Menu
Home
Forums
Visual works
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Info & rules
Site rules
Server list
Sanctuary Discord
Sanctuary FAQ
Sanctuary's origins
Staffing policies
Sanctuary YouTube
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Banned members
User verification codes
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Welcome to the edge of the civilized internet! All our official content can be found
here.
If you have any questions, try our FAQ
here
or see our video on
why this site exists at all!
Home
Forums
Main Sub-Forums
Deific Discussions
What does it truly mean to be a Christian?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
Reply to thread
Message
<p>[QUOTE="Kaleion, post: 10465, member: 13"]</p><p>I suppose it does then, but by that same token it also condemns not only adulterers but even people like Donald Trump, greedy CEO types and I don't see neither of those groups as being criticised by Christians, in fact they seem to be very much OK with greedy people.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You just said you make judgements based on what the text says, it doesn't matter what you call it you're still judging people, this is just a bullshit way of saying "It's OK because the book says it's OK", which brings me back to the issue of people taking the book at it's word, rather than questioning the agenda of the people who wrote it, or translated it the first or second time, seems like people who are too lazy to think for themselves if you ask me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I was though I specifically ask why Christians who claim to disagree with the bigoted practices of the church don't just separate and form their own protestant religions, it wouldn't be the first or last time this happens, but it doesn't seem like they truly have enough conviction in their morals to do it, or you know they don't have the spine to actually voice that opinion IRL and just mention it online, or perhaps they are making up excuses to convince themselves that the Church is just when it really isn't.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Upon investigating that does seem to be the case as far as included books, however there are apparently a few changes with some books containing more verses or whatever, I'm not really in the mood to investigate further right now.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Likely, it's been too long since I've attempted to take any of it seriously so it's entirely possible I'm not fully aware of what I'm talking about, more research would need to be done on my side and if I'm honest I don't think I'll bother as I'm not invested enough in trying to prove wrong to do it, because I don't think I really care.</p><p></p><p>As for cherrypicking, look at your own example above, if the Bible condemns so many groups of people why persecute only a few rather than all of them?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is true, I'm outright making accusations because I know my questions won't truly be answered, the exact same canned non-answers that people have been telling me since I was 5 is all you're going to say, because in reality you're not trying to explain why you believe you're just giving excuses as to why the book justifies x or y, for example you haven't bothered to answer why you think a bunch of ancient people were definitely not lying when they wrote some text which include some stories that sound an awful lot like fairy tales of the world being created in 5 days, magic that can part seas or whatever, instead you decided to change the topic I mean if I were to claim that an invisible man in the sky told me stories about talking snakes and the first people would assume I'm insane, what makes them more credible?</p><p></p><p>I personally don't buy any of it, I've been questioning it since I can remember and no one ever has given me a satisfying answer, I mean I think it's pretty obvious that it's not possible for me to have faith if I was unable to have it even when I was a child, so what interests why someone would take these texts seriously, rather than in the same context that the Illiad or the Arthurian legends, which is to say stories that have some basis in reality but are in their majority fiction, that's what perplexes me, the actual content of the books isn't important to me, I read it even if it was a long time and I know what I think it is, so all I want to know is why believe this?</p><p></p><p>I don't think I'm mentally wired in a way in which it's possible for me to understand the concept of faith, it just seems absurd to me, I don't meant that I think people that have faith are dumb or anything of the sort, but it's just something that my brain seems to be unable to process.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="Kaleion, post: 10465, member: 13"] I suppose it does then, but by that same token it also condemns not only adulterers but even people like Donald Trump, greedy CEO types and I don't see neither of those groups as being criticised by Christians, in fact they seem to be very much OK with greedy people. You just said you make judgements based on what the text says, it doesn't matter what you call it you're still judging people, this is just a bullshit way of saying "It's OK because the book says it's OK", which brings me back to the issue of people taking the book at it's word, rather than questioning the agenda of the people who wrote it, or translated it the first or second time, seems like people who are too lazy to think for themselves if you ask me. I was though I specifically ask why Christians who claim to disagree with the bigoted practices of the church don't just separate and form their own protestant religions, it wouldn't be the first or last time this happens, but it doesn't seem like they truly have enough conviction in their morals to do it, or you know they don't have the spine to actually voice that opinion IRL and just mention it online, or perhaps they are making up excuses to convince themselves that the Church is just when it really isn't. Upon investigating that does seem to be the case as far as included books, however there are apparently a few changes with some books containing more verses or whatever, I'm not really in the mood to investigate further right now. Likely, it's been too long since I've attempted to take any of it seriously so it's entirely possible I'm not fully aware of what I'm talking about, more research would need to be done on my side and if I'm honest I don't think I'll bother as I'm not invested enough in trying to prove wrong to do it, because I don't think I really care. As for cherrypicking, look at your own example above, if the Bible condemns so many groups of people why persecute only a few rather than all of them? That is true, I'm outright making accusations because I know my questions won't truly be answered, the exact same canned non-answers that people have been telling me since I was 5 is all you're going to say, because in reality you're not trying to explain why you believe you're just giving excuses as to why the book justifies x or y, for example you haven't bothered to answer why you think a bunch of ancient people were definitely not lying when they wrote some text which include some stories that sound an awful lot like fairy tales of the world being created in 5 days, magic that can part seas or whatever, instead you decided to change the topic I mean if I were to claim that an invisible man in the sky told me stories about talking snakes and the first people would assume I'm insane, what makes them more credible? I personally don't buy any of it, I've been questioning it since I can remember and no one ever has given me a satisfying answer, I mean I think it's pretty obvious that it's not possible for me to have faith if I was unable to have it even when I was a child, so what interests why someone would take these texts seriously, rather than in the same context that the Illiad or the Arthurian legends, which is to say stories that have some basis in reality but are in their majority fiction, that's what perplexes me, the actual content of the books isn't important to me, I read it even if it was a long time and I know what I think it is, so all I want to know is why believe this? I don't think I'm mentally wired in a way in which it's possible for me to understand the concept of faith, it just seems absurd to me, I don't meant that I think people that have faith are dumb or anything of the sort, but it's just something that my brain seems to be unable to process. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Preview
Name
Verification
What is the name of the default style? (Look to the bottom left of the page.)
Post reply
Home
Forums
Main Sub-Forums
Deific Discussions
What does it truly mean to be a Christian?
Top