Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15

Author Topic: Religulous  (Read 18314 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #100 on: October 24, 2008, 06:39:59 PM »

Quote
Disliking homosexuality without acting on it is bad because that dislike legitimizes others who feel the same but act on it.

Liking faith without acting negatively towards others is bad because it legitimizes people who like faith and do act negatively.

Liking muffins without using them to choke old ladies is bad, because it legitimizes people who like muffins and use them to choke old ladies.

You're retarded.
Logged

Friday

  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65374
  • Posts: 5122
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #101 on: October 24, 2008, 07:29:13 PM »

I like swords
Logged

Cannon

  • Hopes for a great many things
  • Tested
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 508
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #102 on: October 24, 2008, 08:11:22 PM »

I don't care what anyone believes and I don't think anyone should care what I believe.  So I don't tell anyone what I believe and I don't listen when other people tell me their beliefs.

So you're totally lacking in passion and close-minded? Really? That's your defense? Honestly, I don't think it's possible to be consistent with this approach. At least there's no issue of you convincing me otherwise, right? Anyway, you can't stop anyone from caring when they think what you're doing (or not doing) is moral or immoral. Friggin' deal.

...Would it kill you to just say "I don't want to be proselytized?" Some time? Maybe?

Quote
Q. What is meant by the Messiah?
A. The Messiah is one sent by God to free us from the power of sin, so that with the help of God we may live in harmony with God, within ourselves, with our neighbors, and with all creation.

Q. What is the significance of Jesus' resurrection?
A. By his resurrection, Jesus overcame death and opened for us the way of eternal life.

Q. What did the Messiah promise in the New Covenant?
A. Christ promised to bring us into the kingdom of God and give life in all its fullness.

Q. What do we mean by everlasting life?
A. By everlasting life, we mean a new existence, in which we are united with all the people of God, in the joy of fully knowing and loving God and each other.

[...]

Then there's the more faith based view of the savior. The idea that we are not only created in the image of god, but that god was re-created in the image of us has a strong resonance with me. That dying, returning to life, and ascending into heaven the human nature was freed from death and brought up into heaven. I have a kind of compatibleist view on this. I take it as a metaphor, but I'm also open to the possibility of the literal truth of it.

Which is it? A metaphor or the literal truth? Even if you say it's a metaphor, you aren't stating the more exacting truth as you see it. Please elaborate.

You're also going to have to clarify what you mean by God "re-creating Himself." That sounds like contradictory nonsense without scriptural basis.

As I said, I take it as a metaphor, but I'm open to the possibility that it's the literal truth. There is no knowing with something like this.

What do you mean by the more exacting truth as I see it? I'm happy to explain the way I see things, but I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.

These articles you cited seem to be pretty clear-cut to me, spiritually and linguistically speaking. If Jesus only metaphorically/spiritually rose from the dead, or only metaphorically spoke of bringing people the kingdom of God and everlasting life, then what higher spiritual truth are they referencing?

My apologies for the miscommunication. I am not an eloquent person, but I do make an effort to say what I mean. Sometimes I fail, and/or forget to be more careful with my use of words.

And by re-created I mean that there was a fundamental change to the nature of god if he completely shared the essence of humanity. That kind of stuff really isn't at the core of my religiosity however.

Hmm. Well, firstly, you either share something or you don't, but if you mean to say that Jesus was (and is) fully God and fully man, then I can understand why you'd say that. As for Jesus's birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension at some point marking change, then you probably mean it to be revelation, as it is all held to be prophecy which was fulfilled. So our view of God changed, but I'm not sure I can agree with you if you say God fundamentally changed. This is skirting around the broader discussion of the actual Trinity, of course. If no Trinitarian doctrine is at the core of your religiosity, then you've got me scratching my head about what is.

If I seem like I'm skipping ahead or (God forbid) putting words in your mouth, then rest assure that that's not my intent. I'm just trying to further the discussion because I'm curious.

Edit: So I realized that maybe I'm being dense here. Are you guys trying to ask me in a roundabout way whether I think you're going to hell?

...I dunno'. Are they? Not like you're the One who ultimately decides, of course.

In Catholicism God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are all separately definable, but nonetheless part of the same being. It's not really intended to make sense. That's part of the whole faith thing.

If I may offer a response (though I'm a non-denominational Protestant, not a Catholic), then consider this. When it comes to light, you have the light produced, the heat from it, and the source itself. All of those are connected, but are each a part that can be differentiated. Not that I think arguing exclusively via analogy holds up well, but that's a handy way to approach understanding the Trinity. It makes sense to me when I think about it, even if I don't fully understand it. Answers very often lead to more questions and all that.

"It's faith, Hawkgirl. You're not supposed to understand it. You just have it." Hoo, boy. Aquaman would make a lousy apologist for Atlantic polytheism. Anyway, I'm a Christian because it's reasonable, and the other belief systems I've gone over and thought about don't convince me. So this view either states that people of faith don't need to think, or just ignores what ancient Jews and Christians thought "faith" was or is (roughly, loyalty based on prior experience). I can't say if something similar is your view, Bal, but such perspectives irk me.
Logged

Transportation

  • Tested
  • Karma: 2
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #103 on: October 24, 2008, 10:39:40 PM »


Liking muffins without using them to choke old ladies is bad, because it legitimizes people who like muffins and use them to choke old ladies.

You're retarded.
This would be a rebuttal if there was....any kind of casual relation between liking muffins and choking people. Unlike established ones between gays bad->rar protect marriage and yay faith-> (insert atrocity).

Versus yours, which is I like muffins -> rarr choke people with muffins. There is no causality there.

I realize the example is poorly worded but I don't think I need to hold your hand through the garden of knowledge here.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #104 on: October 25, 2008, 01:05:30 AM »

Your claim is that simply being Christian enables the people who murder gays.  Or perhaps that being Muslim enables the people who fly planes into buildings.

Islam and Christianity are both peaceful religions with a small population of very dangerous extremists.  You can't seriously blame the entire population of the faith for the actions of a few total nutjobs.

And Cannon, fine, I agree with whatever you say from this point forward.
Logged

Transportation

  • Tested
  • Karma: 2
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #105 on: October 25, 2008, 08:23:35 AM »

Your claim is that simply being Christian enables the people who murder gays.  Or perhaps that being Muslim enables the people who fly planes into buildings.
It does? By being either one you confirm the religions fundamental tenets. Faith is fundamental in this as it is belief without evidence. There is no justification for God or His wishes. It's what you believe. This essentially means you can get away with anything if think God told you to. See: Abraham.

Believing in faith makes the claim that it is not a bad thing. Since these 'extremists' follow the same definition, you are justifying their behavior because it follows the same logic. Saying otherwise is like a gun rights advocate not saying their position could be responsible for increased gun violence. It is a consequence of their philosophy.

Quote
Islam and Christianity are both peaceful religions with a small population of very dangerous extremists.  You can't seriously blame the entire population of the faith for the actions of a few total nutjobs.
By whose definition? Half the country does not believe gays should marry. There are dozens of state bans. This belief is justified by the Old Testament and since Christians like the Ten Commandments just fine I don't see why it's not valid. Unless you're calling 50% of the U.S. extremists, which contradicts the meaning of the term.

There are various other examples such as abortion. Things are worse in the Muslim world, where gays are stoned to death. Do you think this happens despite everyone having moral outrage over it?

And saying they're peaceful is a laughable claim. Islam was spread by the sword. Christianity had its crusades, witch burnings, inquisition, Jewish pogroms and oh so many other crimes. All justifiable with their religion.

Saying these are not valid is a massive No True Scotsman fallacy. Were there no Christians until the 1960s, then? These beliefs still exist in the form of modern religious discrimination.

If anything Christianity's moderation and its modern 'peaceful' nature is the result of secular forces. It's been dragged kicking and screaming out of the Dark Ages, not skipping along of its own accord.
Logged

sei

  • Tested
  • Karma: 25
  • Posts: 2085
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #106 on: October 25, 2008, 12:16:21 PM »

Logged

JDigital

  • Tested
  • Karma: 32
  • Posts: 2786
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #107 on: October 26, 2008, 08:58:07 AM »

Just how many gay people are there, anyway?
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: Religulous
« Reply #108 on: October 26, 2008, 11:55:35 AM »

Robert Burton on the certainty bias.  (Could go just as well in the Science thread, but it's directly relevant here.)

HT: Bob Harris.
Logged

sei

  • Tested
  • Karma: 25
  • Posts: 2085
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #109 on: October 28, 2008, 01:26:14 AM »

Logged

François

  • Huh.
  • Tested
  • Karma: 83
  • Posts: 3313
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #110 on: October 28, 2008, 02:25:35 AM »

Isn't an ex-transsexual more accurately a double transsexual?
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #111 on: October 28, 2008, 02:34:03 AM »

Quote
Ex Wizard

YOU CAN'T ESCAPE YOUR DESTINY, ISAAC POTTER!
shown here: a glaring lack of familiarity with harry potter, probably
Logged

Dooly

  • Who?
  • Tested
  • Karma: 9
  • Posts: 915
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #112 on: October 28, 2008, 06:04:15 PM »

No one's commenting on "Ex HIV Positive?"
Logged
:painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful:
:painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful:
:painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful:
:painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful:
:painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful: :painful:

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #113 on: October 28, 2008, 06:06:01 PM »

I don't know how people test HIV positive. It doesn't seem impossible that an AIDs victim could be HIV free.

Just implausible, and outside of the range of publicly available treatments.
Logged

Ted Belmont

  • Tested
  • Karma: 50
  • Posts: 3447
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #114 on: November 10, 2008, 10:00:28 PM »

One of the churches in town changed their sign out front to "TRUST IN GOD'S AUTHORITY, NOT MAN'S MAJORITY", and a first grader came to school the day after the election saying that Obama was going to have all the first-born white children rounded up and killed.

 :disapprove:
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #115 on: November 10, 2008, 10:07:34 PM »

Kid was probably a middle child.
Logged

Romosome

  • Tested
  • Karma: 20
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #116 on: November 10, 2008, 10:08:57 PM »

That's a hair away from being worth getting child services involved.

Might not even be a hair away.
Logged

Arc

  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 3703
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #117 on: November 10, 2008, 11:16:52 PM »

first grader came to school the day after the election saying that Obama was going to have all the first-born white children rounded up and killed.

2012 truly will be apocalyptic for a political party that will have nothing whatsoever to run on.
Logged

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #118 on: November 10, 2008, 11:58:08 PM »

Well, they're certainly going to lose their base, ifyaknowhatImean.
Logged

JDigital

  • Tested
  • Karma: 32
  • Posts: 2786
    • View Profile
Re: Religulous
« Reply #119 on: November 11, 2008, 12:25:12 AM »

One of the churches in town changed their sign out front to "TRUST IN GOD'S AUTHORITY, NOT MAN'S MAJORITY"

On the other hand, man's majority is good enough for Prop 8.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 15