[thegrimmreaper]

before i get started, i'd like to apologize for how my last post was organized. i hadn't realized it at the time, as i have been quite tired lately, but my last post was very difficult to read due to having such large chunks of text with no breaks in between. i'll try to correct that from here on out, but i'd ask you to please remain patient with me lol.

mitzalizalor:

Enter the subjunctive mood. Clearly you do not consider yourself to have proved anyone wrong.

no, i do not consider myself to have proved anyone wrong. i have, for the most part, kept the things i said very broad. i quoted a few passages from the bible, none of which were to help my argument, but rather to emphasize the points made within them. those points being, in simple terms, and forgive my language: "hey, don't be a d*ck, that sh*t ain't cool". i have not gone in depth about any personal qualms i might have with the bible as of yet.

For example in addressing "the beliefs or mannerisms" of "religious folk" you have not identified which religious folk (such as Zoroastrians or Hindus) or what forms of exaggeration you're referring to. There are plenty of religious folk having no interest in The Bible and therefore no interest in God. We know that. It's difficult to overestimate the catastrophe they face and whether they know it or not its origin is disobedience to the God they deny so plainly described in His Inerrant Word.

i meant "religious folk" in a very broad sense. i was merely stating that, in my time on the internet, i have seen many people mocking, ridiculing, and stereotyping many different religions in many different ways.

You have completely misrepresented John 8, Luke 6, James 4 and Matthew 12.v.s. so I don't need to address those.

might i ask how exactly i misrepresented them? if i have, i'd certainly like to know how, so that i might correct myself from doing so again in the future. i am certainly not denying that i may be incorrect about some things, i am only human after all, so i'd very much appreciate if you could point out exactly where i went wrong.

Things deteriorated after that; denial of sin is one thing is one thing but flat out claiming that God has not declared sinful matters which He obviously has, moreover which He tells us are abominations, displays a deficit of joined-up-reading probably resulting from selective perusal which I was guilty of too, at one stage, which I fixed by looking at what came before and what followed specific events—or commandments or condemnations, as the case may be—none of which exist in isolation. This applies to both the New and the Old Testaments which I'd encourage you to read in context.

i did not try to deny the existence of sin, nor did i claim that god hasn't deemed certain things to be sinful. if it seemed that way, i assure you it was not my intention. i'm well aware that god has declared certain things to be sins. on the subject of the last sentence in this quote, i have indeed read both old and new testaments. however, it has been some time since i have actually sat down and read the bible, as i am no longer christian and haven't really felt the need to. you have a point, though. starting tomorrow, i will begin reading the bible, cover to cover, so that i might be thoroughly informed before i discuss it further. now, the bible is very long and i am a college student without much free time, so it may take a long while before i manage to actually read the bible in it's entirety, but i will certainly make an effort to do so and perhaps even take notes along the way. i'm sure this will be a win-win for all of us; i will be more thoroughly informed about the things i am discussing, and i'm sure you will be pleased that i am taking the time to try to educate myself about your beliefs more.




james hutchins:

Are you on the drugs son?

no, unfortunately, i am quite sober lol. i couldn't take drugs, even if i wanted to: i have epilepsy. taking brain inhibiting drugs would cause me to have a seizure and go into severe convulsions, which is quite unpleasant, as one might imagine.




basilissa:

I highlighted the most important part of what you said. Yes, the verse you cite (Luke 6:37) says that not judging is a way to avoid being judged. The thing is that only those with something to hide don't want to be judged. I have nothing to hide, and I do not fear God's judgment.

Of course I have sinned - in the past, before I was Saved

i'd like to address this last sentence. i'm not sure whether this was your intention or not, but the way it's worded makes it sound as though you believe that, now that you have been "saved", you have not committed any sins. if this is what you intended to mean, i seriously doubt your statement is true.


it's impossible for us, as humans, to be completely free of sin. you can cleanse yourself of sin by getting baptized, which forgives original sin, and by going to confession, so that you might be forgiven of any sins you have committed since then and the punishments for them, but it is impossible to never commit another sin once you have been "saved".


no matter how hard you try, you will commit sin from time to time, even if those sins are small. it's only human. the only person who is without any sin whatsoever is jesus, for obvious reasons (note that i use the term "person" loosely, as jesus would technically be considered a demigod and not a human being).

Jesus forgave her and ordered her to sin no more. Therefore, she was no longer a sinner. If you spend some time here you will notice that we do have some members who were horrible sinners before accepting Jesus. It is OK to have committed horrible sins in the past, we don't judge that. The problem is with people who continue to sin, and our role is to remind them that God hates what they do and wants them to repent.

i understand that it is within your beliefs to remind those who continue to sin that they are doing wrong and that god wants them to repent, that's not what i have a problem with. the problem i have is with how you go about doing this ("you", in this case, not referring to you specifically, but as the royal "you").


i have seen many a case in which you have attempted to, for lack of a better word, "enlighten" these sinners by doing things such as yelling at/cursing them out, insulting them, or threatening them in a violent manner. this is what i have issue with.


correcting these people in a gentle and respectful manner, as any civilized adult would, is fine in my book. (of course, this applies only to sinners who are already part of your faith or who have shown some sort of interest in said faith. i do not believe this is acceptable behavior to force upon those who are not religious and/or who have not asked. i understand that you believe you have the best intentions when doing so, but i still believe it to be quite unacceptable when it is unwarranted, even if you really do have good intentions). correcting them in the aforementioned ways of yelling at/cussing out/violent threats is unacceptable. not only that, but i feel it isn't a very effective tactic either way. if you insult and yell at someone for doing something you believe is wrong and for not being christian, that isn't going to make them want to convert. if anything, it will only encourage them not to, either because of the negative experience or simply to spite you.

Think of this website as of an intervention. An alcoholic or a drug addict is on a downward spiral - he needs those who love him to be brutally honest with him, so that he does not destroy his own life.

i understand what you're trying to say, and i do agree with it; to some degree. yes, an alcoholic or drug addict would need those who love him to be brutally honest with him, so that he might get back on track. but there's a difference between being brutally honest and just being an *sshole.


let's use the drug addict example you provided to explore this. this drug addict needs help. this is obvious. if he continues down this path, he will be doing serious harm to himself. you need to be brutally honest with him, for his own safety. you should sit him down and address his problem in a calm and civilized manner, making sure that he knows that you are doing this because you care about him, and be as respectful as possible while still making your point. this way, he might fully realize the reality of his situation and what must be done to correct his behavior, so that he might turn his life around for the better.


now, on the other hand, if you yell at him and call him all sorts of insulting things, he will be less inclined to seek the help he needs. he will likely continue on with his behavior, even if only to spite you, and both parties will be quite angry with one another. no progress will have been made and any friendly relations you once had will likely be severed. this is not brutal honesty, it's simply being cruel, and will do no good for either party.


this same logic applies to religion and attempting to correct those who you believe to be sinful. sitting them down and having a calm, civilized, and caring discussion will have a much higher success rate than yelling at people, insulting them, or other things of that nature. yelling, slinging insults, telling people god hates them, threatening violence, are all things that will turn people away from joining your religion. if you're trying to convert these people, doing these things is just plain counter intuitive. why would someone want to convert to your religion after you just yelled in their face? imagine a salesmen yelling in your face for not buying their product. would that make you want to buy it? i think not.

This sort of total genocide was perfectly legal back then, but today there are international laws against that, so we cannot do that anymore. These verses show you, however, that if laws change, it will be totally OK to murder men, women, and children in the name of God, again.

this... this genuinely frightens me, i must say. i don't care what religion someone is from, what their beliefs are, whatever; genocide is not f*cking ok. ever. for any reason. that's sick and insane. i believe in lgbt rights and not discriminating against lgbt folk, but i'm not gonna commit f*cking GENOCIDE on all those who disagree with me. that's absolutely disgusting. no, just no. i'm trying to be as respectful about your religion as possible, but genocide is where i draw the f*cking line. you have to be really f*cked up in the head to think genocide is acceptable, for any reason.

You call that "hate" and "violence," I call that "tough love."

no, "tough love" is interfering with a loved ones drug abuse problem or not allowing your child to play with things that might cause them bodily harm, even if they're having fun playing with it.


beating your wife for not making dinner the way you like it is not "tough love", it's abuse. kicking your gay son out on the street and/or beating him is not "tough love", it's abuse. "tough love" is when you do or say something that might be somewhat unpleasant or upset someone, because you love them and it is for their own physical safety or to help them down the line, such as not letting your child skip homework. beating someone, insulting them, being cruel, etc. is not "tough love", it's f*cking abuse and it's disgusting. if you believe otherwise, you're delusional. this isn't a matter of religious beliefs, this is a matter of human rights. this is unacceptable, no matter what. again, i'm trying to remain as respectful as possible, but advocating for abuse is where i draw the line.

That's a lie. *a bunch of passages that i cut out to save space*

i see where your concern comes from, but allow me to provide some resources that discuss those very passages, as well as the bible's view of homosexuality. this first link, in particular, should be of interest to you. it is written by a priest who went to college for religious studies and speaks old/biblical hebrew (the language the original bible was written in), among many other qualifications. i urge you to check that one out, at the very least.


http://hoperemainsonline.com/


https://www.rmnetwork.org/newrmn/wp-...Sept.-2016.pdf


https://www.hrc.org/resources/what-d...-homosexuality


http://www.matthewvines.com/transcript/


https://sunshinecathedral.org/Small%...e%20Course.pdf


https://www.redletterchristians.org/...its-not-a-sin/

Indeed! That's the essence of True Christian™ hospitality for you: offering own virgin daughters for gang rape, so that the male strangers can avoid being raped themselves!

ignoring the fact that you think offering your daughters up for gang rape is ok, i again implore: if the men of sodom were truly gay, why would lot offer his daughters to them? he, of all people, should know that they would have no interest in his daughters if they were gay.

That single verse shows you two things: (1) that

male-on-male rape is way worse than male-on-female rape, and (2) that women, even own daughters, are nothing more than property which can be used as bargaining chips.

rape is rape, and rape is wrong. no one kind of rape is worse than another, all forms of rape are equally wrong. women are not property, either, they are human beings that are to be treated with respect. is the virgin mary simply a piece of property? she was the mother of jesus, after all, i'd think she'd deserve more respect than that. if women were meant to be property and be subordinate to men, why did jesus treat her so kindly and not order her around and beat her?

I am sorry if you feel that way, but this is what the Bible says, and as a Christian, I have no other choice than to believe what the Bible says. There are many fragments of the Bible which describe events that seem impossible/completely unbelievable, but as a Christian, I have to to trust the Bible rather than science and logic. Because if we start to tear apart the small things, the whole structure would collapse. Because if the Bible is the Word of God, it has to be 100% correct. If, on the other hand, it isn't 100% correct, that would mean it is not the Word of God, just a collection of incoherent ramblings of madmen.

I cannot accept that possibility, so I have to stick to everything the Bible says, even when it talks about a flat world, stars falling out of the firmament, worldwide flood, unicorns, the Sun stopping in its tracks for a day, or when it seemingly contradicts itself.

i understand what you're trying to say, but that's exactly the point i'm trying to make. if tearing apart the small things causes the whole structure to collapse, let it collapse. if the whole structure can be collapsed by tearing apart little things, it's obviously not true, nor 100% correct.


this is exactly what i was trying to say. i don't mean that disrespectfully, i assure you, i'm simply trying to point out the fact that the bible is full of fallacies that prove it to be false. which, in turn, as you said, would make everything contained within it false.


i'm not trying to disrespect you by attempting to prove you wrong, i'm trying to make the facts known. you seem to place all of your self worth on your religion, which isn't necessary. you don't need christianity to be worth something or for your life to have meaning, you can live an equally fulfilling life without it.

forgive me if this comes across the wrong way, but it often seems as though christians only do good things because god tells them to. whether they realize it or not, it seems like they do good only for perceived personal gain, ie. getting into heaven. i do good things, not because some god told me to or because i think i'll gain eternal life/happiness from it, i do it because it's the right thing to do.

again, i hope that doesn't come across the wrong way, this is simply a personal observation of mine and i also have difficulty wording things in exactly the right way.

If this discussion of ours results in you re-opening the Bible and re-examining it, that would be a win-win for both of us, and if you can provide a good Bible-based argumentation (rather than copy-paste of what someone else thinks), I will gladly concede.

as i mentioned earlier in this reply, i do indeed plan on re-examining the bible, cover to cover. it'll take quite a long while, but i'm sure you'll be glad to hear that i'm making the effort.




i wish you all a happy thanksgiving and i hope that we can all be on kind terms with one another!