Zarathustra
Let Go Of Your Team
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 8,110
Your controversy is with God, not with me.
Nah... God and I are just fine.
My problem is with you.
Your controversy is with God, not with me.
Nah... God and I are just fine.
John 3:36
"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.â€
I don't find it offensive so much as confusing why he approaches the subject this way. He has no concept of how forums work. Forums revolve around discussions. I have nothing against his zeal, but why not phrase things that garner discussion and debate and demonstrate and defend his reasoning? Christians have an approach like this ("Apologetics"). Even his own avatar, Charles Spurgeon, engaged people in this way, and wrote tons of books in the apologetic style. He didn't just write bible quotes and left it at that. He was one of the most popular preachers of his era, and I don't think he accomplished that by barking from the hilltops, condemning complete strangers.
The 'wrath' of God. What a crock of crap. Lol.
[brainwashed messaging]
Ohh, man. I learned two things from being raised as a Jehovah's Witness. The first is that the Bible can be interpreted to say about anything. And the second is that nobody has ever convinced anybody of anything by quoting scriptures if they didn't believe them in the first place. In my experience, all conversions happened because the people were lonely, needed a support structure, suffered loss, or were vulnerable in other ways. This must be what is called the Holy Spirit.
I'm totally and utterly outside and opposed to the tradition of solo scripture and bible christians but I remember a good quote I heard once which said 'the devil can quote scripture when he wants to'
It just makes sense, I actually heard it in a dispute between socialist factions whose dogmatism and fragmentation into rival sects mirrors christianity alright.
The RC church has its own version of this, fascists who use the code of canon law as undisputable, undiscussable and uncontestable. I hate it because most of the canon does relate to specific epochs, periods, precise events, such as vows of celibacy and crusades or conflicts and resulting dependents should breadwinners perish.
No one is converted by that, some people conform to it to meet other needs as you say, which is sad. For both the convert and those honestly seeking converts.
You know that I'm not religious.. but the thing with the RC is that it's a living tradition and has a kind of an ecosystem to it, all kinds of different voices. It *can* change with the needs of the time because it's a tradition. Straight out Biblical fundamentalism is just crazy, crazy, crazy.
You're not a messenger of God.
That's irrelevant.
It's a declaration of truth.
I don't gain anything by posting it.
However, I gain everything by believing it.
I don't find it offensive so much as confusing why he approaches the subject this way. He has no concept of how forums work. Forums revolve around discussions. I have nothing against his zeal, but why not phrase things that garner discussion and debate and demonstrate and defend his reasoning? Christians have an approach like this ("Apologetics"). Even his own avatar, Charles Spurgeon, engaged people in this way, and wrote tons of books in the apologetic style. He didn't just write bible quotes and left it at that. He was one of the most popular preachers of his era, and I don't think he accomplished that by barking from the hilltops, condemning complete strangers.
Trolls should aspire to this.