Fellow Christians it?s time to stop posting

[LordMagnusKain]

Romans CH1:

; 24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

This isn?t a reference to argument in an attempt to come to a common understanding or share truth, but rather argument for it?s own sake, arguing with your mind made up, dishonestly, and for the sake simply of upsetting those who disagree with you.

The actual context of the use, of course, has to be taken into account, but in putting this in context don't loose the power of the fact that this is something that we're doing.

This wouldn?t be a problem if we where simply trying to come to an understanding or share the truth, but we take part in the mindless partisan hacker just like everyone else.. and that?s simply not right.

It?s a sin, just like murder or gossip and we Christians shouldn?t be doing as much or encouraging others to.

 

[Infohawk]

One could post something about Christians being required to share their faith, but heck, it'd be great if you guys stopped posting. :thumbsup:

(Edit: should the mods ban Christians? Of course not)

 

[Stunt]

Stop posting?
Christians are a large voice in the American electorate, not hearing their views is hiding the truth and effectively creating a bias, thwarting reality.
I do agree a few members are not effective at discussing and troll; these people should leave. This is not a Christian only issue.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
Stop posting?
Christians are a large voice in the American electorate, not hearing their views is hiding the truth and effectively creating a bias, thwarting reality.

Who says P&N has to reflect society? That would mean we'd have a lot more morons than we already do, including people who couldn't read or write. Do you want intelligent discussion or just discussion?

 

[Stunt]

I want P&N to reflect society. We are all here to inform and learn, if society did more of this, the world would be a better place.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I want P&N to reflect society. We are all here to inform and learn,

First of all, not everyone here is to inform and learn. There are a lot better ways to do that than participating on P&N. Maybe you are projecting?

if society did more of this, the world would be a better place.

If society did what? Gave equal time to all wacko points of view? Do you think we should teach creationism and evolution based on how much support each gets in the local community?

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Stunt
Stop posting?
Christians are a large voice in the American electorate, not hearing their views is hiding the truth and effectively creating a bias, thwarting reality.

Who says P&N has to reflect society? That would mean we'd have a lot more morons than we already do, including people who couldn't read or write. Do you want intelligent discussion or just discussion?

I think P&N has more morons than an accurate reflection of society.

 

[ECUHITMAN]

Sorry sin or not, I will never stop dissagreeing with people that I disagree with. To stop debate would be to roll over and just let the world go by without anyone questioning what is going on.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I think P&N has more morons than an accurate reflection of society.

Hahaha

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Stunt
I want P&N to reflect society. We are all here to inform and learn,

First of all, not everyone here is to inform and learn. There are a lot better ways to do that than participating on P&N. Maybe you are projecting?

if society did more of this, the world would be a better place.

If society did what? Gave equal time to all wacko points of view? Do you think we should teach creationism and evolution based on how much support each gets in the local community?

By wacky points of view you mean mainstream mentalities, yes...understanding the logic or lack of will help in converting them from the wackiness.

For example, you cannot discredit creationism or any other idea for that matter until you understand what it is.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: ECUHITMAN
Sorry sin or not, I will never stop dissagreeing with people that I disagree with. To stop debate would be to roll over and just let the world go by without anyone questioning what is going on.

Questioning, Doubting, Critiquing are signs of intelligent thinking, the church has never been advocates of this, it is more 'the way things are', accept it and believe. I'm not surprised to see debate being a sin.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
By wacky points of view you mean mainstream mentalities, yes...understanding the logic or lack of will help in converting them from the wackiness.

For example, you cannot discredit creationism or any other idea for that matter until you understand what it is.

Sure, you need to know what creationism is if you want to attack it, but I don't see why you need to bother with it on equal time. Society would be better off if we concentrated our efforts on real dillemmas and issues and weeded out some of the ridiculous positions. I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to speak about conspiracy theories or invisible pink elephant gods but that there's no reason they need to be represented in relation to their population or that P&N needs to give equal time to silly ideas.

And specifically Christians generally do not respond to logic. Their religion, as are many, is based on faith which specifically bypasses logic. The purpose of faith is to get around logic.

 

[Brian23]

The leprican tells me to burn things.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Stunt
By wacky points of view you mean mainstream mentalities, yes...understanding the logic or lack of will help in converting them from the wackiness.

For example, you cannot discredit creationism or any other idea for that matter until you understand what it is.

Sure, you need to know what creationism is if you want to attack it, but I don't see why you need to bother with it on equal time. Society would be better off if we concentrated our efforts on real dillemmas and issues and weeded out some of the ridiculous positions. I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to speak about conspiracy theories or invisible pink elephant gods but that there's no reason they need to be represented in relation to their population or that P&N needs to give equal time to silly ideas.

And specifically Christians generally do not respond to logic. Their religion, as are many, is based on faith which specifically bypasses logic. The purpose of faith is to get around logic.

Where did i say equal time? Don't put words in my mouth as part of an arguement.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I want P&N to reflect society.

Christians are a large voice in the American electorate, not hearing their views is hiding the truth and effectively creating a bias, thwarting reality.

Sorry, I understood this to mean you want P&N to represent society and you seem to think Christianity is especially deserved of attention since its a large voice in American electorate. Was it that unreasonable to assume you think there should be some correlation between size and talking time on P&N? Otherwise, why did you care about the "large voice."

 

[Steeplerot]

The "christians" in america only represent a smallish part...

Sure there are plenty of average christians, but it's not them that squawk the loudest, it's our middle-american white, fundamentalist taliban types.

The"god hates f@gs" weirdos make news, the average tolerant sane sort are grossly misrepresented

Best thing both religions (muslims too) can do is to dissasosiate themselves from their radical hate element.

 

[Stunt]

I'm not saying every side of an issue deserves equal time, but if 40% of people feel a certain way, i would see it as odd or unfair to have one person representing this very large group of people. This person may not have the ability to articulate an effective argument, and with so many people with the midset, and so many people divided, representation becomes an issue.

I guess a similar idea would be lack of minorites and women in politics. Do you think it is important to have Minorities and Women represented or is it fine that White Men are ensuring their views are known? Also, can one really get an accurate view of these issues without this proportinal representation?

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
The "christians" in america only represent a smallish part...

Sure there are plenty of average christians, but it's not them that squawk the loudest, it's our middle-american white, fundamentalist taliban types.

The"god hates f@gs" weirdos make news, the average tolerant sane sort are grossly misrepresented

Best thing both religions (muslims too) can do is to dissasosiate themselves from their radical hate element.

It's true, there are a lot of people that go to church for show. I drink with many christian friends, my religious friends have sex, I've fooled around with minister's daughters. Now don't get me wrong, not all christians are like this, but people use religion for different things.

Similarly I know people who are liberal in beliefs but vote conservative for the prospect of a tax cut. Also people who are Conservative but vote Liberal as a charity gesture.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I'm not saying every side of an issue deserves equal time, but if 40% of people feel a certain way, i would see it as odd or unfair to have one person representing this very large group of people.

I don't think it would be unfair unless they were being stopped from talking. And what do you mean by "odd?" Perhaps this:

I guess a similar idea would be lack of minorites and women in politics.

P&N isn't a school, or a political body. It is an interent discussion forum. I think it would be better if views not based on reason were underrepresented.

 

[Stunt]

You want Christians not to post.
You don't want them to talk.
I want to hear their views and help each other what is logical and 'right', religion is something we have to deal with in politics, you aren't going to change that by getting rid of christian posters.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
You want Christians not to post.

Wouldn't hurt P&N.

I want to hear their views and help each other what is logical and 'right', religion is something we have to deal with in politics, you aren't going to change that by getting rid of christian posters.

Again, are we talking about P&N or about the political landscape or Congress? I am not arguing that getting rid of christian posters will change politics. I'm saying it will make P&N a more reasonable place.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Stunt
You want Christians not to post.

Wouldn't hurt P&N.

I want to hear their views and help each other what is logical and 'right', religion is something we have to deal with in politics, you aren't going to change that by getting rid of christian posters.

Again, are we talking about P&N or about the political landscape or Congress? I am not arguing that getting rid of christian posters will change politics. I'm saying it will make P&N a more reasonable place.

More reasonable...like closer to your views?
We are talking about P&N, and yes it would hurt P&N.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Stunt
More reasonable...like closer to your views?

No... now who's "put words in my mouth as part of an arguement"?

What makes reasonable positions is use of logic. At the core of the Christian belief system is faith. More important than the flagrant disregard of logic and reason they show everyday on P&N is the fact that they their belief system involves subvertign logic.

We are talking about P&N, and yes it would hurt P&N.

How?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Romans CH1:

; 24Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves: 29Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

This isn?t a reference to argument in an attempt to come to a common understanding or share truth, but rather argument for it?s own sake, arguing with your mind made up, dishonestly, and for the sake simply of upsetting those who disagree with you.

The actual context of the use, of course, has to be taken into account, but in putting this in context don't loose the power of the fact that this is something that we're doing.

This wouldn?t be a problem if we where simply trying to come to an understanding or share the truth, but we take part in the mindless partisan hacker just like everyone else.. and that?s simply not right.

It?s a sin, just like murder or gossip and we Christians shouldn?t be doing as much or encouraging others to.

You are full of sin, but I forgive you. Remember, unless you get to the root cause of your sin, your egotistical need to argue, whether you actually argue or not will not matter. The blindness will still be there but merely repressed. So what is important, in my opinion, is not whether you argue or don't, but understanding the feelings within. Merely to mask a desire to sin by repressing its expression or expressing it, both are sin.

So why do you argue, or perhaps, why have you argued in the past? What is the hole you are or have been trying to fill?

There is only love and we are either full or empty. Who are you to try to change this? A glass can neither fill or empty itself. In this infinite universe why do we cling to such as our small egos?

 

[Stunt]

I think having important issues represented effectively is paramount. There are going to be instances where religion comes up, and I want these views represented to the fullest of their ability. I agree that religion does twart logic, but understanding their reasoning is just as important as them understanding your reasoning. If we all just sat around agreeing with each other, what does that accomplish?

 

[Glpster]

Hey Christians can have their say, just like anyone else in this country.

As to the degree of validity their statements should be given, particularly those that are based strictly out of their religious beliefs, and not on science, fact, reason, logic, knowledge, and understanding, is another story.

To all you "Christians" out there (and I put that in quotes because 90% of you don't act ANYTHING like Jesus Christ - particularly the fundamentalists.)

Why doesn't your God prove that he and the Christian faith are the supreme truth?

He could instantaneously carve the Ten Commandments (or some other proclamation as to the TRUE relgion) in Mile High letters on the surface of the moon or Mars!!!

So WHAT if there are those few of us (like myself) who would start looking for the aliens out there that are trying to f-ck with us silly humans. The REST, 99% of non-Christians would IMMEDIATELY convert to Christianity.

Of course God could do ALL sorts of crazy things, right? He could put a giant mouth on the face of mount Rushmore, and speak Biblical passages out of it, and everyone could come from around the globe to hear what God has to say.

Oh right!!!! I forgot. According to your God, belief in him is MEANINGLESS, unless it is BLIND faith and belief. If you can't PRE believe in him without any physical or meta-physical evidence, then you are pretty worthless as a believer and follower.

Well..... What say you?