A question for the believers....

[Guest]

If one believes they honestly have the truth about the religious metaphysic... is it wrong to inform others of it?

It isn't if they ask you for that information.

On the other hand the next person that wakes me up banging on my door just to invite me to church may have have to go home and change their shorts.

EDIT: I just realised I don't have Muslems, Jews, Buhdists or anyone else disturbing me at home and the grocery store, the airport the radio, the tv, the billboards, etc. trying shove ther religion down my throat.

 

[English Lady]

LC... I understand as much as I can do I think. And I'd like you to know that I don't agree with alot of the stuff you have had a problem with on here but I think you already know that

Oh and mismused agree with me to your hearts content. I like it when people agree with me

 

[Guest]

Yeah well the women were Arameans, not Christians and not even believers in God but PAGANS just like your friend the cloud

So they were lesser people then? Not worthy? Beneath you?

And you would do well to treat cloudy with the sort of respect you so adamantly demand.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

LC... I understand as much as I can do I think. And I'd like you to know that I don't agree with alot of the stuff you have had a problem with on here but I think you already know that

Oh and mismused agree with me to your hearts content. I like it when people agree with me

Yeah I know and I respect how you've been cool with all of it despite your disagreements even when I went overboard and how you've been cool in the post-Apocalyptic landscape this thread currently is.

You sort of understand where I'm coming from. I sort of understand where you're coming from and all is daisies and waffles. Mmm, waffles.

 

[stingray61]

========================

Repetitious insistence does it for me; e.g.


9:14 AM (Lit time)
Oh and one more tiny thing. I don't care if you believe in my opinions or not, just as long as you stop mis-interpreting the Bible.

(What you believe is "the" interpretation.)

9:31 AM (Lit time)
As I said before I don't really want people to agree with me I just want them to undrestand the Bible correctly, if, after that they still don't believe then that's fine too.

(Ibid? Seems to be. Again, your interpretation of what is correct. Come on, Sting, that's what you're saying. You said you'd admit it if any showed you that you were wrong. Are you really so blind?)

11:43 AM (Lit time)
Christ is the only way to Heaven. The Bible is the Word of God as written down by men and The Holy Spirit. If you DON'T believe what it says you will not get you to Heaven. You must believe in what the Bible says (as far as being saved goes) and follow it in order to go to Heaven. At least that's what I believe.

(Heh-heh! Yeah, right, you've never said any HAS to believe in what I believe in, or where I've said as you qoute "I'm right, and you better see it"? Give us a break. If that isn't "I better," nothing is.)


You're being ignorant and childish. I do believe that you must believe in what the Bible and God and Jesus said in order to get to Heaven, that doesn't denote that I think you HAVE to believe, only that you have to if you want to go to Heaven. There IS a difference there you know if you can't see it that's your choice

12:02 PM (lit time)
Sorry but I think if you're going to get into this discussion at all you should at least be willing to share your beliefs.

(Yeah, that's a kind of "I better" thingy, especially since it fits with the rest of your insistences.)

No that's a kind of "don't be a hypocrite" thingy

(and)

just don't argue mine unless your willing to put yours up to the same interrogation. Refusing to do so is hypocritical IMO

(Name calling now. Hmm! Yep, that's an insistence too. No doubt about it.)

It isn'tname calling, it's calling a camel a camel so to speak.

(and)

I'm trying to get them to understand the Bible as I do before they go knocking it. If they did that, they wouldn't need me or anyone else to convert them or convince them of anything because Jesus, and God, and The Bible do that just fine all by themselves. It's because they don't truly understand it that they disagree with it.

(Now this insistence is a real jewel. I don't truly understand according to what you believe, eh? That's arrogance in the extreme. I started to say pompous, but that sometimes indicates erudition, and there is nothing erudite about anything you have said so far. Nope, only rabid insistence that has a lot of "I better" in it.)


Again that isn't "you better or else" Understanding the Bible in the way God meant it is what you need to do to go to heaven among other things silly.

*Sigh!* Please give it up, sweetie.

mismused

 

[mismused]

Thread hijack here

Oh and mismused agree with me to your hearts content. I like it when people agree with me

========================

You are so easy to agree with. You have a thread for Christians here, and you did it with class.

How can one not agree with you, and your person.

mismused

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Dranoel
It isn't if they ask you for that information.

Are preventative or informative truths of all kinds then subject to being asked first?

 

[Guest]

Are preventative or informative truths of all kinds then subject to being asked first?

When it comes to religious beliefs? Yes.

 

[English Lady]

........ Mmm, waffles.

bring on the waffles!!!


Aww Mismused..you're making me blush thank you!

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

WAFFLE HIJACK FOR JESUS!

 

[English Lady]

You're crackers LC! Or should that be your waffles?

I really could go for a waffle now you know.

 

[Guest]

WAFFLE HIJACK FOR JESUS!

Are we going to shape the waffles like little crucifixes and have butter molded in the likenes of Jesus? ANd Holy maple syrup? Will all prcedes go to the missionarys teaching the heathens and pagens the word of god? Which by the way damns them to hell as soon as the missionary mentions god.)

I'll pass but thanks for the offer.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Are we going to shape the waffles like little crucifixes and have butter molded in the likenes of Jesus? ANd Holy maple syrup? Will all prcedes go to the missionarys teaching the heathens and pagens the word of god? Which by the way damns them to hell as soon as the missionary mentions god.)

I'll pass but thanks for the offer.

Nope they're just normal waffles, which happen to have the power to hijack threads and just happen to be Jesus's favorite waffle recipe.

And they're delicious and free. This moodbreak before Dranoel finally gives in and smashes Joe's face in with a public telephone is brought to you by Satan Industries and the wonderful Waffle Hijack for Jesus program. Remember kiddies, if a theology thread is getting personal, you may need a waffle hijack for Jesus.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Dranoel
When it comes to religious beliefs? Yes.

Why are religious beliefs exempt?

edited to add: In respones to your edit... do you think that might have something to do with not living in Israel or India? Having been to both, I can say that religious observance and flavor permeats so much about everyday life. The frequency by which I was invited to observe or participate in religious activity, and the frequency by which I saw it all around me far eclipsed anything I've seen of Christian invasiveness here in America. That's not to say it isn't there, but certainly to say it isn't alien.

 

[English Lady]

Nope they're just normal waffles, which happen to have the power to hijack threads and just happen to be Jesus's favorite waffle recipe.

And they're delicious and free. This moodbreak before Dranoel finally gives in and smashes Joe's face in with a public telephone is brought to you by Satan Industries and the wonderful Waffle Hijack for Jesus program. Remember kiddies, if a theology thread is getting personal, you may need a waffle hijack for Jesus.

God Love ya LC. Thanks for the grins and goodnight!

 

[Guest]

Why are religious beliefs exempt?

Why should they not be?

Can your religious beliefs prevent lukemia? Cancer? Tonsilitus? Traffic accients?

Is being an atheist a public health hazzard? Can you beliefs stop birth defects? Can they prevent forest fires? Earthquakes?

Will it even stop racism? Will gays and lesbians suddenly be accepted in society because of your religion? Will politicians become honest? (Strike that. Most of them claim to be christian now and it doesn't seem to help them any.)

What is your reason for wanting to push your beliefs on everyone? Why do you feel it is your right and duty to interupt my dinner to shove religious propoganda in my face? Isn't it enough that I have to look at it everywhere else?

Nudity on broadcast telivision is offensive to christians and so it has been made illegal. Well, it has gotten to the point that the symbol of your faith, that damned depressing cross is becoming offensive to me. But what do you think the odds of me getting that banned from public viewing are?

 

[mismused]

========================

Once again, because of the way you responded, the format manner, that is, I need to copy and paste your jewels cast before . . .

e.g.

You're being ignorant and childish. I do believe that you must believe in what the Bible and God and Jesus said in order to get to Heaven, that doesn't denote that I think you HAVE to believe, only that you have to if you want to go to Heaven. There IS a difference there you know if you can't see it that's your choice

Thank you for leaving it my choice, but ignorant and childish?

If you come anywhere near matching the preachers I've met, I'd most near wager all I had on knowledge of the bible. Almost, but not quite. Mercy, but you're worse than the Jehovah's Witness people on the street corner, or pounding on the door.

Uh, since you have no idea if I possess any knowledge about what I say, though I have given some indication, isn't is presumptuous of you to be calling me "ignorant?"

Now that's name calling, bubba! That's okay, I forgive you, but maybe you should really consider if your mouth isn't a little too big for your rowboat . . .

Now, if I really wanted to get your goat, that would be so easy, given your oh, so perfect beliefs, but then I would also probably upset many of the true Christians here, and I won't do that to them. I have great respect for someone like English Lady.

Oh, and you're lending more credence to the increasingly apparent fact that you really don't have any erudition about the bible, just beliefs, baby."

Again that isn't "you better or else" Understanding the Bible in the way God meant it is what you need to do to go to heaven among other things silly.

Well, as is often quoted, there you go again. Your arrogant belief that you know what God knows, which you mean when you say "in the way God meant it," is very telling.

Keep going, sweetie, you're digging a fine hole for yourself.

"O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgements, and is ways past finding out!

For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counselor?"

Wanna tell me again what "God meant?" Uh, for you, that's out of your KJ version.

I do know that the bible often says "meditate" on God's word, but I've never heard it said to be offensive such as you're being.

I'll say it again, you have a good heart, and good intentions, but son, you're so . . . well, you figure it out, for only your consideration of your person will be believed by you.

Thank you, sweetie. "Ignorant and childish" waving bye-bye to the children.

mismused

 

[Guest]

Nope they're just normal waffles, which happen to have the power to hijack threads and just happen to be Jesus's favorite waffle recipe.

And they're delicious and free. This moodbreak before Dranoel finally gives in and smashes Joe's face in with a public telephone is brought to you by Satan Industries and the wonderful Waffle Hijack for Jesus program. Remember kiddies, if a theology thread is getting personal, you may need a waffle hijack for Jesus.

LOL Nah. Public telephones are covered with cooties. I wouldn't touch one if you paid me.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

It seems waffle power will not save us here. Sorry Joe, you're on your own. You often think I'm a regular old shit to you and let's be honest, I tend that way. But really it's for your own good. Someday, you'll try this shit in real life against a Dranoel and you'll think your pride will keep you whole and you'll keep pushing that button and they'll find you the next morning missing half your teeth and part of an ear. Someday you'll find that the pursuit of the debate victory is not half as important as you think it is.

Really I worry about you, but cie la vie.

Play nice boys and Dranoel, don't break anything too painful, he's just a kid.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Dranoel
Why should they not be?

Because if a thing participates in "Truth" it would need an exempting reason to cateorize its responsibility differently than other things that participate in "Truth"... not a reason to keep it in. It's having a truth value at all already puts it in.

Can your religious beliefs prevent lukemia? Cancer? Tonsilitus? Traffic accients?

Possibly things like cancer. If, religiously speaking, there are mandates against smoking--for instance--then lung cancer odds go way down.

Will it even stop racism? Will gays and lesbians suddenly be accepted in society because of your religion? Will politicians become honest? (Strike that. Most of them claim to be christian now and it doesn't seem to help them any.)

It could stop racism, I can think of a great many spiritual leaders who believe that--and demonstrated it a great number of times. It could lead to social inclusion of homosexuality--a lot of work is being done right now involving those very things. It well could make politicians honest, if its a moral code that is strict enough. (I don't think the majority of the world's politicians are Christian, that may be true, I couldn't say... but I'm not sure, beyond that, that Christian politicians are somehow more morally reprehensible than non-Christian politicians. Actually, I'm not sure of the point you're making with that anyway).

What is your reason for wanting to push your beliefs on everyone? Why do you feel it is your right and duty to interupt my dinner to shove religious propoganda in my face? Isn't it enough that I have to look at it everywhere else?

Possible reasons for wanting to inform others, even convince them, about the structure, form, or function of one's beliefs could be a desire to improve the life of another person. It could be to give the other person spiritual options. It could be to reflect a desire for adherance to a goal of truth or accuracy. Lots of potential reasons.

I don't have anything intelligent to say about your dinner or how often you have to look at things, though.

Nudity on broadcast telivision is offensive to christians and so it has been made illegal. Well, it has gotten to the point that the symbol of your faith, that damned depressing cross is becoming offensive to me. But what do you think the odds of me getting that banned from public viewing are?

It, statistically, is also offensive to non-Christians. It has been maintained as illegal for quite a few reasons.

I have nothing intelligent to say about your odds of public viewing... I'm not even sure what you're talking about at this point.

 

[matriarch]

It seems waffle power will not save us here. Sorry Joe, you're on your own. You often think I'm a regular old shit to you and let's be honest, I tend that way. But really it's for your own good. Someday, you'll try this shit in real life against a Dranoel and you'll think your pride will keep you whole and you'll keep pushing that button and they'll find you the next morning missing half your teeth and part of an ear. Someday you'll find that the pursuit of the debate victory is not half as important as you think it is.

Really I worry about you, but cie la vie.

Play nice boys and Dranoel, don't break anything too painful, he's just a kid.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Lucifer_Carroll
It seems waffle power will not save us here. Sorry Joe, you're on your own. You often think I'm a regular old shit to you and let's be honest, I tend that way. But really it's for your own good.

No, I think it more evidentary that it's for your good. That it makes you feel important or big, that it makes you brave. I put it in the same category as hearing about your friend eight times out of ten posts. It's for effect, and your own benifit.

Someday, you'll try this shit in real life against a Dranoel and you'll think your pride will keep you whole and you'll keep pushing that button and they'll find you the next morning missing half your teeth and part of an ear. Someday you'll find that the pursuit of the debate victory is not half as important as you think it is.

Really I worry about you, but cie la vie.

Play nice boys and Dranoel, don't break anything too painful, he's just a kid.

So, just so I'm on the same page... what is it you think you know about me that justifies this strange belief you have that I either censor myself around violent people or that I have an inability to handle myself should it get to that.

Near as I can tell, you don't really have any information on that. But sure... I'll bite.

Why?

 

[Pure]

Joe: If one believes they honestly have the truth about the religious metaphysic... is it wrong to inform others of it?

Generally, 'informing' others of one's (self styled) religious truths, when unsolicited, is going to put them off. But it's not wrong. A bit like farting in their face. Also it's generally ineffectual in winning them over.

Communication between A and B, as opposed to A speechifying towards B, involves not just A expressing/informing, but B listening to A, and considering what A says, and vice versa. So the "I have the truth approach" generally bombs. Socrates had the better idea, dialogue, starting with finding out the beliefs of his conversationalist and going from there.

 

[Guest]

It seems waffle power will not save us here. Sorry Joe, you're on your own. You often think I'm a regular old shit to you and let's be honest, I tend that way. But really it's for your own good. Someday, you'll try this shit in real life against a Dranoel and you'll think your pride will keep you whole and you'll keep pushing that button and they'll find you the next morning missing half your teeth and part of an ear. Someday you'll find that the pursuit of the debate victory is not half as important as you think it is.

Really I worry about you, but cie la vie.

Play nice boys and Dranoel, don't break anything too painful, he's just a kid.

I promise I won't break anything worse than his pride. WHen it come right down to it I really don't care what peoples religious beliefs are. I have some very strong religious beliefs myself. Unfortunately they are not popular and I know it. However, I don't force my beliefs on anyone. Unless someone genuinely wants to know about them I don't bring them up.

By the same token, I have many friends who don't smoke. That's fine. That's their choice and it's probably a good one. So when I go to their house I leave my smoke in my car. I don't even ASK if they mind me smoking. I just don't do it in their house. But you can bet, and my friends know, that if someone comes into my house and starts their subtle little cough routine when I light up, I'm gonna ask them to step outside and get some fresh air.

No I don't care if it's 10 below and snowing, if they don't like the smoke they can go outside to get away from it. Just like I would have to do at their home if I wanted to smoke. Fair is fair. BOTH ways.

You want to come to my house and preach christianity? That's fine. I'll welcome you. Under one condition. Tomorrow I come to your house and preach Pagan and Druid teachings. Fair is fair. Both ways.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Pure
Joe: If one believes they honestly have the truth about the religious metaphysic... is it wrong to inform others of it?

Generally, 'informing' others of one's (self styled) religious truths, when unsolicited, is going to put them off. But it's not wrong. A bit like farting in their face. Also it's generally ineffectual in winning them over.

Communication between A and B, as opposed to A speechifying towards B, involves not just A expressing/informing, but B listening to A, and considering what A says, and vice versa. So the "I have the truth approach" generally bombs. Socrates had the better idea, dialogue, starting with finding out the beliefs of his conversationalist and going from there.

And they killed him for it.

But, sure, let's say it's a matter of working from someone's beliefs and informing them of what you understand to be true? This isn't wrong? Is that what we're saying?