Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Its six of one, half dozen of the other as far as I'm concerned.

Dice Monkey wrote:It is odd you don't seem to understand the use of parable, allegory, and symbol in the use of terms like Crusade yet mock the fundamentalist for doing the same thing with their scriptures.

I understand the use of parable, allegory, and symbol. I just think the idea of Christianity as a bloodthirsty faith goes against its core values. Maybe you disagree, but think it's incredibly difficult to reconcile terms like "crusade", "battle", "fighting", "attack", and "burning in hell", with actual biblical content such as "blessed are the peacemakers", "the meek shall inherit [not conquer, inherit, obtain peacefully] the Earth", "the greatest commandments are to love god and love thy neighbor", the Parable of the Good Samaritan, and so on.

Melissia wrote:

Phototoxin wrote:Melissia In seven years you'll find that the term you're looking for is 'idiots' not 'fundamentalist chrisitians'

No, I think I had the right word.

(P.S.: Left Behind was released in 1995, more than fifteen years ago, and people are still using it as if it were prophecy, because it was set in the "near future" despite having technology which was inferior to even the current technology at the time it was written and so people can claim that HEY IT APPLIES NOW!, and any time they're proven wrong, they'll move the timelines because of its near-future seting)

These are the same people who, when I say I'm a Chemistry major, look at me and get uncomfortable because they think science is anti-Christian. And they're not a tiny insignificant minority, either...

I've been going to Church for quite a long time, even before the left behind movies, and I've never heard anyone claim that left behind was somehow "prophetic". Not saying that there aren't people out there that do believe that, but you need a bigger sample. Or are you saying that there are always a bunch of people that get things wrong? If that is what you are saying than you are hardly saying anything enlightnening. People get things wrong? Wow BIG news there.

I have no problem dealing with chemistry majors. Science isn't antichristian, however a lot of scientists are.

GG

generalgrog wrote:
I have no problem dealing with chemistry majors. Science isn't antichristian, however a lot of scientists are.

GG

A lot of scientists would express values that reflect those of a decent christian; honesty, charity, fairness. They just don't believe in god, that's all.

As for calling people "anti-christian", given your history of comments about things like homosexuality however, your particular 'christian' values are entirely unsavoury and I'm sure decent people would be glad not to share them.

Howard A Treesong wrote:

generalgrog wrote:
I have no problem dealing with chemistry majors. Science isn't antichristian, however a lot of scientists are.

GG

A lot of scientists would express values that reflect those of a decent christian; honesty, charity, fairness. They just don't believe in god, that's all.

As for calling people "anti-christian", given your history of comments about things like homosexuality however, your particular 'christian' values are entirely unsavoury and I'm sure decent people would be glad not to share them.

And there are scientists that do believe in God. And there are even some that are Christians.

And I didn't attack you...why attack me for no reason? Calling my views "unsavoury"? and also basically referring to me as being indecent? (Yeah.... that's what you did by calling people that don't believe the way I do, as being decent, which could logically be interpreted as calling me indecent)

Anyway..... maybe a mod will take notice of it.

GG

generalgrog wrote:Or are you saying that there are always a bunch of people that get things wrong?

Not just a bunch, and it's hardly something that only I'm noticing. Heck, even evangelists seem to have lost their grasp on their own message in their eagerness to try to get more people to listen to it. To quote a Christian commentator (Fred Clark, an alumnus of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary)...

Contemporary American-style evangelism is made even stranger by the fact that it seems devoid of content. It's become a turtles-all-the-way-down exercise with no apparent real bottom. Evangelism means, literally, the telling of good news. Surely there must be more to this good news than simply that the hearers of it become obliged to turn around and tell it to others. And those others, in turn, are obliged to tell still others the good news of their obligation to spread this news.

That may be an effective marketing strategy, but what is the product? There doesn't seem to be a product — only a self-perpetuating marketing scheme. It's like Amway without the soap.

Modern American Christianity in general has a LOT of philosophical, logical, and even theological problems it needs to solve right now before its adherents start trying to make themselves out to be better than other religions, as was attempted in this thread... sure, there's specific adherents to the faith that have worked it out, but there's also so much wrong going on that I really can't see any justification for the message of "we're better than you" that comes from some members of this forum towards non-Christian religions, especially Islam.

Melissia wrote:[I understand the use of parable, allegory, and symbol. I just think the idea of Christianity as a bloodthirsty faith goes against its core values. Maybe you disagree, but think it's incredibly difficult to reconcile terms like "crusade", "battle", "fighting", "attack", and "burning in hell", with actual biblical content such as "blessed are the peacemakers", "the meek shall inherit [not conquer, inherit, obtain peacefully] the Earth", "the greatest commandments are to love god and love thy neighbor", the Parable of the Good Samaritan, and so on.

You have not read the bible much, if you have a problem with hellfire you need to take it up with St Mark before it was alliterated upon by things like the Visio Tnugdali and authors like Dante. You also need to realize that Crusade has not had the meaning you are implying in what 400 years. It now means implacably striding towards something weather it be prohibition of alchohol, cigarettes, or saving souls. Same with battle, same with fighting, same with attack. I see adds every day for doctors who claim to be battling cancer instead of curing it. What of their Hippocratic oath, they should never use language that appears violent because people may think their physician is actually going to throw a grenade at them.

You are basically doing the same thing that fundamentalist do by insisting they should believe what you believe and that is the end all be all.

Can this thread please be stickied as a testament to the fact that trolling religious people isn't, contrary to popular belief, apparently all that frowned upon in the Dakka OT forum?

generalgrog wrote:

Howard A Treesong wrote:

generalgrog wrote:
I have no problem dealing with chemistry majors. Science isn't antichristian, however a lot of scientists are.

GG

A lot of scientists would express values that reflect those of a decent christian; honesty, charity, fairness. They just don't believe in god, that's all.

As for calling people "anti-christian", given your history of comments about things like homosexuality however, your particular 'christian' values are entirely unsavoury and I'm sure decent people would be glad not to share them.

And there are scientists that do believe in God. And there are even some that are Christians.

And I didn't attack you...why attack me for no reason? Calling my views "unsavoury"? and also basically referring to me as being indecent? (Yeah.... that's what you did by calling people that don't believe the way I do, as being decent, which could logically be interpreted as calling me indecent)

Anyway..... maybe a mod will take notice of it.

GG

You dismissed a lot of people in my profession as being 'anti-christian'. I refute this as work with many christians, but for the sake of context I think it should be clear what you think being christian is.

Dice Monkey wrote:You have not read the bible much

Or maybe you haven't read the post you quoted very well. When I said I "find it hard to reconcile" I thought I made my position rather clear-- that there's many aspects of the religion that don't mesh well together in my eyes.

It's why there's so many sects, after all.

Dice Monkey wrote:You also need to realize that Crusade has not had the meaning you are implying in what 400 years.

Bullgak.

Dice Monkey wrote:Same with battle, same with fighting, same with attack.

Bullgak, bullgak, and more bullgak.

You're missing the point with these pedantics anyway... yes, I know these words have multiple meanings. But they're stil hostile words-- and when non-Christians (or simply those whom have been / are persecuted by Christians) hear them being preached and cheered and lapped up by the Christian crowd, it can get pretty scary.

Monster Rain wrote:Can this thread please be stickied as a testament to the fact that trolling religious people isn't, contrary to popular belief, apparently all that frowned upon in the Dakka OT forum?

Indeed. It appears generally ok to rant about Christians quite a bit.

Considering my argument is more "I don't think Christians should really be so arrogant as to claim their religion is better than Islam", I don't think I'm really trolling... but hey, if you want to say that ANYTHING not-positive about the religion is trolling ,that's your prerogative...

Melissia wrote:Considering my argument is more "I don't think Christians should really be so arrogant as to claim their religion is better than Islam", I don't think I'm really trolling... but hey, if you want to say that ANYTHING not-positive about the religion is trolling ,that's your prerogative...

The approach to a serious topic should be handled with care.

But you will find that people who are sensitive regardless will not like to hear in any event a negative or critical assessment of what they believe. And belief is a big issue in many cases, whether it is belief in a religious system, a scientific formula, or a hard truth. Belief takes many forms and offending the beliefs of a person is a risky road to transverse in any matter.

WarOne wrote:

Melissia wrote:Considering my argument is more "I don't think Christians should really be so arrogant as to claim their religion is better than Islam", I don't think I'm really trolling... but hey, if you want to say that ANYTHING not-positive about the religion is trolling ,that's your prerogative...

The approach to a serious topic should be handled with care.

But you will find that people who are sensitive regardless will not like to hear in any event a negative or critical assessment of what they believe. And belief is a big issue in many cases, whether it is belief in a religious system, a scientific formula, or a hard truth. Belief takes many forms and offending the beliefs of a person is a risky road to transverse in any matter.

What is a hard truth? Is that like a fact?

Melissia wrote:Considering my argument is more "I don't think Christians should really be so arrogant as to claim their religion is better than Islam", I don't think I'm really trolling... but hey, if you want to say that ANYTHING not-positive about the religion is trolling ,that's your prerogative...

Why shouldn't they believe that their religion is better than Islam? Obviously they have a preference for Christianity over Islam, so they must think that it is to some degree 'better.' I'd wager that most Muslims believe that their religion is superior to Christianity. Hindus over Judaism, Buddhists over Taoism, Baha'i over Wiccan.

You appear to simply enjoy picking on Christians.

Religious practices are, not surprisingly, entirely subjective and individual. There's no objective "best way" (unless you can converse with a Diety).

WarOne wrote: And belief is a big issue in many cases, whether it is belief in a religious system, a scientific formula, or a hard truth. Belief takes many forms and offending the beliefs of a person is a risky road to transverse in any matter.

Indeed.



Which seems a fair place to end this as, surprise surprise, we appear to have drifted away from the sad event in question and moved onto lets discuss religion for the #12,345th time , even though our minds are already made up.

Here's hoping we wind up with a positive outcome with regards to the poor gent in the original post.