J
JRB
Guest
I couldn't agree more.DRB said:
True, but you are painting with broad strokes there.........there's more like me than you realize..........we're a subversive bunch.BeerDemon said:
No, you get labled as a hater because you spew venom as well.BeerDemon said:
Instead of saying that religion is filled with bigotry and hate maybe you should say that PEOPLE are filled with bigotry and hate. Oh wait, then you would have to include yourself among those filled with bigotry and hate... much like your opinions on religion.
Religion is a handy scapegoat, isn't it?
And the world is now safe.johnbryanpeters said:
Good Lord N8, I agree with you on something.............the rapture must be nearN8 said:
. Yeah hate regardless of the label in front of it is not good.
I can always count on you to whip out a poor analogy. You are correct, PEOPLE are filled with bigotry and hate. But it is people in large organized groups, like Christianity, that get together and attempt to subvert the rest of the population. THAT is the problem and THAT is what I am talking about.Ciaran said:
Venom? What venom are you talking about other than posting that URL - which is a real Web site BTW. I didn't say anything about it so all of you that got riled up about it, it's because the very existance of that site is a black mark on many of your beliefs and you know it. I didn't have to say anything.
Thanks.johnbryanpeters said:
But you did anyway.BeerDemon said:
IMO posting that particular website in your post within the context of this thread was venomous. You deliberately picked one of the worst most offensive websites that claims to be christian. I see it as passive aggressive venom.
My post did not contain an analogy, merely a more truthful expansion of your original statement. My point is that even if religion didn't exist humans would find another excuse to hurt one another. To my eyes it seems that people place the blame on religion instead of on humanity as a whole because no one wants to think that they are in the wrong. I am just pointing out that we are all guilty of transgressions against one another. That NO ONE is an innocent.
I don't want to degenerate into an argument with you, or anyone else about this. My opinions have been expressed. Anything further from me would only be arguing my point against yours... and that argument is futile, we both already know that. Beyond this I think the thread can only degenerate into petty arguments.
Andyman_1970 said:
Like, can I have your car is this is truly the case??...
J
JRB
Guest
I think you can thank whoever turned it into a pissfest.Opeth said:
Jesus was an american.
You are talking about ideologies and I am talking about actual problems within our society that need to be addressed. We have influential nut jobs like Pat Robertson calling for the assasination of foreign leaders and Jerry Falwell endorsing war all over the world "in the name of the Lord". We have rich and powerful religious extremests founding their own law schools to create a new generation of lawyers and judges that will dominate the judicial branch of government. We are becoming a second rate power economically and socially. We can't even turn out enough scientists and engineers to support our own industry anymore and Christians want to teach creationism in school? INSANE!Ciaran said:
You go ahead an generalize and wax philosophical. I am going to continue to discuss actual problems.
J
JRB
Guest
Our ideologies about religion may differ, BD. I am not overly religious, but I also have the right for Christianity to not be attacked. As DRB said, it's extremism. It's no different than Hitler really. He was just an extremist.
You surely don't blame religion as our reason for being substandard in industry developmental careers???
You surely don't blame religion as our reason for being substandard in industry developmental careers???
It's not an attack on Christianity. It's an attack on the current political motives of the Christian organization. My motto is live and let live. So when Christians get out of everyones business, I'll have no problem with them.loco said:
No I don't blame religion for the state of our industry and educational institutions. I blame the fact that as a nation we have become complacent because we have had it so good for so long. But now is not the time to make it worse, which is what the conservative government will do by injecting their ideologies into the educational system.
J
JRB
Guest
BeerDemon said:
I can agree that complacency will be our demise. I agree with all of it, other than the generalization about Christianity. I know what you mean, but it would read better and less offensively to say, some segments of Christianity. I do think we have a serious problem with the current methods of management by our government. I am not sure what the cause is, other than arrogance.
So I'm thinking "BeerDemon, you were a dick to post that link. Jackass". But then I thought "wait a minute, is the response I got an order of magnitude greater than the offense? I think so".
You guys will post and read all kinds of offensive crap about just about everything. Some jerkoff called that crazy congresswomen by the rudest and most vulgar term imagineable and it barely gets a notice. Hilary Clinton is fair game for all manners of offensive name calling. Rude, vulgar, sexist, bigoted remarks of all kinds barely get notice or are in some cases encouraged.
But I make just a reference to a hateful Christian group and the sky is falling. I am a "hater", and "extremest", and all around jackass.
Interesting stuff and I glad I did it. Call it social research.
You guys will post and read all kinds of offensive crap about just about everything. Some jerkoff called that crazy congresswomen by the rudest and most vulgar term imagineable and it barely gets a notice. Hilary Clinton is fair game for all manners of offensive name calling. Rude, vulgar, sexist, bigoted remarks of all kinds barely get notice or are in some cases encouraged.
But I make just a reference to a hateful Christian group and the sky is falling. I am a "hater", and "extremest", and all around jackass.
Interesting stuff and I glad I did it. Call it social research.
J
JRB
Guest
BeerDemon said:
I agree with you. My comment was out of line too. Call this an apology. I don't think you are a hater, or an extremist. I am saying that those crazy Christians, as well as their super duper opposition are extremists. I would simply classify you as a jackass. I don't guess that's so bad, as I am guilty as well. I personally won't bash Hillary. I don't see what benefit there is. With my stupid humor, at least I am amused. I am not amused by bashing Hilary, or any other politicians really. I think a lot of times lately, as someone noted earlier, we lack respect for one another. It is sad to watch. Anyway - my apologies.
That's because there's a war on Christianity going on, didn't you know?BeerDemon said:
Old Man G Funk said:
Finally! When do we start burning the churches? :hot:
The point loco is trying to make is that its ****ed up to categorize ANY group of people in such ways.
For instance, if you replaced christians with Blacks, Gays, Women, Hindus, Pakistanis, Muslims...whatever, and said "They are ****ed up" well, you'd offend those of them who arent ****ed up...because well, not all of them are. Its amazing how discrimination against race/gender/ethnicity and religion are so hated, unless its against christians.
For instance, if you replaced christians with Blacks, Gays, Women, Hindus, Pakistanis, Muslims...whatever, and said "They are ****ed up" well, you'd offend those of them who arent ****ed up...because well, not all of them are. Its amazing how discrimination against race/gender/ethnicity and religion are so hated, unless its against christians.
J
JRB
Guest
Haven't there already been some guys on that???Tenchiro said:
If you read some ID blogs, they blame the evilutionists. Too bad it was some kids that attended a Christian school and grew up in Christian households that decided to rebel.loco said:
One should not categorize people, but one can categorize the chosen actions or ideals of groups.BurlyShirley said:
For instance, saying all Christians are evil (or good) is wrong. Saying Christianity has some evil (or good) teachings may be wrong or right depending on many factors, but it is not on par with making racist statements.
I disagree. I think its exactly the same. If I say "Blacks steal" it is technically correct that SOME blacks steal, but that doesnt make it ok to make those generalizations.Old Man G Funk said:
Sure...........but don't hold your breath..........the whole rapture deal is a farse.PonySoldier said:Like, can I have your car is this is truly the case??...
"Christians steal," would be wrong. "Christianity promotes stealing," might be wrong, but not for the same reason. One focuses on a group of people and paints a stereotypical brush, the other focuses on an ideology.BurlyShirley said:
Edit: I'm not actually saying the Christianity promotes stealing. I'm just using Burly's example as illustration.
Your view of an ideology could be considered as bigoted of another's view of a specific race. It is exactly the same.Old Man G Funk said:
Andyman_1970 said:
Could you expand on this thought?
Burly, if you can't see the difference between these two sayings:BurlyShirley said:
All Communists suck
Communism sucks
then there's not much more I can say. If you seriously don't think that I can attack the ideology of a group of people without being a bigot, then that's simply too bad for you.
Old Man G Funk said:
The point I am trying to make is that what's "acceptable" isnt necessarily any different than what isnt. Personally, racial slurs, ethnic stereotypes, whatever, dont really bother me, its when people start picking and choosing which ones are OK to insult. Obviously "communism" is broadly hated, so its acceptable to say it sucks, but if I say "The Gay lifestyle" is disgusting, then you get all bent out of shape. Both are an ideology of one kind or another. However, if i say "Christianity teaches hate" then you'd be fine. Its all the same really.
I'd love to..........................Westy said:
The passage in question regarding the rapture (which BTW is not a word found in the Bible) is 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
This scenario is created by Paul, no where do we see Jesus predict such an event. The Gospel passages alluding to “the Son of Man coming on clouds” (Mark 13:26, 14:62) are about Jesus’ vindication His “coming” to heaven from earth. The parables about a returning King or Master (Luke 19:11-27) were originally about God returning to Jerusalem (as He was not there in the 2nd Temple period), not about Jesus returning to earth.
I don’t deny the Ascension of Jesus or the Second Coming – I believe some future event will result in the personal presence of Jesus within God’s New Creation.
Paul’s description of the rapture in Thessalonians is a brightly colored version of what he says in 1 Cor. 15-51:54 and Philippians 3:20-21. Paul borrows imagery from Biblical and political sources. He echoes the story of Moses coming down the mountain with the Torah, a loud trumpet sounds and a loud voice is heard.
Second, he echoes Daniel 7, in which “the people of the saints of the Most High” (that is, the “one like a Son of Man) are vindicated over their pagan enemy by being raised up to sit with God in glory. This metaphor was used to describe Jesus in the Gospels and now Paul applies it to Christians who are suffering persecution.
Third, Paul conjures up images of an emperor visiting a colony. The citizens go out to meet him in the open country and escort him into the city. Paul’s image of the people “meeting the Lord in the air” should be read with the assumption that the people will immediately turn around and lead the Lord back to the newly remade world.
[edit] this concludes todays RideMonkey Bible study............
Being gay is not a choice. It's just like your race, you are born with it.BurlyShirley said:
Yes, acceptable to me depends on whether I agree with you or not, but there are different levels of "acceptable." Making a statement about Christianity is NOT the same as making a racist statement, no matter how you try to dress it up.
Andyman_1970 said:
Man are there gonna be a lotta Pissed Off peeps in Colorado Springs then....
Well, you saidBeerDemon said:
You generalized those who follow the teaching of jesus in with godhatesfags and thats what caused people to be upset.
If you care to try and sidestep this with doublespeak (which I highly suspect you will) I should point out that I dont really care and you can save yourself the trouble because you've made it quite clear to me, over the time that Ive been posting here, how you actually feel. Dont waste your time.
Look in the mirror and see who is dressing things up. Im simply saying that generalizing large groups of people based on ethnicity/skin color/religion is wrong, and you're saying "Well, it okay SOMETIMES as long as they're christian"Old Man G Funk said:
Christianity, besides being a choice, is also a culture and so is the gay lifestyle and YOU KNOW that is true. Notice I didnt say "Gays" are wrong, I said "The gay lifestyle" which is a choice, because even if you are gay, you could CHOOSE not to live it. See now, you're faced with an issue of deciding right and wrong for large masses of people, when its really much simpler just not to be a bigot, and NOT generalize people for their culture or beleifs.
Andyman_1970 said:I'd love to..........................
Thanks.
You are equivocating. Nowhere did I say at any time that it is OK to generalize about large groups of people, whether they are Christian or not, and I challenge you to find where I said that. In fact, I said the opposite.BurlyShirley said:
And, the "gay lifestyle" depends on what you mean. If you are talking about the self-expression of how they were born, (i.e. through their acts in the bedroom) that is still wrong. If you are truly talking about chosen actions (and who you are attracted to is NOT chosen) then it might not be wrong. To call me bigoted, however, is completely beyond the pale, especially since I've taken a stance completely contradictory to bigotry.
