[Serious] Over the top

[Shell B]

I want people to say things that are true. I honestly think that we have a duty to speak accurately.

You're a Christian, right? I don't think you're going to be able to say things that are true when it comes to that topic. I do think you believe what you say is true, but it's very likely not.

[Belacqua]

You know how in the USA non-whites get tired of saying 'not all whites' when they make an observation about white people? And most white people don't take a criticism of white people as applying to them if it doesn't apply to them? But a similar observation from a generic American white person about an ethnic minority is considered a sign of bigotry? There's a reason for that. The white person is punching down, the ethnic minority is punching up. 

Which direction we're punching, in my view, doesn't justify us making false statements. 

I agree that attitudes and behavior that looks bigoted has a lot to do with which group we're in -- in-group or out-group, majority or minority, etc. But let's look at Trumpites, for example. It's been shown that his supporters don't care that he's lying. They have pre-established (god knows how) that he's good and immigrants are bad. Therefore, he can say demonstrably untrue things about immigrants and they don't mind. The truth of the particular statement is unimportant as long as the statement is a bad thing about a bad group.

I suppose it's similar to opposite positive statements. When the cheerleader says "we're the best," nobody cares that their team is in last place. It's a speech act, not a truth-telling. 

So I think that "misanthropy is essential" to Christianity is similar. The truth content isn't important, because we've determined that Christians are bad, so the literal truth of the actual sentence isn't what's intended. 

I think this is bad. 

I think the judgment that follows from that is that few Christians are Christian. Jesus is supposed to have said that we would know his people by their love. A lot of the representatives of Christianity in America don't fit that description.

Right, I agree. (Based, I admit, on my reading of what True Christianity is.) But it's kind of the opposite of what the quote says. You're saying that in fact love is crucial to real Christianity, but that modern Christians fall short. And that's very different.

---

I want people to say things that are true. I honestly think that we have a duty to speak accurately.

You're a Christian, right? I don't think you're going to be able to say things that are true when it comes to that topic. I do think you believe what you say is true, but it's very likely not.

I am not a Christian. I have never been a Christian. I have never attended a church service. I have never been inside a church, expect to look at the art or architecture, even for a wedding or a funeral. 

I want people to say true things. That is all.

---

Altough, seeing Drich, Dmitry, etc, pissing and shitting over any moral construct the more moderate theists try to show, they stand in silence when they say the abominable shit they vomit. Like we say in Portugal, Belaqua is calling others whore, before we call him. Who holds double standards after all?

If Drich etc. are saying false things, you should absolutely call them on it. I don't happen to do that because so many other people are devoted to it, they don't need me. 

It is extremely unlikely that we can change people like that. Self-criticism among people who (supposedly) value truth, on the other hand, seems worthwhile to me. 

If you feel that it's OK for atheists to say false things, then I guess we're stuck.

[GrandizerII]

On the other hand, some of us used to be Christians, Belaqua, and serious ones at that. We had not just what we knew regarding the doctrines, but also how we felt about them. Human nature being bad was always meant to be taken in a shameful manner, even if balanced by the "good news" that we can still be cleansed through the blood of Jesus. We could do nothing of our own merits to please God.

[Belacqua]

On the other hand, some of us used to be Christians, Belaqua, and serious ones at that. We had not just what we knew regarding the doctrines, but also how we felt about them. Human nature being bad was always meant to be taken in a shameful manner, even if balanced by the "good news" that we can still be cleansed through the blood of Jesus. We could do nothing of our own merits to please God.

Your personal experiences in church may not reflect the entirety of Christianity.

[GrandizerII]

On the other hand, some of us used to be Christians, Belaqua, and serious ones at that. We had not just what we knew regarding the doctrines, but also how we felt about them. Human nature being bad was always meant to be taken in a shameful manner, even if balanced by the "good news" that we can still be cleansed through the blood of Jesus. We could do nothing of our own merits to please God.

Your personal experiences in church may not reflect the entirety of Christianity.

Not fringe or nonconventional Christian views, sure. But if mainstream Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants in general believe this and it's on the basis of what the scriptures say, then quote ends up being reasonable not over the top. A statement does not have to be absolutely unconditionally true in all respects in order to be generally true.

[Belacqua]

Your personal experiences in church may not reflect the entirety of Christianity.

Not fringe or nonconventional Christian views, sure. But if mainstream Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants in general believe this and it's on the basis of what the scriptures say, then quote ends up being reasonable not over the top. A statement does not have to be absolutely unconditionally true in all respects in order to be generally true.

OK, we'd have to work out what those people say. 

According to them, is Christianity a religion of love or a religion of misanthropy? 

If they say Christianity is a religion of love, and you feel they are wrong and Christianity is in fact a religion of misanthropy, what facts are you using to demonstrate that what mainstream Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants in general believe on the basis of what the scriptures say is mistaken?

[brewer]

[Shell B]

Bela, my mistake. I thought you were religious.

[Belacqua]

Bela, my mistake. I thought you were religious.

I'm used to it.

[GrandizerII]

Not fringe or nonconventional Christian views, sure. But if mainstream Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants in general believe this and it's on the basis of what the scriptures say, then quote ends up being reasonable not over the top. A statement does not have to be absolutely unconditionally true in all respects in order to be generally true.

OK, we'd have to work out what those people say. 

According to them, is Christianity a religion of love or a religion of misanthropy? 

If they say Christianity is a religion of love, and you feel they are wrong and Christianity is in fact a religion of misanthropy, what facts are you using to demonstrate that what mainstream Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants in general believe on the basis of what the scriptures say is mistaken?

That wasn't the argument. Christians are going to look at it with rosy lens even when they talk about the taintedness of human nature. Those not invested in the faith are going to see this for what it is.

The argument, to remind you, was whether what Anom said was over the top. Based on what the doctrines of mainstream Christianity, no.

He may have been rude in his response, but his rudeness doesn't preclude the reasonability of what he said.