to lie...but I have not, as I don't do that. It would make it too easy for you. Now why would I do that.surely you cant be that obtuse?
The post from Juice is what puts the rest in context. You know that which is why you left it out. Not putting it in was the only way it would say what you wanted it to say...
Intentional deception... even by omission... is lying.Now you are just falsely accusing left and right, things you cannot possibly know. I didn't selectively leave out what juice said, and know he said it, as I responded to it. Regardless, lets run with what you say for a minute....
How does what Juice says, change what you guys say there, show me. It doesn't change it, and doesn't really apply Melissa. You can't be seriously expecting me to believe I lied when you aren't even making sense. I am not lying, intentional or otherwise. Saying it over and over without proving it, by something I omitted is ridiculous. I didn't change a thing Melissa. Those are complete posts. Stop trying to convince "whoever..." You KNOW I know better.because "small pox thing" from Chazuk refers to the purposely infected blankets mentioned by juice...
Anyone with a third grade reading comprehension can see that.
My response to Chuzuks response means I agree with him that there were likely no blankets like that...
You would have to know that by reading it. Accusing me of denying that indians every died of small pox and using that exchange as your basis is lying becuase you knew that it wasn't ever what I meant...
You said something about me that wasn't true... isn't that the definition of lying?
The missionaries didn't do the smallpox infected blankets. That was the US Army.
First, the incident with the the smallpox infected blankets was probably never "done." Second, if it had been done, the US Army is composed of people, and those people, in 1837, were likely at least nominally Christian.
If you are interested, the background of the smallpox story is explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churc … t_genocideIf it's true that the blankets were never done, that's news to me. I was taught about it in eighth grade US History.
Equating an army that was probably made up of mostly nominal Christians with dedicated missionaries is a tenuous link at best, and that's being generous. It really doesn't bolster the argument that missionaries knowingly distributed infected blankets.Can you tell me who said that missionaries were knowingly distributing infected blankets?
Maybe we need to ask a Historian rather than speculate?
I've become increasingly aware that the blanket thing is most likely false. I wouldn't call it a cherished belief, but it was something I believed since the 8th grade.
The fact that the US Army was not a Christian institution is not really up for debate. Even if the overwhelming majority of the men in it claimed to be Christians, the army itself was not concerned with the spread of Christianity of the support of Christianity already spread.
I've read the pertinent part of the article and still am confused. I was taught this in public school in 1979. Churchill's article was in the 2000's? Maybe I'm just tired. Thank you.
Churchill knew better when he published in the 2000s. Your Middle School/High School teacher didn't. Anyway, I shouldn't have posted the Churchill link; it was the first handy reference which explained the blankets-smallpox thing.
No problem. It just goes to show that what we get taught in school can stick with us for life, though!
is everyone daft around here? there were no blankets... ok i'm sure there were blankets somewhere but i never stated that anyone intentionally spread it with blankets... that story is false... that's why i never ever said it happened.
the missionaries spread small pox just by having it... were they the only ones that had it? No... but they were the ones specifically going from tribe to tribe... systematically... spreading it quite by accident... but still spreading it in the most efficient way possible.
17 million people dead SHOULD have been a lesson about maybe NOT finding new people and trying to convert them as soon as their presence was known but it wasn't. Missionary work continued to send people to "spread the word" and all their neat little germs to every indigenous tribal people they could find. As late as 1987 this was still happening. Do you think that a little responsibility and restraint might have been a good idea? Of course not! Because no one can admit that they might be the cause of the problem.The Indians contracted small pox when they killed the settler children that had it. 17 million people they killed. Do you think that a little responsibility and restraint might have been a good idea? Of course not! Because no one can admit that they might be the cause of the problem.
I don't value your intelligence enough to read your post and I have no desire to converse with you. I cannot stop you from replying to my posts but I certainly don't need to make it pleasant.
I feel that you do not now nor will ever have anything of value to add to anything I say.
But I love you anyway... walk with Christ sister.Well, at least the native Americans faught back against the invaders before succumbing to the diseases the invaders had.
You never quite phrased it that way before. Before you always made it seem like the missionaries went around intentionally infecting people.
Until recently, I believed the blanket story because I had been taught it in school.
There's two aspects of this discussion that don't get touched on, which are a historical perspective and also a discussion about greater good.
Nobody understood smallpox the way we do today. And when the smallpox broke out, it was the Christians who went in to take care of the people. There were smallpox outbreaks among white people too.
And you have to ask which is better, for people to follow the orders of God even if it runs a risk, or to ignore the orders of God in order to save people some physical pain in this world, knowing that they will perish eternally without the knowledge of Jesus?Way back on page 47... I SPECIFICALLY said that the missionaries had no ill intent. On page 46 I said that the blanket incident didn't happen. I knew that it was most likely an urban legend and stated so before anyone else did in this thread. If you actually look through the thread I said the missionaries didn't have anything to do with the blanket thing anyway...
Cheech and Chong.... or whatever you want to call the twins... ignored that part just like you did. Likely because they didn't want to address what I was saying because they couldn't get righteously angry over it.
I do happen to believe that tribes would be better without hearing the 'word of God' but that wasn't what I was addressing and is completely irrelevant. I was saying that if Christianity wants people to stop attacking it then maybe it should fix the obvious reasons why people have a problem with it. Dead people is one of my issues with missionary work... and honestly I think it is a pretty big one. If missionaries are going to kill people WHILE COMPLETELY AND UNEQUIVIQUALLY obeying the words of Jesus and keep doing it even when they know the risk exists then the world is completely justified in hating the religion they are representing. If you as a Christian don't like it then either do something about it or deal with the deserved backlash.
If you are ok with people dying so that you can spread your religion then go about your life knowing and accepting that. Just a point though... most clergy say that if a person dies without ever hearing the word of God they are like babes that die unaware. Straight shot into heaven. So basically missionaries are risking the lives of these tribes that would have gone to heaven anyway... but now they die fast with a chance of burning in hell. Well played missionaries... well played.
Why don't we ask if the world would be better off if there were fewer murderers? I wonder if they are Christians?
Now that is a fair question! Would the world be better with fewer murderers... Yes. If they happened to be Christian murderers, or atheistic dictator murders, all are bad.
That has too obvious an answer and everyone will say yes and there will be no debate.... Boring.
What causes people to murder is an even better topic.Ask a fictional person???? I'd rather ask a real person who can actually speak to me about his plight and/or his mental illness and/or his stupidity and bad choices and greed and desperation.... all these things can cause someone to kill another human being. Cain and Abel is a story that is not relevant to the topic just someones interpretation of a particular moral dilemma.
God healed me of 40 years of depression and kept me from committing suicide and healed the deep wounds that caused me to spew rage and bitterness all over anyone that vaguely hinted at disagreeing with me and and and I am one of those people that had mental illness that does not any more because God took away all the pain and all the hurt and all the self hatred
Perhaps because HE is so caring and gentle and did not want to traumatize me any further. He would have had to remove my entire brain and put in a new one---how would I have known who i was?
You and Sooner seem rather heartless to this person's sharing of some very personal experiences.
How sad.....JUST proves to me that YESHUA is really my Shield and FORTRESS. Does not even touch me because it bounces off HIM! ONE way I KNOW HE IS REAL.
Aww Shalah, that is right.
Good reminder, and something to take comfort in. He is patient too.... very patient. He doesn't miss a thing though, that is true.Please don't walk in front of any cars or think you are indestructible, that would be sad to hear about.
SAD? SAD? then I would so be in HIS arms and really fully enjoying the BLISS of not even having to deal with those that don't realize the little impish demons that USE THEM to try to provoke others or put them down or feel more superior or
This is a test and I am passing with flying colors. Mental illness? Find Daniel G. Amen on YouTube and listen closely to what HE has to say. Maybe you'll learn how to improve your brain function and actually develop the areas of your brain that control sensitive, gentle, kind etc.
those areas of your brain seem to be asleep at the wheel and you're running your motor mouth because your insecurities won't let you honor and respect others.
I am really enjoying keying this comment. I am bursting with laughter such as I have not in a great while. Thanks for the laugh.how do you get those little smileys into your comments?
Hit "post a reply" or reply to someone's post.
When the box appears, go to the bottom right hand corner and click on formatting.Why are you saying thank you? Your gratitude isn't needed or warranted. I was asked a question by a new member. She didn't ask anything on topic of the thread, but a technical thing with HubPages, so why wouldn't I help?
I can already see, having a conversation with her would be quite difficult, considering what I have already noticed.
THst shows that you can get happy standing in the same shoes that you aren't happy about. (?????)
Think about it ... and then if you don't see anything. then ..? dispose of it! No problem.
What in the world would make you think I don't like the shoes I stand in?
I mean seriously Jerami, why would you even think that I'm not happy with my understanding of my own life?
I love my family. I love what I do for work. I love myself above all of it(if I didn't I would love anything else). However, I also love humankind and rather the world live in peace instead of this constant conflict.
I'm constantly humbled by people. People think I have an ego problem, and refuse to believe me when I say I don't. I'm constantly reminded by others of the respect I've earned. I'm constantly given appreciation for my actions.
Yes, it's understood that many people are going to disagree with me. I have no problem with that. When rational conversation no longer aids in communicating learning/knowledge/wisdom, I do know when to walk away. I have a very high tolerance, because I've already learned that Tolerance comes from accepting people and their flaws.
I just happen to be blunt and extremely straight forward in my approach. Most don't respond positive, but I do get my share of positive from the experience.
When do intellectuals ever have any real fun without feeling the need to be condescending?
Ok, thank you for answering my question. So, if someone comes across as unkind, sarcastic, condescending - is it because it only seems that way to the person that 'takes' it that way. OR are they really being those things?
You're welcome.
Okay, being unkind is going to happen whenever you're going to have communication between two people. It's bound to happen sooner or later, regardless of whether or not these people are friends, in a relationship or just talking to a stranger.
Sarcasm is part of human nature. Sarcasm brings laughter(maybe not to the person who says it, but usually to others who read it). Everyone does it and anyone who claims not to is an outright liar.
Condescending? Well, this is subjective to the subject matter. There are plenty of people who have PH.Ds accredited to them, but when the post to the forums using poor communication skills and bad grammar, then come across as condescending because they are the educated elite- then you have a problem.
So, I am not exactly sure what your point was?I guess I am talking about what some psychologists and psychiatrists call filters; old hurts and memories that cause a person to hear something someone says innocently as condescending or hurtfully sarcastic, or take it as a put down.
It is difficult to have a conversation with someone unless both have the same understanding of words chosen. Like what is a Christian. To define it is impossible. The idea of what a Christian should be and how they really are doesn't always mesh because people come to Christ with all kinds of hurts that have to be healed before they can be mature and grow into true Christlikeness. And then there are those that hijack the name and corrupt it completely.
I had a class on Worldview in college. Did quite well, actually. Got an A. But reading a couple of assigned books on the subject and learning what the instructor expects is easy...
It's easy to 'take' things in a manner that someone did not mean it. And if the parties involved are not willing to work on communication, there won't be any real communication.
I guess some people just can't communicate with each other. And then I have had relationships with people where we communicated great until one of us branched off in another direction and the communication just wasn't there anymore. I guess I'm just babbling and rambling.
Delusion is such a sad thing to see, I have a cousin in a psych ward who believes he can control the weather, you sound just like him.
I had the most fun in a psyche ward in my early 20's. NO worries, no cares, no responsibilities but to follow routine. Delusion? I was so deluded about a lot of things, but what's more real to me everyday in every way is MY KING's love for me and the future awaiting those that learn to love HIM. At least I am enjoying life now delusional or not.
so much better than when i carried the weight of my forgiven sins on my shoulder and was weighed down with condemnation, guilt, shame, self-hatred, shoulds, oughts,
I do know some followers of Jesus who do have power to calm storms...I have seen it.
If you think that you are being rather overly sensitive. This is a forum for debate and I can't seriously debate this person anymore. I feel bad for this person but I'm not going to be overly sensitive either. What do you want me to do? This is a debate forum, it's often harsh but (it is supposed to be for me anyway) friendly. You guys just turn to jerks because I can no longer take this person seriously about their condition? It only goes to show that the lower a persons mental abilities the more likely they are to turn to religion.
You guys want a friendly debate or you just want to be jerks to the people who don't believe as you do? I can't take any of you seriously and I will take you down... scholarly speaking of course.Like I said, you could just be quiet... Kicking someone where it hurts and others asking it to stop, doesn't mean they are over sensitive. It means they have a heart.
Yes, do take me down, scholarly speaking, like you said. Yay for stepped up debate!They dish it out by the truckload but cant take anything. Seems familiar huh lol
But as king David wrote, or someone, HE is my shield and my fortress.
You are doing great ShalahChayilJOY. Nice to meet you.
You too. I am having so much fun now I can hardly see for laughing. I have been praying for the longest time to have that part of my brain restored. And HE has answered my prayers in the most unusual way.....;
It could be that you are paranoid and suffer from a persecution complex Phoenixv, and hate science, the advancement of medicine, and hate logic and reason. Stop trying to force your dogma on others, stop trying to control the masses, supporting witch burning, crusades and the spreading of disease! Oh the horror.... and stop logging in and out, just choose one of us to "be" on here, LOL. (Yes, I am being sarcastic in this post... just to be clear ;p)
Maybe that explains why you cant talk about the topic or argue any points.
If the world had the Christians today, that it had after Jesus' Resurrection and they had not been assimilated into Roman theology and pagan worship of the sun god, mithras, this world would already be like heaven on earth. Because the more that those true little Christ's were persecuted, killed, and fed to and torn apart by wild beasts [[[today it's words]]], they multiplied and grew and even some of those that boiled them in oil and burnt them at the stake were converted and came to know the living, risen Messiah--LOVE personified.
Today those that call themselves Christians but are not willing to die to self, self-interest, self-promotions, self-defense, self-judgment are Christians in name only.
i really don't want to argue points
Yeshua is MY KING. Yeshua is my Messiah. Yeshua is coming again to rule the whole earth and rid it of all its evil, wickedness, corruption, filth, defilement and everything that spoils true PEACE, JOY and harmony among humans.
i can, if i so choose, insult or try to insult with the best of them. Yeshua has taught me better
You don't really want my entire life story here. Read my future hubs and you will see. The depression began when i was about ten, eleven or twelve. He began healing about 35 years ago. Why did it take so long for me to be completely healed? Because from age three, four or so, all I heard was 'you failed.' The depression began because i began to turn the frustration and hatred on myself for failing to live up to ....expectations.
Even God, good as HE is can't just fix 12 or so solid years of 'you're wrong, stupid, can't do anything right etc. And hearing in between, 'i love you' that royally screws up one's psychological make-up
NO, it took from about 1975 to just a couple years ago for ME to realize the LOVE HIMSELF really does care deeply about and accept and love ME! Even now, at times, if something I believe i really want doesn't happen, I have to fight off the lies that God doesn't really love me or He would give it to me. Or the lie that HE is depriving me because HE just doesn't want me to enjoy life or
follow my hubs and if you really read them, you'll see more transformationOn a personal level, I am glad to see you are no longer depressed. I have family members who suffer from it, and it can be debilitating.
can be? IT IS in so many, many ways. See if you can find some books in your local library written by Daniel G. Amen. Gee look him up on YouTube. He does brain spect scans and has excellent information on how to actually work on changing the way the brain which does control a lot of behavior.
I was such an angry, volatile person! and I could not see it until mercifully, the Creator began to 'hold a mirror up to my face' is the way I put it. I meditate on scripture and that is basically what healed me. I have come from completely hating myself and cutting off parts of me that i judged as bad and they were---but came to embrace those parts and then I could change them through Grace. was a time I could NOT even take being confronted and told i was doing something wrong--it meant i was completely 'wrong'
check out Daniel G. Amen on YouTube. And practical things like sunshine, eating way healthier, avoiding sugar, greasy foods, negative people...
my creative brain was dormant, and is still being awakened...You changed yourself through diet and getting more vit d etc. how is that the work of grace?
No, I did NOT change myself. I learned all those other things after God put a brick wall in front of my face and a mirror and whispered, LOOK, see YOUR acting out...
then I gradually learned those other things that were keeping me depressed because they affected my brain chemistry.
Had mental illness and doesn't anymore??? I could argue against that but I don't like to pick on people, good for you for at least feeling like a stable human being. Whatever you need to get it together.
picking on and insulting others seems to be your greatest delight. pick away and enjoy
Not really, I wasn't picking on you it's just you are supposedly mentally ill and you are trying to have a serious conversation debate with someone? That is what this forum is about yes? Debates are always seemingly unfriendly. And I have trouble taking your point of view seriously if in fact you are mentally ill or even was. (A mentally ill person needs medication and is often never fully functional in the mental aspect) I have worked in this area so I know this.
Sorry for your problem, but I ask that you never comment to me or with me again, if we met we could be friendly but I will never debate with you on a topic you can never fully grasp.Art, don't pick on people then deny it, it makes what you engaged in even worse, plus we all see it. You could just be quiet if you didn't have anything nice to say.
You suggest above that she may not be able to have a serious debate with someone, how low do you have to go? You were being unfriendly, and she was spot on the money but Its not just you but so many anti christians here. Mentally ill people can make great points or not, and each point stands on its own merit, good grief. IF she makes a point you disagree with, no matter what her mental state that you seem to go after, then point out how she was wrong. I see others here that express symptoms of some mental problems, and I have not said a word about it. Now you ask her to not comment you again...wow. She as sharing her first hand experience.... that counts for what her experience were at least, and it may help someone else. That has value!
I have been begging others to share facts or experiences here for days. It doesn't come. She isn't claiming to own the debated topics at hand, but she sure is more than welcome here I think, despite you shutting her off from talking with you. Probably better for her. I can't respect someone that starts off a post defending picking, then saying, they aren't really picking on someone then really dig in!
How sad.
Those were selective outtakes that left out the initial comment that we were responding to. You knew that and posted them anyway. THEN you lied and said something that you knew it didn't mean... In the process accusing me of denying the deaths of 17 million people.
What part of that is incorrect?No Melissa, like I said, Chasuk came in, and said that in general. If it was to another post and not in general, and that matters a great deal here, then show me how. Your putting in Juices comment and removing your own didn't help at all. Some of what you say there isn't coherent, so its hard to follow honestly. Melissa, I actually didn't lie, and didn't say something that I knew you didn't mean. What was that anyway? I don't do that. You have to prove it. You are really getting up in arms and beating two dead horses, "YOU LIED!" with Phoenix and myself. Stop it please. Calm down, and show how its wrong of me to notice that inherent contradictions. PLUS, I was being nice, and asking you and simply posting each of your comments. The days are over where you just get to say something, be real upset about it, and hope it sticks.
Still, what did Chasuk mean? Is it how it looks, did you say that you agreed and said that first? Yes.... I wondered how those comments, not cut or pasted in part, but in their whole comment, squared with the 17 million dying. How does it? What I am asking isn't hard, OR, show how my simply asking is wrong to ask. You guys said some big things there. Here it is again for those wondering what we are talking about, and want to have it close by. Not cut, not pasted here in part as suggested by the one that says I am lying about things..
Chasuk said after being gone from the conversation for a little while,
"I hate to say anything that might give succor to our argumentive foes, but the smallpox thing probably never happened. It was suggested, but we have absolutely no historical evidence that it actually occurred."
Melissa responded with,
"*Smiles* I posted that way back... and even if it did happen then the spread of smallpox as a result was statistically small... and if it did happen it was the result of the army not a specific religion."Melissa and I were both referring to a single incident from history, a quite notorious incident frequently invoked in passionate condemnations of American Indian genocide. However, it is unlikely that this incident ever occurred, which I pointed out, and with which Melissa agreed.
Melissa has _not_ repudiated the historicity of the other known genocides to which she has subsequently referred.
Is that an accurate summary, Melissa?
Does that make things more clear, Oceans?Of course that's what it meant
Why do you think you understood so easily when the Bobbsy twins struggled?American Indians did in fact contract small pox. There is not a single incident being discussed here, but two.
One was a proposed deliberate contamination of blankets by a General Jeffrey Amherst.
Two was the actual spread of small pox that may in fact been exacerbated or spread by blankets that missionaries may have been providing altruistically.
The Native American Indian was not a dodo bird that english children clubbed as they got off the boats. So that is a notion that should be dispelled.
My best friends are Native American. Chiefs, sons of Chiefs, Brothers of Chiefs. They fought hard valiantly and in some cases ruthlessly. They were defeated by overwhelming numbers and technology.Right. You reiterated what I just explained, except for the addendum about Native American friends.
But thank you for attempting to clarify my clarification.*sighs*
Or three... the spread of the disease from the missionaries themselves... which has been my clear position from the start.
No blankets needed... just missionaries spreading the gospel... and small pox... with nothing but their presence.
Really... said nothing about either altruistic blankets or infected blankets in that equation... from the beginning... ever... Just likely unwashed Christian Missionaries... that's it...
Can I make it any clearer?
Dirty Missionaries... Small pox... Dead Indians. Lots of dead Indians. 17 million or so... who were killed by small pox... Not AND I REPEAT NOT blankets of any kind...
Just the walking virus banks going from village to village... who were there to spread god's word... at the command of Jesus... and who wouldn't have been there if they were Buddhists...because Buddhists don't listen to Jesus.I dont disagree with the plausibility of actually contracting the disease from the missionaries themselves. The problem arose when it was said that "the pox infected blankets didnt happen. When it basically did. What you really meant was - the proposed deliberate contamination of blankets probably didnt happen. Then you was going nuh huh nuh you a liar liar liar , well you remember the rest.
PS Just being present isnt a crime. Only to an anti-christian would being alive, present, breathing and a christian be a crime. Correct?
I'm sorry... I said it was a crime where?
Again.. saying I said something I didn't is technically a lie.If you have aids and screw someone it is your responsibility when they die.
If you have smallpox and give it to someone then it is your responsibility when they die.
If you know what causes the flu and you know that a population has no natural defenses but expose them to it anyway... then it is your responsibility when they die.
Your argument is "They were going to get it anyway?" Doesn't fly... especially with the Zo'e tribe that was killed by missionaries with the flu... They were NOT going to get the flu. They were happily going to go about their little lives... Until Christians came in AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE WHO who warned them about the vulnerable state... to spread the word of Jesus.... The same missionaries that had to be forcibly removed to prevent the same thing from happening again...It seems some are accusing people of going to help, but to really secretly be trying to spread their disease, knowing they NA would get it and die. That is pretty diabolical of an accusation, which is what I am seeing and would have to be true for the prior point to even make sense. (no, i am not saying you actually said it, it is obviously inferred, or would have to be true based on the other things you are saying. Otherwise, no point is being made.)
It seems to me, that this would be a 180, from what the goal would be of Christians, giving up their lives to share the good news and blankets with people. I don't think its very reasonable, personally. It only fit with a very strong need for Christianity to be evil or wrong. It doesn't fit what we know of the facts.I don't value your intelligence enough to read your post and I have no desire to converse with you. I cannot stop you from replying to my posts but I certainly don't need to make your attention seeking behavior pleasant.
I feel that you do not now nor will ever have anything of value to add to anything I say.
But I love you anyway... walk with Christ sister...Ok Melissa.. I value your right to think those things and choose that. Wishing you the best again, take care.
Much like the Salem Witch trial? It's about Christians fighting off anyone who doesn't follow their God, if you don't follow their God then you are evil and they have every right under the laws of God to kill you. There are many Bible verses that support this.
And all the better if you can make it look like good intentions.
I doubt that people back then knew nearly as much as we know today. Nevertheless it would be just as you say " their responsibility". But not the belief systems. Alrighty then, got that figured out didnt we?
they knew much earlier than that about those things.
Are we starting to understand my animosity towards many of these self-professed Christians? At it's very basic level - Christianity teaches passive/aggressive behavior.
They will argue black is white just for the sake of defending their irrational beliefs. Validating them by agreeing goddunit and Jesus saves is a big mistake I think. Give them an inch, they will take a mile.
See History.
I've always known that Mark... and it sickens me that they do it in Jesus's name.
However I have to deal with them because as a Christian I am my brother's keeper... If I don't point out the flaws who will? And if I don't point out the flaws then I am just as guilty of it as they are because i would have stood back while they raped Christ's name and said nothing about it.
Still... Atheism looks good every once in a while... which should REALLY make them wonder about how much good they are doing in Christ name by driving away believers.But, history is littered with 2,000 years of sickening things being done in Jesus' name.
Oh yes, and many sickening things done in the name of science. Sickening things done in the name of America. Face it, we are human. We are sick. No matter what religion we follow or do not follow.
Not sure I get the argument here. It is OK that we kill in the name of Jesus because we kill for nationalism as well?
Of course its not ok to kill in the name of Jesus. Part of the problem is just insisting that it is being done, and/or that if it is being done that perhaps anyone thinks it is justified. (Especially that other followers of Jesus think it justified.)
I think it would be great if we could talk about particular acts of killing in the name of Jesus, where it was the murderers intent in the fashion we see being used here (ad infinitum on the boards). If a person or group killed in the name of Jesus, and that actually it was their intent, and Jesus taught the opposite, we are left with wondering why people assign the blame to the innocent one (Jesus and his teachings)when and if they do it.
My suggestion is that the answer to this kind of behavior, by people who don't seem the types to engage in it purposefully, is actually explained best by the very worldview that is being demonized in error. My true hope and prayer is that people everywhere that might do this, might consider within themselves why they engage in such irony that might be self sabotaging them and keeping them from a truth that is actually very good.oceans, I'd like to address the first paragraph that I included in this quote because I can speak to this, I hope, and explain something that we have ALL been fighting about throughout this thread. First, if a person of group killed in the name of Jesus - two instances - the Crusades, and the Salem Witch Trials. Two particular instances in which followers of Christ killed in His name. Now, when Atheists/Agnostics/Christians and others criticize the actions of these people, there seems to be the misunderstanding that they are attacking the character and teachings of Jesus.
They are not.
They are in disagreement with the actions of those particular Christians. Christianity itself is NOT on trial here...it is the very UN-Christian actions of those who say they follow Christ. Which is why you hear so many folks say that Christianity and Jesus would be more palatable to them if those who say they follow His teachings did so consistently.
What happens next is that some of us become sensitive. Our faith is a part of us, and in many cases defines who we are. We are doing the best we can to walk humbly with our God and do justice and love mercy. But, we are indeed our brother's keeper. Denying that members of our faith have been unfaithful to our teachings does not reflect poorly on those of us who have, or on Jesus Himself. I've said before in forums that Jesus does not need us to defend Him or fight on His behalf. He is in control and has it handled.
Where I feel the whole thing goes astray is that many of the souls who killed in the Crusades and the Salem Witch Trials did so because their respective Church leaders told them to do it. Most Christians believe that their pastors would never lead them into evil. Many are wrong. But seeing it not only carried out by lay members of the Church, but sanctioned by the Church leadership, can often put forth the picture that is a regular practice within the whole of Christianity.
Does that make any sense in understanding why Christians often feel as though their faith in general is being attacked? It is because we ARE our brother's keeper, and we have often been powerless to keep him on the road following Christ as we have been charged to do.Aww Mo...
Here comes the "but they weren't REAL Christians" response...
Wait for it...Perhaps...lol
I was feeling industrious and optimistic though.I prefer the "Yes... they are idiots but they are OUR idiots" answer. That way maybe something can be done about making MORE idiots.
There's no difference between you two and any other anti-Christians except your arguments are poorer. You take a couple of instances in history, misrepresent them and then use that to slander all Christians.
Jesus taught that we are to in fact obey authority. You use the case of the crusades where islamic forces killed Christians and destroyed sites. When they sent crusaders it was a response to that injustice. You use that as an example to slander all Christians from then on.
The american indians may have contracted small pox from sick European children that they were killing in their attacks on the forts or settlements. But instead you like to think that missionaries doing the Great Commission or altruism were evil just for basically traveling or existing.
You take specific events in history, willfully distort them and then apply that to people you dont even know.
You guys are a couple of fakes or wolves in sheeps clothing. The reason I say that is that you have never really discussed the actual topic and chose to exclusively and repetitively attack Christians. That is your purpose here, based solely on your activity.Good point that I missed or forgot to mention in my posts here tonight....
When people are fighting terroristic types, that were doing things like murdering innocent pilgrims, then THAT battle is a good thing, actually. I don't have any problems with stopping terrorism. So again, your point would be made as would be mine, that those wars even are lumped in as evil (when good in those cases) and in fact used to broad brush Christianity is evil.
That is my only point in many of these posts, in a bottom line kind of way. To point out the continued false accusations when I see them against a good thing, Christianity.
If people like Mark (and everyone else that does it, and their enablers) can ever say, "the world is a better place for those Christians that stopped those terrorists from taking over our world", then that will be a bit more fair. We already know he knows that to be true, we already know that he is currently benefiting as we all are FROM THOSE CHRISTIANS in his free world (if in the USA)...but not only isn't thanking them and their worldview, but continuing to cheap shot attack it.
He will in fact continue to likely say what he has been, rather. That is who I was responding to, among others. When fair, I will give that credit, and when not I will point it out. I ask all to do the same of me, but honestly. If not, I am not able to justify the time spent on reasoning with people that show me and prove to me they don't even value reason and logic as something to strive for.
When people keep on cheap shot attacking such a good thing, its an evidence that the thing is rather good indeed. Its another evidence all its own, as nothing else explains it, except that Christianity actually explains people like that. Atheism doesn't....(as an example of many that dont explain it.) Truths have a way of rearing its head like this, while the opposite is the goal. I love that.Cheap shot attacking?
I think the world would be a better place if Christians had not wiped out the Cathar and destroyed the indigenous populations of the USA, Australia and many in Africa. How is that for a cheap shot?
Atheism doesn't explain anything dear. Atheism is a lack of belief in Majikal Super Beings, that is all. Psychology can explain these people better than majik. Perhaps if you understood that atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color?
Face it - your religion is divisive. Anything good that has come out of it has come at massive costs and despite the basic tenets of your your faith, not because of.
"You are either with me or against me." Said Jesus. Divisive. Have you read your majik book? I think not.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.Actually - it was their black hair that dunnit, not their lack of belief in invisible super beings.
Yes - win.Speaking of clear thinking, it makes sense actually that immoral people that do very real atrocious things with no remorse are acting living out the actions of people that TRULY lack a belief in a god. Its as if they are very sure they will never answer for their crimes.
When in doubt, the actions are a good gauge of intents and actual beliefs.Yes - Hitler was a Christians and had the backing of both the Catholic and Protestant churches. He believed he was doing god's work.
As I said - believing in majik damages your ability to reason.
Still not understanding this defense of your divisive religion. It is OK that you guys murder because people who are not Christians do murder? This is not clear thinking. Sorry.
Do you ever actually read an entire post before responding to it? For example, I never once mentioned smallpox - nor was I ever a part of the smallpox conversations.
I give up. Mark - have at it! And, don't be cuddly.Waste of time with these guys - like all "good," X-tians - they just want a fight.....
Then I take back what I said on that other thread. I am a bad 'Christian.'
Ugh.Saying others just want to fight is a cover up for what is going on. Its actually incredibly unpleasant and frustrating to request true dialogue with people that don't engage in it. When bad ideas fail and are shown how, people like Mark will often say what they do.. "you just want to fight, or win at all costs." No...its not allowing people like that to continue to deceive themselves and others.
Even if he never acknowledges that, others can see how his opinions and desires of what he wants to just be true, doesn't work. Logic and good reasoning is much better. Easy way out = "You just wanna fight! You can never be wrong."
What things make the most sense and are more reasonable? Those are better things and not because I say so. So, if I point out how a point is less reasonable, and is hinging on untruths and illogic, its not my fault what people do with that after that point. Personal choices come into play, and insults are just that and we all can get mad and use those. Bring me something even more "damning" than the equivalent of a dirt clod being thrown while hiding behind a rock if you need me to be wrong or want me to be. OR if I really am, just show it. That is what true refutations can accomplish. Are people up for really facing things, or are they just towing the line and trying to protect what turns out to be bad core ideas? Am I up for it, if you show me to be truly wrong? To myself first... not asking anything of anyone that I am not asking of myself first.You speak of logic and reason and then claim a majikal super being tells you what to do?
Your god is logically impossible and believing in something so unreasonable makes it a farce that you speak of logic and reason. Seems like you are being deliberately provocative.
This is why your religion causes so many fights.Dont feed the troll Ocean. He is just copying and pasting the same one line rhetoric.
Mark, yes I do speak of logic and reason and keep asking for that. Its a good thing to do. I haven't spoken of magical super beings telling me what to do actually. Is the misspelling over and over fun to do or something?
Your god is logically impossible and believing in something so unreasonable makes it a farce that you speak of logic and reason. Seems like you are being deliberately provocative.
That is another argument, and one I have not been making. It is a cover up for what I have shown to be illogical, unreasonable and often not based in fact. What I am requesting doesn't cause fights, unless people can't face realities of what they say and suggest. What I am saying is promoting of peace actually, if people could do it.
I want more of those types of people in the world, no matter what their worldview. It would promote peace, not war.LOL
No - your god is logically impossible.
But you have certainly convinced us that the world would be a better place with fewer Christians in it.
Little wonder you need to hide your identity. LOLGood points make you laugh, and then not refuting them to prove it?
Tactic #194 and #79 (I like how Phoenix shares the tactics and thought I would continue that...)
"When I can't make good points, I will LOL a lot, and hope no one notices..."
and
"When I have lost the ability to make my desired points and don't want to accept that reality, I will resort to changing gears to a whole new discussion that wasn't even being had as my response, and hope no one notices."
Aka taking the picnic to a new location.....No - really - you make me laugh out loud. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL actually.
You are very brave though - I will give you that.Thanks Mark. I appreciate that... I don't see many people standing up to this kind of bold behavior towards a whole group of people, that it turns out, they just disagree with. You and others would stick up for any other group likely, and I see that happening from others.
I am glad you can see that standing up to this kind of really bad stuff is actually a brave thing to do. You get mocked like you do here, and called all kinds of good things including people judging my soul. Ironic, this is just what Jesus predicted. Another proof of its own that people can't make up. Christianity as a worldview explains this behavior, but nothing else does.
I was speaking in general to both of you. The overall point that I was making besides- "the anti-christian smear PC version of history is BS" and " we are doing God a service by being dishonest anti-christians " notion- the overall point was - you ally yourselves with anti-christians, not on any merit of arguments -dont fool yourself -you seek the same goal of being anti-christian, period.
It is all in the fruit. When you say- " I give up. Mark - have at it! And, don't be cuddly. You are willingly and publicly grafting yourself on to their tree. And the fruit is rotten to the core, at least because of it being disingenuous.Please prove me wrong. And I mean that in sincerity.
I appreciate the offer, Phoenix, but I do not owe you proof of anything.
I respect you as a fellow human being and a fellow Christian. In the end, I know before whom I will stand for judgment - and it's not you.
I pray that rather than seeing me as one who defended other followers when they were wrong, He will see that I did my best to edify them to do right, and comforted those to whom they were unkind, judgmental, condescending, and flat out cruel - whether those were other brothers and sisters in Christ or an Atheist who does not live the way I do.
Jesus tells me to LOVE. That's what I try to do. I don't recall Him specifying whom He wanted me to love. 'Others' seems pretty damned inclusive to me.
Call me an anti-Christian. Tell me that I'm grafting myself to the tree of the evil Atheist. If that's what gets you through the night, so be it. I sleep well, thanks, with or without YOUR approval.
Be well.You have never defended other followers, (from what I have seen) whether they were right or wrong- AND you have never proved them wrong. You just puppet the same anti-christian smear stories and thought they were accurate portrayals of history. Good luck.
Actually, this is an example of someone who did show support for the side making the poorest points, but never offering any of her own, then hiding behind that later. Arm chair quarterback kind of....
What I did see with her, what she actually brought, is a strong need and/or want for one side to be right, and the other wrong. That isn't really much at all, and doesn't weigh in at all on whether one side is right or wrong. Its like a little distraction running around on a field where others are trying to really play the game, kicking the shins of the side she wants to lose. Those trying to play offer up points, not support them then back down by saying, "I never said a word on that..." We know that. We asked her continually to bring something.
I can see why one doing this would give up and ask others to do it better and not be cuddly, lol.Wow, thanks for such a kind and compassionate description of me.
I have no need for one side to be right and another wrong. I have a need for both sides to be honest.
I'm also sorry YOU feel that way.Its just what I observed, and actually a kind and compassionate person shows another how something they are engaging in isn't the best way. Trying to explain it in a different way can sometimes help.
Trying to assert that people are just feeling something when they make actual points doesn't mean they are. This is why some of us keep asking for more than just opinions...that would include how one feels about something. Feelings weigh in on a lot of things and can explain behaviors, but apply less where facts count more.
Yes, publicly promoting the thugging of christians- Doing God's work err they?
Well they are gonna need a bigger dog with a bigger fight in them.
I have seen these types run off most non-aggressive Christians. There used to be a lot of them here, but eventually they wear you down. What is really, really funny is they call it LOVE! lol
I maintain, its more loving to show someone that thinks they are right, to show them how, than to try and defend one's open animosity toward a particular group they disagree with.
Yes - I know you have trouble reasoning properly. I put it down to believing in majik myself, but it may be inherent. This is how I show my love to you. It is for your own good.
His argument resembles
Poor anti christian debate tactic
#201 If you can't win a debate, throw out the "you make baby jesus cry because..______" you just won't roll over and take it.
Too bad they cant just bring an argument.
Yeah Phoenixv, why can't you just take what others say badly about you, and be quiet or go away? Why can't you allow her and others to be kind that way?
Don't ask someone to take responsibility for what they say. Let them really think they are being taking some moral highroad. Then, be sorry and never ask them to stop saying things for what turn out to be poor reasons.
Let her state the obvious, about loving as Jesus commanded her, while showing the complete opposite in words on this forum, and others that do the same thing. Let her blame her frustration with the results of her own choices on you, and stop being so logical.
Never...
I think the nice and sincere request there to prove you wrong is being answered with a no, while doing some more of the same stuff we already saw.
One thing that would explain this is that she can't prove you wrong, but that obvious truth is not acceptable for some reason. I wish all the people here that engaged in similar things, saw that there is a strong disconnect with reality of that situation when that is being done.
Is it more kind to let it go, and for me and others to just leave these forums, or is it kind to share how they are doing this, in case its not as obvious? Some people don't allow for evidences to be just that...
In my over 15 years of experience, people are actually not citing particular instances usually, and as seen on HubPages extensively, it is Christians and Christianity on trial, not just those very obviously bad actions.
I respect your right to say what you do, but I observe the opposite, the going after Christianity FOR what those people did. If you do not see that, I do not see how that is possible. For instance, anyone that knows me and what I write, will see me nearly BEG for what you are saying they are only doing....but then there would be no need for me to keep asking it if that is exactly what they were doing.
As I show in responses to particular points made by the people doing it, I am indeed replying when they are broad brushing all of Christianity, and demonizing all of it for the actions of a very few. If only they were just doing in their words, what you say they were. If they were, I would have no point.
If they Do do it more in the future, I would applaud it though, it would be such a nice change of pace. There is a strong need to demonize what is actually good. That being, Christianity. You can't define it as those two examples you gave, but some actually do. (not you as in Motown...) Anyone that does that. My goal in pointing it out every time I see it, is that they see how they do it, and not even just stop it, but to ask themselves why. It is meant to be a clue for a bigger thing or problem going on.
I can't reply to your post for some reason. No I was saying we will kill for something. None of it is okay. But it is not the fault of a single group. You would know what I meant if you read and responded to my earlier post to you
Your earlier post to me apparently got buried. Perhaps you'd care to post it again?
Calynbana, good points that make sense. Many people here are forcing the issue one particular group of people. We are no further in helping the true human condition and its problems, and maybe helping to make it worse, for not seeing the true points like this one. Its people that are very sick. No one gets a free pass on evil.
Here is my last response word for word. The post you ended off with "No Kristianity no discussion."
I am confused by your last sentence, it does not make sense.
No I do not believe is magical super beings, I believe in God. If you look up the definition of God, you will find that he is not by nature magical. There is your mixed up fact number one.
Number two, claiming that it is Christianity that creates arguments, fights, and wars. You have said numerous times this is why "your" religion starts wars.
I think you are mistaken, it is not the religion that starts problems, it is the very attitude that says "your" religion. It is the us against them mentality that starts problems. Conflict arises when people think they are superior in some form whether it be intellectually, spiritually or physically. It also arises when people insist on categorizing other people, Christians believe in God, but they are also human. Just like atheists. We cannot be categorized as war starters any more than any other religious group. People are war starters.
Fact number three. Check what it actually means to be Christian. I do not know who you have met that has claimed to be Christian but I do know your definition of Christianity does not match the definition that the early Christian church believed in. It definitely does not match the definition Christ laid out for his followers.
Be honest with yourself and others, look into who Christians really are, if it helps look up the definition of words before making presumptions.
I think I may expect a little too much from people here when I ask them to be objective and respectful. I am used to a more respectful adult environment. But then again I am from Canada tongue (that was a joke btw)I have to laugh at the "I don't believe in imaginary super beings, I believe in God". That is your opinion on the matter and could never be conveyed as literal fact.
Well! Could you be more condescending?
Your God is by very definition a magical super being. I tried looking up the definition of God and couldn't find any agreement. Perhaps you would care to define it for me?
You define it I'll disprove it.
“Your religion" is divisive. You're either with me or you're against me. There is only one way.
I think you might want to look up the definition of the word “fact" because you seem to using incorrectly. How funny you use the terms “objective and respectful" when discussing magical super beings.
You create the division. You are the religion. You are the one that says there is them or us.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
I did not include the numerous other posts or facts that you seem to conveniently not see lol
Again I cannot reply to the right post so I am going to reply to this one. I have not created and us and them attitude Mark. I have avoided that. Categorizing people necessarily creates categories. The people who believe Jesus is God and everybody else, the people who belief there is no God and everybody else, the people who believe in the FSM and everybody else :p It is not my religion. It is not your religion or lack there of. It is the categorization of people, it is the attitude itself.
I personally do not have a religion. I follow Christ, I attend church with people of a variety of beliefs. I don't care what your religion is Mark, I don't care if your supposedly "with" me or "against" me. What I care about is the fact that we are all in the same boat. We are all humans on earth trying to answer the same questions. We are all in pursuit of the truth. We take different routes but we are all searching for the same thing. We may come to different conclusions but that is for each individual to decide.
Christians are not supposed to do the whole us against you bit. They are supposed to present the Good News, if people receive the news well then they are to continue, if not they are to move on to other people. Jesus said that he came to divide, when he says this he does not mean decide who is better or worse, or saved or not. He meant that His Word will divide. It does, new Christians often have a lot of persecution to deal with in many countries. Jesus tells His followers that they are no better or worse than anybody else, that they are simply chosen to spread the word. They still sin as much as they try not to, they are still human, they are still learning and growing. Just like everybody else.
Some people may actually use the name of Jesus to justify violence, or separation from other people but they are not understanding what it means to be a follower. Relating all Christians to the fundamentalists is like relating all atheists to Stalin, or calling all atheists communists. It is ridiculous.
Finally about God. You cannot find a definition of God because it depends on which god you are looking at. If you want to talk about the Christian God then you need to refer to the Bible and look at I AM. Since this is the Christian (and Jewish) God then you need to go by their definition of the being. The Christian God is an immaterial, timeless mind. It is not magical, the Bible says magic is a bad thing, the Bible says God is Good. That contradicts, because your definition of God is flawed. You are talking about your perception of the Christian belief. Buuuut you are human and your perception of what others believe is not enough, you need to actually understand what others believe in order to describe it accurately. Magical superbeing is contradictory to what God is, at least the God of the Bible.
It would be like calling Allah a deadbeat dad god, it doesn't make sense. That is not what the word/name Allah means, that would be the perception of the person regarding the religious followers.
I am sorry if I sounded condescending btw it was not my intention.
Finally I have to say this, of course people of a belief system are going to believe their way is the best way. If they didn't they wouldn't be of that belief system. They would choose whatever system was better than theirs. If I thought Islam was the most rational, reasonable and loving religion why would I choose to be Buddhist? Do you see what I am saying here?
Also atheism is basically a religion now, I know you said you were agnostic but you seem to sit around and bash religion and the concept of a God. If you thought there could be a God I don't really think you would bash the idea. That is something that people do when they do not believe there could be a God. Atheism is becoming a religion, there are atheist gatherings, atheistic evangelism, atheist websites, atheist persecution, atheists who persecute, donation services for atheistic causes etc. It seems to be moving in the direction of a religious institution.
So perhaps Christianity when not being lived out as Jesus asked can cause conflict, perhaps Islam when not lived out as the Qu'ran teaches can cause conflict, maybe atheism (I do not think there is anything that holds atheists to a standard of behavior) can cause conflict. However it is not the religions themselves, it is the attitudes of the believers and non believers. It is the us against them attitude. The one that Jesus discourages, the one that Buddha discourages, the one that elementary school teachers discourage.
Do I need to clarify further?Matthew 12:30
Ah - another believer who has not read the majik book.
Let me know when you have read the majik book and we will talk again.
CiaoThat particular verse is an answer to a charge by the religious leaders who claimed that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of demons. Which would be futility. Perhaps you should read the book instead of cherry picking verses out of context. See: reading comprehension.
This would be why your religion causes so many fights.
See: your religion.
Ciao
To answer your last post to me. That is for Jesus to decide, not His followers. We cannot make those judgements as Jesus said we cannot. That is what I have said before. Careful when you quote mine Mark. Now what about my main points? You are still commenting only on Christianity.
I want to add one more thing, Saying Majic book, of majik superbeing or however you like to spell them is meaningless as they do not actually apply to the Bible or God as I explaind to you earlier.
It is like me saying Knowles is a teenage boy based off of my perception of his posts on the forums. This is not what you are right? It is what I could think of you. I would be wrong in this perception also come off as sounding foolish for making a foolish assumption with no basis other than a emotional response to your "theories". Apply this how you will to your description of God and the BIble.
Another illustration, saying that Harry Potter was not using magic, that he is using miracles in the name of Jesus. I could have this crazy perception of Harry Potter, but it doesn't change what the character of Harry Potter is, and it doesn't change what the author was expressing. It just makes me look like I have not done the reading in order to judge Harry Potter properly. In other words like I have no clue what I am talking about.
A Catholic priest once made a very good point.
The single greatest cause of atheism in the world today is Christians - who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and then walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world finds unbelievable.
That's a paraphrase of course, but I'd bet you see my point.I have heard that before, and it is a good excuse for people to become atheists perhaps. Maybe that is why Jesus seemed to share the point, and went hardest after the hypocrites of his day.
People that claim one thing, but actually are supporting the opposite cause, are not helping the cause of the thing they "say" they are supporting. Its ever not been the case that actions indeed speak louder than words.
You are talking about America,which until recently was monolithically christian.I look beyond that.Passive aggressive behaviour??tell that to a nigerian christian who wants to just go to church to worship but cnat do so coz the muzzies will bomb it.The christian is being aggressive.And if I can clearly remember coz of atheists hatred for anything christian,the UK government is financing the buliding of mosques using taxpayer money as churches are converted to cyber cafes.Oh did I mentionthat muslims can wear veils but christians cant wear crosses to scholl there?And you wonder why christians never agree with Atheists on anything
I never said you said that. Claiming that I did was a lie.
Poor anti-christian debate tactic
#77 Change some syntax so you can revert to
Poor anti-christian debate tactic
#17 If you can't win a debate be vague and incoherent and follow up with 10 posts of "you're a liar"I think its good you are pointing out people's tactics when you see them being used. They need to know this stuff doesn't fly.
That's not what I meant at all...but thank you for putting words in my mouth...
I sincerely meant that the pox infected blankets didn't happen. Which is actually not too surprising because that is exactly what I said...
But saying that I meant something I didn't say... btw... is technically saying something untrue... just sayin'.
- Motown2Chitownposted 13 years ago0
Could anyone who has participated in this thread explain what a real anti-christian/Christian is in the context of the conversation taking place?
Sorry, I didn't understand what was meant by it, either.
I think it means that those who disagree with them are anti-christian while they are Christian... even if those disagreeing is Christian then they are obviously not a REAL Christian and therefore their view of Christianity can be safely ignored.
I took that to mean people who say they are Christians, but are boldly anti Christian in their actions, meaning, to go up against Christians and Christianity. One of the two said they were Christian, and anti Christian pretty boldly. The other one didn't say it so clearly, but was very much in tandem and behaved much in the same manner.
And for the record i'm sure you would get off on thinking I am angry... but I'm honestly not. I just know you are lying and I'm calling you on it... and much like the 30 posts you made about me and your opinion on my statements I will return the favor *smiles*
I welcome being shown where I have lied, but you have to show it. Its not crazy for people to ask that of you. Also, I don't deal in opinions too much, because people get into trouble and use them as fact too often. They aren't helpful. I showed how you were wrong when I thought you were, and people were free to give rebuttals.
If I am wrong about you being angry, then I am wrong, but you act very angry with your words, and are seeming a bit irrational in this whole LIAR thing. You have to establish people are lying or its just one more immoral behavior that doesn't help anyone, right?When you tell a lie about someone the burden of proof is on you... You said that I rescinded my story that 17 million people died then failed to prove it... as you still have.
I said that missionaries caused the spread of the disease... I said that in my first post on the matter... I never said blankets of any sort either infected or uninfected or purposely infected or unpurposely infected spread the disease... therefore my conversation with Chazuk about the blankets was completely irrelevant to any of my points and changed nothing.
Either you knew that and misrepresenting what the conversation meant... which means you were lying... or you obviously misunderstood my points for the last 6 or so hours and most of the arguments that I've been telling you are irrelevant to the point WERE. Either way you were wrong about SOMETHING and you need to admit it and apologize.
In addition this little lesson in insanity should 1. Show you that sometimes you really don't want what you are asking for... You went on for 30 posts 48 hours and three threads about wanting to debate me... Trust me in your case you really would prefer I make sarcastic one liners rather than me explaining at length.
So if you are going to whine about wanting to raise the bar then you might want to make sure YOU can reach it... because regardless of your feelings of being ganged up on... the reason you felt attacked was because you and your SP were wrong and out-debated... accept it or don't... but until you do you are going to get your feelings hurt a lot and spend a lot of time thinking that groups of random people with no affiliations are banding together to get you.
Finally...I don't like being stalked and I don't like being taunted. An object lesson is the way i chose to go with it instead of attempting to get you and all of your accounts banned. I'm not sure I could have but I'm guessing after so many posts about me but not to me i probably could have gotten you on personal attacks even if i didn't get you on harassment... (which it was BTW). We'll not even go into sock puppet world and what I think the chances of finding your posts from the same ip address (or same proxy server) would be.
So learn some manners... if for no other reason if this was the popularity contest that you seem to think it is or the contest that you seem to think it is... then you would be loosing on both ends. And learn to admit when you are wrong... it makes people like you more.
Peace.Please provide quote and context, but if you can't, know that I have cleared up what is some of the misunderstanding as you were unclear.
It was confusing when two people say, that smallpox thing didn't happen, and I truly didn't read it in the context of what you kept insisting on. You don't have to believe me, and you don't tend to ever assume the best or believe people when you disagree with them from what I see, but that is the truth.
Its good that people ask for clarification. Your original point was never made, and turned out to be just how it looked, a particular attack on Christianity where it made no sense. You can't now try and put that off on others, or act like I am somehow immoral when I don't propose such ideas as that when its not warranted, against a whole group of people.Poor anti christian debate tactic
#17 If you can't win a debate be vague and incoherent and follow up with 10 posts of "you're a liar"
Poor anti christian debate tactic
#14 Become paranoid and start accusing people of multiple accounts and trickery
Poor anti christian debate tactic
#12 Actively participate, be the most obnoxious person on the thread, call people liars, insult them, call them mindless sheep and zealots and then have the unmitigated gall to claim YOU are being harassed, stalked and victimized.
BYE anti christian ladyWhat is ironic is i specifically made sure to do everything that your alt account did to me... Keep accusing...
The difference was my arguments were actually readable because I don't know how to fake the kind of incoherence that you-with both accounts- have.Poor anti christian debate tactic
#14 Become paranoid and start accusing people of multiple accounts and trickery.wow... I think she really thinks that? Its perhaps easier to think we could even pull that off, and then would for some reason, which makes no sense. I posted plenty just for me, as many have commented on. I can't do you as well! You make better, more concise arguments than I can and use better imagery than I can. You are great, and I think I am going to take all that as a compliment.
Looks like they are used to people just bending over and taking it. What a surprise they are getting lol.
Uh oh get out some tissues and violins- up next
Poor anti christian debate tactic
# 22 Draw imaginary lines in the sand and double dog dare them.That was along the lines of what I said a few times earlier on....expecting people to just lay down and take it...Not gonna happen here....and thus, I am so horrible! lol
I was talking about the "if you post to me again ima tell my mommy!" thingy
see:
Poor anti christian debate tactic
# 22 Draw imaginary lines in the sand and double dog dare them.Hmmm, you guys are funny.... you give me an idea for which I will clue you guys in on later.
I have a job, and in the evenings, or my day off, (too much of today for sure, but so did you lol, and do that more on a regular basis...)
You say a lot of unfounded things, and do a lot of putting down. I don't need to be liked more, I don't even want to be by the types that would like someone more for engaging in and depending upon dishonest tactics. You have acted in a manner unbecoming, and while I can't change that, I can ask that you debate more fairly.
I am more about substance, and don't care for your style really, and while some do, that is their choice I guess. Its hard to defend bad points, and illogic, and I don't envy your position, but then I don't feel too badly either as I saw you choose that both times I have had to engage with you. It doesn't benefit me at all, and is very frustrating but I tried all the same, (which will help me in the future.) If you have to win by using underhandednes, then you "win" by cheating, if you really do perceive that you won anything. Cheaters don't really win ever, and aren't satisfied and frustrated overall, which makes sense. It explains a lot that I have seen here I think.
I am not perfect and I am not always right, but I do know when people think their aggression or tactics can buy them a win or pass off onto others the idea that one comes out on top. Whether one liners or long drawn out posts, I will call anyone on all tactics and hope others do the same for me. Its not just for you, I do this for, but anyone. Bring real accusations against our common choice of religion..Christianity. I think its the best worldview out there, and don't choose to particularly go after other Christians, unless I see them in error and they welcome such things.What are some of the other tactics in the past? The ad homs, the Calling people liars, going after your personal information and then releasing it like that one time, the "swarm tactics", the extra accounts paranoid thingy (as if that would help Idky)?? But they always have the same tactics. What else do they do? There are quite a few tactics. I am actually going to start listing them.
If only they would engage strictly the "argument" tactic. Oh well.I asked you to stop relying on the No True Scotsman tactic several times but it didn't help. You accuse other people of making bad arguments, but most of yours are obscurantism and diversion and name calling and apparently driven by unconscious projection, since you accuse other people of the very qualities you possess in abundance.
I mentioned blankets in an offhand quip and it's suddenly become an important issue. It never was; the Europeans would have slaughtered the natives one way or another in any case, but you (along with everyone else) ignored everything else that I said. Arguing over blankets is an easy diversion, since it's the easiest thing to discredit, which is no big deal to me since it was the least damning of the things I've said tonight, most of which went unanswered.
I don't hate Christians. I don't think the world would be better off without the people who do good who also happen to be Christian. What I hate is blind devotion to divisive and destructive dogmas that conceal their worst features behind their brightest lipstick, who preach love...but only if you convert. Who tell you not to cast the first stone but judge and damn others as easily as fish breathe water.
There are many good people doing good work in God's name. In spite of Christianity.Juice, You can't ask me to stop asking people to be reasonable and I explained what in fact, I was doing. If you care to point out any particulars and what you had a problem with in particular (in an example) I would look at that for sure. I don't engage in name calling and if I do call a name, it is usually very warranted and not just thrown out there. It wouldn't make sense for me to do the very thing I asked others to stop doing, or they at least could then point out my hypocrisy. I mean really point it out, and not just say, liar or hypocrite! So I will take your initial chides in that context.
Regarding the blankets, and comments from Chasuk when he had been gone and came back, then the other responses....there was no dishonesty from me, but some confusion perhaps. I don't claim to have read every last post to its final detail, but I have shown that when questioned and accused, I go back and try to look things over again. I don't know what to do more than that. How many posts does this thread have now? It wasn't a diversion, the argument about blankets.. Its a large part of the story actually.
Is there anything that you alluded to there that was missed that you want me to address? I am sorry if I missed something... I have a lot going on here also at home and am a pretty busy person. If you ask in particular, I can look at a copy paste or something for sure.
I am actually in agreement with you when you share you like the ones who do good and are Christians, but not those that say one thing but dress up as something else, and are quick to damn others. Jesus didn't either, and I am glad you don't hate Christians... I think many actually do, unfortunately.
You seem to define Christianity differently than me, so I wonder what that is. You say many people do good work in God's name despite Christianity... I think Christianity is the teachings of Jesus... Not the RCC or the additions of man to his words. To those that follow....well God bless them, they are too few and far between. I hope to be more Christlike in my actions in the future, and don't claim to be perfect. In these debate types of settings, I try to get there to be fairness when often there are no governing rules for all. That is why I try to appeal to basic things that I think we all agree on.What you have described there are the Evangelical christians based in the US.Again judging a worldwide religion based on the narrow minded view of how American evangelicals behave.I for starters have never liked that branch of Christianity which was created for money.
Orthodox Christians are by far more than evangelicals on this,do you hear them damming people to hell???Have you ever seen how Christianity is practiced in the rest of the planet other than the US?I have.
What an interesting post... Even when shown a mirror you still insist that you are morally superior. I have been using your tactics against you all day and you have screamed that they were unfair... but when shown they are your tactics then you make no acknowledgment other to say that me using them against you was unfair.
You don't want to raise the bar... you just want to find some way to win.
That's pretty sad because you are the only one playing. You seem to think that we are trying to win popularity contests or score points... we arent. There is no one around keeping track of anything... and while we may like some of the people on here we will likely never meet or be friends... at most we'll laugh with each other on line occasionally but to say we are "friends" shows an very underdeveloped sense of what true friendship is.
The veiled insult about me wasting time on a more regular basis is also an example of immaturity and inconsistency... first you say you want to stop insults then you make one... And the level of insult also implies that you don't understand adult situations and priorities.
You really want to make friends but you don't know how... You percieve me as having friends that are just people agreeing with me and see it as us ganging up on you when we coincidentally share the same opinion... That makes it easier to dismiss what is a flaw with your argument by saying that other's wouldn't agree with me if they weren't friends with me. Which is also kind of sad.
I am asking... sincerely and very much without malice... that you refrain from responding to my posts and refrain from writing posts about me... It's nothing personal and I can't force you... of course... but you ruin my experience on the forums. If you can't respect that then you need to ask yourself why. That request also goes for your "friend".Melissa, You didn't show me a mirror, you showed accusations. Be fair please. You don't use my tactics, I am against using any tactics, and people are fed up with me reiterating what I do value. I value logic, reasoning and facts. You didn't use those against me.
I don't need to win actually, but if you are going to win, I ask that you try and get a fair win. I don't care who wins, and am a fan of, let the best one with the best ideas win, with the least tactics! I know people don't like me for this, as I sound like I am whining or repetitive in my requests. I ask that not for me, but for all of us. I do want to help be a part of inspiring to raise the bar. If you notice, I am not usually in these forums because the bar is so low. What is the point? The guy with the best ideas isn't allowed to make fair points.
I beg to differ, about being the only one trying to play, as you very clearly want to win at all costs. I don't care about popularity, but I care that people that would normally seem not to esteem immoral tactics, will do so for a friend if they are engaging in that kind of thing. I don't want to be popular and if you notice, I am doing just fine in achieving that! lol (Its a good thing its not breaking my heart I am so not liked around here..... I don't miss that obvious fact) I don't think you are real true friends or anything, and really I don't know, and use that term losely and feel its safe to assume you are at least online friend, or that they have a common perceived enemy, that being Christians. Which was all the more odd by Christians themselves.. that was a first for me lol.
The comment about time on here, was in response to your counting my posts and hours on here. That was kind of strange to me, and I only said that to show that I am actually not on here that much, and work a lot away from the computer and home. Don't force that as an insult, a lot of people are on here a lot that I see, not just you. Implying over and over that I am obsessive, or especially with you as you tried to imply over and over, was kind of strange, to be fair.
You may not believe me, but I am actually not trying to win friends here though friends are nice. I actually have some HubPage friends through my hubs and we comment each other back and forth. I treasure those people. I also enjoy debate and testing my own worldviews to see if what people are accusing could possibly be true. So I once in a while come in places like this, especially when I saw the provocative title, and started in. It feels like I am being forced to debate while blindfolded and with a hand behind my back dealing with all the extra junk, instead of just attacking the points head on as we each give them. As for friends and agreeing with you, I think you don't actually make good points these last few days, and quite the opposite. So its kind of fair to me to assume when people come in with glowing compliments, I do truly doubt those almost, and don't forget I have seen a lot. It just reminds me of other people that I did know were friends or rather, "same side takers" very often, not really friends. Having common enemies rather.
I can't, with all due respect, and also without malice, not refrain from responding to your posts. Not sure why you would ask that, though I guess I can maybe understand why you might. If you come up in other posts from other people, then you come up. I am just being totally honest and fair in answering you, and don't like being told or requested to say or not say certain things. In fairness, I also won't ask the same of you.
If I ruin your experience on the forums, please consider why that is, especially in light of how you now know my major points about how I hope things to be fair, etc. My friend is a true friend not an imaginary friend. You really have run away with what you perceive to be friendship issues with me. He lives in a different state, and that little bit of strange accusation there needs to be faced head on. Sorry to disappoint you, but if you go back and look we can not possibly be the same people. Perhaps in time, if you watch more closely you will see that anyway. I don't have that kind of time and energy to keep logging in and out at light speed, nor do I see what the benefit would even be in doing that. If I upset you so, please refrain from reading my posts. I have found for me, that can be very helpful, and you will see me do that as well on occasion, though I don't announce it. I just stop responding to people and truly don't read their upsetting posts.
I DO wish you the very best in life, truly, even if you never speak to me again. I really do. Take care Melissa.
Melissa said,
"Liar. I said that pox-infected blankets likely didn't happen... but I never said that was what spread small-pox in the first place. You are lying to say that i said that 17 million people didn't die. Prove it. I'm not mad that you are a liar... but you shouldn't call yourself a REAL christian."
Phoenix said,
"There is a difference between small pox infected blankets and deliberately small pox exposed blankets. Whatever the case it may have been spread by blankets. Deliberate or not. If you would word it correctly there would be no confusion. Try to be civil."
I am responding...
Ok, I see now, what she really means by pox infected blankets, are blankets that were deliberately exposed and contaminated with smallpox. and to be used as a biological weapon.Correct she is misstating it and isn't differentiating between "proposed" deliberate contamination of blankets by General Jeffrey Amherst, and blankets that might have been exposed to smallpox by missionaries incidentally. She thinks you are a mind reader of incoherence.
CHRISTIAN:one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ.
If most Christians tried to act Christ-like instead of quoting Bible verses to hurt and control other people; the world would be a more peaceful and greater place to live.I agree with your sentiments there. People can say anything, and they do, but the actions show if they are really following Jesus, which isn't easy to do.
Oceansnsunsets, do you see the question that I asked you, above?
Would you do me the courtesy of answering it, please?Does it make it more clear? Sure, all the explanations have given more insight into the points made, and being more clear and concise can't ever hurt and can generally help. Thus, why I asked the questions I did. As you likely saw at times last night, the sheer amount of posts were flying by and pages were being added quickly. Add to that, the demands to go back and find other things. I tried hard to answer other questions missed as well like by juice.
I never mind people asking if I see a question, and the only one I see for me is asking if its more clear. Some....I got the gist last night, as I understood more by other posters as well. Thanks for trying to be helpful in that way.
It doesn't change the original part of the debate that was given, but that one segment and how it was unclear has been made a bit more clear thanks to everyone including you.
obviously....world would be better place minus all abrahamic religions...abrahamic religion is among worst inventions of human race...
So where were we?
Oh yea Christianity brought civilization and a better world because in the last 500 years they gave the world hospitals, charity, and colleges.
Meanwhile the Buddhist side of the aisle has brought, well, I haven't seen anything yet.
Anyone claiming that they are a Christian yet deny the Great Commission or attack it constantly with illogical arguments are not following the core tenet of Jesus, so therefore their claim to being a Christian, means nothing ie they can claim they are a fig newton for all I care.
The Great Commission although undertaken by human beings and comes with fault and mistake is what makes : 500 years they gave the world hospitals, charity, and colleges- possible.
Now the claim that "Christianity causes war". Oftentimes people will make the claim and offer "the crusades". They will immediately contradict themselves by describing the actual event. They will use terms as " restoring " response to". These are accurate terms to describe the event but are a contradiction to the premise. Christians were being killed and sacred pilgrimage sites were being destroyed. That was the "cause"- the response was the effect.
If not for Christianity, Islam, would have advanced further than Spain, much further. It could be easily argued that today that except for Christianity, we could all be under Sharia law and Mark Knowles could be wearing a burka.Haha I am just going to sit here and smile.
Seems like a lot of assumptions to me. Doesn't it bother you that you haven't convinced anybody, yet? I can post a big list of assumptions, too.
Let's see, where were we:
Since the decline of monolithic Christianity in the middle ages we have modern medicine and science, philosophy, the separation of church and state, democracy, capitalism, freedom of speech, equality, religious tolerance, etc., etc.
And Christianity has built a bunch of schools and hospitals made possible by the scientists and educators that fought tooth and nail against the stifling anti-intellectualism of Christian dogma. Well, technically that's not true, either, since they borrowed the models for schools and hospitals from the pre-Christian societies that made Christianity possible.
The thing I love about unfounded assertions is that you can say anything and then just ignore any valid criticisms. Dogma is a wonderful thing. It's like being in an invisible bubble that is impervious to logic and reason.But my claims are backed up with reality. Your claims have no merit.
If you do a search on hospitals you will probably get 50/50 obvious religious foundation type hospitals. Saint Such And Such, Baptist Memorial etc.etc etc etc "Historically, hospitals were very often founded and funded by religious orders..."
Most schools in my country anyway were usually one room churches in the beginning. Towns all across the USA built a Church and taught everyone to read and write and taught the kids. Later usually that property was donated to public schools.
Many of the top colleges in the country were founded by Christians or Christianity. Harvard, Yale and most of the colonial colleges were Christian founded.
Charities, well thats obvious, thats what most religions do and I think goes without saying.
Sticking with the OP, Buddhism just wasnt as proactive, but if they would like to offer rebuttal, I would like to hear it.But why is it important to have the position? Why is it important to be part of the majority? How does it make you better? Has it enriched your life in any way? Is it important that hospitals have christian support or a christian name? Does it make it better than other hospitals, buddhist or atheist? Why does it matter to you?
Because it is an answer to the OP. It is not important to be part of a majority, its just an answer to the OP. It has enriched everyone's life because our great grandparents went to the schools, we go to these colleges, we use those hospitals and need that charity. It is not important that these establishments are predominantly or were predominantly Christian, its simply a statement of the facts. If a hospital is good, no it doesn't make one better than the other, just the quality of the care of the particular hospital makes it good or bad, no matter who founded it. It matters to me because it answers the OP.
PS: If I am seriously injured or sick I am going to the "nearest hospital" it doesn't matter who founded it. So what is more likely? I go to Baptist Memorial or Buddhist General? I go to Saint Lukes or Atheist Community Hospital?
If we are honest with ourselves, for just a moment, An ambulance driver would become thoroughly confused about the locations of a Buddhist General Hospital or an Atheist Community Hospital if I asked to go there. He would probably think I have a concussion.Silly. If Christianity didn't exist, well-intentioned people would still build hospitals and schools. You're confusing good-will with religion. In my experience, they have nothing to do with each other.
Silly
woulda coulda shoulda doesnt really mean anything now does it?That your best? Your attitude seems to indicate contempt for history (and reality). Why are (were) Christian nations the most affluent? Didn't have anything to do with their egotistical mission to take over the world, did it? Western nations steal the land from indigenous peoples and exploit third-world countries and then pat themselves on the back for building schools and hospitals...in New York and Texas. Oh, I forgot, since no real Christian has ever committed a sin, it was the millions of anti-Christians who controlled public office and large corporations who did all the stealing and exploiting. They live in Christian countries and go to church and invoke God and Jesus, but they don't count because it's inconvenient for your propaganda. Woulda coulda shoulda indeed.
It will suffice. Christianity actually got it done. First you say Christianity didn't bring these good things. Then you contradict yourself or concede and admit they did, but claim "maybe someone else would have". If wishes were horses? But hey you still have the opportunity? When are you going to go for it?
I'm not interested in the rest of the irrational diatribe. Have an awesome day!Weak. You never address any of the real criticisms and restrict yourself to arguing in circles about trivialities. "Christianity actually got it done". What, the bloodshed and exploitation or the building of hospitals? They got both done. Do I have an opportunity to burn heretics or build a school? If Christians had restricted themselves to building hospitals and schools I could have commended them, but this is starting to sound entirely too much like: "It wasn't me, baby. I wasn't myself. I promise I'll never hit you again." There's a reason why people mistrust your dogma.
My apologies to the Christians who actually do good in the world. I might not support your beliefs, but I support your good intentions. I just wish people didn't need a 2,000 year old crutch to justify being good.
/endI am sorry that you contradicted yourself. I don't want to wade into all your emotions, hypotheticals, and bizarre analogies. Anyone can become emotional, spin, rant, create wild portrayals. I am just interested in what can reasonably be proved or disproved and a fair overall assessment. Good day.
And I was like baby, baby, baby, oh
Like baby, baby, baby, no
Like baby, baby, baby, oh
I thought you'd always be mine, mine
Are you a doctor? Do you make donations? If you do, I completely respect that... Is it important though to point it out to the world, as if it were a bit of useful information?
And trains, planes and automobiles were built by industry who fought tooth and nail against the stagnant Bourgeoisie-like cosmetic industry and capitalist dogma that we all know is their real agenda and well, that is not exactly true either because this and that and the other, and they all stole all their material from well known stand up comics and well, its just the horror of it all after all.
Phoenix, you're not making sense anymore. You've tried to make it seem that valid points are invalid, like your points.
Please log out and log back in as oceansnsunsets. You need to take 5 to catch your breath.As far as I know, Oceans has other engagements, more than likely all evening. Some kind of Sicilian Family Reunion, or something like that.
So PhoenixV and oceansnsunsets are the same person.... do you have some kind of split personality or do you just need the support for everything you say and since no one else may you might as well invent someone that does?
Just like God and Jesus for justice and morality.I think the reason several anti-Christians on Hubpages are claiming that we are the same person is that they want to attempt to intimidate and coerce us into silence by threatening us with TOS of no more than one account in the forum.
artblack01 wrote:
"So PhoenixV and oceansnsunsets are the same person.... do you have some kind of split personality or do you just."
PhoenixV wrote, "I think the reason several anti-Christians on Hubpages are claiming that we are the same person is that they want to attempt to intimidate and coerce us into silence by threatening us with TOS of no more than one account in the forum."
Ocean: Perhaps. What artblack says and others that are counting on it to be true (lol), shows more of what I have kind of been saying all along. People will count on something that is far less likely, and goes against the evidences or the facts, to maintain something they would rather believe to be true, than what is more rational to believe is true. The goals could be many and varied. A couple of things that could be achieved are the following:
- An attempt to try and just discredit two friends that are on the same page and making fair points, because they don't have anything else to go after fair points with. (not having better points, logic and reasoning, but not accepting that.)
- An attempt to do what phoenix says, encourage people to report multiple names being used by one person in the forums (or more). I invited them to do that, to test this lol.
- A distraction from what is really being said, so a smokescreen of sorts.
- Just another version of an accusation that can be thrown out to people that don't deserve it, Christians in this case again. (a favorite and obvious past-time of many on HubPages Forums) Which feeds some need, but that won't also count as an evidence to them that something in their own thinking is awry.)
- A proverbial stomping of the foot at people they just want to be so wrong, but can't show how. Its as if some are saying, "They are the same, maybe even multiple personalities! I don't care that its less likely to be true, hopefully people won't think too hard about it see how silly I am for the insistence!) Reality check...not for me, but for those doing this. "You must pay, because I want you to be wrong but can't show how!"
Funny thing is, no one has suggested how the using of multiple accounts would "help" anyone here in a forum setting, to keep up what would be needed to play that game anyway. I don't see ANY benefit, and much more frustration if I were to try and do that. It only goes to expose the person that keeps this tactic up. Its illogical and unreasonable for reasons stated, besides the ones that were already obvious.I haven't done it here but I have done it myself, actually pretended to be a different person. It was for the purposes of playing devils advocate, I wanted to see how the other half lived so to speak. I also have caught people in the act of doing it themselves, and there wouldn't be a rule against it if it didn't happen.
"It only goes to expose the person that keeps this tactic up. Its illogical and unreasonable for reasons stated, besides the ones that were already obvious."
I agree with this 100%
"- An attempt to try and just discredit two friends that are on the same page and making fair points, because they don't have anything else to go after fair points with. (not having better points, logic and reasoning, but not accepting that.)"
Why double team, it's almost the same thing as having two accounts in a way. Because you could be in the same room telling each other what to say and so on. It's more funny to me than anything else, and I am okay with you guys, I rather enjoy debating with both of you....
"Wonder Twin Powers, ACTIVATE!!!!"I'm flattered that you consider us "super friends" with extraordinary powers, although I am completely unfamiliar with the show or theme or book, whatever.
I think of myself as a type of Road Runner or Pink Panther, you know, something cool like that and Ocean as a type of Scooby Doo, (or elmer fudd?!)
Beep Beep!!!!..........Oh...whatever! Fighting words! lol @Elmer Fudd, you are in for it now.
I DO remember the wonder twins, though I didn't see them much on cartoons..
lol @ super friends with extraordinary powers...aww that is too kind and this whole thing has me smiling because its too funny.C'mon you have ACME arguments that never get off the ground or explode on ya. lol
oh? really? prove it!! (those thinking we are one and the same are going to love this little exchange in particular...lol)
acme arguments.....whatever!Seriously, you will have a debate opponent right on the edge of a precipice, and then the whole thing comes out from under your feet. Or the ACME argument becomes so stretched out that it slingshots you out of the point.
see: Wile E. CoyoteMeanwhile all they see of me is the dust from my feet, unfettered. Or me walking away, unaffected with that debonair walk the Panther has, to the tune of some pretty hepcat jazz.
LOL
That would be why you hide your real name and hide behind a fake name. Pride.
I see you swaggering with.... Oh wait - who are you again?
You know it is against the Hubpages' TOS to use this many fake personas - right?I can't believe Mark just pulled this out.... my oh my, Mark, you are so obvious and it seems very desperate.
Mark said, "You know it is against the Hubpages' TOS to use this many fake personas - right?"
More accusations of others that aren't based in fact. Testing it could prove one way or the other of course, but I don't think that is the only goal.
This multiple account thing was desperate from the minute it began, also by a person making very poor arguments but not being able to deal with that evidently.
Notice, he goes after all people fairly, with fake personas (not..) and judges them with a put down as to why, pride this time? lol
Self soothing techniques come in all forms. Things must be worse than I thought.
It would all be more funny if it weren't so sad, that some need to rely so hard on what is less likely, less logical and reasonable, to be the truer thing in one's mind. Tactics at play repeatedly, show something deeper going on. I have said it before, but it bears repeating.Sorry that you don't like following the rules. But - I don't blame you for hiding your identity.
I would too if I had the moral courage you have.
Well done. I expect Jesus is....... Well p no matter. I would hide my identity as well if I acted as you do.
I have said it before, but it bears repeating. You have no moral compass. Oh well. Are you enjoying congratulating yourself? LOLMark, I do follow the rules on HubPages. Test it, contact them and see. Your goal is obvious, but your actions are not warranted nor based in fact. Stop wanting to know my real name, or leave me alone in this regard, as many people here have names that are not real, yet you don't go after them. You have a very awful way you conduct yourself here, and its your choice. Go on, keep it up. It keeps exposing that whatever worldview you are operating out of isn't working for you. Or, in fairness, you just choose to be this way, either way, your words speak for themselves, as mine do for me. I know its hard to accept, clearly, but you must.
I don't care that you say I have no moral compass. Its rather affirming really from someone that acts in the ways you do toward those you simply disagree with. Remember, needing or wanting others to be wrong will ever be the thing that makes them wrong. Acting bully like, while alluding to how you don't blame people for being afraid or hiding, only exposes you all the more. You do know, you are taking the most obvious, easy way out, right? If you were intellectually strong and moral yourself, you would not need to do this. I don't make you do it, you choose it. I could use the word here that is defined by these actions you take. I will leave it to you to come up with it. Why do you do this to yourself, is the biggest question anyone could ask? Don't you want better?
lol, wake up, wake up!! Sorry, sounds like a nice dream though! ;p
One thing that keys people in to the idea that you may in fact be the same person is the apparent similarities you both share. As much as you would like to say you are two separate people you have the same exact subjects in hubs and they are fairly random which is also shared trait between both of you. Your writing styles are also identical the only thing different is the personalities which sometimes change between you which could mean you are two people sharing the same two profiles which only one of you has authored or put together or you are in fact the same person playing two different characters but sharing the same... Responses in differing emotional contexts.
Clever.
You guy(s) are pretty good.They (he/she) have certainly convinced me the world would be a better place with fewer Christians.
Hopefully Jesus will hurry up and come back to rapture them off the planet so we can clean up the mess.Sorry that you don't make any sense Mark, and that your irrationality gets the best of you that you say things like the above. You show why there is no point sometimes in even trying to debate rationally, even for very patient types. Its making everyone weary. Your worldview has turned out to be quite negative, in the way you express it.
I can imagine that you would want a world with less people like us, that so easily show you to be wrong (never mind your lashing out), would be a better world to you Mark.
You acknowledge a mess, I don't disagree there is a mess, perhaps you are attributing a mess to the wrong people. People who want less of other people, even for good or poor reasons, doesn't help to make a better world.
I think we write very differently, but have been friends for years. He joined HubPages, and then did the contests.... of course we have many same hub types, but doing double?
Its such a incredible stretch, and I know for a fact we are two separate people. Its kind of humorous watching people though and kind of pathetic too. I invited the first person to contact HubPages, which probably has been done, with the strong need to silence, and here we both are. Remove us if we are violating TOS, but look inward for whatever is so upsetting if we are not, that some NEED us to be proven wrong about something, anything at all...
Imagine, people pretending not knowing of two people that know each other well, as if that is such an odd thing. I met this person in a debate group ironically, when atheists were trying to do swarming tactics and attack on the net. We have debated certain types of people for years, seen all the different tactics they pull out, and what you see is from that.
To whoever wants to think we are the same, that is fine, but its a lie and there are ways to test it. Do so... does everyone feel happy now that attention was diverted from the real points of this thread again and the topics that came from it? Well done Mark lolLets follow this idea through, the same person idea...
If we are the same person (though we are not) then what? You have ONE person that is able to do what the two of us do, and how does that help you guys? lol
Trying to find similarities of very good friends will always be able to be done, but I guarantee you, this is why we are not banned from the forums nor will we be. I can't totally speak for Phoenix, but I don't do ban worthy things, but I mean more for the reasons some opponents are giving, we simply aren't breaking TOS. I don't see him doing any ban worthy things either. I see a lot of things that probably should not be allowed done by others though. People can test it, they likely have...and here we are. I am not a HubPages staff or anything either. Its true, we aren't one person. That is the hard crushing blow of reality lol
If we are one, isn't that even worse for those against us? think about it....
It was an old super hero cartoon I grew up with, sorta. I don't know about extraordinary powers though. Ha ha.
You and Oceans seems to know each other so well.
Road Runner and Pink Panther? Hmmm.Yea I am from a little bit older generation- Jetson's, Bugs Bunny. Whereas Oceans is a mutant teenage turtle. Ohps, I don't mean she is an actual mutant teenage turtle, I just mean from that generation, yea that's what I meant.
Thats right....you are way older than me, lol, jk
The Road Runner comments stung especially, that was one of my favorites! I loved the Superheroes, Little Rascals, and even remember Speed Racer lol, and many more.
I loved land of the lost, that was kind of fun. I love the older cartoons, they were the best on a Saturday morning..
I never liked the teenage mutant ninja turtles, nerd lolBy "way older" do you mean I am more mature? Yes I agree.
Speed racer was cool, by Little Rascals you mean Our Gang? Alfalfa singing was my favorite.lol, such desperation haha
Yes, our gang, and yes Alfalfa singing and to Darla was fun, even if painful at times. They had lots of old ones, I loved them all.
Personally I could care less, but you must admit that you guys parrot each other a lot even if you aren't the same person. One might even believe you were twins, mentally anyway.
You say,
"Anyone claiming that they are a Christian yet deny the Great Commission or attack it constantly with illogical arguments are not following the core tenet of Jesus, so therefore their claim to being a Christian, means nothing ie they can claim they are a fig newton for all I care."
That makes sense. How does one claim one thing, no matter what it is, but then act opposite or attack the core tenet as seen, then remain that "thing?" It is illogical. When we see things like that, it is fair to ask what would explain that, or what makes sense of that? If we can do this with ourselves but not have a good answer, then why not address that? Maybe we want to be on the side of one thing, but also want something more (fill in the blank______) whatever that may be. Maybe we just engage in a lot of poor thinking an reasoning for some reason. If so though, why would that be? What does it gain anyone?
Other points are good as well, and if we just sat back and agreed with some of the reasoning we see displayed sometimes, we would need to stop driving to drop off food for a food pantry, because in so doing we could accidentally really injure someone. What kind of issues are going on that a person would blame the idea of giving food to the needy AS the fault of the accident and needs to be stopped immediately? Then we have very hungry families not having food as a result of the small chance of a problem that might happen (though it does a very small percentage of the time.) We could demonize volunteer fire fighters as well as well as all kinds of things...
In the name of all things good, let us consider why we want to demonize innocent Jesus in this case. ONLY in the case of Jesus and Christianity do I see such insistence that it is evil in some way. People just know better than to do that.
There is great evil in the world, and how that plays out and encouraging others to think as poorly hurts the greater good, and doesn't make this world a better place, but worse. Enabling others that do this, also doesn't help to make the world a better place, but worse. If we think, hey that person has a point, and stop doing all good things, for fear of what sometimes happens, then we also don't contribute to a better world but a worse one. In these cases, are the objectives of something good, or something evil, achieved? (whatever those things might be) It isn't good, that is for sure.
You can't! You are trapped in a never-ending battle! It can last days, months, or even sometimes--years!
Whether on this list or in my real life, even if I am completely silent people are always trying to get me to believe in something I know is false, or that I am not for in any way.... especially if they think it's a good thing and it really isn't.
I don't find that many Christians are trying to force beliefs on anyone here or on the net. That is a twist of things..more often if you look, they are responding to assaults on their religion.
Some would like people to think Christians are truly forcing something on them, (not saying you are doing that here, but it echoes suggestions of that), but I don't see that. It doesn't even really make sense.
Even if Jehovah's witnesses or Mormons come to your door, one is totally free to say, "oh, no thank you..." and even THEN, no one was trying to force anything. I am not one of those religions, but I had to speak up at this idea. Its just not true. People are free to do and believe what they want. On the other hand, what doesn't make sense that I observe over and over, is people that seem to really lack a belief in a god, spending a lot of their life debating and talking about how it can't be true. Again, no one is forcing that... A good question then might by, "why is that?" Does anything explain this? I think there is something that does.Well, then look at it from another perspective, create a profile and then make the claim that you are a nonbeliever. And by the way, what is it you are here doing yourself? Trying to promote?
"Even if Jehovah's witnesses or Mormons come to your door, one is totally free to say, "oh, no thank you..." " This may be true for the most part but then what is up with all these groups, like "God hates Fags" or the Anti Evolutionists trying to get creationism taught in science class? And all the other protests for benign things, as well as all the missionary groups, I don't think there has ever been a time when I was treated nicely or fairly by someone of faith when I said I had none. It's called passive aggressive.
Why do I come here to debate a God I know is not real? Because of these issues. Because Someone has tried to force my son to be taught Creationism in his school, because men in suits pass out Bibles in front of the street at his school, because I had kids my age when I was in high school preaching during lunch out loud and disturbing my peace. How do you like being told by your parents and other Christian family members that you will go to hell if you don't believe as they do, or being disowned by other family members or long time friends just for saying, I don't believe in God.... or even as little as saying I don't know if there is a God.
You say they don't force you, that is a lie.
Why do I come here? Because I am here to be counted, it's kind of like taking a survey or voting, if you don't voice your beliefs no one will believe that anyone believes such a thing. Does that make sense?
It's like a protest.
And I know what you were gonna say, you think we are here because we really want to believe in God, all Christians say this. It's what they've been taught to say.
I feel your pain, Chris. Best you can do is just overlook it when it pops up in the list.
Sadly, Chasuk started something worthwhile here and it's degenerated quite a bit.Maybe someone can analyze why it degenerates and how and whom the main culprits are?
I smell new hub topic!!!
Chris, try not posting in it anymore. Might help.
- Chris Hughposted 13 years ago0
Serious? Now I'm on another one, about the Bible being historically accurate and if so do I believe its supernatural claims. I'm simultaneously bored and annoyed. Why does it show up on my feed? Is it because I made the mistake of commenting on that thread?
Up at the top right you can unfollow threads if that is what you mean? But not sure if it will help. It will stop the green thingy from showing up.
Yes. When you comment you also automatically "follow" the thread. Go in and "unfollow" it.
- Chris Hughposted 13 years ago0
Oh, wait...the little circle with the x in it. That's it! That's my, not meaning anyone, salvation!
No, there is no way to filter the general forum feed. BUT, if you want to stay away from religion and/or politics, you can bring up the main forum feed page and search categories on the left side of the screen. It's a little more cumbersome, but it works.
As for it appearing on your feed, yep, it's because you commented. To change that - go above your status line on your personal feed and click filters. Then click forums and uncheck 'in topics that you posted on.' Save your changes and you're good to go.
As for being one's brothers keeper..here are my views on that. (If people are inclined to agree that we are to indeed be our brother's keeper.) I agree we are to encourage each other to do good, and to carry out the good news, and obey Jesus. Helping one's brothers and sisters to do that is good.
That is what I am trying to do if you notice, not just show how people are using poor reasoning in their attacking of Christianity falsely. It is hopefully an encouragement to other Christians that may be encountering this kind of stuff for the first time, as I remember how that felt so long ago. People might think they are really believing a bad thing for all the incessant lies we see put out here daily on these threads. Help support those that may be caught up in all of this, not knowing what to believe.
Brother's keepers don't attack their brothers. A true and good brother's keeper helps their brother to see how they MIGHT be in error, despite more put downs and tactics. Don't you see....there really IS good and evil in this world, and it doesn't come prancing around as an angel dressed in a good costume and a devil with a pitchfork... Its active, and wreaking havoc and isn't so obvious.
The favorite tactic? Lies, in all its nasty forms. Dishonesty, distortions and broad brushing are just some. A brother's keeper that sees it will just point it out hopefully and help their brothers to see it too. I agree with you though in that we should also try and stop any person that says they are a Christian, or claiming to kill in the name of Jesus and try and ask them, "where you do you find the command for that from Jesus?" Tell them they are in fact breaking the commands of Jesus, and should instead love, forgive and pray for even their enemies! If you are suggesting that a good brother's keeper will indeed do all they can to stop any murdering of people, then you won't get any disagreements with me.
Clear thinking is not something I take for granted when I see it anymore...it is endangered, it seems to me.Clear thinking? You believe in a majikal super being with no basis in reality. How is that clear thinking exactly?
“Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." Says Jesus - Matthew 10:21Bad cherry picking there. Its about persecution for being a Christian.
No - it is a prophesy that your religion will cause conflict. Even so - you continue - why is that?
Being employed causes conflict. Me and the other employees feel like our boss persecutes us on a daily basis.
No the quote by Jesus was about how people would persecute them for their beliefs, yes even their brothers and sisters. The same kind of persecution that brought the death of 100 million human beings at the hands of atheist dictators.SO - you agree that Jesus said that this will cause conflict. Good - that is a start. Not sure what the black haired thing has to do with it. Again - you are being unreasonable and do not seem to remember what you just said.
This is a prediction that - if you do as instructed and go around preaching hate mongering nonsense - it will cause conflict. Lying and changing it to mean "persecution," is not reasonable. I don't see the woprd "persecution," anywhere there. Sorry.So that makes it ok for Christians to persecute, in the case of hubpages, atheists? An atheist cannot start a thread without it turning into a debate on Christianity. The only persecution I've seen of Christians has been through return fire when you decide to jump in on a conversation started by atheists, or theists of a different belief (other forums). Honestly it's got to the point where trying to reason with any of you is pointless. You don't care to understand, you only want something to refute so you can keep going.
The quote that was referenced was about real persecution, life and death persecution for beliefs is what Jesus was referring to. Not drama queen forum persecution.
Persecution is Persecution, it doesn't matter how you try to sugar coat it, or how you try and justify making it ok to do something, it's still the same thing. You can't change the meaning of a word just because you feel it's ok to do so.
Mark, in response to your verse, I will post the surrounding verses also and lets all look at it fairly. It is speaking of the persecution that will come to the disciples at least...
Matthew 10:16 - 23, as opposed to just vs 21. Jesus says...
16 “Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. 17 Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, 18 and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles. 19 When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. 20 For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. 21 Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, 22 and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes."
So what exactly was the point you wanted us to see in this verse, and in taking it in its context?
For me, it is speaking of a time when that will happen. When I see this world, it doesn't seem so crazy to say that indeed, brother may deliver up his brother to death and other people within families. When I look at this world, I actually see major strife in families, and they are being torn apart. It looks to me like Jesus was not speaking in error there. Notice the next verse..."and you will be hated by all for my names sake..."
Jesus is speaking of what we see, and have seen in the past. We see this stuff happening in the world. The verse you share affirms what you are trying to use as something against Christianity it seems. I hope you will care about that, I really do.Yes - it is telling you that your irrational beliefs will cause conflict and fights. Quite right too. I don't need to be the son of god to warn you that going around preaching irrational nonsense will cause a fight.
You lost me - sorry. I don't understand this line of attack. All you are really doing is convincing me your religion causes a lot of fights and belief in majik damages your ability to reason.
Your anti religion belief system has killed so many people. Its understandable that no one here would vote for one.
We get to vote whether you guys believe nonsense or not? Since when?
More people have died in the name of God than any other reason on Earth, anyone being killed from atheism or anti religion is such a small number it's negligible. It's always been one religion over another, science has always played the victim in some way, shape, or form.
So far we have The Crusades, Manifest Destiny/Europeans Invasion and missionary ideology, Salem, Terrorism, and just about every war in history.
Mark, did you read the context? Mark said,
"Yes - it is telling you that your irrational beliefs will cause conflict and fights. Quite right too. I don't need to be the son of god to warn you that going around preaching irrational nonsense will cause a fight."
You can't just say it is saying something it isn't. He is touching on the incredible evil that is in the world, and how they will have to deal with it. He isn't denying his own worldview, but yes, the REAL TRUTH (not the other truths, no one really goes after all the other religions, for a reason..), will bring trouble, and the bible speaks of why. It is because it is real, and true, and THOSE THINGS, are what evil really cares about.
Its such a good message and is so true, that will truly save and change lives, that the evil in the world wants you to not get to be a part. It uses distortions and lies to do so, and hatred, even unto wanting to kill people.
That is irrational for people to want to kill others just because of a differing worldview, if indeed it is JUST another religion or worldview. I hope that you might care about at least yourself to consider that this in its own way, is its own evidence. The irrationality on the part of the world to want to do such evils to people that only believe differently, is meant to be a clue to those that want to see.
Christianity isn't for wimps, clearly. Its the best thing, but will never be forced by God onto people that don't want it, want to reject it for any reasons. My constant harping on this point of people using poor reasons to reject it are to also help point this out. I actually care about people and that they don't miss this if they really might care about truths of matters."That is irrational for people to want to kill others just because of a differing worldview," I agree, but isn't that what all political and religious groups are doing.
As far as evil goes, what is it? Acts of hurt are evil, but this is more due to the social contract, in order to live peacefully within a society you need to work together and not hurt each other mentally or physically, this is before the Bible, this is nature and the reality of living in a social group.
Christianity isn't for wimps? Christianity isn't for anyone. God can't force something onto anyone because he doesn't exist, it's people who force God onto other people... which I believe is also evil.
You speak of truths? What are they? The Bible states many common sense truths, none of which originate from but are given credit to The Bible. I was raised a Christian but what I learned of Christianity, God and the natural world has moved me so far away from religion and anything "supernatural". I only call myself an atheist in reference to this topic but in reality, I am just a humanoid life form trying to study the universe around him. God has no place in it.
Yes, clear thinking trumps poor thinking every time, in my book. When I see it, I will give it the kudos it deserves. When I see otherwise, especially in an effort to discount a whole people or group (it isn't for fun for sure), then I will speak up.
Believing in majik damages your ability to reason.
How is that?Lets take you at your word. Show me how I have not been reasonable. Thanks.
Well, pretty much just about everything you write. You can start there.
You didnt show anything. Do try to follow along.
I dont need to show anything. You and your friend do that fine on your own.
You mean you cant show anything. Its all about syntax.
Jane, anyone can say anything they want, including all kinds of lies. People asking you to back up your words, is a good thing. Just saying things means little, we could never really discuss anything. Passing around opinions and assertions don't help, but just are more fighting, the thing that people supposedly are so against.
You and your Muppet are truly fascinating. But dont you ever get bored saying the same nonsense over and over again?
But you have to actually show "what you believe is nonsense and what reason you believe it is nonsense"- see: rationale
Otherwise WE could also just say stupid vacuous stuff like -dont you ever get bored saying the same nonsense over and over again?I'm sorry you have reading comprehension difficulties. I will say it again, slowly. Everything you write is unreasonable. So you can take anything you've written so far as an example of your unreasonableness. Do you understand now?
Well you are coming along nicely you have 1/2 of it. Now show with reason everything we have written, each and every post specifically HOW its unreasonable. But you are doing good. So far you are as consistent as flipping a coin.
Janesix, you do realize that anyone can play an easy game of just "saying" you are unreasonable? This brings nothing to the table... and is pointless and counts as nothing. Your point in trying to say one is unreasonable without proving it shows they likely were being very reasonable. If you could show how, you likely would have. If you can't back your statements, don't say them. Anyone can just say anything. I ask this of myself first, and you now, again.
One thing that would explain this behavior is that you are stuck now, having said something without thinking it through and just wanting it to be true.
As something to keep in mind, some people have been doing this for a long time, and purposely don't post unreasonable things if for no other reason than not making it so easy to justify what you want to be true. That is what this looks like, that you just WANT certain people to be unreasonable. In the mean time, guess what this looks like... someone being very unreasonable. Do show how, or maybe stop the insults, thanks. I am not perfect, right or reasonable all the time...but I try to be and I try to be fair. Do help me out....show what I said that was unreasonable. Since all my posts are, according to you, just show me, it will be easy if you are being honest.Oh MY GOD the two of you are boring. How do you manage to keep this up for hours and days at a time?
You have chosen a religion. You. It is a divisive religion. Your majikal super son says so. There are 40,000 different cults and there have been many, many wars started because of these divisions.
Yet - you are arguing that it is not divisive. How is this reasonable?
Mark, what do you think magic is? May I ask you what your theory is behind the complex life forms supported by our Universe? May I ask you to account for the orphan genes that have stumped scientists that believed in common ancestry? May I ask you to tell me your feelings behind the start of the Universe? I really want to know where you stand. Could you provide your understanding of evolution and genetic memory? Are there any instances in life where you lean on faith? Perhaps faith that your body will remember how to take that next breath? Perhaps faith in your own intelligence that gives you the confidence to mock others in the search for understanding? If you could explain to me your thoughts perhaps our conversations could go somewhere less high school, and a little more in depth.
Oh my... you know not what you do. If he honours your request... and I do mean honours... bring an open mind and pack a lunch. If he believes you are truly trying to understand you will learn a lot. If he thinks you are just wanting to argue he will eat you alive.
That's no insult to you... I just don't think you understand the reasons he is so impatient and what the insults are shorthand for.I really don't. I have not actually gotten any real information from him. I have read sarcasm and insults, some of which were directed at me for my beliefs. I really want to understand why he holds such such contempt for me just for my belief system. All I have done is asked him to explain his insults, and the reasons behind them.
I also don't understand why he thinks he can judge me or my responses based off of a fundamentalist baptist model. I think we had a decent conversation earlier, and that has been all I have been looking for on this forum. I have been a follower of Christ for less than a year, believe me I am nowhere close to a Christian clone. I still have many unanswered questions, and many problems of my own with some denominations.
I think the hostility I have found on these threads from atheists specifically has been ridiculous. Especially the comments from Mark and Randy. I think that the important thing to remember is that people are not made from a cookie cutter. We are all different, nobody shares exactly the same faith, and there is no reason to assume the worst in somebody. If one needs to assume the worst (such as saying things like cut and pasted questions) it is a sad thing. I am saddened by that persons outlook on life and people. I think I have learned from Mark, I have learned that some people are just set in their ways and there is no use in trying to have an intelligent conversation with them. There is no use in trying dispel somebodies preconceived notions about who you are (especially when they are based on age and religion) because often it is based off of their own issues and that most importantly even old men like to troll :p1. Mark is ridiculously intelligent and almost completely logical. He expects to debate on that field. He requires empirical data. There is no such data existing in most religious theologies.
2. Mark has limited patience and a long memory. There is likely no argument that you can bring forth that he hasn't already heard and dismissed. If you are making an argument that he has previously heard and answered then you are dismissed outright.
3. If you wish to debate with him you must answer his questions directly and you must acknowledge his points. Clearly.
4. You will be given ONE shot to obey his rules for debate... if you fail you are dismissed.
Yes... he is an arrogant ass at times (sorry Mark) but he also has every reason to be. With that said... the one really lengthy debate that we had... which lasted a couple weeks if I remember... was actually quite educational. He was only obnoxious a couple times and I just ignored it in favor of the actual conversation. I think that's another test of his... if you get offended by his obnoxiousness then obviously you are too emotional to debate logically... at least in his view.He sounds reasonable to me, I mean, why waste your time on arguments you've already had, especially ones that you KNOW for a FACT are as ridiculous as trying to prove that Gravity is a lie, or walking into a brick wall with your eyes closed will get you to the other side of the wall?
Some people are more tolerant then he is of stupid debates, kind of like people who teach elementary school, they are teachers so having stupid questions is par for the course.
I have experienced a lot of similar things to what you explain here. Its a struggle, because at some point I just revert to that it is pointless (near)arguing, even if my intentions are good. Its like trying to reason with a person who clobbers you on the head (with words in this case) over and over, laughs, talks about how "I can see why you are scared", and things like that.
When I take time to think things through and answer very sincerely, its like a mockery of all things good, when I am met with just a tenacious verbal clobber again. What is the point? For me, I have to trust that there are some out there that care that the behavior you describe also shows something deeper. It could be a number of things, but one thing it is not, effective debate or discussion to really try and prove any points. It works against such goals. That IS sad, and one gets weary.
I hope some see that whoever we are, and whatever we believe, our chosen worldviews can be based on good things or bad ones. Its actually NOT about who has the biggest stick, and willing to brandish it the most. I don't believe truth is relative, I think it exists and can be found for true seekers, and this includes myself..(I say to myself first in fact.) Best way I have found, was not to rule out things in advance, not to give my worldview preferred treatment, while clobbering the others, but really looking hard and being willing to face the possible truths people are spouting about what I believe. Truths stand on their own, I have found. If some teaching doesn't, it will for sure have problems.
My #1 biggest problem is people that want to redefine things, set up the game, so certain things always win, and others always lose, as if it was about scheming and who can be the most clever. Nothing explains all I see, well, except for Christianity. This behavior means it would be possible to self sabotage myself if I engaged in it. It doesn't bother me to be clobbered so much, but what bothers me others are seeing people mentally clobbering themselves more than anything in their path in life by possibly missing truths along the way. Biggest question is... what if I was wrong? Then what? Can I face that? I appreciate you Calynbana, thanks for your posts and sharing a bit more about yourself there.You have said a lot of the things I believe and have been feeling. I want to have decent conversations but most people seem only interested in beating you over the head. Mark is certainly one of the worst but he's far from the only one. Even some people who claim to be Christian seem to hold Mark in some kind of awe, as if his superior intellect means that whatever he says is automatically true. And then I get into arguments with him and then feel just terrible afterwards.
God does want us to be able to defend our faith, but not with harsh words and empty accusations. We should not be arrogant, if anything our knowledge that there is a God and what Jesus did for us should make us the most humble of all people.
Thank you.Chris, thanks so much for your response. I don't see the superior intellect you spoke of, perhaps I just haven't experienced it yet. I think I haven't experienced it yet because I haven't seen him bring any debate that was pertinent to the topics we were discussing. I don't think he liked me pointing out all the tactics, play by play as I saw them happen. I know Mark isn't the only one and far from it.
One can be smart on some topics, but incredibly unwise and immoral. These are to be clues I think to us as all.
What they want, is not realistic an not even good for them. I truly believe this. People that want to be truly strong and debate their points, philosophies or worldviews well, debate fairly. This CAN be done IF you have good ideas you are working out of and morals, because these things have a way of defending themselves, and standing on their own.
Conversely, we can see how people that continually operate out of tactics as we see, show they clearly don't truly feel confident in what they believe. There is a reason for this, and that is because it is not true, good or solid or all of the above. The anger this generates in a person seems to be misdirected, which is one of my biggest points of all for everyone here (including me when and if I do it..but I try not to.)Amen!
I do sense an intelligence in Mark, but like you I've never seen it actually displayed. I've read a couple of his hubs, and he is smart, but again there's nothing that shows he is ready to crush me with his superior arguments. Just a lot of personal insults.
Nevertheless, there are those who seem to believe that he's simply holding back. I'm not so sure myself, but maybe.I already crushed you, but you pretended it didn't happen.
Any time you want to point me at the massive amount of historical evidence for the existence of Jesus - I am ready and waiting.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.Mark, you once told me that you are all about love.
Why can't you love those who disagree with you? I'm just wondering (and expecting to get attacked)I do love him, I'm just trying to educate him and see if I can get him to stop causing so much conflict by lying. Expecting to get attacked? Why?
Ah, you're baiting me again! I'm on to you now!
I never said you weren't clever!
You're not getting me that way again, you saucy devil you!So - no contemporary historical evidence of Jesus then? Do we agree on this now?
Are you really trying to put words in my mouth?
That is an awful lot of questions, and I don't think this forum is the correct place to educate you on biology or answer your cut and pasted questions about evolution. Let's be honest here - you are not asking those questions for answer - you are attacking our understanding of the Universe in order to defend your irrational beliefs. This is one of the many reasons your religion causes so many conflicts. Your beliefs have no basis in fact, so you need to attack any knowledge we do have.
I will answer some questions.
I have no reason to suppose there was a time when the Universe was not here. I know you need to make that assumption to defend your beliefs, but it makes no sense to me. The Universe is here. WHy assume it was not here somewhen?
Majik = God. God is a non answer. Majik = bringing back people from the dead etc.
Faith?
No - I don't lean on blind faith ever. Faith in my own intelligence is a different sort of faith to blind faith in the illogical and impossible which you possess. Not sure why you wish to equate the two other than as a semantic argument to defend your nonsensical beliefs.
Faith that my body will take it's next breath? Not really faith. Once you understand the autonomic nervous system and make a few forays into Yoga or martial arts in order to understand how much control one has over these things - they cease to be majik. Sorry. It is quite amazing the control one can develop if one chooses. It is really quite interesting. There are plenty of books on human physiology out there. Perhaps you could try reading some? It is a fascinating subject, particularly when one delves into neurophysiology.Please stop bearing false witness against me (albeit badly formatted). This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
If you had any morals - you would stop lying about me.Mark's above reply is why it is pointless to debate him, because he cant debate.lol
Sorry you didn't understand. Perhaps if you read some books?
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts. You have no moral compass to guide you. All you basically did is call me a liar and not address my points.You offered nothing of substance "to understand". Which books do you recommend? Comic books? Be a quiet spectator Mark. Safer that way.
I offered plenty of substance and you obviously didn't understand so I Will keep it shorter in future. Don't blame you for hiding behind a fake user name though. A lot of Christians do that. Probably frightened - they seem to do that a lot.
My personal information is relevant to you for some reason? Mark? I have dealt with people like you for 15 years. And when they start flailing they always want to dig for personal information. You know why that is? Partner, I am already 5 chess moves ahead you. Dont make me checkmate you in the future. Understand?
People like me huh? K then. I don't blame you for being scared - it is only human nature.
Not sure I see how that was a threat. Probably scared and paranoid.
Mark Knowles said, "don't blame you for hiding behind a fake user name though. A lot of Christians do that. Probably frightened." Then, "I don't blame you for being scared."
Not much explains someone saying, "I don't blame you for being scared", but I don't know why you said that Mark. Even if it was after I explained why I have a pseudonym for a name (which many people do...), it doesn't make sense (even less actually) to say, "I don't blame you for being scared." What are you alluding to or talking about?I'll have to confess that I'm not fond of pseudonyms, even though my own online identity is marginally pseudonymous. In most circumstances, if you are wiling to say it, you should also be willing to own it. However, those who opt for pseudonyms don't necessarily do so out of intellectual cowardice; I think Mark misspoke there.
Well I have removed about 180 hubs "so far" because they had potential personal information on them. Still not sure why we should be frightened or scared.
Why am I unsurprised to see that you never pass up an opportunity to flog a dead horse?
I said it because of the way you comport yourself. If you were not so aggressive and obnoxious - I would not have said anything.
Very brave of you to be so aggressive from behind a fake user name. I expect Jesus is very proud of you.Aggressive and obnoxious?
You know, Mark, this is a little like the pot calling the--
Oh, wait, you use your real name, and even a photo.
Nevermind. :-)Exactly. And it is actually me.
I bet I get more hate mail and threats than these guys.Haven't gotten too much, maybe 10 months ago when I actually started writing.
That's the problem. You are trying too hard. Relax - and let it flow. .......
Well I cannot apologize to you, because I have never sent you hate mail or threats. Besides it would be a tu quoque argument or excuse. Posing the tu quoque argument is an admission in my opinion, which is confirmation that, that was your intent.
LAWL
No wonder your religion causes so many conflicts. Don't blame you for hiding though - considering how you behave. Awful brave of you.
I don't believe you have had any threats either.
Well when you consider anything other than "You are absolutely unquestionably right" as threatening hate mail then your life becomes a maze with scary enemies at every turn. If you are consistently wrong this just makes it worse.
No wonder it became offended at the use of "persecution complex"
Are you implying it is unsafe to be here at Hubpages? Can you clarify?
As far as I know "usernames" are allowed on Hubpages. Why should we be frightened? Can you clarify?
Sigh.
No offense, PhoenixV, but your reading comprehension skills are _not_ substandard.
Why are you playing this disingenuous game?
Mark said, "People like me huh? K then. I don't blame you for being scared - it is only human nature."
Why would Phoenixv or anyone need to be scared, that you say you don't blame him for being scared? (not that he is, but you say so....)
It is my experience, that when Christians on the net do make good arguments with people that just really want them to be wrong, they do go after people and want personal information. They even get even frustrated you don't share your real names. Then they put you down for it, as we see here.
I have personally been threatened, and know of others whose families also were threatened. We didn't deserve that. When people want to terrorize you, its a very good thing to not give out your personal information so they can do so. This is not being made up, its really awful.
I used to have my real name on my things. I can't, it wouldn't be responsible for me to do so. Isn't that sad? So yes, frightened of people that can't face their irrational hatred just because you support an opposing worldview, especially if you do it well. I have had some go off on how they hoped to torture some one day, Christians that is. I kid you not. Its not a put down on Christians that they might keep their information private. It is a reflection of the people that don't want them to have freedom in the world and on the net in this case. It proves Jesus right as well, by default. They didn't do anything to deserve such treatment.
I would love to have my real name for all my articles I have published here. This is a good name for me on the net though.Yes - I can see you are scared. It must be better to threaten god's judgement and speak for Jesus from behind a fake user name.
That way you are safe.
Like Peter.Imagine someone wanting people to be scared to the degree Mark K wants Christians to be. (Not just Mark though, others said some things not too different) We have been here discussing our views on why the world wouldn't be a better place with less Christians, and in fact the opposite. Then we get good or bad responses from people. Then this...
What would explain the jump, the extremes? Again, Christianity would explain it. I can't make that kind of thing true, but when it does it to this degree, it affirms what I thought all along. I hope and pray that people here will want to look within and consider, that the irrationality we sometimes see is meant to be a clue to a bigger problem.
I would rather get mad at myself, if I am believing ideas that turned out to cause me this kind of frustration (or whatever it is), that I have to keep hinting at people to be scared, or that they must be afraid, or how brave they are, while smiling big and LOL'ing a lot. Our words and reasoning in these forums are coming from our philosophies and worldviews. I encourage all of us to look within.I don't want you to be scared - Quite the opposite actually. Fear is the only thing keeping you from accepting reality.
You are not offering reason - just fear. Let go the fear. Be yourself and honest. I know it is easier to threaten god's judgment and Jesus' return from behind a fake user name but - be a man instead.
Go on - try it. Stop being scared of reality.
Peter understood your fear.Mark says "I don't want you to be scared - Quite the opposite actually. Fear is the only thing keeping you from accepting reality."
I am not scared, and my participation and continued participation shows that. I was sharing with you why its justified to not have your names disclosed to people that really want to hurt you, and speak of how brave you are like others who were killed, lol. Get this Mark...you don't get to say I don't accept reality without showing how I haven't. You keep making stuff up about me, when I have been trying to discuss this thread.
You say, "You are not offering reason - just fear. Let go the fear. Be yourself and honest. I know it is easier to threaten god's judgment and Jesus' return from behind a fake user name but - be a man instead."
The truth is I have been begging all here that haven't been offering up reason, and instead taking the easy way out with put downs, ad homs, etc, to step up their game if they can. I am being myself, I am being honest. I haven't threatened God's judgement and Jesus' return. Stop making stuff up AS your justification to put down so many untruths about me and others. Let us talk and reason well, with the topics we are discussing. Is it that you just don't want to do that, or can't, or won't? I keep asking. Its not happening that I can see. Its reality that I am facing head on, and asking others to do as well.
Mark K says, "Peter understood your fear."
If its the Peter I am thinking of, then yes, he did deal very much with people that wanted to do things like persecute and even kill when they couldn't prove him wrong. I find it terribly ironic... I didn't make you say that twice now... Interesting....Your fear is obvious. Good for you. Keep casting God's judgement and hiding your name. Got it.
Irony? Oh yes -I haven't cast God's judgement on one person here. That is a lie, Mark. Yes, I will keep my name, even if get mocked for it. I like that name.
Where is the irony that you speak of, I must have missed it. Show me, like I showed you. Remember, just the saying of things doesn't make them true.Good oh. I thought you were promoting teh Christian worldview - my mistake.
Denying it again huh?
Is that the third time?
I just find it funny how many Christians choose to argue from behind a fake user name. By your own admission - it is from fear. Which rather casts a large doubt on your faith.
Wouldn't you agree?Oh, I see, I was assuming the best about you, that you were just being honest.
Here is what you did, define my worldview with your anti christian personally held (atheist too I believe) worldview, then judged me for it, and acted like I said it in the way you like it to be defined. Truth is, I didn't say anything you said. Care about truth more.
I started a new thread just a bit ago, asking people to discuss those kinds of things and that I thought it was the best worldview.
Don't say things I didn't say, and you don't get to play tricks.... Its not a satisfying win anyway, if you have to play games to win and by acting in the ways I am seeing. Anyone can do that....
I said I avoid big problems from atheists on the net, by not sharing personal information they go digging for, when they want to hurt me. That isn't casting fear on my religion. It is showing however, casting the light on atheism and humanism and some others that engage in behavior like that. I am very confident in my worldview. This is getting kinda lame Mark, to be totally honest. I have been very patient with you. Can you step up your debate please?I understand - you are scared. I already explained that I understand that.
It is ironic and rather makes a mockery of your faith though. Plus - I don't believe you about your fake attacks by atheists.
But I understand why you need to lie about it.
night
Mark, do you mean Peter, who was crucified upside down for following teachings of Jesus? Is that the Peter you mean? If not, who? It was random and I don't know for sure, so I am asking.
Please answer, so I am clear.No Peter wasn't crucified - how silly that you believe such stuff. Is that why you deny Jesus? Because you are scared of being crucified?
No wonder you hide your real name.
The Peter you don't believe was crucified, is that who you meant there? I think it was. I wanted to be clear on exactly where you were coming from. Laughing hard, and then changing the discussion of whether or not it was a real incident, and using that for further put downs, doesn't mean that isn't exactly WHO you meant when you said Peter. You said, "Peter understood your fear.." then didn't want to own it, but cast more insults.
Now, why would you say I deny Jesus, and mention that I am scared of being crucified..? (Man, I can't make this stuff up!)
I am a very proud follower of Jesus, he means the world to me.
Why is it bad to use a pseudonym in your opinion? I am actually very curious. I have never posted anything by my real name because I work with kids. I am not supposed to be searchable by them, I have dunno if it is different in the states but in Canada we are encouraged from all directions to avoid using real information online. Do you think it is better to have a real name up as an aspiring writer? (I am asking as a younger writer looking for advice please don't take this the wrong way :s)
Our? I am only asking what you believe Mark. I am done trying to explain myself to you. You seem to assume the worst in me at every turn and it is disheartening.
Thank you for answering some of my questions semi-seriously. If you ever want to have a real conversation feel free to message me, I feel like you have a lot of knowledge to share.
I just wish you would have realized I am not trying to be hostile, I am not against you, or atheism (I was one up till last spring) I just wanted to understand what you believed because I felt like you would have had some intelligent points to add to the discussion.
I avoided talking to younger atheists because of immaturity issues, but it didn't seem to matter. I am not going to engage in a back and forth argument. I explained my beliefs, and some of the reasons for them. I was just asking you to do the same.
I am under the impression that you do not care what I think, that you are just reinforcing your ill feelings towards Christians by ridiculing them online.
I will not bother you anymore, I am going to take some time away from the threads. People act like teens online, I am going to stick to talking to adults in person and hopefully finding some people willing to bounce ideas back and forth with a little objectivity.
Btw I did not cut and paste anything, kind of amusing that you would think so though :p perhaps you need to rethink your position of Christians. Not all Christians are stupid, and not all atheists are intelligent.
This is a veiled argument from ignorance, clothed in a Socratic method ripoff, and attempting to appear benign when it is genuinely an attack, carefully hiding the disdain and sarcasm beneath its surface. This is a typical passive-aggressive reaction of a believer. The argument is totally emotionally based, lacking any substance.
The sum of this Socratic-method argument from ignorance is to argue that if humankind cannot explain to my personal satisfaction how (x,y,z) was accomplished, then my "god of the gaps" explanation is validated as the correct answer, and you are too stupid to see how right I am.
This establishes a false dichotomy, that if you are wrong, I am right. History is replete with examples where the "god of the gaps" has been dislodged by scientific knowledge - the germ theory being a terrific example of how "magic" was replaced by knowledge.
Of course, now that this knowledge is understood, the believers have simply "moved the goalpost" to another area that is not totally understood.
For an omnipotent god, this constant shrinkage in size secondary to gained knowledge must be troubling - eventually, he will disappear from sight altogether.
There is a basic dishonesty in this argument from ignorance-type response that is not based on a person being dishonest but on confirmation bias that creates self-delusions. It is quite difficult - almost impossible - for the deeply committed to understand that their argument boils down to this: I personally believe that a supernatural superbeing is a better explanation for the mysteries of life than any natural explanation, and I believe this because it makes me feel better to believe this being is in control.
In other words, belief in magic helps resolve my fear.
The entire belief issue boils down to a psychologically-based need to feel as if control is possible, when in reality no control is possible except a personal control over one's own thoughts and actions.Calynbana was obviously, simply, asking Marks opinions and offering debate in a more civil and adult way.
But mark just has just enough of a spark of intelligence to never offer anything of substance so he does not have to actually back up his misinformation. That way he cant be shown to be stupid. No risk that way. Except its obvious.Umm no I was just trying to break past Mark's sarcastic wall. I was trying to get any real honest opinions from him. I didn't really care about winning a debate or making a point. I just wanted to get some real discussion going sans ad hominems. Didn't work obviously haha
I think that your response was a little much though. Why does everybody assume the worst of everybody on this thread? It is really sad. You do not really know me, or why I would make such a post. This isn't about winning, conversation should never be about winning. It should be about sharing opinions and ideas, not attacking others opinions and beliefs.
Interesting opinion btw.
Calynbana,
Fair question to ask about magic. First google search I found for magic's definition was (and I thought it interesting...),
"Noun:
The power of apparently influencing the course of events by using mysterious or supernatural forces."
I loved your questions, because they are thought provoking and things that matter to all of us no matter what our worldview. Our universe is so amazing, and we can't begin to fully understand it and especially not duplicate it even WITH all our applied mass of knowledge we have. It isn't for the lack of trying either.
Requesting for more stimulating intellectual debate may be my favorite though, because clearly many of us have been spending some time here hoping for some good back and forth. It is my request as well. I haven't had a chance to get caught up on all of the answers yet, but look forward to it.
Brothers keeper is a concept most commonly believed as taking care of each other's general welfare. Not self appointing themselves god of our spirituality as these two are attempting. That is GOD's job, and I rebuke them in Jesus name.
You've appointed yourself as jesus' personal rebuker?
That is within the chain of command system. Electing themselves anyones spiritual administrators are not. Calling it "brothers keepers" is a farce and a misnomer.
Jomine, you say
"Science can't say anything about a beginning, because there is no beginning."
You know there is no beginning? Isn't that just an assertion of something you believe to be true? If not, how do you know for such a fact there is no beginning?Current evidence is that there was a finite time in that past where " our universe" did not exist in its current form. Time, beginnings, concepts, proposed infinities or near infinite eg density are irrelevant to an "existent universe".
PS They are relevant as to a cause but are irrelevant in the actual state of an existent universe in its current form.The contention is about the beginning of the universe. Universe has no beginning, because beginning is based on the concept time, as I already explained. There is nothing called time in the universe.
Also matter and space are eternal. Where is 'beginning' in eternal? You took an arbitrary point and assumed it as beginning, or assumed it as time zero. Suppose, if I take the time when homo sapiens first appeared as time 0 or the formation of earth as time 0, does that mean there is no time(that is motion) before that, that that is the beginning? It might be the beginning of man or earth. For universe to have a beginning there was a time when all matter was absent and space too was absent. Space is already an absence of everything. So space is present always. Nobody has seen, let alone explain, matter spontaneously appearing and disappearing. So how can you assume a beginning to eternal universe?
Yes, i do think we would be better off with fewer Christians.
Imagine any sport for a moment, take soccer or football. Imagine two teams, opposing each other that play and one team plays fairly while the other takes cheap shots or plays by another set of rules.
The side that loses has some decisions to make at this point. They can lose and take a loss well and train harder in the future, or they can even want to get on a better team even. We see this in sport.. Teams want good players. Affirming a bad play over and over and putting down the player that played fair doesn't work, and just gets embarrassing.
When we were all kids, some kids had fits, and took their balls home. Some pretended that the other team wasn't good, and they might have even wished there were less of them in the neighborhood.
The muscle in this game isn't just the brain, but the heart and morals a person chooses. Perhaps this is why atheists pick a new team, instead of just wanting less of the other team around. Even if a power can crush the opposition unfairly (as we see in history and in the case of innocent Jesus, best point of all), it still won't address the real problems.
It makes complete sense to me that this would bring me personal frustration and anger and a strong need to put down or want less of certain people groups. My biggest point I hope people care about is why do people choose that over a better choice and way of being? Towing the line for a team that takes cheap shots and keeps on doing so when shown, to me isn't a good way to spend my life. Aren't there more satisfying options? Side note... this is the kind of stuff the best books and movies are made of.... we as humans seem to know it intuitively.No - we just hate liars, war-mongers and self-righteous hypocrites. Sorry.
Jesus hated those first, so if that is ALL it is, then you agree with Jesus. It doesn't explain the animosity, and makes it all the more odd. We all don't like liars, war mongers and self righteous hypocrites. So what does that get you? We are at the same point as before.
If you were just going after those types, we wouldn't even have a conversation about wanting less of those that follow teachings that agree with those points.
That is one way to answer the points I suppose.."Jesus hated those first" even if Jesus existed he wasn't the first to hate those things.
Many of us Atheists are science minded, we need evidence to believe in something. That is how we decide what is true or false, we almost never assume, and we don't use faith to decide what is true for us (that ends the "you need faith to be an atheist" thing as well). Many of us usually only comment when we see some comment that we know is blatantly dishonest, ignorant or even sometimes hateful. I myself have a bad habit of contradicting things I know are false, whether a lie or just uninformed I don't discern until I get to know the person. But I will speak my mind and I will tell you the truth.
- Motown2Chitownposted 13 years ago0
oceans and Phoenix, I don't generally do this, but I'm going to step a little out of my comfort zone and tell you some truths you might not like to hear.
The two of you (for all the whining you do about how Christianity is so wrongly under 'attack' are two of the biggest bullies I have ever encountered in the HP forums. And certainly not just to me, but to absolutely everyone with whom you've come into contact. Well...everyone who has the temerity to disagree with you. You have zero actual debate skills, you can never actually PROVE your own points and so you demand from others that they prove theirs - over and over and over.
I have no doubt in my mind that you believe you are truly doing the work of Christ - and by God, you're doing it better than ANYONE else in the world. How DARE you speak to me about my standing with my God. First, you're wrong. Last, it's really NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. I know my failings better than anyone, as does my priest, as does my God. I am under no illusions (as the two of you are) that I am perfect. If you ever want to know why people turn away from the God we love so much - take a look in the mirror.
I believe that our God is ultimately LOVE and MERCY, NOT judgment and condemnation. Therefore, when I see things that I don't think are right within my faith, I think He probably expects them to sadden me and for me to wish they were better and to help make them so. I don't believe in lying and would rather acknowledge and live a painful truth than a comfortable lie any day of the week. I think you both choose to live in a comfortable state of deception.
This is not meant to insult you or meant in any way as a personal attack, it's just my final take on the two of you - who I'm sure will post something far lengthier regarding your final take on me.
I no longer wish to discuss anything - at all - with either of you. I very sincerely, however, wish you both the best, and pray that these forum experiences are emotionally and spiritually fruitful for you.When people say one thing in a post, and then a lot of the opposite, more is going on.
Its easy to call people bullies, that are asking people that are making attacks on a certain group of people at least be valid. This isn't just this thread that it happens, but it happens ongoing here.
I imagine and am pretty sure that some are not used to Christians asking others to just be more fair, and raise the bar. People are usually run off... Its easy to continue to put those that are not easily run off, and ask for better, as if the problem is with THEM... The opposite has been shown to be true.
People can say whatever they want, and this next is going to sound rather bold. When done speaking to me, or silencing a person in some way, and when with ones own thoughts alone, these requests and ideas are still true and the most fair for all people anywhere.
Wanting to blame those that actually have good ideas is not a new response. Not being able to show how someone is wrong when that is a huge goal, has to be frustrating. I just wish that stuff would end, and we could all go on discussing still. I wish you the best too Motown. Sorry you see me as such a bully. I just don't take stuff from others, and know that their anger at me isn't warranted, and the trying to portray me or others in a bad light doesn't mean any of that is true. It would have to be actually true. I hope that when I am gone from here that others also don't take that poor behavior, and ask for people to raise the bar. It takes away the fun for some, as was shared, but why should being like that be fun to a person? Its having fun at others expense and for poor reasons. I don't find that kind and loving as Jesus commanded. Actions speak louder.
take care.Your relationship with God is none of our business? Hello, that is what we have been telling you. You dissent from Jesus' commission? That's fine, become a humanist and do some volunteer work. Oh wait, you cannot go out into the world. See ya.
- Chris Hughposted 13 years ago0
I dunno about Christians, but my world would be a better place without all this pointless hatred filling up my feed. I can't figure out how to get rid of it, even with the kind and helpful suggestions of the people who replied to my last post. I think what I need to do is unfollow the frequent contributers to this thread. Unfortunate, but perhaps for the best. Flame on, my friends, flame on.
Flaming someone is true flaming. Asking the flaming to stop is helping the problem you are seeing in these folks. Asking people to stop asking others to stop flaming (not you... you aren't doing that but others are) isn't wise. They want to be able to continue to flame at will it seems.
I hope more on HubPages speak out on this problem.Find something else to do besides looking at your hubpages feed. Problem solved.
Mark, if someone threatened you, and was looking for your private information to hurt you, and you hid that information from them, is that more of a reflection on your worldview, or theirs?
In my case, its a sad reality of the people that can't face their own worldview, so much so, they get angry, and lash out at those holding a worldview that stands on its own, (which likely means its also the truth.)
Knowing all of this, only a person not in possession of good morals or values (or a good worldview, whichever it is) would then still try and demean and put down the person that has been threatened when they tried to protect themselves and their family.Scared. Gotcha.
Don't believe you. No faith - that is your problem.you aren't even listening anymore, and I don't think even really reading my posts.
Yes I am. You said you are scared and were just protecting your family from threats.
I don't believe you. I think you are lying.I always thought Hubpages was a safe place that was professional and a place of business. Are you saying that Hubpages is unsafe?
I am not lying. The threats were personal, and when I made my account here account, I still had children. These people search the net for you, and use swarming tactics against others. I am not making it up. So when I started here, I wanted to be safe from them. Anyone would be. Its not wise to invite that kind of trouble. Maybe you would do differently, and give your enemies that want to hurt you personal information so they could. It is you that isn't seeming fair or honest, not me. I don't believe you would give it to them, just so you can be doing this kind of crazy behavior now.
Do you feel like you have turned the conversation around enough now, that others won't notice you aren't debating, and engaging in a way that shows Phoenix and myself to be right about you? You can just not debate, if you really don't want to. If you do, then why not do that?I believe he is making a bunch of barely veiled threats and he is suggesting it is not safe on Hubpages? Maybe he should clarify?
I have never seen Mark make a threat to anyone, thinly veiled or otherwise. I think it's time you stopped making up lies about people.
I disagree, because he said -
Mark Knowles -don't blame you for hiding behind a fake user name though. A lot of Christians do that. Probably frightened
I don't blame you for being scaredOur usernames are an arrangement between " us and hubpages" so he is interjecting himself in the business arrangement between us and Hubpages and suggesting that, well saying; "I don't blame you for being scared"
Why should we be frightened and scared here?I would say that you are being paranoid, but what i really think is going on is that you just dont like Mark. You cant have a real debate so now you are just making crap up. Grow up.
For some reason he is interested in my personal information and another member of hubpages personal information. I think I will remove any content here on Hubpages that has any of my personal information until I can clarify why It is being suggested that I should be frightened and scared and why "he does not blame me" for hiding behind a "username" as he suggests.
Yep... first chauzk wants to kill all Christians and now Mark... LOL Mark!... is going to do physical harm.
ROFLMAO...
Can't breathe...
What's he going to do... taunt it to death?
Why am I imagining the Frenchman in Monty Python and the Holy Grail?
It's a diversion. It has realized that most of the community not only disagrees with it but is more intelligent than it. It is now looking for someway to avoid having it's ass tromped...once again... in debate.
And Mark would run circles around it if it wanted to REALLY debate logically... it has to figure out a way to avoid it while saving face... It hasn't saved face of course since it's pretty obvious what it is doing but it likes to think that everyone is at the same intelligence/maturity level it is and therefore won't notice.It? Really? This is getting really childish. I had more respect for your opinions.
Two identities... one female one male... same person. It's neither a they a him or a her. What would you call it?
I actually really don't think they are one person. I haven't been entirely involved in the convo so I am not sure where this assumption came from but from what I have read they seem to have quite different personalities. Not to mention different writing techniques, and patience levels. I dunno I don't think they are one person...
Acting, plus look at their hubs, almost identical subjects, either they are brothers or lovers or class mates that live in the same place and their responses are (albeit) different from time to time and they writing techniques appear different (they aren't if you compare them, I can fake patience levels myself or lose my patience easier on some people than others, ha ha, and then go back and sound calm. One person is definitely the calm persona and the other the more harsh seeming one. They could be different people.... this is just observational for me, and I could see how people could see them as the same person.... I bet they love this conversation too. Who doesn't like people debating about them.
Personally I don't care, I think the forum rules are a bit strict and at times arranged to fail.
Mark, what did you mean by "no faith, that is your problem." What would I say that would cause you to think I have no faith?
No human is perfect and it was intended to be that way. Striving for perfection is an amazing talent and keeps us motivated. But, as a previous poster stated, the term "Christian" means to be like Christ. We can all strive to be like Him but in today's world it is even more of a challenge, which in itself is inspiring. It we all find away to disregard "naming" our religion or denomination, and just treat others the way we want to be treated (the Golden Rule), with love and respect, then the world just might be a better place.
Kristen, I like your points, and that makes sense to me. I would agree with you there.
Everyone's idea of perfection is different, it's like an opinion, everyone has one and none are the same.
I don't really find that Christians are the issue. I think religion, in general, has definitely played a significant role in different countries and societies butting heads with one another. Even if Christianity were to ever be "abolished", other cultures would probably continue to disagree on what they thought was right.
Jesus is the WHOLE WORD. In the beginning was the WORD and the WORD was with God and the WORD was God.
People misuse scripture to prove their point or understanding because as humans we often feel the need to 'be right' to validate ourselves whether we are truly right or wrong.
Christianity is interpreted by each individuals understanding of the theology that they hear. Neither God nor Jesus is the author of Christianity. The first people called Christians were called that because they were so LIKE the Jesus that gave HIS LIFE for them.
If a chicken calls itself an eagle is it? By their fruit you know what a tree is. God hates religion.
Jesus is a KING Who came to restore the world to its original order ie, the garden also called the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven.I am a Christian,and my family ,friends ,strangers,employers ALL say it is a better world because I was in it
Things is, if I didnt know Jesus Christ ,like personally...I would have entered and passed with no influence, none
So I am what I am because of JesusChris Neal wrote:
The missionaries didn't do the smallpox infected blankets. That was the US Army
__________
Well to be accurate it was a British General and there was in fact 2 blankets and one handkerchief used from the smallpox hospital.Well, I don't trust the British.
Neither did history.Well from the same source, its impossible really to determine how small pox was transmitted and the disease may have been transmitted to the Indians by native warriors returning from attacks on infected white settlements.
With that we can assume that any claims of missionaries killing 17 million is "made up" because they like that story best. It is impossible to verify unless the were there of course.
Yeah, missionaries mainly use the money they get to do missions to "help people" as they go around swimming and having vacation.
Oh wait that was my cousin who is involved with a huge rich church.
And cheap labor does all the work, if you can convince the locals that their doing it for God/god, they'll do it for free.
I would further go on to say that civilisation as it was presented in the 1800's was in fact not.
The world would be a better place without most religions, especially Christianity... proof is Sweden. And if anyone wants to get rid of me in the US give me enough money to move there, Ha!
Who lied to you that the swedes do not practice christiantiy???Please visit and tell me how many swedes will Not be in church on sunday.The difference between the Lutheran churches in Sweden and the American ones is that the american ones are now stocked with fire-and-brimestone-hell-if -you-do-not-repent televangelists out for the media sensation by opposing everything.In Sweden,people worship in a dignifed manner and tend to be open and tolerant to diverse views.That is the same case in Denmark where church beliefs are very stong yet porn is a major industry.You rarely hear the danish lutheran church making a hullabaloo abot it do you?
Wow. This thread is getting a little ridiculous lol. I am unfollowing and taking a break from these forums. They are just too tempting and time consuming. I am not sure if I answered all the posts directed at me so if I did not I am sorry, pm me and I will do my best to answer
It could be said that laws are dogmatic. But most civilized human beings like the law, within reason. Some laws are good and some are bad, it isn't perfect, some laws are changed, interpreted or repealed until it becomes dogmatic once again.
Yet the law cannot determine the absolute intent. It finds violation and assesses culpability. It cannot peer into the heart.
Would it not be great to have a Justice that is objective? And knows the circumstance and intent?
If some child is beaten or abused all its life from everyone it comes in contact with, just out of sheer bad luck, and they finally snap and kill someone that is abusing them, do we hold him to the same accountability as someone that killed for 20 bucks? The law really cant discern the intent and circumstance of each life.
A God could hypothetically do this.
Whether one choose to believe God or not, I wonder why no one would want an objective justice like that.Laws are consciously created by men and women and revised as needed. We know that we are not eternally bound to those laws, so if they prove to be too harsh or too lenient we can adjust them, as you say. Courts of law already do this; judges assign various penalties based on circumstances.
The laws of God, by contrast, are handed down by divine revelation and cannot be changed by anyone but another prophet. They are beyond the control of mankind.
Laws are not an example of dogma unless they cannot be revised. Some man-made laws do indeed become dogmas: people know that they are the invention of man, not God, but they can be turned into dogma by appealing to tradition, divine intervention, etc.; eg. the belief that the wisdom of our ancestors was greater than our own or that the laws were, in fact, inspired by God after all.
So, man-made laws are not dogma, but may be turned into dogma by protecting them behind another, accepted dogma.
Scientific 'dogmas' have their own special kind of protection known as consensus. A million scientists can't be wrong, can they? Of course they can be, which is why scientific dogmas always come with a clause acknowledging that they may be overturned at some point in the future. Some ideas do become very entrenched, but no scientific dogma is really protected in the way that non-scientific dogmas are. They are similar to laws in this regard. (Religions do occasionally try to protect scientific theories, but, as we know, this generally doesn't work out very well.)
The problem with divine law is that there is no way to prove it or change it. Unless you happen to grow up in that particular religious environment or have some sort of religious conversion, there is no reason to accept these laws. I was raised in a secular household. I have no reason to accept Christian dogma. The only time I've ever stepped into a church is to attend a wedding. For a person like myself, the Christian world view has no more inherent truth than the world of Middle Earth. I've read the Bible, I admire Jesus as a religious figure, just as I admire Gandalf as a wise man, but I don't find the Christian model of the world, God, or the afterlife remotely convincing. Devout Christians don't always understand that calling non-Christians sinners or threatening them with hell or the devil has no impact. It's just an irritating gesture, like being given the middle finger, that we either sit through patiently or ridicule or retaliate against depending on our mood and temperament.
I have no need to believe in a God (or disbelieve, for that matter). If there is a God, I am certain he is not less logical or less loving than myself. If I can forgive a man for not believing in things that defy logic, then by extension I know that God can. If terrible things happen, I know they can be explained as natural events or man-made tragedies created through human weakness or stupidity. There's no need to invoke God for justice in the afterlife. There's no need to believe in complex doctrines or engage in rituals. Religious people often don't understand how non-religious people can deal with a world without God. Personally, I don't have any problem with it. What I don't understand is how people can put up with the strain of trying to appease an unknown entity. It seems like a terrible burden to me.Bumping this-So I can understand your position on dogma
To attempt to understand your position better, could it be summed up kind of like this- It is best to analyze everything, the best that you can and whatever you find to be positive or beneficial things, that those are things we should keep and we should have the freedom to separate out the bad stuff, according the circumstances of course, to be flexible in that way etc, something like that?
Is this what you mean by being anti-dogmatic?Not really. Accumulating evidence, making hypotheses, testing them and gathering more evidence is appropriate for many things, but I don't think that's required for certain things.
Morality is one of those things. I think being good is instinctive. People are only hostile or intolerant when they have a mental rule that tells them to behave that way. Dogmas are ways of formalizing those rules. Religious dogmas give them divine sanction. I don't think truly spiritual people are working from a set of rules, I think they're responding naturally and automatically to other people in real time without a screen of beliefs separating them from others, without beliefs that allow them to turn other people into objects. Good people do good because it is natural to do good.
Plenty of people will disagree with those statements (I'm guessing most people in this thread will), but so far it's proven to be true in my own experience. I've never encountered violence or intolerance that wasn't based on some sort of in-group/out-group dichotomy. There is, of course, a biological explanation for this phenomenon, but I believe our brains are capable of overriding this behavior unless the organism is in a life or death situation. Tribalism seems like a primitive form of dogma. Competition led to the development of this 'us/them' mentality which became rationalized and justified by tribal dogmas so that people could avoid feeling guilt for their actions.
I think the story of Adam and Eve is a good illustration of this principle: before people developed the knowledge of good and evil, people lived together in harmony. It's only when you divide people into good and evil that you need moral doctrines and laws. This isn't a trivial claim, so I don't expect anyone to accept it. I encourage you to investigate for yourself, though, as an interesting hypothesis.
The whole idea of 'spreading the Gospel' is based on this idea of separation, that there is a group of people that is saved, and a group that is not. I don't think this is true at all. There's no need to spread any religious teaching. To me, that just seems like a way to dominate other people. You just have to get rid of your own prejudices and rigid thinking and be present for other people without judgement. If Christians simply imitated Christ and did good and dropped the whole 'you must believe x, y, and z to be saved' bit, they wouldn't have the problems they currently have. Requiring people to believe any particular dogma is the tool that creates division between people.That's the thing about human beings. They are free to believe whatever they want, including dogma. After all, we live on planet earth and in the end we have to be somewhat realistic. Whether you choose not to believe in any dogma, does not invalidate anyone else's choice to accept dogma.
You don't like dogma? I personally don't like the worlds monetary system. I think its just a ponzi scheme and I believe I can show that to be true. It causes more problems than anything. I think we should all just trade cows, chickens and apples etc if we need to barter.
I think the world should bend to my wishes. What do you think? And please go into as much detail as possible.Yes, people are free to believe whatever they want. My beliefs change all the time as I examine my own experience. The older I get, the less use I have for dogma or prejudice of any sort. To me -- and this is simply my belief, as you correctly point out -- any thinking that attaches a value judgement to distinctions between people (rich/poor, white/brown, male/female, Christian/Muslim, straight/gay) is a distortion that can only lead to intolerance or violence. You are free to believe whatever you want. I just don't see the point in believing things that can't be proven and that lead to conflict.
Let's put aside this discussion since we're both determined to keep our respective beliefs.That won't stop some people from trying to ram it down your throat... Unfortunately, there's no age limit for believers. They either grow out of it or they don't.
Juice says, "There's no need to spread any religious teaching. To me, that just seems like a way to dominate other people. You just have to get rid of your own prejudices and rigid thinking and be present for other people without judgement."
I think what Jesus taught, and the amazing hope it offers, is a great thing to share with people. If you know what Jesus' teachings are, it is opposite of wanting to dominate people. If someone is distorting it to indeed dominate people then that would be wrong and obvious. (We know of examples in history which I am openly opposed to those ideas, of forcing things on people.) Not sure what prejudices you are referring to either...was someone sharing prejudices or rigid thinking here that you disagreed with in particular?
I don't think it was ever a suggestion from people here, that supporting someone's bad dogma is a good thing (in any form, whether from a group or anything else). I found this part of the conversation to take a strange turn, though there have been many diversions. I could have missed something, but am responding to what I am seeing as I see it.
I am convinced, the world would be a much better and more peaceful place if more people practiced what Jesus taught even though its very hard to do sometimes.I find every conversation with Christians to be one strange turn after another, so I guess we have something in common.
Sure, the world would be better if more people acted like Christ; I also think the world would be a better place if more people acted like the Buddha, or Gandhi, or Krishnamurti. As I've said many times already, I don't have any problem with people imitating Christ; the problem stems from telling people they will go to hell if they don't accept the articles of your faith, and using the rejection of your faith as an excuse to treat people worse than you treat yourselves. That is domination. That is where all the conflict comes from.
Juice said,
"Laws are not an example of dogma unless they cannot be revised."
That is one idea or opinion, but it runs on other assumptions about the bigger law giver in question. A perfect law giver, wouldn't ever need to revise imperfect laws.
This might be a great topic in another thread, "what laws of Jesus are too burdensome to bear?" Many are great, and people think so across the board. My bigger point, is that is your opinion, and people might have others. It would apply to humans always, but even so, there are some main ones that are lasting and true.The problem with this argument is that I don't have any reason to believe that a perfect law giver exists. From my perspective, it's simply an unfounded assumption. It may seem true to you, but it has no relevance for me.
As far as the implication that Jesus' laws are too burdensome for me or other non-Christians to bear goes, you're just trying to be provocative. From my perspective, adopting a dogma is just an easy way to avoid thinking for yourself about important issues. I could as easily argue that thinking is too burdensome for religious people, but where would this exchange of untrue generalizations get us?Juice said,
"Laws are not an example of dogma unless they cannot be revised." I responded, then he or she says,
"The problem with this argument is that I don't have any reason to believe that a perfect law giver exists. From my perspective, it's simply an unfounded assumption. It may seem true to you, but it has no relevance for me.
As far as the implication that Jesus' laws are too burdensome for me or other non-Christians to bear goes, you're just trying to be provocative. From my perspective, adopting a dogma is just an easy way to avoid thinking for yourself about important issues. I could as easily argue that thinking is too burdensome for religious people, but where would this exchange of untrue generalizations get us?"
I was pointing out how you were slipping in your worldview to make a claim that at first glance makes sense, and showing how it makes assumptions in doing so that you don't know to be true for sure. My point about Jesus was not being provocative, but sincere, and based on what you were saying and why. His laws aren't too burdensome to bear, and if they were that fact would be a reason some might need to be revised. My question about Jesus, if you could answer that, at least would show how you had an opinion on how might one need to change it or revise a law. Or, they could be perfect laws, from a perfect law giver. (which some rule out as possible in advance.)It doesn't matter what the laws are. The problem stems from forcing people to accept the doctrine attached to it. The dogma is irrelevant, and the laws are self-evident. We don't need God to tell us not to hurt each other.
Juice,
Is anyone trying to force you to accept a doctrine of any kind? What is that about?
As for the last statement, I don't disagree. We have a conscience,every one of us, that knows its wrong to hurt each other. This is part of the reason why we can question the need to do so when we see it happening, even of people that have no religion.You asked me why I don't like Christianity and I told you. You're implying that my rejection of Christian dogma is an emotional reaction. It's not.
I didn't think I implied it anything about emotional reactions, but I do follow up on ideas given as reasoning. I am asking you follow up questions using the same terminology and ideas you are using. You mentioned you don't like people forcing their dogma on you, so I asked.
Good points and reasoning to back them.
I think everyone would want some kind of justice, and if for nothing else, the Christians that ever did the atrocious acts that some paint Christianity with.
I sincerely think God is the best judge of all. He isn't too harsh, nor too lenient. He cares about the heart, if you look at the teachings of Jesus. If you look, you can find evil hearted people anywhere, from any groups.I hope for an objective justice. I think all that would be good, should and would. And when I find out what is behind that final curtain and if objective justice is there, I think it would ask me: Did you make anyone aware that you were hoping for me? What do I say? No, it was not my responsibility? Or with good conscience, say I did.
I hope for a very real justice as well. This is sobering for ME though, of course as well!
We all live like we believe that justice being carried out against people who break laws, is a good thing. None of us, or almost none of us want to live in a society that a murderer can shake their fist at the justice system and get out of jail free for it. We KNOW that wouldn't be right.
We also know of criminals who are very mad, not at their wrongdoings, but for being caught, or even that there was someone suggesting they couldn't just do whatever they wanted. These same criminals can become very angry and think it a great injustice that anyone or any power would put them in cuffs, give them a hearing, and possibly send them to jail. Yet, if not for that system, we wouldn't have the free societies we have today.
Imagine the criminal suggesting that he ought to still have his freedoms and be allowed to break laws, not have to answer for them, and that even suggesting it would be evil! Imagine a power that said, "if you are truly sorry for your crimes, you will be forgiven them.?" Its all not as foreign thinking as some try to portray it. We live like those ideas you shared are 100% true. None of us can make that be that way. This is one of the ways I test ideas.... Look at our world, look at people... What religion or worldview best lines up with what can't be denied...? Distorting a worldview so as to attack it better is only tipping the hat toward it, as if it cannot be denied in genuine and actual ways.You know, the majority of Criminals in prison are (cough) Christians.
Catholic 29,267 31.432%
Protestant 26,162 28.097%
None/Atheist/Unknown 18,537 19.908%
Muslim 5,435 5.837%
American Indian 2,408 2.586%
Nation of Islam 1,734 1.862%
Rastafarian 1,485 1.595%
Jewish 1,325 1.423%
Church of Christ 1,303 1.399%
Pentecostal 1,093 1.174%
Moorish 1,066 1.145%
Buddhist 882 0.947%
Jehovah's Witnesses 665 0.714%
Adventist 621 0.667%
Eastern Orthodox 375 0.403%
Latter-day Saints 298 0.320%
Scientology 190 0.204%
Hindu 119 0.128%
Santeria 117 0.126%
Sikh 14 0.015%
Baha'i 9 0.010%
ISKCON 7 0.008%
-------------------- ------ --------
Total 93,112 100.000%I'm not sure where you got those numbers, but we have at least a dozen times more inmates in US prisons than that.
Unless you are not talking about US prisons... in which case...
Nevermind. :-)I believe this is either regional or collectively those who were willing to take such a survey, let me check.... one second.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics on religious
affiliations of inmates. Total number of
inmates per religion category and taken in 1997
Total Known Responses 74731 100.001% (rounding to 3 digits does this)
Unknown/No Answer 18381 ---------------------------- Total Convicted 93112 80.259% (74731) prisoners' religion is known.
Held in Custody 3856 (not surveyed due to temporary custody) ---------------------------- Total In Prisons 96968I will make some calls to FBP and confirm this number, if it is incorrect I will delete my comment later today. If it remains...
Wow 19.908%? That is much more than I even thought. Demographics suggest 16% so you are doing exceeding well.
According to Wikipedia, there were 2,418,352 inmates in US prisons, as of 2008.
Maybe your figures were regional, or something. Still, I have no reason to think that they are inaccurate, as a percentage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarcerat … populationI have no problem accepting the figures and the conclusion, when compared to demographics. I think it should stand.
What freaks me out about this is the chart, it pretty much just goes straight up every year.
And America puts more people in prison than any other nation in the world.
We all need to test what we believe, but Jesus proves Himself time and again.
Where do you get that impression about God from, I looked all over the Bible and he generally seems like an evil monster, as far as justice is concerned. Jesus was sort of an exception but then you get to revelations and he also looks like a monster.
I get the impression from Jesus' teachings, and how he speaks of his Father, God.
Here is my short "take" on how God judges ultimately. We are born, and indeed do sin. God has rules for his creation, we break them. The rules we break are actually hurtful to us or others anyway. The laws are summed up into two greatest commands, and we break those.
God asks of us that we acknowledge him, and be sorry for our sins if we are, and ask forgiveness of the One that can truly forgive. We can (want) to do that or not. (He doesn't force.) Many want to break the rules but also not have to acknowledge God or pay the consequences.
Some want to shake their fist at God, some even want to boldly give him the equivalent of the "finger", lol. Then, they don't want him to be able to judge ones heart. I actually understand the idea, that people don't want a God over them. What flows from that is what I see.
To those that don't want God, AND he gives them that, well what is the problem? As for being judge, I truly think he KNOWS everything and every possible angle that no human court can ever achieve. He shows us that he desires mercy and grace and people that care about their wrongdoings. THAT is a kind God, and he was willing to take the "hit", for having one's own innocent son die in place of the sinners of the world is way more fair to us than them.
To sum up... He made us, we shake our fists at him and want to be our own gods really, then we realize we can be thankful to him for his life and love, (or not), and he forgives us the sins, AND arranged for the penalty to be taken from us. If we don't want to be forgiven of our sins, and insist on our own ways, he is STILL patient giving us a chance, and then he lets us have our choice. We can't gripe at that too.It's way more complicated than that, in reference to nonbelievers or people who want to give the finger to God. The God of the Bible wants us to acknowledge him and worship him, ask him for forgiveness and do his unquestioning bidding.... morally.... however, the thing that get's us nonbelievers is, how can you follow or worship someone who is a completely evil bastard? The God of the Bible, according to Christians, has the right to be immoral because he is God and created these morals so he can break them.... so why would I want to believe in such a being? I don't even get my morality from him I get it from the reality of every action has consequences. It is irrelevant if God is there or not something bad comes from doing bad.
If my father and mother gave me life by making me yet they are actually murderers should I respect them? NO! I would turn them in (especially if they were hypocritical enough to give me the morals they themselves ignore).That isn't morality that is conceding causality or determinism. Causality is not morality. By default you have no logical grounds to claim to be able to apply morals. At best are a subjective belief, nullified by determinism.
Nonsense, and I've done the philosophical crap to death, I refuse to discuss this in those terms....
What I will say is this. If I do something bad what will happen, logically?
People will hate me, I will hurt someone that could hurt me back, I could hurt someone I love and care about. I could hurt a potential friend, I could go to jail, I would become a bad person for whom I myself despise, I would lose all sense of society in which case I would be a sociopath or psychopath in which case I would be more likely to be killed or imprisoned for such actions. These outcomes also determine my sympathy and empathy and vice versa. I do not want some one to do bad to me. It's a social contract ingrained in us by being social animals. Example: a person born in another nation of different moral standards even if raised Christian is likely to have different moral standards from American Christians. Same with any group of people really. A person not raised in a good environment and still taught Christian values is also not very likely to have real moral values. Many Serial Killers are themselves Christian.Well now that you go into greater detail, I can say, that morality is not amorality either. Regardless they are a subjective belief that you have, albeit distorted.
"Regardless they are a subjective belief that you have, albeit distorted."
In what way are they distorted? I have never killed anyone or hurt anyone willfully, nor would I, I obviously don't get my morality from the Bible, where does it come from? It comes from rational logic and reason, I don't need a God to tell me what is moral especially one whom is himself immoral.oh, but HE says in HIS word that HE has put HIS LAW into every heart. So you think that you just intuitively know it when HE PUT IT there all along so YOU would come to KNOW HIM
You assumed that HE wrote it, my statement to you is, I don't believe HE wrote it nor does HE exist. Some humans wrote it and said HE wrote it but that neither proves HE exists nor does it prove HE wrote it.
You equated morality with causality at first. Then you went into great detail describing a sort of amorality as your beliefs in my opinion.
If you hurt someone, your only concern seemed to be 'how it directly effected you" and "what were the consequences if you did". You never seemed to acknowledge any remorse for the action itself or compassion towards the victim.Cherry picking is not flattering. READ THE ENTIRETY.
If you feel remorse you empathize and sympathize with the person you hurt.
Remorse is an emotional expression of personal regret felt by a person after he or she has committed an act which they deem to be shameful, hurtful, or violent. Remorse is closely allied to guilt and self-directed resentment.
If someone lacks empathy or sympathy they will also lack the ability to feel, guilty, this feeling of remorse is completely implied in my statement.I understand the definitions of remorse, sympathy, empathy and regret. You just didn't express any in your subjective view of morality.
Then I can only comment on your reading comprehension.
If you insist.
Insist- Verb insist - To assert
Show - Verb - To demonstrateNeeded to be said, amazing but true. The main weapons of debate around here I see being unleashed regularly, are assertions, and insistence, opinions, and then put downs when all else fails. Anyone can do that though. Its nice to show others that are diametrically opposed to you, a better way of discussing and debating. I know I would appreciate it.
If all one gives is an opinion, or an assertion, or insert added "weight" onto a point, or get really really mad or degrading of others, then others can just do the same or give an opposite view, and how is anyone the better for it? Its not a stimulating conversation, where people do well or not on merit. Mob mentalities that thug to win, (the best debater will leave when thugged long enough, and I think it gives "faux" wins to the true losers of a debate in places that enable it..) How is this a good way to be, and how is it a good worldview that has to do this to survive? When people have to do that, it is a clue not just for their opponents, but meant to be clues for themselves. An idea or philosophy or religion isn't working! When you have to cheat, say in a chess game to win, did you really win, or are you the biggest loser in that case?Are you just saying that, sharing your opinion with us, or care to back it up? How am I lacking self awareness if I am? Or do you like to just say things...?
"I would become a bad person for whom I myself despise," is that not acknowledging a showing of remorse? Which I had to clearify with
"Remorse is closely allied to guilt and self-directed resentment."
Because though you claimed to know the definition you did not see my statement as having shown a sense of remorse.
Just saying.
Artblack, I actually see the core, or bottom line of Christianity as very simple in terms of what it is and in the ability to be understood. It is found in the gospels, by Jesus, who Christians are following. Without Jesus, there would be no Christians or Christianity. Jesus came straight from God, was perfect, and his words weigh in heavily on these ideas.
Part of what has happened, is people don't want what God offers, they want to reject it, and want to justify it by engaging in distortions, lies and untruths spread by others, which I think is wrong. They could be right or not, but this is where I encourage every person to look at things fairly for themselves.
Is it true that Christianity is about following an evil bastard? That is an example of where a person (you or whoever) inserts their own personally held worldview, but is applying it TO Christianity, then judging it from that point. That is just an opinion really. I find the absolute opposite to be true, and IF Christianity is true, all I am seeing in this regard makes sense! There is more going on, like evil wanting God's creation to miss out on his love, and eternal life for starters. One easy way to do that is to spread some lies that God is an evil bastard. I think what Jesus taught, is an amazing extension of the hand from God for humanity. This is how I look at it.
Rejecting God's son Jesus, who came from heaven and eternity to do all he did for us, isn't any small thing. To choose to side with the insistence that "I can break my maker's rules, and judge him for judging it, and call him an evil bastard, etc", is one way to look at it. I think its less logical and rational to do so however. He could have forced his creation to have to follow him, that could have solved it, but that wouldn't be moral, or satisfying I think... (sorry for the lengthy response, sometimes I can't make them smaller easily) In short, I don't see the argument in the same way as you for those reasons."Part of what has happened, is people don't want what God offers,"
I will disagree with you on this, it's not that they don't want what is offered it's that they don't believe that what is offered is valid or truthful.
First of all your first statement is a statement of belief, but what if.... let me put it another way.
A man says he is the richest in the land, he drives fancy cars and so on, but you have never met him in person, this is someone who you saw on TV. He says if you send him ten dollars in one week he will be able to turn it into a million dollars and deposit it into your checking but all he needs is the ten dollars and your checking account information.
Do you believe him? He has many people on TV who attest to him?
This is the same for the nonbeliever, The Bible is the TV, the God/Jesus is the conartist/fictional rich person, the money is the promise of heaven upon death, you are the person testifying to this person, "He's gona give me the million dollars because I sent him my ten dollars and account information, you'll be sorry when you didn't"
As far as "That is an example of where a person (you or whoever) inserts their own personally held worldview" yes, what other view is there really, you cannot have someone else's world view unless you can be convinced that your world view is in error rather than being told it is.
"One easy way to do that is to spread some lies that God is an evil bastard." However, one only has to read the Old Testament to have this opinion of him which is where I get my opinion that he is an evil bastard. No one told me he was, in fact quite the opposite, until I met others like myself.
"God's son Jesus, who came from heaven and eternity to do all he did for us" You still have to prove that this is a true statement rather than a fictional one.
"I think its less logical and rational to do so however." IS it illogical or irrational to believe that something might be a lie? It's called self preservation, and the right to not be fooled. Is wanting something, that could be true or false, proven to you to be true or false irrational or illogical?Yeshua [Jesus] came NOT to start another religion, but to reestablish the garden of Eden [His kingdom] on earth. It is NOT by slinging the 'dead letter of the law' or what we believe or think we know as HIS subjects, but by truly taking the time to KNOW HIM and WHO HE IS to us and WHO we are to HIM, then letting HIM LIVE HIS LIFE through us decreasing while HE INCREASES in reality for all to see HIM, not what we think we know.
everyone can read the Bible for themselves. IF they 'see' a mean Judge that has put out a lot of laws, rules, don'ts and they are bound by and enslaved in 'sin' missing the mark because IT IS PLEASURABLE and all they know, really can they be expected to hear give it up for ....what?
IF they find truly caring, compassionate, accepting Ambassadors of the KING who KNOW HIM as HE is---who will build them up in who they are, all that other stuff that is dirt will wash away and they will shine like the stars in the sky.
HEY we need to start getting on our faces and wait until HE is ready to live HIS LIFE through us and quit flinging the law around as if they don't know it"Yeshua [Jesus] came NOT to start another religion, but to reestablish the garden of Eden [His kingdom] on earth."
I guess he failed.
"everyone can read the Bible for themselves. IF they 'see' a mean Judge that has put out a lot of laws, rules, don'ts and they are bound by and enslaved in 'sin' missing the mark because IT IS PLEASURABLE and all they know, really can they be expected to hear give it up for "
Personally I see a hypocritical guy who in his early years killed many people including women and children and set up standards that are ridiculous and gave laws that were immoral and then changed his mind, sent his son, said you can only be saved if you believe in me for whom he only showed up for a select few and never responds to requests for audience either in person nor sends heavenly representatives, he's cryptic enough to be untrustworthy and says he will start killing all sorts of people at his own hand who didn't follow him and also send everyone else who didn't follow him to ETERNAL damnation for which he blames you for not believing in him..... however, being unable to demonstrate his own existence has his followers debate his existence against all evidence for the natural world and his apparent lack of evidence for his own existence and the empty threat of damnation and empty promise of salvation. From what? My sin, for which I can only translate from the Bible means my inability to believe in him and the concept of original sin, which is not really "PLEASURABLE".
Other than that, if God existed and felt the need to damn me then damn him, but he doesn't so I don't care.
I care about real morality not fictional biblical morality.So basically you are really really angry with someone that you feel does not exist?
No, I would say I am angry at the people who have been trying to tell me some all powerful guy that doesn't exist does exist and insist that if I don't believe in this nonexistent person I will go to hell.
It shows more how reprehensible those people are.
My hubs clarify my position better.Its hypothetical afterlife. I would think that if you are true to your philosophy it wouldn't matter. If its some consolation THEY arent in control of who will awake to everlasting life, and who will awake to shame and everlasting contempt. That would be up to you really correct, hypothetically?
An afterlife has nothing to even do with this argument, what the hell are you talking about????
I am talking about the here and now, hypothetically doesn't even come into play in this so called conversation. I am talking about all the so called "Christians" who do very nasty things to people in the name of Jesus. Whether mentally or physically. I could care less about a hypothetical being who doesn't exist. If it were another group all together doing them I would be talking to them or about them but right now I am talking to and about the hypocrites and liars who live in lala land.Art said, "I am talking about all the so called "Christians" who do very nasty things to people in the name of Jesus."
Why am I not seeing these people that do very nasty things to people in the name of Jesus? Isn't that really just an exaggeration to put down Christianity? If not, do you actually know of people that, in Jesus name, do nasty things to others?
Who are they, what have they done? Even abortion doctor killers, they don't "do it in the name of Jesus" that I have ever heard, and they are some of the most nasty! Even Catholic pedophile priests, don't say, "in the name of Jesus I molest you..." Do you guys see the extremes being put into play here, to make points that turn out to not be very true when looked at more closely. You know, the facts, the truth, and what is being claimed?
I mean I can be wrong....show me some instances. If and when you do, guess what? Jesus can be quoted as speaking in advance of these matters saying things like that it would have been better to have a millstone hung around one's neck and be cast into the sea, than to hurt one of the little ones, etc. The demonization of a good worldview, seems to stem from other reasons. Still, I would love to see someone actually show me a crime done, that was a natural outworking of a teaching of Christ, where the person doing the crime made it abundantly clear it was done in the name of Jesus. If it can't be shown to be true, why are people counting on UNTRUE things AS their basis for so many of their arguments?
OOOPPSS Did I say, to re-establish HIS kingdom on earth? Why would you say HE failed if you don't believe in HIM or HIS KINGDOM?
Anyway, Did HE fail? or is it HIS 'followers' failed? OR was He just giving the world time to learn something more about self, sin, grace etc?
I have had times in my life that I did not want to believe God exists because if HE did why did I have to suffer so much verbal abuse as a child, learn to hate and despise myself, be filled with bitterness, rage and anger that spilled out of me at the most inopportune times [in my view] and cost me more friendships than i had to lose...
God is definitely not easy to understand ever. As for believing HE is there and that HE cares deeply---only HE is truly able to reveal HIMSELF to anyone. He begins with a beautiful garden and that was NOT enough for mankind--they decided their way was better
He calls Abraham out of his way of life and begins with a new 'family' clan and that clan deteriorates so
man keeps degenerating and God never gives up forgiving, trying to give hope,
The day is coming when all evil and wickedness will be destroyed, He will rule and reign and HIS KINGDOM will be reestablished on earth as it is in heaven.
no one can live up to HIS Standards without HIS grace. Many a man set out searching the scriptures and historical evidence to disprove Jesus life and therefore God's existence or at least that HE is a good and loving Father
well, it shall all be evident when time as we know it comes to an end. "Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is KING."
if we reject that God is real because of the way that the world is, we really affirm HIS goodness, mercy and especially HIS long-suffering and patience! HE could at any second wipe us all out again and start over....
The one thing I do not like about God is HE rarely does things the way I believe HE should, and He rarely gives me my way. BUT i have discovered that HE always, always, always does me one better
God is a monster to those who don't understand that HE is wanting to lift us above what is evil, twisted, corrupted, bent, broken etc.
Roman Catholicism taught me He was a mean judge just waiting to punish me if i failed to 'be perfect' but what is that?
It took years and years and years for HIM who is GRACE and TRUTH to heal all those old deep religious wounds in my soul. And man did healing HURT LIKE HELL sometimes. But so would surgery if there were no anesthesia. Sometimes God does anesthetize before surgery
But most of the time HE wants us to face, embrace and walk through the pain holding HIS HAND so we 1) know pain and have compassion on others hurt and pain 2) discover that we are much stronger than it
3) discover that HE truly cares deeply about OUR PAIN and longs to heal us from its devastating effects -- being so afraid of being hurt that we refuse to be real, transparent and instead
hide behind sarcasm that stings others and is designed to keep them at bay
hide behind humor designed to try to make everyone 'love' me
hide behind all kinds of facades that simply are masquerader costumes so no one can see the real us
when i started being real---i was a mess and i did 'hurt' others. God forgives---sometimes they do too. Sometimes they don't but that is between them and God.
There is a great difference between 'hurt' and injure...
Sometimes the truth that will set someone free hurts, but it heals.Clap clap clap, great story, it's like lord of the rings. One ring to rule them! But the ring also brings corruption.
Here is the funny thing about your religion though, as much as you believe in it you cannot prove that it's relevant to reality or to us nonbelievers who are science minded and get their morals from rational logical associations.i appreciate your dialogue, art. i don't have a religion. i don't try to practice any religion anymore. religions prescribe outward behaviors that can't always be controlled.
I have a relationship with a KING. When I take the time to wait on My KING, my LIFE, I am healed, comforted, strengthened, changed, renewed and most of all established more deeply in the KNOWLEDGE of HIS acceptance which is all that matters to me now
i am not saying i don't care about others views of me, just that others views can not hurt me, nor can i be led in any direction by flattery or approval
My KING has healed most all of my deep wounds. My KING has and continues to set me free from the religious ideaologies that I must act in a certain way to be accepted by 'God' --- i don't care to fit into any society where if i don't conform i am an outcast
I am HIS and HE is MINE and HE makes me free to be, to express, to live, to learn to love all of HIS creation and creatures be they 'right' 'wrong' confused, agreeable to me or disagreeable to me.
we are so bent on proving what we believe is right we fail to even acknowledge the common humanity that makes up the fiber of all our beingsooops and the spark of life that animates us all too
Of course you arent part of a religion. Thats what most christians say. Funny that none of you ever want to associate yourselves with other christians.
i've been bitten so often why would i? and sadly i have also bitten others with the venom of religious 'idealogies' I am the KING's daughter. I am the KING's Ambassador. I am a project still in the making in HIS hands. I am...a vessel of clay waiting to be molded, filled and poured out to bring a refreshing drink of water to a thirsty, drying world.
I am HIS and HE is MINE and I will be more and more and more LIKE HIM as days go by. Yeshua [Jesus] was not, is not a ChristianShalah,Depending on what you consider revelation for humanity from God, if we go by the words of the prophets, then we need to be able to admit that God had some rather harsh words for his own creation that insisted on pretty awful evil. Often, harshest for those claiming to be one thing but act another, etc.
Peace love and tolerance and good feelings are all good, but one cannot deny the harsh realities in a world filled with some pretty awful people that hurt others and are glad to do so. I don't see them as a vessel of just unfinished pottery or something. I see them as making a very conscious decision to do evil sometimes, (and everything in between, from good to very evil people), and they don't want anything to do with God.
The message of hope for those that do wrong, and that can change and be sorry, is still a good message for all. God lets them choose one way or the other to some degree, and doesn't force good on those that don't want it. The types I am referring to don't really want to reason, or respond to peace joy and love, though I wish they would.You said Jesus was not Christian. I define a Christian as a Christ follower. If Jesus is the Christ, the true son of God, then he would have no reason for following himself. He would be the living definition of Christianity, and not bound by those that follow it, or distort it, but be the standard of measurement. He is perfect, and the way the truth and the life.
I found Janesix's comment interesting. It seems she could almost take issue with the idea that all Christians can't just be lumped negatively together, which is the natural out flowing of what the lumping would do. Some really WANT the bad apples to wreck the rest, so to speak. Some really want to color the rest with the bad apples, of which Jesus spoke of first, which is so ironic again. (not saying this is all true of Jane necessarily, having moved on from her point about some Christians not wanting to be lumped with others...)
Why not just say, "no thank you" to Christianity? People rather can't leave it alone, and have a strong need to demonize it. I find that so interesting for many reasons which I have been commenting on as to what might explain it.hhhmmmnnn let's see Yeshua [Jesus] did follow Himself! In the beginning was the WORD and the WORD was God. When He came to John the Baptist, and John wanted to forbid Him baptism HE replied, something to the effect, I must fulfill all righteousnes. Therefor following the WORD whom HE was and is and is to come in FULLNESS.
words and discussions and meanings and why must we try to tell others how to express themselves and what they SHOULD say and how they SHOULD say it? it's not merely 'religion' that is used as a tool to try to control others or to make others over in our own understanding and image
I said what i said the way i said it because i am who i am and i'm not you---no offense to you and the way you express yourself
i will express myself in my way not the way anyone else prescribesNo offense taken Shalah, and I think I maybe wasn't clear there... I wasn't trying to change how you express yourself, just commenting on your post. I appreciate what you are sharing and how you explain things, even if we may not agree on everything. Share away, and I will do the same.
"i don't have a religion. i don't try to practice any religion anymore. religions prescribe outward behaviors that can't always be controlled." So you don't believe in God?
re·li·gion
   [ri-lij-uhn]
noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.Art, I think everyone has a worldview, even if not a religion. Part of the beginning of the definition you give above for religion, applies to one's worldview as well. We all were brought up in different worldviews and philosophies, even if not religions. As we get older, we realize we may or may not want to change gears from the views of those that raised us.
I love it when people define things around here, so thanks."when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency" did you miss that one? I bet you did, with your cherry picking interpretations of what people say.
Let me put it to you this way, I follow the evidence, I have recently changed my view on the entire Universe due to some evidence recently given to me about the nature of the Big Bang and what it means for our existence... so don't think for a second I am not willing to change my view given evidence for which Christians haven't a shred to prove anything they believe.Art, what in that post there did you take issue with? I don't see how your comment above and your tone fits anything I was saying at all. I was in fact thanking you for posting a definition, it wasn't sarcastic at all. Did you have anything you disagreed with? I was sharing my take on how all people have worldviews there.
I think rather, that corrupt people bring corruption to whatever worldview they bring it to. People that act corrupt bring corruption. A religion or worldview that is wonderful can be missed. If it is a true one, then it does apply to people.
Many Christians love to study science, and I find that comment interesting, which is often put out there, that Christians are not really science minded, but atheists or other worldviews are more science minded and rational. That is only true when its true from my experience, and that is logical to boot.
Haha honestly I do not really think it is worth the time! I am sure he has a lot to offer, but I am not willing to deal with bs for long enough to be "worthy" of debating him. It is not about being emotional, it is about not wanting to debate. I don't care about being right, or making points he hasn't heard. I just wanted to know what he thought. If it isn't worth his time that is fine, but this dribble definitely isn't worth my time :p I will just read some Dawkins and get my dose of an arrogant intellectual.
Also nobody has an reason for being an arrogant arse, if they think they are justified in being such an arse then they have bigger issues than finding worthy "opponents".
Not really. His arrogance isn't anything but self-assurance of his intellect. He is looking for intelligent debate if he assess that there is little likelihood of such then he feels no need to waste time. It's not the most cuddly philosophy but it does tend to save time. So technically he is justified... just not in a way that improves anyone's self-esteem. As he is not responsible for anyone's self-esteem it works for him.
I have been here 3 years. I rarely post in the forums because of the atmosphere here. I chose to post just because of this particular thread. Your assessment is 100% accurate and far too generous, in my opinion. In 3 years of observation I have seen nothing but insults and literally baby talk from that person. But dont take my word for it, just search the archives.
It's been a pleasure and an honor to meet you Calynbana. I wish I could be as good a Christian as you. You have been patient and kind. I wish I had 1/100 of your patience. I have wanted to say that all along, but I didn't want to give the appearance I was looking for allies or interested in feeding egos just to get an ally. What I say is sincere. Keep up the good work, so I can learn from you.
The World would be a better place yes...change their names to Duncan!
As human beans we sometimes have to express what we believe because we don't KNOW WHO we are, and don't know how to express who we truly are.
Thriller wrote:
These idiotic religious threads will finish off HubPages...
I missed that, and seem to be missing lots of posts, then a ton show up at once, lol. To Thriller, I have kind of always thought that, to be honest. Its crazy to observe it, even when not involved.
Generally speaking, I stay away, and my reasons have been given throughout this thread. Usually, I write only hubs and comment on other hubs here. The allowing of such an incredible negative climate to particular groups is amazing to me. No side is perfect, but as for negativity, flaming, trolling, and low blow nastiness, some groups are so ongoing about it, incessant, I wonder how long it will last. I am surprised I am still here, I mean by my own choice. Its hard to support it in any way, shape or form. Making money here means you are making HubPages even more......
Regardless, the requesting of raising the bar, avoiding the negative and sticking to points is a good thing for all I think. You wouldn't think I would get such kickback for it lol.So where were we? Oh yea Christianity brought schools, colleges, hospitals and charities and Buddism brought us yoga, no wait "meditation". These are the undisputed facts. What I've just told you is exactly what you will hear from Me and Ocean and most Christians and honest people. Now the anti-Christians here are going to try and work a little magic here. They will try a little misdirection. They will offer astonishing stories about small pox blankets. Dazzle you with official sounding terms like "dogma". They may even try to cut into a few well meaning missionaries. They will have no evidence, but it'll be entertaining. But in the end, all this magic will not obscure the fact that Christianity brought schools, colleges, hospitals and charities and Buddhism brought us for all intent and purpose" taking a waking nap" These are the undisputed facts. I just dont think yall can handle the truth.
Empty rhetoric?
J-u-i-c-e do you think you are entitled to an explanation of Christianity and what it is all really about?
J-u-i-c-e, we live in a world with good and evil that we all need to guard against. Who's gonna do it? You? artblack01? Christianity has more responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You disingenuously weep for so few yet curse ALL Christians. You don't know what I know. Although proactive work causes problems, those same problems sometimes saves lives. And Christians existence, while grotesque to you, saves lives. But deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you need us in those hospitals, colleges and charities. We use words like love, hope, and charity. They're the backbone of our lives. You use them as a punchline. We haven't the time or inclination to explain ourselves to ungrateful people who need and use all those things; but questions the way we do it. Better just to thank us. Or pick up a book, a medical kit and some food and do it yourself. But we don't give a dang what you think you are entitled to!Oh of course that must be why all those places with hardly any or no Christians like Asia are all doing so horribly? They just can't get by without you can they?
Your sense of entitlement is mind blowing, no one needs Christians, places without them are doing just fine as for hospitals well, countries with lower levels of religiosity actually have better health care on average, who would have thought?Please don't try and put me in this group. We already know that nothing you've said has an once of honesty. Now you want to call us liars? You have to show evidence for your accusations otherwise you prove all us antichristians you are full of it. Christianity has more responsibility than we can fathom??? Ha! They don't take responsibility for the dark ages or the genocide or the fascism they attempt to perpetrate on society. You've list all credibility as far as I am concerned. And as far as this once friendly debate we had, its over.
Pretty much demolished your own credibility there. I'm almost sorry I kicked that hornet's nest.
You seem to like to just say things, no offense. I mean that to potentially help in your future discussions.
I thought it was pretty good stuff Phoenix shared,lol. Do you intend on doing it yourself? Why not let the Christians continue on doing good for communities across the globe as they have for ages, despite the continual put downs of others?
Yeah, lets enjoy removal Christians from the planet as Mark wanted to experience and talked of celebrating after the fact. He spoke of cleaning up the mess they left behind. I think after a post like you responded to with Phoenix there, the mess would be one coming soon after. For a time it could be good. Remove all the good, the Christians and God's spirit in them, and lets see how things play out then. I think it won't be pretty, and even then some will dig their heels in, and not care about the cause and effect of what they see as an evidence.
http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Secular_charities
Christians ideas of charities is killing all nonbelievers and preaching to people they help on the street and denying them help if they won't listen to their preaching.
My entire family is Christian, don't lie to us kid.
If anything these statements you've made are an all out unfriendly attack and I am through debating with you.My name isnt "kid" if you don't mind and of course we can end this friendly debate. I'm here to help any way I can. You believe that, don't you, artblack01? That I'll help any way I can? Others here can debate you if you like. But from now on if you want to debate me you will have to ask me nicely. I can take put downs, tactics and insults. I don't want money or medals. What I do want is for you, with your goofy avatar and oddball username is some courtesy. You got to ask me nicely.
The only thing I want from you is to never acknowledge or comment to anything I have said, I will from now on do the same for both you and oceans. Nothing you two say has an ounce of honesty.
Ok, that is fine I guess, and I wish you the best. Never forget though, especially regarding honesty, that only things that are actually true are true. People that disagree with me on simple points like that, tend to want to stop talking to me.
(good thing I am not wanting to be popular here...)Well I hate to see them go, but we can always remember them fondly. If we had the chance to do it all again, would we? could we? What's too painful to remember
we could simply choose to forget, So it's the good times we can remember
whenever we remember, the way it was.
Jesus didn't say do good to people and if they don't accept my teachings, then stop. He said the opposite, even of enemies.
If you only use poor examples, you will miss what Christianity is all about. That doesn't hurt anyone but you in the long run and anyone else that adopts similar thinking on things. It doesn't reflect the truths of matters, but rather the truths of those individuals or organizations. "Its not all or nothing, its not all perfect or else it gets thrown out...."
Not saying you do this, but some look for a few examples and say, "I want nothing to do with that!" when really they just wanted to reject it for whatever personal reasons they have. Its inconsistent thinking to be so rigid like that, as we already don't apply that same kind of thinking to the rest of life in so many areas. This is meant to be a clue. I know I harp on this, but I actually care about people, and care they are deluding themselves for what turn out to be untrue reasons. Its also ok to just say, "I don't like Jesus, and don't want his teachings as a part of my life, or I don't want to answer to any god." I wish more would just say that, it would be a fair and honest response.
You know this entire thread is now beyond ridiculous.
Plain and simple- if MORE Christians walked the walk, instead of cheaply talking the talk, then this whole conversation would be moot.
Related Discussions
- 349
Would the world be a better place if there were fewer atheists?
by Barefootfae 13 years ago
This seems to be an issue. There is a forum beating Christians over the head so I decided why not be fair?
- 57
Would the world be a better place without religion?
by Dwight Phoenix 10 years ago
Would the world be a better place without religion?A lot of persons always speak bad of religion and how it's just a flurry of confusion to turn races and nations against each other and how churches don't really help out at all.But suppose many people wishes came through and all of a sudden there...
- 44
Would The World be A Better Place With Out Religion?
by Thomas Byers 12 years ago
Would The World be A Better Place With Out Religion?I see all the fighting over Jesus and religion and I often wonder if the world wouldn't be a better place with out religion. After all no one has ever proved that God exists have they? What do you think?
- 14
Would HubPages be a better place if it had fewer religious threads?
by EmpressFelicity 13 years ago
Just asking.
- 33
Would the World be a Better Place if there were Fewer Agnostics?
by Emile R 13 years ago
I figured the question was coming, so I decided to be pro active. I like agnostics. I see them as open minded individuals with an insatiable curiosity; unwilling to settle for half an answer.Others see us as namby pamby wafflers who can't make up our minds.Would the world be a better place if we...
- 34
Religion preaches love, but is the source of major world conflict.
by Anthea Kwaw 13 years ago
Religion preaches love, peace and unity, but provokes hatred, war and disunity. Would the world be a better place without religion?