Typical theists versus typical atheists

[Succubus]

Please help me find a contradiction said by Jesus himself. Thank you.

Jesus, to the thief on the cross:
“Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

A whopper. Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

Luke 23:43

[vorlon13]

Please help me find a contradiction said by Jesus himself. Thank you.

Jesus, to the thief on the cross:
“Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

A whopper. Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

Luke 23:43

Anything Jesus said or did on crucifixion Friday while He was still dealing with the effects of being crucified on Thursday.

[KerimF]

[1]
A typical theist doesn’t mind believing in miracles, said religious if approved by certain religious people, privileged by the high class.
A typical atheist doesn’t mind believing an idea, beyond his personal experience, if said scientific and approved by certain scientists, privileged by the high class.
 
[2]
A typical theist doesn’t mind obeying rules if said inspired by a god and approved by certain religious people, privileged by the high class.
A typical atheist doesn’t mind obeying rules if said inspired by certain great ancestors (who are usually supposed representing ideals for the human race) and approved by privileged Elite.
 
Even from these two points, one may conclude that while a typical theist is made ready to accept being a follower/supporter of a certain heavenly ruling system, an atheist prefers to be a follower, if not a supporter too, of an earthly ruling system he used to know.
 
In the ‘real’ world (far from the great speeches, religious or political and as I see it), the role of religions (of various heavenly ruling systems) and politics (of various earthly ruling systems) are much alike. In both camps, minds of the faithful believers/followers are driven cleverly to where they are supposed to be. For example on one hand, a person is made ready to risk his life for a god. On the other hand, a person is made ready to risk his life for a flag (actually, the ideals it represents).

In other words, religions and politics complement each other, so that the most powerful/rich families in every region in the world can legitimately be served by the men on bottom who can choose freely to be theist or atheist.

Siri Gibberish Translator, "I just made shit up and pulled it out of my ass".

Let me clue you in, the use of the word "typical" is bullshit.

Monopolies of power can arise in any aspect of society, be it religion, class, political party, economic view or an overlap of a combo of those things.

Closed oppressive theocracies such as Saudi Arabia and Iran have the same thing in common with North Korea, worship of the state. Neither are good. 

In the open west in pluralistic societies the concept isn't either to worship a god, or worship the state, but systems of checks and balances on all powers, public or private.

China is a closed state, it has a one party monopoly on the economy, but it is also at the same time a capitalist country. The Kim family is a family monopoly but the family itself also gets rich investing in the global economy. Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in General Electric. Cuba is a majority CATHOLIC and Fidel Castro had at one time a personal fortune estimated to be $800,000,000.

None of your OP made any sense at all. And it most certainly does not argue for a western open system with any sense of coherence.

It seems that you are trying to prove me, by your post above, that your country is the best one in the world.
Please, you don't have to prove me this because I am glad you believe what a typical citizen should believe about his ruling system. This is always good for the sanity of the common people in any country around the world.

[Brian37]

Siri Gibberish Translator, "I just made shit up and pulled it out of my ass".

Let me clue you in, the use of the word "typical" is bullshit.

Monopolies of power can arise in any aspect of society, be it religion, class, political party, economic view or an overlap of a combo of those things.

Closed oppressive theocracies such as Saudi Arabia and Iran have the same thing in common with North Korea, worship of the state. Neither are good. 

In the open west in pluralistic societies the concept isn't either to worship a god, or worship the state, but systems of checks and balances on all powers, public or private.

China is a closed state, it has a one party monopoly on the economy, but it is also at the same time a capitalist country. The Kim family is a family monopoly but the family itself also gets rich investing in the global economy. Gadaffi was a billionaire who owned stock in General Electric. Cuba is a majority CATHOLIC and Fidel Castro had at one time a personal fortune estimated to be $800,000,000.

None of your OP made any sense at all. And it most certainly does not argue for a western open system with any sense of coherence.

It seems that you are trying to prove me, by your post above, that your country is the best one in the world.
Please, you don't have to prove me this because I am glad you believe what a typical citizen should believe about his ruling system. This is always good for the sanity of the common people in any country around the world.

Oh fuck off, the right are the bullshit hyper nationalists here. I have never and will never brag about America being the best at everything, no we are not. Especially with the orange buttface in office. Trump certainly IS NOT the best we can do and the sooner that fucker is out the better.

That has nothing to do with economic systems. And you missed the part where I said BOTH left and right misuse the word "capitalism" because it is NOT a form of government. Every nation both friend and foe worldwide invest in the global market. 

Your OP was nonsense, that had nothing at all to do with how I think America is currently doing. Right now we could be doing way better at a lot of things.

[pocaracas]

Besides, everyone should know that the best country in the world is Portugal.

[KerimF]

Please help me find a contradiction said by Jesus himself. Thank you.

Jesus, to the thief on the cross:
“Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

A whopper. Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

Luke 23:43

Thank you for this example.

I wonder if this thief was Roman or Jew.
If he was Roman, 'paradise' doesn't mean a real thing to him. In this case, Jesus knew that the thief will take his invitation, speaking practically, as an imaginary one... from a friend.
If the thief was a Jew, I learnt from a few Jews that the notion of paradise in Judaism is about a place on earth (if I understood them well). In this case, they were indeed, on that day, on earth but with their human living flesh in state of death.

My point here is that:
Let us assume this saying wasn't written on the Gospel, will this removal affect, in any way, the essence of Jesus message about the unconditional love and care towards all others, friends and enemies?

And since I don't worship words, I simply left this saying (among others) to those who worship them.

Thank you again for pointing it.

Kerim

[Succubus]

Jesus, to the thief on the cross:
“Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

A whopper. Jesus was supposed to lay dead in the tomb for three days following his crucifixion.

Luke 23:43

Thank you for this example.

I wonder if this thief was Roman or Jew.
If he was Roman, 'paradise' doesn't mean a real thing to him. In this case, Jesus knew that the thief will take his invitation, speaking practically, as an imaginary one... from a friend.
If the thief was a Jew, I learnt from a few Jews that the notion of paradise in Judaism is about a place on earth (if I understood them well). In this case, they were indeed, on that day, on earth but with their human living flesh in state of death.

My point here is that:
Let us assume this saying wasn't written on the Gospel, will this removal affect, in any way, the essence of Jesus message about the unconditional love and care towards all others, friends and enemies?

And since I don't worship words, I simply left this saying (among others) to those who worship them.

Thank you again for pointing it.

Kerim

I'm sure there's a name for this dishonest tactic but I can't identify it, moving the goalposts?

[KerimF]

It seems that you are trying to prove me, by your post above, that your country is the best one in the world.
Please, you don't have to prove me this because I am glad you believe what a typical citizen should believe about his ruling system. This is always good for the sanity of the common people in any country around the world.

Oh fuck off, the right are the bullshit hyper nationalists here. I have never and will never brag about America being the best at everything, no we are not. Especially with the orange buttface in office. Trump certainly IS NOT the best we can do and the sooner that fucker is out the better.

That has nothing to do with economic systems. And you missed the part where I said BOTH left and right misuse the word "capitalism" because it is NOT a form of government. Every nation both friend and foe worldwide invest in the global market. 

Your OP was nonsense, that had nothing at all to do with how I think America is currently doing. Right now we could be doing way better at a lot of things.

I wonder how many times you will have to tell me that my OP is nonsense
At least, you keep your word. This is a sign that you are not one of the great actors in office.

---

Thank you for this example.

I wonder if this thief was Roman or Jew.
If he was Roman, 'paradise' doesn't mean a real thing to him. In this case, Jesus knew that the thief will take his invitation, speaking practically, as an imaginary one... from a friend.
If the thief was a Jew, I learnt from a few Jews that the notion of paradise in Judaism is about a place on earth (if I understood them well). In this case, they were indeed, on that day, on earth but with their human living flesh in state of death.

My point here is that:
Let us assume this saying wasn't written on the Gospel, will this removal affect, in any way, the essence of Jesus message about the unconditional love and care towards all others, friends and enemies?

And since I don't worship words, I simply left this saying (among others) to those who worship them.

Thank you again for pointing it.

Kerim

I'm sure there's a name for this dishonest tactic but I can't identify it, moving the goalposts?

My English is rather weak.
I am not sure what 'dishonest tactic' and 'moving the goalposts' are supposed to mean.

Thank you.

[Succubus]

My English is rather weak.
I am not sure what 'dishonest tactic' and 'moving the goalposts' are supposed to mean.

Thank you.

Well here's another one you won't get: Do you study stone bridge architecture?

[KerimF]

My English is rather weak.
I am not sure what 'dishonest tactic' and 'moving the goalposts' are supposed to mean.

Thank you.

Well here's another one you won't get: Do you study stone bridge architecture?

No I don't.
And it seems you are shy to tell me directly and clearly what you have in mind. But please don't worry, I understand always such a situation.