(April 5, 2016 at 6:21 pm)Won2blv Wrote:

(April 5, 2016 at 10:45 am)robvalue Wrote: Well, my point would be that Christ is held up as being a figure of supreme importance (even God, often), and he hands out a bunch of rules. Then the same people holding him up like this go and ignore those rules. Doesn't make sense to me. It appears to be a total contradiction.

I agree that its a total contradiction, but that alone doesn't invalidate the benefits of Jesus teachings does it?

No, it doesn't. Jesus (allegedly) said some sensible things which people could potentially benefit from, if they hadn't already thought of them.

(April 5, 2016 at 10:20 am)Won2blv Wrote: (I'm starting this thread in response to another thread. I don't know the exact rules on doing this so I'll vaguely reference it, but it should be clear which one it is)

On another thread a point has been made that since Jesus told an individual that he need to sell all his belongings and give to the poor, if any christian even owns a tv they are living in perpetual sin. And that it couldn't hurt their chances of getting to heaven.

That is not what I said in that thread. You express uncertainty about the rules of this forum. Lying about other members is against those rules, wouldn't you think?

I said in another time and in another place that owning a TV is deliberate sin. In UPPING THE ANTE ON PASCAL'S WAGER, I am making a DIFFERENT ARGUMENT. Do you understand?

Quote:Lets assume this is true.  Does this mean mean that if all atheist lived by Jesus words it wouldn't hurt? Let me explain, using the said account of Jesus, maybe this wouldn't inspire an atheist to truly give all of his belongings but what if this scripture inspired them to give a donation to a homeless shelter? Or donate clothes? Or maybe give money to refugees in Syria?

The world would be a better place if we all lived like Jesus. That's what Jesus wanted, all he got was the church. Insert Bad Luck Brian here.

Quote:If you are an atheist that believes in humanism, does this prove that living by christ's standards, even if you can't fully live up to it, is it better for you and humanity? Does this prove that living as a christian is the best for the world?

Living as a Christian and following Jesus' words are two different things.

Saying that living by the words of Jesus would improve society and saying that the words of Jesus are the best thing for society are two different things. He had some ideas (which were hardly new) which, if practiced, would improve society, but he also said a lot of stuff that got his ass killed.

Quote:I don't believe the answer to those questions is yes. I believe humans can do good to humans for the sake of humanity. But if an atheist makes a point that christian don't live up to christs standards, what is the point that you're making? That christs standards are supreme? Or that we're all just selfish, and this proves that Jesus words aren't worth noting? Or something else? I just don't understand the point that is being made

The point is that Christians need to finally understand that they're not the moral authority.

Quote:if any christian even owns a tv they are living in perpetual sin. And that it couldn't hurt their chances of getting to heaven.

Oddly....the bible does not have a lot to say about TV.

(April 8, 2016 at 7:26 pm)Nihilist Virus Wrote:

(April 5, 2016 at 10:20 am)Won2blv Wrote: (I'm starting this thread in response to another thread. I don't know the exact rules on doing this so I'll vaguely reference it, but it should be clear which one it is)

On another thread a point has been made that since Jesus told an individual that he need to sell all his belongings and give to the poor, if any christian even owns a tv they are living in perpetual sin. And that it couldn't hurt their chances of getting to heaven.

That is not what I said in that thread.  You express uncertainty about the rules of this forum.  Lying about other members is against those rules, wouldn't you think?

I said in another time and in another place that owning a TV is deliberate sin.  In UPPING THE ANTE ON PASCAL'S WAGER, I am making a DIFFERENT ARGUMENT.  Do you understand?

Quote:Lets assume this is true.  Does this mean mean that if all atheist lived by Jesus words it wouldn't hurt? Let me explain, using the said account of Jesus, maybe this wouldn't inspire an atheist to truly give all of his belongings but what if this scripture inspired them to give a donation to a homeless shelter? Or donate clothes? Or maybe give money to refugees in Syria?

The world would be a better place if we all lived like Jesus.  That's what Jesus wanted, all he got was the church.  Insert Bad Luck Brian here.

Quote:If you are an atheist that believes in humanism, does this prove that living by christ's standards, even if you can't fully live up to it, is it better for you and humanity? Does this prove that living as a christian is the best for the world?

Living as a Christian and following Jesus' words are two different things.

Saying that living by the words of Jesus would improve society and saying that the words of Jesus are the best thing for society are two different things.  He had some ideas (which were hardly new) which, if practiced, would improve society, but he also said a lot of stuff that got his ass killed.

Quote:I don't believe the answer to those questions is yes. I believe humans can do good to humans for the sake of humanity. But if an atheist makes a point that christian don't live up to christs standards, what is the point that you're making? That christs standards are supreme? Or that we're all just selfish, and this proves that Jesus words aren't worth noting? Or something else? I just don't understand the point that is being made

The point is that Christians need to finally understand that they're not the moral authority.

I am only going to respond to your accusation that I lied about you. You practically said that exact statement on the thread that you started based off of your stupid point. It is completely apropos to that specific thread. So you're either lying, or being completely disingenuous about your statement. No where in your incoherent rambling do you make one shred of sense. I am dumber for engaging with you. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul. Do you get that?

(April 10, 2016 at 12:37 am)Won2blv Wrote:

(April 8, 2016 at 7:26 pm)Nihilist Virus Wrote: That is not what I said in that thread.  You express uncertainty about the rules of this forum.  Lying about other members is against those rules, wouldn't you think?

I said in another time and in another place that owning a TV is deliberate sin.  In UPPING THE ANTE ON PASCAL'S WAGER, I am making a DIFFERENT ARGUMENT.  Do you understand?


The world would be a better place if we all lived like Jesus.  That's what Jesus wanted, all he got was the church.  Insert Bad Luck Brian here.


Living as a Christian and following Jesus' words are two different things.

Saying that living by the words of Jesus would improve society and saying that the words of Jesus are the best thing for society are two different things.  He had some ideas (which were hardly new) which, if practiced, would improve society, but he also said a lot of stuff that got his ass killed.


The point is that Christians need to finally understand that they're not the moral authority.

I am only going to respond to your accusation that I lied about you. You practically said that exact statement on the thread that you started based off of your stupid point. It is completely apropos to that specific thread. So you're either lying, or being completely disingenuous about your statement. No where in your incoherent rambling do you make one shred of sense. I am dumber for engaging with you. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul. Do you get that?

Show me where in the thread the statement was made.

Under the old rules Jews were supposed to forgive debts at set times, such as every seven years and the Jubilee year every 50 years.  Jesus tossed those aside and said that if a person follows him then the believer has no debt claims against anyone.  That's because the believer is expected to freely give whatever someone asks of him and he is not to expect repayment.
http://www.bricktestament.com/the_teachi...05_41.html

(April 10, 2016 at 6:37 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Under the old rules Jews were supposed to forgive debts at set times, such as every seven years and the Jubilee year every 50 years.  Jesus tossed those aside and said that if a person follows him then the believer has no debt claims against anyone.  That's because the believer is expected to freely give whatever someone asks of him and he is not to expect repayment.
http://www.bricktestament.com/the_teachi...05_41.html

I am familiar with the jubilee year provision. Could you give me the specific verses where Jesus says what you said? Thanks

(April 10, 2016 at 3:16 am)Nihilist Virus Wrote:

(April 10, 2016 at 12:37 am)Won2blv Wrote: I am only going to respond to your accusation that I lied about you. You practically said that exact statement on the thread that you started based off of your stupid point. It is completely apropos to that specific thread. So you're either lying, or being completely disingenuous about your statement. No where in your incoherent rambling do you make one shred of sense. I am dumber for engaging with you. I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul. Do you get that?

Show me where in the thread the statement was made.

Read the 8th post on your thread. You don't even make pascals wager as a qualifier for your argument. You say "christians" multiple times. You are absolutely an idiot or just completely dishonest. Probably a little bit of both. You make the statement that they don't even try. Clearly you don't understand the point you're trying to make, or simple logic 101.

(April 5, 2016 at 10:20 am)Won2blv Wrote: (I'm starting this thread in response to another thread. I don't know the exact rules on doing this so I'll vaguely reference it, but it should be clear which one it is)

On another thread a point has been made that since Jesus told an individual that he need to sell all his belongings and give to the poor, if any christian even owns a tv they are living in perpetual sin. And that it couldn't hurt their chances of getting to heaven.

Lets assume this is true. Does this mean mean that if all atheist lived by Jesus words it wouldn't hurt? Let me explain, using the said account of Jesus, maybe this wouldn't inspire an atheist to truly give all of his belongings but what if this scripture inspired them to give a donation to a homeless shelter? Or donate clothes? Or maybe give money to refugees in Syria?

If you are an atheist that believes in humanism, does this prove that living by christ's standards, even if you can't fully live up to it, is it better for you and humanity? Does this prove that living as a christian is the best for the world?

I don't believe the answer to those questions is yes. I believe humans can do good to humans for the sake of humanity. But if an atheist makes a point that christian don't live up to christs standards, what is the point that you're making? That christs standards are supreme? Or that we're all just selfish, and this proves that Jesus words aren't worth noting? Or something else? I just don't understand the point that is being made

No, when I make that point I am pointing out either cherry-picking or hypocrisy, as well as some of that mote/beam thing when my interlocutor is an obnoxious preacher.

I don't, however, speak for any other atheist. My uplink to the Hive Mind failed last week and IT has been terribly slow getting to my work order.

(April 11, 2016 at 6:40 pm)Won2blv Wrote: Read the 8th post on your thread.

That was referring to conversations I have with people. It is different from the argument.

Quote:You don't even make pascals wager as a qualifier for your argument.

Because it is a different topic.

Quote:You say "christians" multiple times. You are absolutely an idiot or just completely dishonest.

Normally I am talking to Christians, not JW wackos like you.

Quote:Probably a little bit of both. You make the statement that they don't even try. Clearly you don't understand the point you're trying to make, or simple logic 101.

Here's the problem. You said REPEATEDLY said that I said this was an absolute requirement. I asked for you to show where I said that. I DO NOT SAY THAT HERE. Here I am only saying that they are not trying their hardest as Christians. Get your facts straight, dipshit.