RE: My heart is breaking... I thought Christians are suppose to love "uncondition...
January 5, 2016 at 11:33 am
(December 31, 2015 at 9:29 am)MTL Wrote:(December 30, 2015 at 10:08 pm)The_Empress Wrote: You. Are. Fucking. Vile.
He is. he overuses that ROTFL emogi, and always to express vicious (albeit undemonstrable and therefore unjustifiable) derision.
It just shuts down any value of conversation with him,
if he's going to be so calculatedly, relentlessly, arrogantly, needlessly, remorselessly unkind and condescending.
I draw comfort from the fact that his belief basically hinges on a determination to delude himself no matter what
and that there is, in all likelihood, absolutely zero reward waiting for him in eternity...for all his troubles.
I ordinarily don't take pleasure, per se, in the disappointment I think awaits most Theists,
because many are kind and humble, at least;
but he is the very cankerous type of toothache of a Theist that first gave me my earliest reasons to despise religion.
There is such a thing as being a "good ambassador of Christ".
He is anything but.
I used the Roflol emoji to break or protest the sympathy the OP was trying to establish. then as a bonus I got to be cold and intentionally to the point, because of the underlining severity of attempted manipulation the OP put into his original post. That is why I asked if this was all real. Because what the OP has done is no different than a priest using religion/his authority to molest little boys. The OP wanted to use the same religion to force some girl into a relationship with him, by intentionally manipulating a key principle of the religion.
People who do this sort of thing should never go unchecked. These are the seeds of thought that make men evil monsters. therefore they should be ripped out by the root, not coddled or nursed.
It is not the fault of the girl nor the religion that the OP is trying to manipulate them both into 'loving him' unconditionally. what kind of monsters allows anyone to do this? would you allow a priesor really any member of the church t to use their religion to get what he wants sexually by holding some precept over someone else? Then what's the difference here? Are you so foolish as to not see the manipulation the OP was attempting to use? or because he claims to now be an atheist he can not do any wrong to anyone in the church?
