Loyalty and religion

Post Reply New Topic

DW_a_mom needs to shut up.

Take it easy. No one needs to shut up. She has a firm mindset about religion and it seems to me she does not evaluate it properly. But she is acting out of personal conviction as are you and I.

Again, your personal feelings and circumstance are not part of this.

You are promoting a book that visciously assaults me as a person.

Visciously attacking people is against this forum's rules, is it not?

You are even a mod and so definitely shouldn't openly support things that support this viscious, personal attack.

"Doing your best to stop the spread" doesn't include advertising it.

I wasn't talking about your faith. But I think its fair to say if a passage is in a book it is part of the book.

If you identify yourself as part of something supporting a book containing a viscious attack on people, you are supporting this viscious attack and reminding people of it every time you show your support for it.

You tried to moderate Sand for criticising ideas yet it is OK for you to assail me as a person through your support of the text that condemns me as being incapable of worth?

Sorry for double post, but I lol'd and thought I'd share this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv9IvCpiHxA[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0wSjJAsrAk&annotation_id=annotation_511982&feature=iv[/youtube]

Part one was banned by youtube because it contained bible passages that were too violent and broke their guidelines.

I have to disagree. This whole discussion is about personal feelings. You may feel that your positions are based in logic, but it is your own personal logic and it has been evaluated from your personal perspective. As a result, it is your personal feelings you are expressing. You cannot invalidate my thoughts just because they don't follow the same logic path as yours. Logic is not a single direct path.

I accept that you feel insulted by my mere presence because I have chosen to stay within a faith family that you feel insults you. I think you have made an extreme over-construction in that, but I will accept it as real. But given the choice between a life time of slow evaluation and changing my whole system of logic to keep from offending one person, I am going to have to live with offending you, and I am sorry for it. I wouldn't choose to offend you, but you don't leave much wiggle room.

Funny, I don't think of myself as having a firm mindset. Its more that I don't want a few people with very strong beliefs to change my conclusions, no matter how well they argue. There is nothing logical about adhering to a faith, and I know that, so it seems to me that the challenge is to keep faith despite the logical challenge. I guess what I do feel strongly about is the bent of this board so totally away from supporting faith of any sort, and I feel that singular intolerance to be a negative thing that needs an occasional voice to offset it. But, honestly, I pretty much always regret that I've bothered. I don't enjoy the style of the debates. I don't think Aspie on these sorts of things (we don't know if I'm AS or not, it is my son who most definitely is) and while I am an effective debator in the NT world, the styles here are very different.

Giftorcurse, you've been outright rude with your statement. Don't post on PPR if you don't want to listen to differing positions. It is supposed to be what this board is all about, even if the norm is that most everyone joins voices in rallying against religion. I am sorry your thread went off-topic, but I don't consider that my fault; my initial response was within the theme, even if you basically chose to ignore and mock it.

If any of you think I believe the same as those you consider Jesus Freaks, you haven't been listening. I promise you, the extreme right is sure I am going to Hell, for my thought process is far too open in their way of thinking. But the extreme right is a much more rare than most realize. Just because they talk the most and the loudest, doesn't mean they represent as much of the faith community as they project. Most people take a more balanced and nuanced approach. That plays out differently for different people, but where I live, it's the norm. In some ways, I know, posters here find that more difficult to respect, as the logic isn't as clean, but there is nothing logical about people and emotions and life and faith. If you want to live a full life, you embrace the messiness of it all and try to live by what you hope is a well formed conscious.

Oh my word.... Are you really not understanding?

I didn't say anything about your presence, I said every time you stated your support in christianity you support something that personally directly insults me in its rulebook, whether or not you believe in the bible it still directly states that I am incapable of good and am worthless.

You support this viewpoint by supporting christianity because the bible is central to it. This isn't logic because we aren't dealing with any ideas a priori, this is all stuff that is here in the world.

Christianity and the bible are inseperable. THIS is a tautology "Christians rely on the Bible as the inspired word of God." - Oxford cultural dictionary. If you don't do this, you aren't a christian. THIS is logic.

You tell Sand (as a mod) that he can't say things that offend you when they are his beliefs, but when you offend people with what you say it is tough.

"You cannot invalidate my thoughts just because they don't follow the same logic path as yours."

I didn't invalidate them, I said they had nothing to do with what I was saying. It doesn't matter what your specific standpoint is, as long as you support christianity and say you do, you are saying you support the bible and so are saying you support that passage, whether you do support it or not.

And logic is either right or wrong... That would be why it is so powerful in philosophy compared to other ways of dealing with things.

But this isn't about logic.

Sand puts forward his belief - you say he can't because it upsets your feelings.

You put forward your affiliation with christianity and that offends me, but that's OK?

Maybe you really do believe that atheists are worthless, because your actions show this. Or maybe you are just very selfish and don't realise your hypocrisy.

Either allow it all and don't try to censor other people's beliefs when you don't like them or allow none of it, including your own offensive affiliations.

The thing that occasionally chuckles me is the psuedo-sophistication of intellectual dishonesty coupled with some punitive spin of an incomprehensible nature! But overall, I just hope to help make/keep this a safe and relatively friendly place where anyone can freely share his or her own thought on any matter.

TheOddGoat, we disagree. End of story.

Logic is not black and white, because it is unique to one person's perspective. Beleive it or not, that is something I've learned from reading here. Everyone uses logic, and they use it differently but completely logically, therefore the logic is not nearly as absolute as the posters wish to believe.

Sorry for miss-stating your point; I do see the difference between presence and statement, but I still disagree with you. And I still disagree that you can correlate an indirect position (Christian = Bible = saying what is said in any passage there-in) with a direct one (a statement by a poster that belief in God is insanity).

Sorry Mr Goat but I see it is you that is using flawed logic to attack DW not the other way around.

You claim, that because she is a Christian she therefore supports every ideological view point in the bible, and therefore, because you are somehow vilified in the bible, she too, is vilifying you.

So lets first take a look at the definition you have posted; "Christians rely on the Bible as the inspired word of God." the operative word here is Inspired. The use of inspired strongly suggests that Christians do not see the bible as the explicitly accurate word of god and as several people have already pointed out the bible was written by humans, inspired by, not dictated by, god and therefore will inevitably contain individual bias.

Secondly; I have always had the opinion that to be 'Christian' means to live ones life in a style similar to 'Christ', using his teachings and philosophy to guide and motivate oneself. I am not a theologian, but I am fairly confident that the biblical account of Jesus and his teachings, demonstrate someone who sincerely wanted people to get along and to make adjustments for others behaviour.

Thirdly; I understand that Jesus taught that whilst his followers should still adhere to the old testament; the new testament takes precedent. In other words, if there is a conflict in ideology between the two, the new testament is the correct one to use.

So to suggest that because a person claims to be Christian, means that they agree with every word in the bible is erroneous. You appear to be as guilty of cherry picking as some religious fundies

As written, such would not have been possible since there was no "new testament" at that time. However, yes, much of the world has that kind of understanding today, and I say that is a complete misunderstanding.