Too much trash talk against Christianity

El_Duderino 09 · 20-05-2016 11:08AM

steamengine wrote:

And what did the YES side want us to do ? Vote Yes. And what did the NO side want us to do ? Vote No. Did both sides have groups lobbying ? Yes. - there's your answer, its called democracy.

You would be correct if the options were 'nobody can have a gay marriage' and 'everyone has to have a gay marriage'.

The actual lobbying was one side saying that people should have the choice and if your religion forbids it then you can follow your conscience. The other side were saying nobody should have the choice because their religion forbids it.

Can't you see the difference?

robdonn · 20-05-2016 11:09AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Are we all as bad as we could be? No, thankfully!
Are we all good? In respect to God's standards, no.

May I ask what God's standard is in relation to pedophilia? I don't remember seeing anything about it in the Bible despite shellfish and pork getting a mention.

looksee · 20-05-2016 11:56AM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I don't accept the principle that people are good by nature.

Are we all as bad as we could be? No, thankfully!
Are we all good? In respect to God's standards, no. If we are attempting to live our lives in clear opposition to what God has spoken that is still wrong from a Christian perspective. Downplaying our sin and it's consequences to others is dangerous.

If we are attempting to convince ourselves that we are good on our own account we're mistaken.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

What are God's standards? Other than reference to interaction with God, which is irrelevant if you are not a follower of that God, what standards does God have that are not basic human decency and social behaviour?

How do you define sin?

Timberrrrrrrr · 20-05-2016 12:01PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good afternoon!

I don't accept the principle that people are good by nature.

Are we all as bad as we could be? No, thankfully!
Are we all good? In respect to God's standards, no. If we are attempting to live our lives in clear opposition to what God has spoken that is still wrong from a Christian perspective. Downplaying our sin and it's consequences to others is dangerous.

If we are attempting to convince ourselves that we are good on our own account we're mistaken.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

As others have asked what are "gods" standards and also how could someone who has never heard of this "god" be expected to live up to his standards?

steamengine · 20-05-2016 12:19PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

You would be correct if the options were 'nobody can have a gay marriage' and 'everyone has to have a gay marriage'.

The actual lobbying was one side saying that people should have the choice and if your religion forbids it then you can follow your conscience. The other side were saying nobody should have the choice because their religion forbids it.

Can't you see the difference?

I'm not discussing gay marriage per se, so for the third time I'm discussing lobbying or campaigning on any issue by believers or non-believers or their representative groups as being a normal part of the democratic process. Keep missing the point if you wish.

El_Duderino 09 · 20-05-2016 12:28PM

steamengine wrote:

I'm not discussing gay marriage per se, so for the third time I'm discussing lobbying or campaigning on any issue by believers or non-believers or their representative groups as being a normal part of the democratic process. Keep missing the point if you wish.

I've just made my point. Both lobby bit only one tries to force others to conform to their view. The gay marriage referendum is a great example as I mentioned earlier.

One side lobbied for choice which would apply to everyone. The other side wanted nobody to have a choice and instead impose their religious rules on the whole state.

You don't have to engage in the discussion, but please at least acknowledged that you understand the difference.

frag420 · 20-05-2016 12:33PM

steamengine wrote: »

I'm not discussing gay marriage per se, so for the third time I'm discussing lobbying or campaigning on any issue by believers or non-believers or their representative groups as being a normal part of the democratic process. Keep missing the point if you wish.

Allow me to try and explain this to you very simply, Ive just called my sister and tried to explain it to my seven year old niece and she got it so here goes........

Yes both sides are lobbying.

One side is lobbying to tell people to fill in the census correctly, to think about their answers before they tick the box, in particular what religion one is! They are not telling people what to answer but to tink about it before they do. IE if you are not a Catholic then dont put down that you are because you made your communion in the 80's but have not stepped inside a church since.

The other side (the Church) is lobbying to push their beliefs on the rest of the country including those that are not members of the(ir) church!

Can you see the difference now?

As my niece said to me "what fool could not understand that, now more importantly when are you taking me for ice cream uncle lala?"

steamengine · 20-05-2016 12:56PM

frag420 wrote: »

Allow me to try and explain this to you very simply, Ive just called my sister and tried to explain it to my seven year old niece and she got it so here goes........

Yes both sides are lobbying.

One side is lobbying to tell people to fill in the census correctly, to think about their answers before they tick the box, in particular what religion one is! They are not telling people what to answer but to tink about it before they do. IE if you are not a Catholic then dont put down that you are because you made your communion in the 80's but have not stepped inside a church since.

The other side (the Church) is lobbying to push their beliefs on the rest of the country including those that are not members of the(ir) church!

Can you see the difference now?

As my niece said to me "what fool could not understand that, now more importantly when are you taking me for ice cream uncle lala?"

Dig deep now and buy that bright little niece of yours a '99' :cool:

frag420 · 20-05-2016 01:04PM

steamengine wrote: »

Dig deep now and buy that bright little niece of yours a '99' :cool:

So can we take from that reply that my 7 yr old niece gets it and yet you still struggle with it?

What can we do to help you with understanding this? Should I ask my niece to help you with it?

steamengine · 20-05-2016 01:23PM

frag420 wrote: »

Unless God and my mom got together back in the day then he has nothing to do with my creation, it was down to a cold February night and my parents feeling somewhat amorous that created me!

I know there is a lot of talking of the coming of our Lord but it didn't create me!!

frag420 wrote: »

So can we take from that reply that my 7 yr old niece gets it and yet you still struggle with it?

What can we do to help you with understanding this? Should I ask my niece to help you with it?

I do struggle with some of your posts, what did you mean by this line ?

El_Duderino 09 · 20-05-2016 01:30PM

steamengine wrote:

I do struggle with some of your posts, what did you mean by this line ?

Evidently. Some religions thrive on their members inability to comprehend. Not you're religion, I'm quite sure.

The poster was using a pun to illustrate their point in a light hearted way. Think really hard about it, see if it comes to you.

robdonn · 20-05-2016 01:32PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Think really hard about it, see if it comes to you.

Teeheehee...

indioblack · 20-05-2016 01:32PM

solodeogloria wrote: »

Good evening!

As I said earlier thank you for your question. People like you force me to think and I'm a man who likes to think things through.

If I was considering the relative badness of the murderer versus the family I will agree with you that the murderer doesn't deserve to go to heaven. If the family are the benchmark that the man is compared against then I agree with you. He doesn't deserve to go to heaven as much as the family. However the truth is that neither of them deserve to be there of their own account. I don't deserve it at all. That's why it is called grace. Grace simply put is the unmerited favour of God. Nobody deserves it (Romans 3:23).

The Bible is clear that we all will stand at the judgement seat of the Lord Jesus. It is also clear that of our own standard we are fully guilty and we are without excuse. If the murderer repented and put his trust in the Lord Jesus then he is a new creation. God is transforming him into something new. Jesus paid for his account in full. The issue is in the relationship between us and God. Repentance also means sorting out relational issues with others and it most certainly means being subject to the rulers and authorities. It would mean turning yourself in. It would mean turning away from what you used to do.

I really don't like thought experiments like this because it abstracts me away from real lives. I long that everyone would do the right thing and turn and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ before it is too late because I want people to know the love that God has for them and I long for all to see that the Christian life is much better than living for ourselves now. But if you reject Jesus His warning is repent or you will likewise perish. I can't tone that down because I can't compromise the truth.

Let me know if I missed anything in your question. I want to answer it well and properly and I don't want to be evasive.

Much thanks in the Lord Jesus Christ,
solodeogloria

I read timberssss hypothetical scenario yesterday evening and, from a Christian perspective, it was obvious what the answer would be.
The murderer had repented, [presumably of all his sins, including murder].
The parents had not repented of whatever shortcomings they were guilty of at the time of their deaths.
They may have been more worthy people than the murderer in the whole of their lives - but that's irrelevant in this context.
He get's judged on his repentance, they on their lack of same.
The children have no opportunity to live, to be good and bad, [the human condition], so I'm not sure on what basis they will be judged.
Hypothetical scenarios may be awkward - sometimes limiting and lacking the myriad of detail that is a human life - but this is belief, a subjective matter.
There is something unsettling and incomplete about all of this.
Of course the murderer should be judged - on the whole of his life - taking into account his changed heart and repentance of course - but that isn't the entirety of him, it's not all that he was as he lived here.
The parents may also be judged by the same logic - not simply because death deprived them of the opportunity to, who knows, follow the same redemptive path as their killer.
How will the children be judged? The adults at least were able to reach a stage in their lives where they had, [hopefully], the intellectual ability to make choices between right and wrong - not forgetting that huge grey area in between.
The children , in this hypothetical case, never got that far.

frag420 · 20-05-2016 01:47PM

steamengine wrote: »

I do struggle with some of your posts, what did you mean by this line ?

I would hazard a guess that you are struggling with the vast majority of posts that dont agree with your Christian outlook......

So the bold part was tongue in cheek, a joke if you will.

The second part was that you still dont seem to grasp what people are saying so I was doing the Christian(nice human) thing and offering help in understanding it........from a 7yr old who had no issues understanding it after about 30 seconds!

steamengine · 20-05-2016 01:54PM

frag420 wrote: »

I would hazard a guess that you are struggling with the vast majority of posts that dont agree with your Christian outlook......

So the bold part was tongue in cheek, a joke if you will.

The second part was that you still dont seem to grasp what people are saying so I was doing the Christian(nice human) thing and offering help in understanding it........from a 7yr old who had no issues understanding it after about 30 seconds!

Please explain it, not much pointing in explaining one post and not the other - what's the problem ???

marienbad · 20-05-2016 01:56PM

steamengine wrote: »

Please explain it, not much pointing in explaining one post and not the other - what's the problem ???

I think asking responders to be accurate in a survey is simply common sense and not lobbying .

frag420 · 20-05-2016 02:22PM

steamengine wrote: »

Please explain it, not much pointing in explaining one post and not the other - what's the problem ???

Its a bit risqué..........dont want to upset those with a delicate Christian disposition!

steamengine · 20-05-2016 03:09PM

frag420 wrote: »

Its a bit risqué..........dont want to upset those with a delicate Christian disposition!

I wouldn't let that stop you, there are not that many Christian posters in here any longer for some unknown reason.

robdonn · 20-05-2016 03:20PM

steamengine wrote: »

I wouldn't let that stop you, there are not that many Christian posters in here any longer for some unknown reason.

Christianity forum attendance starting to reflect church attendance?

El_Duderino 09 · 20-05-2016 03:31PM

robdonn wrote:

Christianity forum attendance starting to reflect church attendance?

But not census form ticks!

steamengine · 20-05-2016 03:40PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

But not census form ticks!

Church attendance is possibly desirable but not essential for one to be a Christian. The census form question was not about church attendance.

endacl · 20-05-2016 03:58PM

steamengine wrote: »

Church attendance is possibly desirable but not essential for one to be a Christian. The census form question was not about church attendance.

Escape route from awkward conversation spotted. Well done!

mickoneill31 · 20-05-2016 04:23PM

steamengine wrote: »

Church attendance is possibly desirable but not essential for one to be a Christian. The census form question was not about church attendance.

The census didn't ask if you were a Christian. It asked what your religion was.
http://census.ie/the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/

Church attendance is essential for Catholics.

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-are-the-necessary-minimum-requirements-for-catholics

http://www.ecatholic2000.com/essentials/precepts.shtml

(Or are those sites wrong, I just did a google)

I know, I know, the stock answer is if you feel that you're a Catholic then you are and it's perfectly acceptable to say any religion (even if you don't follow its rules or know what they are).

El_Duderino 09 · 20-05-2016 04:31PM

steamengine wrote:

Church attendance is possibly desirable but not essential for one to be a Christian. The census form question was not about church attendance.

Same for belief in things like transubstantiation, virgin birth, god, catholic dogma, right?

steamengine · 20-05-2016 04:31PM

mickoneill31 wrote: »

The census didn't ask if you were a Christian. It asked what your religion was.

Church attendance is essential for Catholics.

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-are-the-necessary-minimum-requirements-for-catholics

(Or is that site wrong, I just did a google)

So what if they don't attend - if they deem themselves to be still Catholic that's the end of it.

frag420 · 20-05-2016 04:34PM

steamengine wrote: »

So what if they don't attend - if they deem themselves to be still Catholic that's the end of it.

So if I agree with same sex marriage, abortion etc and decide to call myself a Catholic.........am I a Catholic?

mickoneill31 · 20-05-2016 04:35PM

steamengine wrote: »

So what if they don't attend - if they deem themselves to be still Catholic that's the end of it.

Not according to the Church it isn't. But it's standard, Catholics seem to pick and choose what it means to be Catholic. I know some that don't even believe in God. But for you that's fine. If they still think they're Catholic then that's the end of it. Seems daft to me.

I deem myself to be the Lord high commander of Earth. End of story. Same logic.

steamengine · 20-05-2016 04:35PM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Same for belief in things like transubstantiation, virgin birth, god, catholic dogma, right?

It depends on what denomination one belongs to - or none.

frag420 · 20-05-2016 04:35PM

steamengine wrote: »

I wouldn't let that stop you, there are not that many Christian posters in here any longer for some unknown reason.

Well you said God created us all. I said he didnt, it was my folks that created me.

I then made a joke about the coming (cumming) of our lord and I was suggesting that it was not Gods ejaculate that created me!

Make sense now?

You know if God did create me then we could call it the Emaculate Ejaculate!!

steamengine · 20-05-2016 04:39PM

mickoneill31 wrote: »

Not according to the Church it isn't. But it's standard, Catholics seem to pick and choose what it means to be Catholic. I know some that don't even believe in God. But for you that's fine. If they still think they're Catholic then that's the end of it. Seems daft to me.

Why does that bother you as an atheist ? People know what they are especially in Ireland where religion is in the DNA. Things have changed, the church is the people and not necessarily the hierarchy sitting in their ivory towers.

Too much trash talk against Christianity

Comments