Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
You know what assuming does.I see the usual suspects have devolved this discussion into a Christian bashing thread. Quite sad. I will leave this here in response.
Kim Davis - The Christian Rosa Parks
- Thread starter brett636
- Start date
I don't understand why Cruz and Huckabee aren't leading rallies for this woman.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
She isn't a government official. A private company has much more latitude. Cruz and Huckabee used Davis like a cheap prostitute. They are both beneath contempt.
We had a Muslim driver that refused to deliver alcohol. FedEx fired him and his lawsuit failed. For once, I agree with FedEx.
Last edited:
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
He was already an ass. 10Point nailed it...live the faith and keep your mouth shut about the belief system of others. That pastor demonstrated more of what is good about Christianity than someone who has memorized the Bible like Mr. 666.
I Am Jacks Damaged Box
***** Club Member (can't talk about it)
Because religious freedom is cool...as long as it is our religion.
10 point
Well-Known Member
If you've read the New Testament you can easily see that Jesus had compassion for people bound by ungodly issues but had scathing rebukes for the two faced religious leaders who led many astray.
It wasn't the poor folks that demanded his death it was the rich religious "leaders".
It wasn't the poor folks that demanded his death it was the rich religious "leaders".
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Precisely. Ironically, the Puritanical, Victorian, Bible-thumping zealots like someone we all know, are the ones turning people away from Christianity. Most of the time. they are Biblically educated, but not formally educated. Their narrow, screeching interpretation of the Bible and their intolerance for the beliefs of others are maddening.
I have one in my own family, a sister-in-law who has been "seized by Jesus." Everything revolves around church and God, to the exclusion of almost everything else. She has a lesbian sister, whom she has shunned because of her lifestyle, and has lost almost of her friends except those that are just as heavily into church as she is.
The real irony is that she has a gay son, who is smart enough not to come-out to his mother, who would undoubtedly shun him as well. On the gay scale of Rock Hudson being a "1" and Richard Simmons a "10", this kid is an "8". He has already come-out to selected members of the family, but when he goes home to visit he has to bring a "girlfriend" (beard), who is usually one of his lesbian friends.
Before she was Born Again, this woman was great, and kept her Christianity to herself. Now that she is unleashed, she is killing her relationships one-by-one, except, of course, for her relationship with God.
I also have a co-worker who claims to have a Masters in Theology. Very nice guy, but every conversation eventually turns to God somehow, and most of his answers are literally scriptural. When the crane collapsed on the mosque on 9-11, killing 109, he was almost gleeful, because this most definitely was divine retribution for the 9-11 attacks. I found it both revolting and painfully ignorant.
So sad, and so needless. There are plenty more where they come from. Practice your faith, but don't allow it to consume your life, or make you hate others who are different from you and/or believe differently.
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
10 point
Well-Known Member
Loving your enemies takes a strength that can only come from faith in a bigger picture.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
That makes sense. Then why do so many Christians seem to have the narrow views I describe? The same goes for other religions (including Islam) that claim they are the only ones who have it right. Live and let live.
10 point
Well-Known Member
I think it may be because many Christians don't settle their faith issues and just don't mature as they should.
That's something that has never changed from the early church until today. Shallow Christians. Its easier to spout verses than to apply them that's for sure and it too often has become a club with members that circle wagons.
If you look at what is written I find two verses in the Bible to be universally true:
Those that are forgiven much (normally) love much.
And:
Don't try to remove the speck out of someone else's eye until you get the plank out of yours.
I don't blame people (who don't believe the Bible) for their unbelief. I blame those in the church for have been given much (spiritually) and not have been good stewards with what they were given.
We don't need more spiritual country clubs.
We really need people who actually care enough to throw $40 into some invalid's grocery bag and not need a tax receipt, or praise, or for anyone else to know about it including the recipient. That's faith and compassion that changes lives.
Last edited:
Catatonic
Nine Lives
I see the usual suspects have devolved this discussion into a Christian bashing thread. Quite sad. I will leave this here in response.
OK ... this is just plain goofy.
brett636
Well-Known Member
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it rubbish. Feel free to offer your own logic in response, but considering you are the guy claiming science hasn't figured out heterosexuality I imagine your logic will be rich with faults.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Hmmm. To posit there is an absolute, unchangeable moral law given to us by a absolute moral lawgiver, in this case it equals god, then it would stand to reason that god does not violate his absolute, unchangeable moral law.
Just on the Noah flood story alone seems to me blows that theory out of the water. BUT, BUT, there is an apologist explanation for this. "Thou shall not kill" did not exist until Moses which was well after Noah so everything is still good. Ahhhh, Houston we have a problem. God did order the Israelites to slaughter everything in Canaan not nailed down.
And if the 10 commandments are the basis of all moral law, why did god wait almost 3k years after creation to finally get around to dictating them to Moses at Sinai?
Before one goes and ascribes all morals to god and therefore make absolutes from that, you might consider the reality a group of jews about to die in a german concentration camp came too. This event was recorded by Ellie Wiesel as actually having taken place. The entire film (God on Trial) is powerful and moving but this very scene linked below is the most powerful.
If one is a person of faith, this film won't change that but if you are any kind of human being, you won't come away as an absolutist about your moral high ground either. And besides, if being an atheist equaled immorality then seems to me the vast amount of the prison population would be atheist when in fact the actuality of prison population is just the opposite. And what about all the corrupt political leaders? Americans have spoken that they will not vote for an atheist but in the case of a believer in god, well you know where this is going now don't you!
Just on the Noah flood story alone seems to me blows that theory out of the water. BUT, BUT, there is an apologist explanation for this. "Thou shall not kill" did not exist until Moses which was well after Noah so everything is still good. Ahhhh, Houston we have a problem. God did order the Israelites to slaughter everything in Canaan not nailed down.
And if the 10 commandments are the basis of all moral law, why did god wait almost 3k years after creation to finally get around to dictating them to Moses at Sinai?
Before one goes and ascribes all morals to god and therefore make absolutes from that, you might consider the reality a group of jews about to die in a german concentration camp came too. This event was recorded by Ellie Wiesel as actually having taken place. The entire film (God on Trial) is powerful and moving but this very scene linked below is the most powerful.
If one is a person of faith, this film won't change that but if you are any kind of human being, you won't come away as an absolutist about your moral high ground either. And besides, if being an atheist equaled immorality then seems to me the vast amount of the prison population would be atheist when in fact the actuality of prison population is just the opposite. And what about all the corrupt political leaders? Americans have spoken that they will not vote for an atheist but in the case of a believer in god, well you know where this is going now don't you!
10 point
Well-Known Member
Three things come to mind:
As for the flood on people who were continuously wicked and the destruction of nations that worshipped demons and made their children to be burned to death as a sacrifice to demons I say that if God created it He has a right to destroy it.
Jesus said that you (each person) will be accountable for what you did with what you knew. That's fair enough.
And #3: If you believe that his death paid the price of your redemption that you would have eternal life in heaven and that if we do not believe that we are condemned already.
Eternal life. It is like insurance. It isn't important until you need it.
As for the flood on people who were continuously wicked and the destruction of nations that worshipped demons and made their children to be burned to death as a sacrifice to demons I say that if God created it He has a right to destroy it.
Jesus said that you (each person) will be accountable for what you did with what you knew. That's fair enough.
And #3: If you believe that his death paid the price of your redemption that you would have eternal life in heaven and that if we do not believe that we are condemned already.
Eternal life. It is like insurance. It isn't important until you need it.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
This topic came up during the debate last night. I thought Jeb Bush gave the best answer when he said that accommodations should be made on her behalf by allowing her co-workers to issue the licenses rather than forcing her to go against her beliefs.
How did "money" convince the crippled man that GOD existed??
Pimps do the same thing, so does that give them legitimacy?
TOS.
10 point
Well-Known Member
Did I say that? No.
I'm not going to repeat the story just so you can twist my words.
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
My comment about science and heterosexuality was inartfully worded, I'll admit.
My point was that the topic of human sexuality is an entire ocean and science has only dipped it's feet in. It's presumptuous of you to think that the science about homosexuality is somehow settled. You think there is no scientific basis for homosexuality and that it's a mental illness - so far science disagrees with you, but this is a 'conversation' in the scientific community which is just getting started.
As for your 'Atheist's dilemma', it seems like a less elegant version of the Euthyphro dilemma.
I don't like or dislike the version you posted, but it's simply shoddy logic. The main premises of this argument constitute a 'false dilemma'. If you restrict the initial propositions of an argument to a black and white choice between two options which are presupposed to be valid in and of themselves, then of course you can continue 'logically' through to a conclusion, but that doesn't make it valid.
This argument is an informal fallacy because it's not evident (anywhere in the argument) that the opening propositions are in fact valid, and in either case, they aren't the only possible choices, therefore the conclusion is unconvincing.
This type of argument is inductive, meaning the argument itself cannot be proven beyond any doubt whatsoever (vs. a deductive argument). With inductive reasoning, the premises of an argument seek to supply very strong evidence in support of the conclusion. Your 'Atheist's dilemma' has weak and restrictive premises, the conclusion is dodgy, and I remain unconvinced.
Listen, people way smarter than you or I have been debating this for millennia. If there were an airtight formal deductive argument (where the premises are definitely true, and the terms of the argument are unequivocal, therefore the conclusion is necessarily true) on either side of this debate, we would have heard about it. The issue would have been solved.
Which leads me to the conclusion that arguments about the existence or lack thereof of a higher power (which by definition must be inductive, since belief in God is a matter of Faith, and disbelief in God is a different sort of faith) won't really get us anywhere.
It's interesting mental gymnastics for sure, but no one ever read your 'Atheist's dilemma' and found God. As well, there are plenty of 'logical' arguments against the existence of God - my guess is they wouldn't sway you.
For what it's worth.
