Curious

[Big Take]

I don't usually relate the two. My own opinion at the moment is that charities are more destructive than they are good, as well as their intention is.

How very Christian of you.

I think I'm understanding why you don't self-identify as one now :)

[Jazcash]

I don't usually relate the two. My own opinion at the moment is that charities are more destructive than they are good, as well as their intention is.

How very Christian of you.

I think I'm understanding why you don't self-identify as one now :)

I don't give to charity, I don't care much for charities atm either because I don't have a lot to give. When I earn an income, I shall do and will probably fund a Christian based organisation.

I rarely have to think about charities and so when I do, I don't take it all that seriously and don't instantly turn to Christianity for advise...

Also, "self-identify"? Are you implying other people identify me as a Christian simply because I defend it? Let me make this perfectly clear. I am not a Christian and never have been. I wish I was but I'm not taking it very seriously in my life at the moment.

[TradeMark]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk

This sums up just one of the problems with the Bible, I really found watching this funny

LOL, exactly

[Hobo Joe]

By the way, does your bible says what created God?

I love this question, it's such an endless circular argument. :D


Does your science say what created the big bang?

[TradeMark]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68 this was good too

[JohannesH]

"What happened before there was anything"

[TradeMark]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJxCFa8YmbQ rofl typical religious thinking here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm7nNXdqyPM good talking

[Pxtl]

[Sucky_Lord]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJxCFa8YmbQ rofl typical religious thinking here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm7nNXdqyPM good talking

Absolutely brilliant :D

[TradeMark]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTWnekRwrNo
good talking again...

"if this is the only life you get, then it becomes infinitely valuable. if you believe youre going to live forever after this life, the less valuable this life becomes"

explains pretty much the behaviour of religious people... suicide bombing etc. doesnt care a shit about this life, their reason for living is to just get good seat at the afterlife, like that would make things better for others in this life >_<

[Big Take]

I don't usually relate the two. My own opinion at the moment is that charities are more destructive than they are good, as well as their intention is.

How very Christian of you.

I think I'm understanding why you don't self-identify as one now :)

I don't give to charity, I don't care much for charities atm either because I don't have a lot to give. When I earn an income, I shall do and will probably fund a Christian based organisation.

I rarely have to think about charities and so when I do, I don't take it all that seriously and don't instantly turn to Christianity for advise...

You just take advice from scripture for determining large portions of your life, just not these other portions that involve inconveniencing you. It's cool, I know how it is, no pressure on you to put yourself in the same box as the people you're defending tooth and nail as upstanding and moral and righteous.

Also, "self-identify"? Are you implying other people identify me as a Christian simply because I defend it? Let me make this perfectly clear. I am not a Christian and never have been. I wish I was but I'm not taking it very seriously in my life at the moment.

Well, the belief in a Christian God is, to most people, the sole requirement for the label of "Christian" to be applied. You don't feel it is, and so you self-identify as a non-Christian for your own reasons. That's perfectly acceptable. Hell, if you want to self-identify as cake, or as a lesbian, or as The Emperor of America, that's all fine. Please understand when other people use more common diagnostic criteria to assign you their own functional labels, and I hope you acknowledge that I said "self-identify" because you yourself identify that way, as distinct from being labeled by society at large, or the community here.

I have a quick question for you, since you mentioned gay marriage earlier and how you feel it's immoral and shouldn't be allowed in society, and yet you don't consider that persecution. By that same logic, banning all marriage between Christians wouldn't be persecution, just reasonable control that some people (aggressive atheists) think is necessary for the good of society. Can you imagine a world where such a scenario was likely, and then please explain how that wouldn't feel like persecution to you?

[KaiserJ]

this whole damned thread is a circular argument

its not like anyone is going to give any ground anyways, clearly people have made their minds up already (and why wouldn't they have)

one thing i want to just mash into your heads again though... defining yourself as christian these days is not enough... sure, its not inaccurate, but that's like calling jesus "oh that beard dude" when it would be easy enough to just be more specific, as well as distancing yourself from people who you DON'T want to be associated with.

jaz i really felt you were arguing semantics when you said you weren't a christian... i feel like you're 90% there... it would be like peeling an orange and saying "oh well im not an orange because i lack peel, but i have the values and morals you would normally expect to find in my pulp". (borrowing a slice of your cake analogy) it was very difficult to understand your perspective until you pointed out exactly what your standpoint was because its an unusual one (at least to me) anyways, i hope you can understand how that would be pretty confusing to some people

beyond that, i don't want to offend anyone; some of your views (and others in this thread ofc) when presented without justification can be taken as offensive by some people so it's something you need to think about as well.

as soon as anyone starts the whole "oh well science can't be proven" then it's not even worth discussing anymore... its not like we're somehow going to solve the age old conflict of science vs religion on spring forum when so many before us have tried and failed.

and i suppose the whole point of this thread was tolerance... muslims are not tolerating their prophet being drawn, people are not tolerating the beliefs and practices of muslims.

if we can't even get "science is at least partially real" or "not all christians are the same" or "morality can be aquired in ways other than religion" (which, any of these points i don't think would offend either side of the debate or be damaging to any argument) then i think we're shit out of luck in terms of reaching any sort of viable conclusion.

and yeah, i suppose that considering the varied backgrounds people come from on this forum, this debate could have become something a lot worse.

[Big Take]

[paring down for size]

and i suppose the whole point of this thread was tolerance... muslims are not tolerating their prophet being drawn, people are not tolerating the beliefs and practices of muslims.

I think it's important we add a clause acknowledging the importance of being intolerant of intolerance.

if we can't even get "science is at least partially real" or "not all christians are the same" or "morality can be aquired in ways other than religion" (which, any of these points i don't think would offend either side of the debate or be damaging to any argument) then i think we're shit out of luck in terms of reaching any sort of viable conclusion.

These are all very valid points and I don't think anyone's disagreeing with them.

And one quick note out of order,

its not like anyone is going to give any ground anyways, clearly people have made their minds up already (and why wouldn't they have)

The objective of rigorous debate is not to shift the opinion of the person you're debating with but rather to demonstrate the flaws in their argument to undecided or less-entrenched audience viewing the debate. During electoral debates, the victor is not the one who gets their opponent to shift, but rather the one who gets the electorate to agree with their way of thinking.

[KaiserJ]

i'm extremely intolerant of intolerance, it's hardwired into my circuitry

good point re: the debate, maybe we have some forum lurkers with unformed opinions about this subject that are forming opinions even as we speak; its an interesting idea

anyways.

i hope we can all still be friends after.

[Jazcash]

Well, the belief in a Christian God is, to most people, the sole requirement for the label of "Christian" to be applied.

I'm not even going to read the rest because you believe that somebody who believes in the Christian God is automatically a Christian.

[Big Take]

Well, the belief in a Christian God is, to most people, the sole requirement for the label of "Christian" to be applied.

I'm not even going to read the rest because you believe that somebody who believes in the Christian God is automatically a Christian.

Funny, because if you'd read the rest you'd have realized that I don't personally hold that belief, just that large portions of society do.

Let me just drag up something I said earlier and reword it slightly...

I think part of the problem is that Jazcash wouldn't know an intelligent debate if he was strapped into a chair and forced to watch one Clockwork Orange style.

[JohannesH]

You're christian if you've been baptized obviously

[Sucky_Lord]

You're christian if you've been baptized obviously

Nah, I have plenty of friends who have absolutely no belief in God, but were baptised as children. It goes back to the choice thing. I could take you when you are a baby and put a gun in your hand and wait for you to pull the trigger. Would that make you a murderer? No of course not, you have no concept or knowledge of what is going on. Same goes for infant baptism.

[KaiserJ]

all i can do is look at dictionary.com

ÔÇônoun
7. a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
8. a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian.
9. a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren.

this is pretty much how i had the word defined in my mind...

and by defenition 8, dictionary.com seems to feel jaz that you could be considered a christian. what you yourself feel is of course aside from this but it's the standard use of the word as far as i've seen in my own reading.

[Jazcash]

all i can do is look at dictionary.com

ÔÇônoun
7. a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
8. a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian.
9. a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren.

this is pretty much how i had the word defined in my mind...

and by defenition 8, dictionary.com seems to feel jaz that you could be considered a christian. what you yourself feel is of course aside from this but it's the standard use of the word as far as i've seen in my own reading.

Here's my clear cut equation. If you're a Christian, you're going to heaven, if you're not, you're going to hell. Also, being Christian is a choice. If I say I'm not a Christian then I'm not.