RE: Request from a Christian.
January 1, 2017 at 2:29 pm
(This post was last modified: January 1, 2017 at 2:39 pm by Astonished.)
(January 1, 2017 at 2:15 pm)Dragonspride1995 Wrote:(January 1, 2017 at 2:00 pm)Astonished Wrote: And you saying stuff like that doesn't strike you as being offensive to us at all? I seem to recall mentioning that one of the things Christians did to get under my skin was to say things like that. Doesn't make it any better that I'm not a child anymore.
saying they "sin just like us all?" Offends you? I honestly had no intention to do so, I apologise.
The implication is that you consider us to all be on the same level of the playing field. This is not so. Firstly, I don't acknowledge the concept of sin as a thing, so your accusation that I engage in something that is touted to be negative is a false one (and by a judge who is a hypocrite, liar and murderer), and in fact breaks the commandment that you shall not bear false witness. Second, it implies I've got responsibility for something that I did not do (original sin) which is utter horseshit. Third, it implies I'm doing something that merits burning in hell for eternity. Fourth, it is an attempt (whether backhanded or overt) to inflict a guilt trip upon me which is a horrible thing to do to anyone, let alone with the previously mentioned implications that go along with it. I could go on, but honestly, that word is so unbelievably loaded, it is mind-blowing that you can't grasp that and think before you say something like that. And that's without even going into the idea that some people think sin is irrelevant and that faith in their imaginary friend is the only thing necessary for whatever fairy tale afterlife they've got in mind.
So if you didn't quite understand where I was coming from when I first replied to you, this is the underlying problem. There's this barrier of logic and perspective that is preventing you from seeing things in this way. I can say that I see things from your point of view because I was, however briefly, a person of faith. I daresay it is a complete impossibility for you to say the corollary of this statement is true for you.
What I will say now that I know you are trying to write a book about...I'm not really sure what the point would be from what I've read, to be honest...is that there is no way for you to clean up religion, to make it something pure, something good, something that has been romanticized in the way that you seem to believe it to be. That book is so full of hatred, intolerance, violence, mindlessness and the worst elements of humanity, it just cannot be done. That it's been able to fool people into thinking that for this long is, like the name says, astonishing. I can't even say it's a noble effort on your part because you've heard people telling you this before and just refuse to believe it. It's like trying to say that you can pet a porcupine in the same way you can a dog or a cat. Not only is it not true but you'll get hurt trying to prove otherwise, and anyone else you try to convince to do so.
Saying someone isn't a 'true Christian' is the height of arrogance, too, and you should know that. I can point to any page in the bible to justify a point I want to make, and then find a refutation of that on any other page I might flip to. You can't claim a book tells the truth, let alone the ultimate truth, if it contradicts itself, is derived entirely from subjective interpretations rather than objective facts, and has been proven wrong on droves of its own bogus claims about the nature of the universe. So you've stacked a delusion on top of a delusion by thinking that the bible is something it isn't, and that you can make it into that very thing that it isn't if you're not entirely correct about the first part. This "No True Scotsmen" fallacy you're committing here is blinding you to the fact that you are not justified in saying you are better than anyone who commits religious atrocities because you're getting your outlook from the same source, using the same methodology as they are. Just because you reached a different conclusion than they did doesn't mean either of you are right, since you can't use rationality to demonstrate why your position is better than theirs, or vice versa if the bible is your only criteria for deciding. Once you divorce yourself from this abominable approach to life, you'll see that it was the ultimate mistake to ever have done so in the first place. I can only give you the facts, though. You have to decide what to do with them. Oh, and the nice thing is, they're not open to interpretation so it's very clear.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.
---
There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.