Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reading comprehension is sorely lacking on this site.
You have said some things that make no sense, and if your statement is in response to my questioning what you were talking about, then your response here shows a lack of maturity. A mature person would explain themselves further versus childishly doling out an insult.
I'm not surprised. "rules" and "laws" are specific descriptions of actions that should or should not be done to put principles like "love one another even as I have loved you" into action. They are always subject to examination as to how well they perform their function. ...You seem to be confused by the definition of "rule" instead of the definition of "principle." No surprise. Maybe you should look up the definition of "explicit."
and you have not answered the question, are these rules or principles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
..."do unto others" "love thy neighbor" rule or principle?
10 commandments....rules or principles?
honor thy parents, thou shalt not murder, steal, covet, commit adultery....rules or principles?
You have said some things that make no sense, and if your statement is in response to my questioning what you were talking about, then your response here shows a lack of maturity. A mature person would explain themselves further versus childishly doling out an insult.
The OP is operating too much from a place of ego and the need to be superior, intellectual, witty, one-up, and right. There is no discourse going on here coming from a heartfelt, genuine, and sincere place with this individual.
You mean a book that takes the good morality most people have and claims it is given by your god while ignoring depiction the evil monster your god is depicted as in the OT?
Wait, I have just Googled it. Frank Turek.
I refer in passing to a book and you immediately assume that my entire intellectual position is that of the author? How familiar can you be with Dr. Turek's work if you didn't immediately recognize the title of what is by far his best known book?
The fact is, issues such as how consciousness could arise in a purely materialistic universe, why we should trust our survival-oriented brains to discern truth, and what basis there can be for declaring anything moral or immoral are some of the most significant difficulties with the atheistic position. This is recognized by greater minds than Dr. Turek (e.g. Alvin Plantinga), but Turek's book summarizes the issues nicely. You may see flaws in Christian morality, but the issue that believers raise is whether atheists can validly claim to have any moral standards at all.
Your statements consistently suggest to me either a serious lack of familiarity with Christian theology or a willful mischaracterization of it (my guess would be the former). More to the point, they are refuted by reality. If the God of the OT were a moral monster and Christian morality were hopelessly confused, Christianity wouldn't have been studied, believed and practiced by some of the greatest minds humanity has produced in all branches of philosophy and science for 2,000 years, including such contemporary philosophers and scientists as Plantinga, William Lane Craig, John Lennox, Francis Collins and innumerable others.
This undeniable fact refutes your assertions. Christianity can certainly be challenged and debated, but to keep attempting to portray the religion as nonsensical and believers as fools just makes the person who is doing this look silly and intellectually lazy. It's no advertisement for atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktoni
Christians have become everything that Jesus preached against. They have tossed aside any notion of empathy, compassion, humanity and tolerance. They have become the Pharisees, adhering to a legalistic interpretation of arcane rules they use to attack and condemn other people. All of Jesus' teachings and mantras have been turned on their heads.
This is painting with an extremely broad brush. How familiar are you with the Christian community, which includes Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants of every stripe from extremely liberal to evangelical to fundamentalist? On what possible basis are you making these sweeping statements?
I would say, based on pretty extensive familiarity with the Christian community as a whole, that virtually every statement you make in the portion I've quoted is false. There are some segments of the Christian community, notably at the extreme fringes of the evangelical and fundamentalist segments (and especially in America), for which there is a grain of truth in some of what you say. Their methods may be much harsher than is necessary, and they may drive away more people than they win for Christ, but even the most irritating have hardly "become everything that Jesus preached against." Jesus himself was far from a warm and fuzzy guy, and it's a mistake to overlook this side of his personality and message.
I know nothing about you, and your profile reveals nothing, but my guess is that you're in the same boat I suspect Harry Diogenes is in: You really don't know much about Christianity at all and are simply jumping on the anti-Christian bandwagon for reasons that are personal to you. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
I have no problem with people who jump on the anti-Christian bandwagon with full knowledge of what they are doing and why. I'm happy to discuss and debate my beliefs with such people. But the anti-Christian polemics that characterize this forum just seem kind of tedious and silly to me. I think they would strike me this way even if I were an atheist who took my atheism seriously.
The thread that was going to put us on the right track seems to have gone off the rails and over the edge. Is anyone surprised?
and you have not answered the question, are these rules or principles?
Since you should have been clarifed in your understanding by a comparison between the definitions of "rule" and Principle" I'll leave that as an exercise for the student. Which are they and why do you think so. Remember to bring the definition of "explicit" into play.
"reviled by the world," like Francis of Assisi and Teresa of Avila? Done right I doubt that a follower of Christ would be all that reviled.
I come in for my share of criticism, but as I have mentioned I'm not all that good about doing it right.
Nope, you don't have to worry. I asked christians to actually discuss a few teachings of christ. Seemed like a pretty easy idea to me. But they want to "win", which is very un-christ-like. I tried.
There's a book called "Living Buddha, Living Christ", they ought to read it and get in the spirit that there is such a thing as discussing and even comparing actual teachings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
