Hey missluckie

It seems to have passed over your head that I also agree with 80% of what catfish says. More than that possibly. You seem to be missing all of those similarities in our position and homing in on the disagreement between us. I am asking him openly to explain himself. He refuses and calls me names, yet you seem to think it's me doing that.

Have you seen him freely admit to not being an orthadox Christian? I have. Please let this sink in.

I hate religion, hold the belief that love wins / ie God is good and that that is biblically based, believe that there is no biblical backing for homophobia, etc.. I believe in reasoning your beliefs for yourself. I never take any one elses word for anything. I have to undesrstand it. What in catfish's refusal to discuss this with me do you find him being the loving, caring sharing kind?
Apparantly you think I'm attacking his faith?? I totally respect his and your right to belive what you like. What I have to question is his rejection of orthodox Christianity and at the same time his stated aleigence to it. He needs to be honest with us all here.

What do you think about the Jehova's Witness faith? They are fully bible believing christians by their own standards. They accept the whole of the bible, unlike catfish, but they don't accept the Nicene Creed or that Jesus died to save them. <-- This is orthadox Christianity. If you don't accept that then you aren't part of that group. This is the only problem here.

I don't doubt catfish's sincerity in what he's saying. He may be doing very nicely with his beliefs, and I wish him no ill in that.

catfish, to me, has some glaring inconsistencies obvious in his understanding of scripture. I try to discuss that with him but all I get is insults in return. Kudos to him that he thinks for himself. That is vitally importantly to me too. Don't you think it slightly odd that he formlates his ideas using atheists as his sounding board? How would atheists have any input to his perspective. Look at his threads and you see people responding in incredulity.

How the hell would you know that I don't speak for my religion accurately? You have zero understanding of it. That is why you are confused.

(February 3, 2013 at 3:48 pm)catfish Wrote: I'll take the spirit of Truth any day.

I suggest taking more water with it. Also maybe some ice.

(February 3, 2013 at 5:46 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I hate religion, hold the belief that love wins / ie God is good and that that is biblically based, believe that there is no biblical backing for homophobia, etc..

Well it is sort of kind written in the Bible. For anyone who wants to use it to back the homophobia they have.

"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." Leviticus 18:22

You can't really say it's just the Old Testament so you can just ignore it either.

"I can guarantee this truth: Until the earth and the heavens disappear, neither a period nor a comma will disappear from Moses' Teachings before everything has come true." Matthew 5:18

(February 3, 2013 at 6:21 pm)Zone Wrote: Well it is sort of kind [of]

A lot of things are. But a lot of things aren't applicable/don't constitute anything beyond their context.
Sure I've seen people base bigotry on those. Rarely I see serious points made. As I've said, I'm not basing that on a whim. You'll have to take my word on that as I'm not interested in fleshing it out right now. I hope you understand.

First of all, there is no such thing as evolutionary morality. I think you might be making fun of me or making a joke at this point, because things like fascism and all that nonsense is predicated on eugenics, which is a debunked area of science and not based on evolution. It more follows social darwinism than anything else, which is a social theory, not a biological one, and is just reprehensible at the best of times when speaking from a moral standpoint.

If you can't test the holy spirit, then how do you know it's there? Compassion does not come from some invisible thing inside us, it comes from our inbuilt nature as societal beings who have an intrinsic ability to understand the concept of socialising amongst our fellow humans.
Saying the holy spirit is there and then giving some excuse for not having to prove that assertion doesn't prove the truth of anything. It's just a baseless assertion.

Again though, I'm not sure if you're joking.

---

Ahh, if I accidentally take something you've said to someone else as something you said to me, then I apologise for it.

DEMONstrated is just a play on words though. I can not for the life of me figure out why in every other sphere of life people want evidence, but when it comes to things like a god, no evidence required. Faith is not a virtue, it's gullibility.

It's been remarked that the bulk of Christian practice and creeds exists as nothing more than an army of shibboleths or code words, shared not for the purpose of communicating what they believe, but rather as simply a way for them to distinguish between those they should greet with open arms, and those who should be greeted at the pointy end of a spear. I've seen nothing in this thread to disarm that impression. One might say there are two kinds of Christians, those that obsess over distinguishing who is a true Christian or not, and those that don't. It seems merely cute, but it points to a reality that there are two large categories involved. The first, one that is inclusive, consisting of those that embrace diversity and pluralism of belief, and then there are those who place a strong emphasis on exclusivity and "correctness" of behavior and belief. It's worth noting that the latter appears to be the more pernicious kind, likely at the root of the persecution and death of millions throughout the years, from the Cathars to the medieval Jews, to the Nazi holocaust. I think if Christians want an example of something non-believers dislike about Christians, the sort of behavior modeled by Frodo and catfish here likely ranks high on that list.

As to particulars, it's been my impression of catfish from the time he came here that he is the sort of person who derives gratification from believing himself to be special, unique, and different. Giving non-informative, vague and non-disclosing answers appears to be a way of preserving his image of himself as unique and different. Personally, I find such behavior somewhat juvenile, but to each his own. However, imo, in this situation, his usual game of cat and mouse is actually aggravating an already heated situation, and I'd ask for a little more honesty, plain speaking and disclosure.

Oh, and for what it's worth, neither of you appear to be doing a very good job of turning the other cheek. While I'm reluctant to put the brakes on a slap fight between Christians, there are better ways, in my opinion.

LOL, as fucking vague as I can be. (and not one to put on a show) < there's my mild jab in case you missed it
You have too much time on your hands...
.

My intention is not to end up at the other end of a pointy spear, but I take your point. Nice post . I keep saying that I value everyone's ideas and aim to be tolerant and respectful. That seems to be ignored, or maybe I'm not reflecting that. In no way is this a witch hunt. I'm after a clear understanding, and all the obvious misunderstanding is attracting my spidey sense which can't help but respond. Apologies for that.

---

(February 3, 2013 at 5:12 pm)missluckie26 Wrote: You mock your own brother openly and cause confusion to those who don't know why. In essence, you're defaming your god in the name of your own selfish reasons.

Apologies miss cluckie, can I just address this last little niggle

This isn't my brother in Christ. Catfish, love his cotton socks, is a brother in faith to me as much add you are my sister, assuming you aren't a Christian as is widely defined by the Christian Church which encompasses some forty thousand denominations, all of which I would happily refer to as brothers and sisters in Christ.

He is a brother in theism no doubt. That doesn't preclude him from being as polar opposite in faith to me as any other.

Now that isn't to say that I wish any harm on him whatsoever. In fact if he were an outsider, then that would make me love him even more, as that is the commission of the church. Most of the people that I love, value and cherish are not my siblings in Christ. I do work pointedly at not hating on people. That's a huge failure to me. I do like to poke fun and maybe that's a weakness. I'm as susceptible to pride as the next person.

(February 3, 2013 at 6:44 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: A lot of things are. But a lot of things aren't applicable/don't constitute anything beyond their context.

The context being the word of the supreme God of all the universe. Though I suppose you have to cherry pick out the parts that humans must have inserted into it. That would be anything you don't agree with by your own moral standards which aren't derived from your religion but taken from secular Western society. So no-one really gets their of morality from the Bible, and I'm not sure if there has ever been a universal human standard across cultures. The closest we have to such a thing being the golden rule but that would amount to a combination of empathy, being able to put yourself in some elses place and the fact that this what you would want other people to do to you so it's practical. That's everything you need to know about morality in a nutshell and there is nothing supernatural about it.

(January 28, 2013 at 5:14 am)Tobie Wrote: Oh my, you really need to look up some facts. Christians make more responsible citizens do they? Is that why they are the faith group with the largest proportion of their population in prison?

See this is where all labels get it wrong, not just Christians. Since our first non nomadic tribes, our first cities, as a species, there has always been crime. And throughout the ages our boarders and governments have changed and you STILL have a ratio of criminals vs general population.

Christians make up most of the prison population in the states and the Americas because those are the cultures they come from. You go to China and their prisons would be full of, what a shocker, Chinese Buddhists.

But, there is a lower ratio of crime in less religious countries than there is in more religious countries in the west.

Point being and you touched on it, labels don't automatically make someone moral or immoral.