Callaghan [1316121]

This thread is embarrassing to read. I'm just going to drop in to remind Christians that those who assume the position of "teacher" will be judged to higher standards when the time comes, and remind atheists that "sky daddy" is an unoriginal insult.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

Ok so how do we improve this thread? Do you have any suggestions?

Callaghan [1316121]

Less naval gazing and armchair sociology, more Q&A.

Violence [2603171]

.

I'll keep to my atheism thank you very much.

No luck
No gods
No heaven
No hell
No karma
No kismet
No superstitions
No prayers
No pergatory
No guilt
No sin
No torment
No judgement

Latinobull14 [2881384]

Again you are wrong. My point to your view of me are not a rewording or a politer version of your saying. It’s contradictory of what you are saying.


You said I’m here for pride,(polishing my halo) and how much I can use the book, but it’s the exact opposite which I explained.


You used the example of how I would avoid speaking about bad “Christian example” and I gave you my answer on those touchy subjects and how I don’t avoid touchy subjects.


How are they the same?

Now if you are really true to your atheism, that means you believe in subjective morality. Your idea of good is different from my idea of good, which is different to Hitlers idea of good. Since there is no objective morality, no sin, then we can not judge other people version of good. So if your son wants to join a cult, if that’s his idea of good then you can’t judge him for that.


If you can agree with that statement then you are true to your atheism.
If you can’t agree with that, then you have to verify if you really believe what you are claiming.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

Well in this case then morality would be the question of "who is this good for?" and "Who is this bad for?" and the moral thing to do would be doing things that at least, would not hurt other people. I know this is an oversimplification of things, and it doesn't cover everything, but it does cover a lot of the morals people agree on.

Violence [2603171]

.

I'll keep to my atheism thank you very much.

No luck
No gods
No heaven
No hell
No karma
No kismet
No superstitions
No prayers
No pergatory
No guilt
No sin
No torment
No judgement

Latinobull14 [2881384]

Again you are wrong. My point to your view of me are not a rewording or a politer version of your saying. It’s contradictory of what you are saying.


You said I’m here for pride,(polishing my halo) and how much I can use the book, but it’s the exact opposite which I explained.


You used the example of how I would avoid speaking about bad “Christian example” and I gave you my answer on those touchy subjects and how I don’t avoid touchy subjects.


How are they the same?

Now if you are really true to your atheism, that means you believe in subjective morality. Your idea of good is different from my idea of good, which is different to Hitlers idea of good. Since there is no objective morality, no sin, then we can not judge other people version of good. So if your son wants to join a cult, if that’s his idea of good then you can’t judge him for that.


If you can agree with that statement then you are true to your atheism.
If you can’t agree with that, then you have to verify if you really believe what you are claiming.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

Well in this case then morality would be the question of "who is this good for?" and "Who is this bad for?" and the moral thing to do would be doing things that at least, would not hurt other people. I know this is an oversimplification of things, and it doesn't cover everything, but it does cover a lot of the morals people agree on.

Latinobull14 [2881384]

But that’s the issue at hand right. Who says not hurting people is good? Why should I care for helping those who are less unfortunate. Why shouldn’t I keep all my money for myself? The problem for me is that there is this endless loop with subjective morality.


Why should I care for other people?
Because it’s good.
why is it good?
Because you would want someone to take care of you.
But if I’m selfish, I can better take care of myself so why should I help others if I can help myself?
Because it’s good.

That’s the issue with subjective moralism. It gets to a point where there’s your version of good and my version of good and neither of us is wrong. It’s like what’s your favorite color? It’s just a subjective question that can’t be right or wrong.


If you believe in that, that’s what you believe, but because of the reason earlier, I can’t accept the idea of subjective moralism.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Would you like some more straw for the man you're fighting?

Show post

broleaf [3140943]

I fail to see the extreme distortion; I think you are just in denial. Feel free to poke a hole in the theorem I posted however.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Simple. Atheists are more moral than Christians.

Looking to a book of obvious fiction and claiming "this is where I derive my morals from is a horrible thing to do. It abandons any personal responsibility for critical thinking or governing behaviour.

A Christian can go to the Bible and simply say "I am beating my slave, but not to death. I am a good person following the teaching of the Bible". Or they might say "I know someone who has a different religion than me. I am going to stone them to death in according with the teachings of God. I am a good person". Or they might be caught committing a sexual assault on a woman so they would pay the woman's father off and then marry her thinking "I am doing the right thing".

Whereas an atheist would usually (I can't speak for all atheists) come to the conclusion that enslaving people, stoning them to death, etc are bad things because they can critically appraise those actions and realise they are bad. Not good, like you think.

Latinobull14 [2881384]

So how is the bible fiction? What proof do you have that it is total fiction? Almost all scholars and non-religious historians agree that there was a man named Jesus who did exist in the 1st century.

Also, how does the bible not allow critical thinking? If anything it greatly encourages this. Jesus in many scenarios spoke in parables. He spoke in these ways to help us think and understand the issue at hand and to analyze it and get an answer from that analysis.... which is critical thinking.

Also, the bible doesn't answer everything in life. The Bible speaks about clothing the poor and feeding the hungry. That is what the bible says. But who do I help? Do I help those struggling in Mexico, India, Canada, the Philippines, the USA, or the Remote Islands? The Bible doesn't say which one gets priority. So I have to use my judgment and my analysis of the situation to see where I should help. This is just one example of how the teachings of the bible still require analysis and judgment.

ElHeffe [2564022]

I am impressed, are you a professional contortionist by any chance?

Let me simplify my point.

The Bible quite clearly teaches that people of other religions should be stoned to death.

Now there are two issues that can be derived.

1. You think that this is the moral way to behave (Christians are instructed in morality by the Bible). So if you are not actively doing that, you're going against the teachings if God. You're a sinner and will burn in hell.

2. You don't think this is a moral way to behave. In which case you haven't derived morality from the Bible. That means it's quite possible for other people (such as atheists) to derive a moral code outside the Bible. Soz being no better than an atheist, it's the Big Fire for you.

So... should people of other religions be stoned to death?

Latinobull14 [2881384]

So I understand your point, but you are missing a huge part chunk which would change the narrative of your thinking and that would be Jesus. So yes you are right that in the times of Moses and the early Jewish religion, the law stated that if you were an adulterer, or worshipped one of the false Gods, or practiced homosexuality, you were to be stoned to death. I agree with you as that was the moral standard at that time and the law that was placed. I will need a Jewish person to verify this statement but I believe that some Orthodox Jews still believe in the Mosaic Laws and practice them. Again don't quote me but this is what I heard but I could be 100% wrong.

Christianity isn't built on Mosaic Law but rather built on Jesus. What does Jesus say about stoning an adulteress woman?

3 As he was speaking, the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in the act of adultery. They put her in front of the crowd.

4 “Teacher,” they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?”

6 They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. 7 They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” 8 Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust.

9 When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. 10 Then Jesus stood up again and said to the woman, “Where are your accusers? Didn’t even one of them condemn you?”

11 “No, Lord,” she said.

And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more.”
JOHN 8:3-11 NLT

TLDR - The leaders told Jesus we should stone this girl according to the law. Jesus said whoever hasn't sinned throw the first stone. Everyone left and no one threw a stone. Jesus told the woman to go on and don't sin anymore.

But how is Jesus in the Jewish tradition, going against the laws of the Jewish religion?

Jesus came to fulfill the law not to abolish it. He was the ultimate sacrifice or the one to get stoned or die for our sins. He took up all the pain and suffering from the law so we don't have to.

13 You were dead because of your sins and because your sinful nature was not yet cut away. Then God made you alive with Christ, for he forgave all our sins. 14 He canceled the record of the charges against us and took it away by nailing it to the cross.
Colossians 2:13-14 NLT

So now instead of living by the law of Moses' time, we live by the grace of Jesus. So your statement that Christians follow the morality of stoning sinners is incorrect because Jesus took our place for death and gave us the ability to have a second chance.

This topic goes a bit deeper but I think this will satisfy your points and hopefully change your narrative. Remember, the Bible is both a morality and a historical book :)

Strand [2821241]

Interesting that you won't respond to my post about taking the words of scripture in their historical context. Makes it seem like you're pursuing an agenda rather than here for a debate that could end up teaching you something.

If you read more of Exodus and Leviticus beyond just the laws you've cherry-picked, you'll find mention of offerings and sacrifices one could make in order to be reconciled and avoid further punishment. Perhaps the looming threat of harsh penalties was designed to ensure that people would be motivated to make amends for their sins rather than go on living in their unclean state. I'm willing to bet that most people would rather buy and sacrifice a bull than be stoned.

Anyway, your point is moot because of the New Testament, which fulfills the Old. Jesus' sacrifice negated the need for any further offering of purification, for no sacrifice could surpass his own. Through his teachings and his sacrifice he also nullified the need for anyone to die for their sins. So don't pretend there's some Biblical mandate on Christians to stone anyone.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Liar.

Just be honest instead of digging your hole deeper. There's no historical content. Either it's the Word of God or it's not. There's no footnotes that say "oh, this is just a metaphor".

"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:18

Not one jot of law has changed. Not one tittle of the law has changed.

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” Exodus 22:19.

That's not a suggestion, it's not an idea. It IS a mandate. That's the morality of the Bible. Oh yeah - feed and clothe the poor by all means. But also stone mediums to death.

The fact is that the Bible is just a buffet to people. They pick the bits they like and they ignore the bits they don't. People make up their own moral mode and then they look for justification for it.
Same with the point I made earlier about people inheriting their parents religion. There's no one in the world who believes in God because of the cosmological argument. You believed because you're softheaded and then went looking for a bunch of logical hoops to jump though to justify the thing you already believed.

We ALL make up our own moral codes.

Strand [2821241]

Me--"I'm going to explain how the tiny pieces of the puzzle you provided fit into the larger narrative, historically, socially, and as they relate to Judeo-Christian tradition."

You--"I'm gonna ignore all that and pretend the straw man Christian I've cobbled together in my head based on my interactions with a few weirdos on the internet represents the views and practices of the entirety of a community for the past 2000 years."

Always funny how certain atheists refuse to consider nuances or gray areas.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Simple. Atheists are more moral than Christians.

Looking to a book of obvious fiction and claiming "this is where I derive my morals from is a horrible thing to do. It abandons any personal responsibility for critical thinking or governing behaviour.

A Christian can go to the Bible and simply say "I am beating my slave, but not to death. I am a good person following the teaching of the Bible". Or they might say "I know someone who has a different religion than me. I am going to stone them to death in according with the teachings of God. I am a good person". Or they might be caught committing a sexual assault on a woman so they would pay the woman's father off and then marry her thinking "I am doing the right thing".

Whereas an atheist would usually (I can't speak for all atheists) come to the conclusion that enslaving people, stoning them to death, etc are bad things because they can critically appraise those actions and realise they are bad. Not good, like you think.

Show post

Latinobull14 [2881384]

So how is the bible fiction? What proof do you have that it is total fiction? Almost all scholars and non-religious historians agree that there was a man named Jesus who did exist in the 1st century.

Also, how does the bible not allow critical thinking? If anything it greatly encourages this. Jesus in many scenarios spoke in parables. He spoke in these ways to help us think and understand the issue at hand and to analyze it and get an answer from that analysis.... which is critical thinking.

Also, the bible doesn't answer everything in life. The Bible speaks about clothing the poor and feeding the hungry. That is what the bible says. But who do I help? Do I help those struggling in Mexico, India, Canada, the Philippines, the USA, or the Remote Islands? The Bible doesn't say which one gets priority. So I have to use my judgment and my analysis of the situation to see where I should help. This is just one example of how the teachings of the bible still require analysis and judgment.

ElHeffe [2564022]

I am impressed, are you a professional contortionist by any chance?

Let me simplify my point.

The Bible quite clearly teaches that people of other religions should be stoned to death.

Now there are two issues that can be derived.

1. You think that this is the moral way to behave (Christians are instructed in morality by the Bible). So if you are not actively doing that, you're going against the teachings if God. You're a sinner and will burn in hell.

2. You don't think this is a moral way to behave. In which case you haven't derived morality from the Bible. That means it's quite possible for other people (such as atheists) to derive a moral code outside the Bible. Soz being no better than an atheist, it's the Big Fire for you.

So... should people of other religions be stoned to death?

broleaf [3140943]

1. You think that this is the moral way to behave (Christians are instructed in morality by the Bible). So if you are not actively doing that, you're going against the teachings if God. You're a sinner and will burn in hell.

Not a single man or woman alive is untouched or uncorrupted in one way or another by sin. Hence, the importance of rebirth and communion. You bring up a valid point, although however I'd respond with 'render unto Caesar' and such, dismissing your entire argument.

2. You don't think this is a moral way to behave. In which case you haven't derived morality from the Bible. That means it's quite possible for other people (such as atheists) to derive a moral code outside the Bible. Soz being no better than an atheist, it's the Big Fire for you.

Don't forget, our Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for their wickedness.

So... should people of other religions be stoned to death?

Muh Render unto Caesar.

Man, did I just speak like a politician?

Lastly, my previous statements about atheists lacking moral grounding still stand.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Ah, so you are simply a moral coward, hitting the eject button when you've been demonstrated as a fool.

This has nothing to do with Caesar. This is to do with the Bible and morality. If you claim the Bible is the source of morality, then it's clear the teachings of the Bible are the moral thing to do.

I understand you might be prevented from carrying these actions out. But if you hear that someone else has stoned:

A blasphemer
An adulterer
An occultist
People who have sex before they are married

Then are you pleased that a moral action has been carried out? Either way you lose. Either you're a lunatic who thinks people should be stoned to death. Or you know people should be stoned to death because the Bible makes many, many deeply immoral pronoucements.

So you can f**k off with the "you should talk to a priest". Because it's YOU who are making these pronouncements.
And you can f**k off with your "atheists have no morals" bullshit. Because buddy, don't pretend your shit don't stink.

broleaf [3140943]

I am just being politically correct and adhering to 'render unto Caesar' on these forums. In a sense, it should be clear enough how I feel about non-spiritual individuals.

Don't get mad; every atheist moral belief is based on the contemporary context and is subject to change. Tomorrow, for all you know, your side may consider child sacrifice the norm or embrace pedophilia. In fact, there has been a recent push by some to change the term 'pedophile' to 'child attracted minor'—that's atheist moralism for you. It's not based on any moral grounding, making it subject to atomize and divide into irrational, chaotic directions throughout the age of spirit.

broleaf [3140943]

It's a rebranding of the term 'pedophile.

Callaghan [1316121]

This thread is embarrassing to read. I'm just going to drop in to remind Christians that those who assume the position of "teacher" will be judged to higher standards when the time comes, and remind atheists that "sky daddy" is an unoriginal insult.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

Ok so how do we improve this thread? Do you have any suggestions?

Violence [2603171]

.

I'll keep to my atheism thank you very much.

No luck
No gods
No heaven
No hell
No karma
No kismet
No superstitions
No prayers
No pergatory
No guilt
No sin
No torment
No judgement

broleaf [3140943]

Staff Edit - Harassment

Violence [2603171]

Broleaf...... You'll be banned soon enough so I'm not going to waste too much effort on replying to you barely literate drivel.


I will repeat one line from my original post.


If my son chooses a religion I have no issue with his choice.

Violence [2603171]

.

I'll keep to my atheism thank you very much.

No luck
No gods
No heaven
No hell
No karma
No kismet
No superstitions
No prayers
No pergatory
No guilt
No sin
No torment
No judgement

broleaf [3140943]

Staff Edit - Harassment

Violence [2603171]

Broleaf...... You'll be banned soon enough so I'm not going to waste too much effort on replying to you barely literate drivel.


I will repeat one line from my original post.


If my son chooses a religion I have no issue with his choice.

Violence [2603171]

Oh look broleaf got banned.


Anyway.....

Violence [2603171]

Edited

Strand [2821241]

Interesting that you won't respond to my post about taking the words of scripture in their historical context. Makes it seem like you're pursuing an agenda rather than here for a debate that could end up teaching you something.

If you read more of Exodus and Leviticus beyond just the laws you've cherry-picked, you'll find mention of offerings and sacrifices one could make in order to be reconciled and avoid further punishment. Perhaps the looming threat of harsh penalties was designed to ensure that people would be motivated to make amends for their sins rather than go on living in their unclean state. I'm willing to bet that most people would rather buy and sacrifice a bull than be stoned.

Anyway, your point is moot because of the New Testament, which fulfills the Old. Jesus' sacrifice negated the need for any further offering of purification, for no sacrifice could surpass his own. Through his teachings and his sacrifice he also nullified the need for anyone to die for their sins. So don't pretend there's some Biblical mandate on Christians to stone anyone.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Liar.

Just be honest instead of digging your hole deeper. There's no historical content. Either it's the Word of God or it's not. There's no footnotes that say "oh, this is just a metaphor".

"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:18

Not one jot of law has changed. Not one tittle of the law has changed.

“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.” Exodus 22:19.

That's not a suggestion, it's not an idea. It IS a mandate. That's the morality of the Bible. Oh yeah - feed and clothe the poor by all means. But also stone mediums to death.

The fact is that the Bible is just a buffet to people. They pick the bits they like and they ignore the bits they don't. People make up their own moral mode and then they look for justification for it.
Same with the point I made earlier about people inheriting their parents religion. There's no one in the world who believes in God because of the cosmological argument. You believed because you're softheaded and then went looking for a bunch of logical hoops to jump though to justify the thing you already believed.

We ALL make up our own moral codes.

Strand [2821241]

Me--"I'm going to explain how the tiny pieces of the puzzle you provided fit into the larger narrative, historically, socially, and as they relate to Judeo-Christian tradition."

You--"I'm gonna ignore all that and pretend the straw man Christian I've cobbled together in my head based on my interactions with a few weirdos on the internet represents the views and practices of the entirety of a community for the past 2000 years."

Always funny how certain atheists refuse to consider nuances or gray areas.

ElHeffe [2564022]

Nuance? Grey area?

This is the Word of GOD, dude. The WORD of f**kING GOD.

There 'ain't no grey area. You stone the bastards God tells you to stone.

Violence [2603171]

Boredom boredom

Latinobull14 [2881384]

It's me again!

Not gonna lie, I genuinely enjoyed the conversation that I had in my previous post and wanted to extend the topic to a singular topic which is Jesus. This is the foundation of the Christian beliefs, (at least it should be). With that, there are different arguments involving Jesus whether he was only a prophet, not a God, he didn't exist, etc.

Let's talk about it. Let's have a conversation about it and feel free to question my belief.

My Belief:
Jesus is the Son of God who came down to heaven in human form to save us from our sins by dying on the cross for us. He then resurrected after 3 days and after addressing his disciples in his resurrected form, he ascended to heaven. Jesus himself is God but separate from God the father.

AMA
Edit: Edited my belief portion as my wording made it seem like Jesus isn't God but only the son of God and not God himself.

UPDATE Been MIA had life things happen lol but I will get around to answering everyone points when available

Ata [2507441]

I am most interested in comparison and discussion with other religions.

You say you believe in Jesus as God etc. Are you ready to kill for your beliefs? Possibly you aren't, but millions of people in the last 2000 years have been more than willing to do that. All in the name of that same Christian God!

Then someone else comes in and says Allah is the only God. And they will also kill anyone that says different. How can they both be right? Why do people kill in the name of faith?

Latinobull14 [2881384]

Yeah, so people would do whatever in what they believe to be true. In America, there have been cults in the past and these cult leaders would convince their followers to kill themselves for the cult leaders because of whatever reason. The followers of the cult believe that the leader is the truth, mainly through manipulation and other means, and in doing so do what he said because in their mind it's true or right.

Now with religion, there are very few times when God calls a nation to overthrow another nation in his name. There are a few examples of that in the Old Testament but there is a reason. For example in Deuteronomy, God calls Israel to destroy and in simple terms wipe out the Canaanites. Why would God order that? The Canaanites were doing very wicked things. To name a few, child sacrifice, homosexuality, bestiality, worshipping idols etc. They had been doing this for generations and God couldn't allow this wickedness to happen so he brought so called the Israelites to destroy them.

Now after Jesus, I can't speak for every war because I don't know the background and historical context of every war. But what I can say is that people who use Christianity or God's name to justify power, money, or fame unjustly are wrong. There have been many wars in which people used Christianity as the reason but it was mainly for power or money. Those were wrong and those who claimed to be Christian who started the war were wrong.

Christianity isn't just a title you add to your name and you are a Christian. Christianity is a way of life and true Christians aren't Christians by what they say but are Christians by what they do. Not that they are perfect because from the pastor to a child all sin and fall short. But they overall life and actions in their life should reflect God.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

Ok, I think that child sacrifice is wrong because murdering innocent people is wrong (unless, of course God demands a sacrifice, but not of a kid, and then it's okay and a good thing?) I don't really see anything wrong with homosexuality, as long as all the people consent to it and taking precautions to prevent harm (eg. std's) as applicable, bestiality is wrong because the humans have too much power over the lives of other animals for them to be able to consent without coercion, explicit or implied, and worshiping idols is fine because of religious freedom, and people should not be persecuted for their religion. I need to do more research on what actually happened, but some of the things that they did are definitely a lot worse than other things.
Edit: I did some research and apparently God ordered a genocide of these people. This is not good, guys, and I don't think they deserved to be killed like this (I don't believe in killing criminals at all), especially if it's over stuff that;s not even crimes, like being gay or practicing their religion.

Latinobull14 [2881384]

You are correct it was a complete wiping of the people of Canaan.

The answer is why? Why did God Judge them so harshly? IDK why God decided to kill them for their sins vs other possible judgements.

But what I can say is that if he is the creator of us, he decides what is the right judgement on his creation. In the same way, if a son skips school, the father can choose a judgment of no hanging out with friends or no friends and no phone. One is more drastic but both are equally fair punishments.

But why are you comparing the separation of entertainment to the death of a region? I am just showing that a leader figure is capable of setting their degree of punishment. Now it's important the Canaanites didn't do this for 1 year and God was like nope be gone forever. This was 300+ years of going against God's word and destroying God's creations. In comparison to a father and a son. If the father has a rule of no weed in the house and the son constantly and blatantly smokes throughout the house. The father is going to restrict things from him, remove phones, remove recreational stuff, etc. But with those changes, if he still doesn't care and the son is still smoking and not changing anything and not caring about the rules the father set in place.

The father has 1 of 2 choices. Remove the rule and let the son do what he wants, or remove him from the house(once he is of age) and he isn't allowed to live in the house. Removing him from the house will keep his laws and rules in place but it will cause his son to probably be homeless, it might cause him to do more drugs but he wasn't able to follow the rules of his leader for a long time so drastic measures must take place.

This is God. The Canaanites were defiling themselves destroying children and practicing sins that completely go against God's rules and laws. So since they didn't change for centuries, God needed to go to drastic measures.

There's more to this but I'll leave this here if you have more questions or don't agree let me know and I'll explain more points.

Violence [2603171]

This threads been resurrected again??



Why bother? You have your beliefs, you want to bang on about how super wonderful they are and how much of the book you can use in lieu of actual debating skills.

Splendid. Let me save the casuals the time with a surmised version of the last 8 pages.


OP : I love me some jesus, he the main man .


Everyone else. Bully for you, it's not for me tho and the church actually causes a great deal of misery but you do you.


OP well in corinthians job lot banana it says "thine misery is inflicted upon you as part of his great plan to bring you closer to the divine light" Ergo I'm right and you're wrong but I'll dress this up in a wall of text so big no sane person will bother to read it properly.

I'm off to polish my halo. (BTW you're all wrong but jusus will save you after you die because that's an argument I find ultimately conclusive because I'm so squishy for the lord)


Everyone else. Mmmm hmmm. So explain again why the clergy like wearing children's sphincters as cock rings?

OP. That's not MY church......




BORING.

Latinobull14 [2881384]

So you are completely wrong. I don't make this post to show how much I know the bible or my debating skills. This isn't a pride thing for me.

I make these posts for three reasons:

1: I genuinely enjoy speaking to people about different beliefs and ideologies (Side reason)
2: I believe that Christianity is true and I want to share the joy and peace with others so they can one day have the same joy and peace I have(Main reason)
3: Help those who are Christians who are confused or have questions about topics that I can answer (Semi-Main Reason)

Someone can correct me, but I am pretty sure I answered every question both easy and difficult to understand. Some questions I can't go full detail because I don't know the topic or studied the topic enough, but overall I'll give my input. Since you brought up the topic of priests sexually assaulting kids. If a priest sexually assaults a kid, he sinned and there should be consequences for his sin. If a priest constantly commits SA to a child, I wouldn't call him a Christian because he isn't turning away from his sin and living a Christ-like life.

Like I said in many posts, being a Christian isn't a title, it's a lifestyle that you must live 24/7. I don't call someone a Christian based on their title or their contributions to the church. I call someone a Christian based on the life they live every day. Not that they are perfect, because I'm the farthest from perfect, but as a person who strives to get closer to God and refrain from sin. And when they do sin, they turn away from it and try harder to not fall into it.


If you truly find this boring and don't want me to respond to the post, you have every right to not post and ignore it. But if you do respond and I find the topic interesting, I have every right to respond back.

Violence [2603171]

This threads been resurrected again??



Why bother? You have your beliefs, you want to bang on about how super wonderful they are and how much of the book you can use in lieu of actual debating skills.

Splendid. Let me save the casuals the time with a surmised version of the last 8 pages.


OP : I love me some jesus, he the main man .


Everyone else. Bully for you, it's not for me tho and the church actually causes a great deal of misery but you do you.


OP well in corinthians job lot banana it says "thine misery is inflicted upon you as part of his great plan to bring you closer to the divine light" Ergo I'm right and you're wrong but I'll dress this up in a wall of text so big no sane person will bother to read it properly.

I'm off to polish my halo. (BTW you're all wrong but jusus will save you after you die because that's an argument I find ultimately conclusive because I'm so squishy for the lord)


Everyone else. Mmmm hmmm. So explain again why the clergy like wearing children's sphincters as cock rings?

OP. That's not MY church......




BORING.

Latinobull14 [2881384]

So you are completely wrong. I don't make this post to show how much I know the bible or my debating skills. This isn't a pride thing for me.

I make these posts for three reasons:

1: I genuinely enjoy speaking to people about different beliefs and ideologies (Side reason)
2: I believe that Christianity is true and I want to share the joy and peace with others so they can one day have the same joy and peace I have(Main reason)
3: Help those who are Christians who are confused or have questions about topics that I can answer (Semi-Main Reason)

Someone can correct me, but I am pretty sure I answered every question both easy and difficult to understand. Some questions I can't go full detail because I don't know the topic or studied the topic enough, but overall I'll give my input. Since you brought up the topic of priests sexually assaulting kids. If a priest sexually assaults a kid, he sinned and there should be consequences for his sin. If a priest constantly commits SA to a child, I wouldn't call him a Christian because he isn't turning away from his sin and living a Christ-like life.

Like I said in many posts, being a Christian isn't a title, it's a lifestyle that you must live 24/7. I don't call someone a Christian based on their title or their contributions to the church. I call someone a Christian based on the life they live every day. Not that they are perfect, because I'm the farthest from perfect, but as a person who strives to get closer to God and refrain from sin. And when they do sin, they turn away from it and try harder to not fall into it.


If you truly find this boring and don't want me to respond to the post, you have every right to not post and ignore it. But if you do respond and I find the topic interesting, I have every right to respond back.

EverleighRaven [2949890]

I have a question: how does Christianity bring you joy and peace? The idea of converting to Christianity stresses me out and scares me because I do not like the feeling of being watched and judged 24/7 to always do the right thing and not mess up or sin or think the wrong thought (I have intrusive thoughts), because God is always there watching me, and live like this 24/7 for the rest of my life, and I do not think it would last long-term, because I think it the stress would take such a huge toll on my body and my mind and be very unhealthy for me. This is what I am worried about. So as a non-religious person, I just try not to think about dying and possibly going to hell and suffer, that sounds terrifying as well, so I just put off thinking about it and making a decision about this. Also I do not want to decide to become a Christian one day, and then regret my decision because I couldn't handle it. Please help me-I have never been religious at all, and I don't really know what to expect, and I know I will never be perfect like God, and striving for perfection is likely just setting me up for failure. This obligation just feels so overwhelming.