(October 8, 2018 at 3:48 pm)Reltzik Wrote:

(October 8, 2018 at 3:23 pm)Drich Wrote: Sure.. 

Initially a dead dialect was to mean the use of KJV. However since you did use the NIV I can consider the use of 1/2 quotes as 'killing off the words of Christ.' I know several different translation use different words here. I did not know or did not remember the NIV using the archaic poetic interpretation because it uses a different source/uses a different codacee than the KJV does. I know it to use the same as the easy to read, as it is a rework of the world bible (simplfied for the deaf which means the principles are broken down much like the niv but further) and this is how that reads:
25 Many people were traveling with Jesus. He said to them, 26 “If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower. You must love me more than your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters—even more than your own life! 27 Whoever will not carry the cross that is given to them when they follow me cannot be my follower.

28 “If you wanted to build a building, you would first sit down and decide how much it would cost. You must see if you have enough money to finish the job. 29 If you don’t do that, you might begin the work, but you would not be able to finish. And if you could not finish it, everyone would laugh at you. 30 They would say, ‘This man began to build, but he was not able to finish.’

So to review:

For choosing to use a translation that was published less than half a century ago, was deliberately put together to use modern English (not a "thou" or "shalt" to be found) and is one of the most popular (and perhaps THE most popular) English translations today...

... and for quoting a verse in which Christians are told they must hate from the NIV in direct response to your challenge, rather than quoting from whichever translation you are employing... in an argument about Christianity generally, in which the role of the more popular translations in shaping Christian conduct are more applicable than the less-popular ones...

I am a douche bag -- your words -- quoting from a dead dialect -- your words -- and have done so not because it is one of the most rational translations to choose in this context, and also not because I'm only familiar with a few translations rather than having the vast familiarity of some sort of a Biblical sommelier, but rather because I am cherry-picking and must be trying to make it say whatever I want -- again, your words.

.....

...

.

Well, THIS is obviously a charming, rational, sensible individual who clearly has great value to contribute to the dialogue.  It would definitely be very productive and not at all be a waste of time or source of constant frustration to engage with him.

*inaugurates his ignore list by adding a fucking douche bag to it*

The guy is a dishonest disingenuous debater that tries to cheat his way out of arguments, and I thought pride was a sin, obviously not for that fellow.

(October 8, 2018 at 3:23 pm)Drich Wrote:

---

(October 8, 2018 at 3:23 pm)Thoreauvian Wrote: Seriously?  You question whether Christians believe in Hell as a fitting punishment?

seriously.. Because nowhere in any bible does it say hell is eternal for us.

It says hell is eternal

It says Hell was created for satan to burn forever (not rule but to be punished in hell forever) 

Jesus Says the soul will be destroyed in Hell

Jesus says Hell is the second death

Jesus says we will be consumed by the fire..

No where does it say we will burn forever... That is mythos that surrounds the church and may have even been taught/is taught, but again not what the bible says. If you seek to worship the God of the bible or are will be punished by the God of the bible then it is by the bible that you will be redeemed or judged. not by what some preacher claims.

Perhaps you are right about Biblical passages, but that doesn't mean Christians don't believe it or that such belief doesn't inform their hatred of some people -- unless you are invoking the no-true-Christian argument.

Quote:In short God uses people like me to keep you people honest. other READ WHAT IS ON PAGE

I'm glad your fucking god isn't in charge of hiring.  He's a fucking moron.

You are an utter failure.  What does that make him?

Quote:The mods deleted it, as they should have. Prior to that, Minimalist, being the complete douchebag bigot that he is, posted a thread titled "Why are Christians so Stupid", in clear violation of the prime directive. That stayed up for a couple of days even though I reported it as a violation...so I posted "Why are Atheists so Stupid" just to make a point and making clear in the OP that it was doing so.

So much butthurt

---

Quote:It's called suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. Apparently, it's actually is a thing.

Yeah no it's not 

Quote: Funny how I started a me-too onion thread then atheists have to go an conform to the stereotype.

Actually we didn't it's the theists on this thread that showed Min's thread was right

"But the funny thing to me is... you guys condone and protect islam. Mandated hate. mandated misogyny, mandated death to homosexuals and here you have the huevos to ask why do christians hate???"

Not true. I dislike all religion, and I wager most atheists here do as well.

Quote:"But the funny thing to me is... you guys condone and protect islam. Mandated hate. mandated misogyny, mandated death to homosexuals and here you have the huevos to ask why do christians hate???"

Were the hell have we ever done that ?

Quote:So much butthurt

I wonder why his fucking god doesn't help him out?  Hey, asswipe.  Why don't you pray for your god to strike me dead?  We all die eventually so sooner or later you are bound to get it right.

(October 8, 2018 at 3:48 pm)Reltzik Wrote: [quote='Drich' pid='1827863' dateline='1539026631']

Sure.. 

Initially a dead dialect was to mean the use of KJV. However since you did use the NIV I can consider the use of 1/2 quotes as 'killing off the words of Christ.' I know several different translation use different words here. I did not know or did not remember the NIV using the archaic poetic interpretation because it uses a different source/uses a different codacee than the KJV does. I know it to use the same as the easy to read, as it is a rework of the world bible (simplfied for the deaf which means the principles are broken down much like the niv but further) and this is how that reads:
25 Many people were traveling with Jesus. He said to them, 26 “If you come to me but will not leave your family, you cannot be my follower. You must love me more than your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters—even more than your own life! 27 Whoever will not carry the cross that is given to them when they follow me cannot be my follower.

28 “If you wanted to build a building, you would first sit down and decide how much it would cost. You must see if you have enough money to finish the job. 29 If you don’t do that, you might begin the work, but you would not be able to finish. And if you could not finish it, everyone would laugh at you. 30 They would say, ‘This man began to build, but he was not able to finish.’

Quote:So to review:

For choosing to use a translation that was published less than half a century ago, was deliberately put together to use modern English (not a "thou" or "shalt" to be found) and is one of the most popular (and perhaps THE most popular) English translations today...

what is your problem? do you have a persecution complex? I admitted in my first line to you I THOUGHT YOU WERE USING THE KJV!!!! Then I made an arguement that you killed the context by only using 1/2 of what was written. I even said I was unaware the niv used the poetic rendition of the passage the kjv did! yet your off on some tanget that shows you didn't even bother to read what I wrote. or you are comming into this conversation so enraged all you see is what you want to see.

None of what you said corresponds to what I wrote.

Quote:... and for quoting a verse in which Christians are told they must hate from the NIV in direct response to your challenge, rather than quoting from whichever translation you are employing... in an argument about Christianity generally, in which the role of the more popular translations in shaping Christian conduct are more applicable than the less-popular ones...

I do not care what version you use so long as yu use it properly. using the KJV makes your successful understanding less likely than if you use another version, but us can use it. in the case of your quote you simply did not use the passage properly. I took your passage and framed it properly.

Quote:I am a douche bag -- your words -- quoting from a dead dialect -- your words[quote] 1. where did I write douche bag? 2 you are a douche for quoting something you do not understand, AND take what was there out of context then demand a recogning! What did you think was going to happen? you quoted just enough to

[quote]
-- and have done so not because it is one of the most rational translations to choose in this context, and also not because I'm only familiar with a few translations rather than having the vast familiarity of some sort of a Biblical sommelier, but rather because I am cherry-picking and must be trying to make it say whatever I want -- again, your words.

.....

...

.

Again not your translation but your decision to stop mid sentence and play/pretend your quote filled my request. Those were your word.. it stopped being the bible's words when you chopped them out of text!

Quote:Well, THIS is obviously a charming, rational, sensible individual who clearly has great value to contribute to the dialogue.  It would definitely be very productive and not at all be a waste of time or source of constant frustration to engage with him.

*inaugurates his ignore list by adding a fucking douche bag to it*

look precious little snow flake.. I am here to straighten out the bs you people claim to be quotes from the bible. Most of you intentionally misquote cherry pick create straw men out of passages lie/do whatever you need to to support a point.

WHY WOUlDN'T be on the offensive? This stuff is life and death, and you people treat it as an opportunity to make fun of those who do not think as you do!

For example you cut 3 paragraphs of dialog out, in order to make the bible fit your bull shit claim. You destroyed the context in order to isolate a single word and then placed that passage fragment in line with your own personal thoughts to combat a biblical truth. Those are the deeds of a really bad person... yet you demand "charming, rational on a specific level, and a sensibility that contributes to your dialog?!?!" Sounds to me you want a puppet. sounds to me you want a simple minded person to manipulate so you can get away with making straw statements unchallenged! Again snow flake I am not here for that. I am here to represent the truth of scripture, and if that upsets you, then it would be better if you did put me on ignore so you can pretend life is as shallow as you think it is. because I will not allow you to go Uncontested.

---

(October 8, 2018 at 5:49 pm)Thoreauvian Wrote: [quote='Drich' pid='1827863' dateline='1539026631']

---

seriously.. Because nowhere in any bible does it say hell is eternal for us.

It says hell is eternal

It says Hell was created for satan to burn forever (not rule but to be punished in hell forever) 

Jesus Says the soul will be destroyed in Hell

Jesus says Hell is the second death

Jesus says we will be consumed by the fire..

No where does it say we will burn forever... That is mythos that surrounds the church and may have even been taught/is taught, but again not what the bible says. If you seek to worship the God of the bible or are will be punished by the God of the bible then it is by the bible that you will be redeemed or judged. not by what some preacher claims.

Perhaps you are right about Biblical passages, but that doesn't mean Christians don't believe it or that such belief doesn't inform their hatred of some people -- unless you are invoking the no-true-Christian argument.
[/quote]

what hypocrisy.. you blame God and other Christians for those who do not understand who they worship... Again hate is a human trait that people bring into the church and then use anything they can to justify their hate. look at the venom on the atheist side towards the christian members here.. does it take eternal hell for them to muster this hate? look at some of the crazy left wing political groups, i don't know one who claims to represent the church. look at the hate and intolerance there is in those groups for trump and his followers. people have much hate in them and they use whatever they are passionate about to direct their hate. this is not a church thing. this is a bad person thing.

(October 7, 2018 at 10:42 am)Mathilda Wrote: Obviously not all of them. Some are just default Xtians who happen to have been raised in a country where Xtianity is the predominant religion. But I mean that ones who take it seriously. So many of them are full of hatred or ascribe this emotion to their god. God hates sin, homosexuals or anything or anyone not like them. Why is this?

We're all familiar with the concept of a hateful Muslim in the same way, and although evangelical Xtians don't threaten to cut heads off unbelievers, it's not much better as a woman when you hear how they want to remove your bodily autonomy. Or the insidious conditioning of children where they instil a fear of hell into them.

Yet each one of these hateful Xtians will claim that their religion and their god is one of love. The double speak is of 1984-esque proportions.

The only thing I can see that is common to many of the hateful Xtians is  lack of empathy.

To be fair to most Christians it only seems to be the American ones who are hateful. They are trying to spread the toxic brand world wide, but mostly over in the UK at least, people just look at that sort with pity.

(October 9, 2018 at 1:02 pm)Drich Wrote: what hypocrisy.. you blame God and other Christians for those who do not understand who they worship... Again hate is a human trait that people bring into the church and then use anything they can to justify their hate. look at the venom on the atheist side towards the christian members here.. does it take eternal hell for them to muster this hate? look at some of the crazy left wing political groups, i don't know one who claims to represent the church. look at the hate and intolerance there is in those groups for trump and his followers. people have much hate in them and they use whatever they are passionate about to direct their hate. this is not a church thing. this is a bad person thing.

An impressive way to change the subject.  Yes indeed, hatred is a human problem.  But the discussion was specifically about how Christians rationalize their hatred.