The Religion of Blinding Bluster

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
So it's a free-for-all and we can know nothing for sure? That's silly.
That's reality. Being human means getting used to uncertainty. It's not a free for all because various facts and beliefs carry varying degrees of certainty. Experience over time is your guide.
You are a loony tune.
You are an ultra-maroon. But ad hominems get old especially when you are attacking someone who is so nice and has admirable goals at least. Meanwhile your goal is clearly self-engrandizment over all else.
That yet... some people are complete wrong; like you.
A mature dude would at least own up to his own subjective stance.
Mystic nonsense.

Your dismissal of my claim that God wrote the Bible means nothing at all to me.

Your rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ is duly noted.

Your "spirit guide" is not God's spirit. It's the other guy.
Common sense isn't mystical.
 

Right Divider

Body part
That's reality.
Not completely true.
Being human means getting used to uncertainty.
To some degree.
It's not a free for all because various facts and beliefs carry varying degrees of certainty.
Yes, that is where your world-view falls flat on its face.
Experience over time is your guide.
Yes, my experience is that your experience is incorrect.
You are an ultra-maroon.
Your opinions means nothing to me since you are nothing but a randomly evolved hydrogen molecule.
But ad hominems get old especially when you are attacking someone who is so nice and has admirable goals at least.
Ahhhh. How sweet.
Meanwhile your goal is clearly self-engrandizment over all else.
Nonsense.
A mature dude would at least own up to his own subjective stance.
I don't claim to be God. But I know God. You are lost in your own little world of make believe.
Common sense isn't mystical.
Common sense isn't so common, you have none.
 
Last edited:

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Not completely true.
Nice.
To some degree.
Good form. Hope to see you use this phrase more.
Yes, that is where your world-view falls flat on its face.

Yes, my experience is that your experience is incorrect.
We could just respect our differences and allow the other to live life according to personal conscience. Or is that too new age for you?
Your opinions means nothing to me since your are nothing but a randomly evolved hydrogen molecule.

I am a mass of molecules evolved from systematic processes including some elements of chance but that's not all I am.
Ahhhh. How sweet.
Purex comes off like a diplomat and you come off like a stereotypical truck driver. This is funny because JR is a truck driver and he is less brutish than you.
Nonsense.

I don't claim to be God. But I know God. You are lost in your own little world of make believe.
Pretending to know God better than others and so precisely amounts to anointing yourself his special messenger. Narcissism cloaked in humility is usually pretty transparent
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
How could any of what?

The question was how could rape be justified? And the answer is if circumstances were such that rape would be necessary to ensure the future of the species. Obviously that is not the case, now. But none of us knows what might happen in the future. And my point with this is that because none of knows what might happen in the future, we cannot know for certain that what we consider 'wrong', now, will always be considered 'wrong', absolutely. (Thus, the problem with declaring morality absolutes).

Even now not everyone would consider slavery an absolute moral wrong. Nor will everyone define slavery in the same way. And the same goes for all our moral 'wrongs': murder, rape, robbery, lying, cheating, and so on. People define these differently, and justify them according to their own standards. And this is true no matter how one arrives at their standards.
In what way could rape be justified or necessary to ensure the future of the species? If it came to the point where that's "justifiable" then the human race has all but died out already.
 

Right Divider

Body part
We could just respect our differences and allow the other to live life according to personal conscience.
Please describe how I've "not allowed the other to live life according to personal conscience".
I am a mass of molecules evolved from systematic processes including some elements of chance but that's not all I am.
How do unguided molecules have "systematic processes"?
Purex comes off like a diplomat and you come off like a stereotypical truck driver.
I have far more respect for truck drivers than I do for diplomats.
This is funny because JR is a truck driver and he is less brutish than you.
He's young... he'll grow into it.
Pretending to know God better than others and so precisely amounts to anointing yourself his special messenger.
I never claimed to "know God better than others", but clearly I do know him better than someone like you that does not even believe that he exists.
Narcissism cloaked in humility is usually pretty transparent
It's quite transparent in your case.
 
Last edited:

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
How could any of what?

The question was how could rape be justified? And the answer is if circumstances were such that rape would be necessary to ensure the future of the species.

Rape.
Murder.
Abuse.

They are 100% indefensible. To answer your ridiculous question regarding ensuring the species of mankind …

IF rape is necessary to continue mankind, mankind is not worthy of saving.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Romans 1 is not the Mosaic Law.
I know.
Haven't you ever read it?
Yes, I have.
Here, I'll quote it for you, so that you don't even have to get your Bible out:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.Professing to be wise, they became fools,and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. - Romans 1:18-32 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans1:18-32&version=NKJV

Thanks.
I, as a member of the Body of Christ, am dead to the law. It has no hold on me because of what Christ did. I live by faith in God.
The reason I mentioned it is because you are advocating an OT punishment for crime.
Are we not past that?
Society as a whole, however, is not, ESPECIALLY those who have not come to Christ.
Thus, as Paul says, we establish the law. "Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness," those four laws are the foundations of society, with "do not covet" being the means by which we establish motive, despite it not being a crime itself, only a sin.
I think the two laws of Christ are a better synopsis of the NT...Love God with all your might, and love your neighbor as you love yourself.
Binding to whom?
To those who still use OT punishments, as that was the root of my posts.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
How could any of what?

The question was how could rape be justified? And the answer is if circumstances were such that rape would be necessary to ensure the future of the species. Obviously that is not the case, now. But none of us knows what might happen in the future. And my point with this is that because none of knows what might happen in the future, we cannot know for certain that what we consider 'wrong', now, will always be considered 'wrong', absolutely. (Thus, the problem with declaring morality absolutes).

Even now not everyone would consider slavery an absolute moral wrong. Nor will everyone define slavery in the same way. And the same goes for all our moral 'wrongs': murder, rape, robbery, lying, cheating, and so on. People define these differently, and justify them according to their own standards. And this is true no matter how one arrives at their standards.
It is good that God gave His followers His "definitions".
It clears up a lot of the confusion you recognize springing from the minds of men.
 

Jenkins

Active member
It is good that God gave His followers His "definitions".
It clears up a lot of the confusion you recognize springing from the minds of men.

New creature does not mean "born again".

"Born again" is referring to Israel.

These might help, if you read them: https://graceambassadors.com/search?q=born+again&x=0&y=0#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=born again&gsc.page=1
Same concept. Those Redeemed through Christ rejoice with this, rather than quibble over language.

Thanks for your wisdom to pursue the Truth of a personal salvation through Jesus.
 

Jenkins

Active member
God has not told me, nor indicated to me in any way, that He wrote the Bible. If He had, I surely would accept it as such. Instead, a few deeply flawed religious zealots have told me this, and then offered me no cause whatever to believe them. As they clearly are NOT God, gods, demigods, nor any form or manifestation of transcendent divinity beyond any other flawed and confused human. And as a flawed and confused human myself, I see no need for their council. Especially when they are SO flawed and confused that they don't even know they are flawed and confused!
#2315 "theopneustos" Godbreathed, in 2 Tim. 3:16.
Wise of you to ask.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber

Then why ask about the Mosaic Law, when I'm talking about Romans 1?

Yes, I have.

Thanks.

The reason I mentioned it is because you are advocating an OT punishment for crime.

Again, Romans 1 is not "Old Testament."

Do I literally have to spell it out for you?

In Romans 1, Paul is talking about people who are deserving of death, and mentions, among others, homosexuals and murderers.

Are we not past that?

God's standards of justice for moral crimes are absolute. They are valid for all at all times in all places.

So no, while society may decide otherwise, we are not "past" God's standards of justice.

I think the two laws of Christ are a better synopsis of the NT...Love God with all your might, and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

The law is summed up in those two commandments, but that doesn't mean that people know what it means to love.

The law is a tutor to bring people to Christ. Telling people "love God and love your neighbor" isn't enough, especially for the wicked.

To those who still use OT punishments, as that was the root of my posts.

If God says that certain crimes are deserving of death, why do you, Hoping, think that we should discard that and try to find newer, different punishments for those crimes, let alone hope that they are just (because it's guaranteed that they are not)?
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
I can't help but notice that most of the folks that visit this site are of a common type. That is the type of religious Christian that is usually male, usually quite aggressive and antagonistic toward others, and very 'legalistic'. The kind of persons for whom God, religion, life, people; everything is about being right or wrong. And they MUST be in the right, or see themselves as being in the right, at all times. Their religion is all and pretty much only about righteousness. Even to the exclusion of love, forgiveness, kindness, generosity, justice, unity, and reason. And it makes me curious about how and why these folks are so obsessed with the idea of righteousness. And especially with the idea of their own righteousness.

Were they raised in some horribly authoritarian environment where they were constantly threatened with dire consequences for any instance in which they could be found "wrong"? Were they brainwashed somewhere along the line to believe that God is some sort of unrelenting punisher of any and all human flaws and failures? Are they victims of this kind of religiously couched child abuse? Or is there some sort of internal psychosis that drives these people to have to see themselves as morally and ethically superior to everyone around them? Sort of like Donald Trump's narcissistic personality disorder?

I realize none of these people are going to be able to answer or speak to this question on this thread. As they will not be able to acknowledge their own thoughts and behaviors in this light. But there are a few of you that have been coming here for quite a long time, and that are not of this 'type' of religious Christian. (I'm sure it applies to people of other religions, too, but they are not likely to be tolerated for long, here, so I'm focusing on those that are.) And I am curious about what you think of this kind of dogmatic, blinding bluster, as a religious expression. Why you think it happens? And how do you, personally, respond to it. I do see some of you attempting to debate with these folks but that would appear to be totally ineffective. Like trying to debate Donald Trump. Once the need to be right usurps both fact and reason there really is no point to debating them with facts or reason, anymore. And what else is there?

Also, I don't 'dislike" these people nor see a need to change their point of view, necessarily. They are who they are and I appreciate them for that. I believe we humans are what we are supposed to be, and that includes our many foibles and idiosincracies. But they tend to leave us with no meaningful way of engaging with them. And no real way of even understanding why they've come to be on the path they're on. Maybe it's just none of my/our business, but I am a naturally curious soul. Especially when it comes to the various ways we humans come to see ourselves in relation to the world.
You've just described left-wing social justice warriors.
 

PureX

Well-known member
#2315 "theopneustos" Godbreathed, in 2 Tim. 3:16.
Wise of you to ask.
Where did you see that "this text was authored by Me, God" quote? Because your interpretation of some vague poetic phrase isn't going to stand as the equivalent. Sorry.
 
Last edited:

PureX

Well-known member
Rape.
Murder.
Abuse.

They are 100% indefensible. To answer your ridiculous question regarding ensuring the species of mankind …

IF rape is necessary to continue mankind, mankind is not worthy of saving.
Even today killing our fellow humans is routinely deemed necessary for the future of humanity. Millions of them. And yet one rape makes humanity not worth saving in your eyes? The rape of a woman that refuses to offer her reproductive self to save the human species?

You have some very strange priorities, friend.
 
Top