Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer. I hear from women that I am a great person, perhaps one of the best that they have seen however they did not want me. When I think about this, I start to think about Christ. He was perfect, he gave us hope to make it to heaven. He wanted a relationship with us. He loved us so much that he died for us and you know even then he faced rejection. With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that? How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him. It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

Millions of others have suffered crueler or as cruel fates as Jesus' alleged crucifixtion. Many did it with love in their hearts and smiles on their faces. I prefer to worship them collectively, creating pagan idols in their honor while believing they are the sole cause of all existence. I call this collective God, Bob. It helps create a relationship between Bob and I.



Also, one must ask, if he knew that he was the son of God and would be in heaven with God after his death, how much suffering could it truly have been? Presumably, he is the only person in history to know beyond a doubt of such a fate after death. If this is true, it puts his death in perspective and makes it not suffering or rejection at all, but a glorious celebration. So my question isn't how Jesus dealt with negativity....with rejection, suffering, etc. It's how everyone else manages to without such certainty. Wow, how do they do it?

And perfect is subjective, relative to one's view. If Jesus is perfect, it's based on faulty assumptions of objective standards as laid forth by Christian dogma, not on actual truth.

Originally posted by atv2
With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that?

Because people have free will and make their own choices about how to view the world just as you have done.

Originally posted by atv2
How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him.

If you take a look at the world's religions by the numbers it's not as though the guy did poorly when all was said and done.

Originally posted by atv2
It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

He probably just accepted that people should and could make their own choices. After that he moved on like any rational person rather and pointlessly trying to force people to agree with him. Excluding his one little outburst at the fig tree Jesus didn't really seem like the kind of person who let a lack of followers bother him at any point.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Millions of others have suffered crueler or as cruel fates as Jesus' alleged crucifixtion.

Condemned to death for little more than what he said, betrayed by every personal friend, nailed to a cross so that his lungs would collapse, stabbed in the stomach, left to die by his omnipotent father in a place reserved for criminals despite attempting to live a life of purity? Oh and he apparently lived for 33 years knowing it was all going to happen but had no way of stopping it.

Kinda hard to top that. I'm sure there are more painful deaths but hardly crueler ways to live and die.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Many did it with love in their hearts and smiles on their faces. I prefer to worship them collectively, creating pagan idols in their honor while believing they are the sole cause of all existence. I call this collective God, Bob. It helps create a relationship between Bob and I.

What a relevant and original sentiment.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

What a relevant and original sentiment.

Stop persecuting him for his believe in Bob.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Stop persecuting him for his believe in Bob.

Nah.

Sym just has it in for me on this forum. I can't say two sentences without him taking exception to them. I don't let it bother me. But the over-the-top sentiment of this guy was begging for a sarcastic response, which I provided before answering the questioning more earnestly.

Also, something doesn't have to be original to make a valid point.

Originally posted by atv2
I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer. I hear from women that I am a great person, perhaps one of the best that they have seen however they did not want me. When I think about this, I start to think about Christ. He was perfect, he gave us hope to make it to heaven. He wanted a relationship with us. He loved us so much that he died for us and you know even then he faced rejection. With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that? How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him. It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

dont feel like a reject, it isnt ur fault, and its the first step. not feeling sorry for yourself is paramount my friend.

as for christ. i agree with the points posted before, it isnt exactly a lot of suffering, if you have the promise of being the victor and knowing for a fact that ur right.

Originally posted by atv2
How did Christ handle rejection?

I have read that he stopped by the local pantry on his way home, got a gallon of Rum Raisin ice cream, curled up in front of Lifetime: Television for Women and Gay Men, unplugged the phone and just vegg'd out all weekend. In other words, he didn't handle it very well.

Originally posted by Devil King
I have read that he stopped by the local pantry on his way home, got a gallon of Rum Raisin ice cream

Did he remember to replace the can of salmon he ate yesterday?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Did he remember to replace the can of salmon he ate yesterday?

If he expects to have a job come monday morning, he did.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Also, one must ask, if he knew that he was the son of God and would be in heaven with God after his death, how much suffering could it truly have been? Presumably, he is the only person in history to know beyond a doubt of such a fate after death. If this is true, it puts his death in perspective and makes it not suffering or rejection at all, but a glorious celebration. So my question isn't how Jesus dealt with negativity....with rejection, suffering, etc. It's how everyone else manages to without such certainty. Wow, how do they do it?

And perfect is subjective, relative to one's view. If Jesus is perfect, it's based on faulty assumptions of objective standards as laid forth by Christian dogma, not on actual truth.
Christ suffered the weight of all the sins of mankind. It was not the physical torment that caused the most suffering, but rather the sheer burden of every single misdeed that was, is, and will be.

Also, your statement about how perfection is subjective is an objective statement that is actually subjective. At least, according to your reasoning.

but that doesnt make sense. he would only have FELT the weight at the exact moment of DEATH, as his death was when the PRICE for all the sins of mankind was payed. but he cried "oh god, oh god why hast thou forsaken me" BEFORE he died, pointing to his suffering. needless to say, in either way, it was the PHYSICAL suffering which was the most apparent to him, and yeah, i can think of far more terrible lives led and far more terrible deaths of the same people than christ. not to make a mockery of his suffering which was indeed very great over time, but still, there are worse.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Christ suffered the weight of all the sins of mankind. It was not the physical torment that caused the most suffering, but rather the sheer burden of every single misdeed that was, is, and will be.

How convenient...

Originally posted by leonheartmm
but that doesnt make sense. he would only have FELT the weight at the exact moment of DEATH, as his death was when the PRICE for all the sins of mankind was payed. but he cried "oh god, oh god why hast thou forsaken me" BEFORE he died, pointing to his suffering.
First of all, I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that Christ would have only felt the weight of sins at the moment of death. That doesn't make any sense.

Second of all, Christ's emotional suffering was enormous, considering that he suffered from hematidrosis.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Christ suffered the weight of all the sins of mankind. It was not the physical torment that caused the most suffering, but rather the sheer burden of every single misdeed that was, is, and will be.

Also, your statement about how perfection is subjective is an objective statement that is actually subjective. At least, according to your reasoning.

Thus proving my point.



Be careful not to make the objectivism fallacy, however. Opinions are subjective. Like what "perfect" is, for example. Empirical facts can be treated as objective, as there is a basis for analysis and comparison.

Also, how did he feel this burden? Was it knowledge of every sin throughout time, which would shatter a physical mind into incoherence? Or was it simply the concept of it, which of course could be tiring, but would be uplifting when one knows the eternal heavenly payoff at the end.

No, Christ, within a Christian paradigm, had it easy. If I knew beyond a doubt that I was the Son of God, I'd happily accept all that Jesus suffered and more, and not consider it a burden in the least.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Empirical facts can be treated as objective


eeep!

Originally posted by atv2
I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer. I hear from women that I am a great person, perhaps one of the best that they have seen however they did not want me. When I think about this, I start to think about Christ. He was perfect, he gave us hope to make it to heaven. He wanted a relationship with us. He loved us so much that he died for us and you know even then he faced rejection. With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that? How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him. It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

I think a lot of people will use this as a springboard to just start another debate and overlook the fact that you've started the discussion stating you have a big problem with yourself right now. Believe me, I know what it's like to be romantically rejected and it's a tough thing to be disliked.

But I agree with what someone said earlier. The key thing is to not feel sorry for yourself. I don't claim to know every facet of Jesus' mind, but he was afraid to die. It's not a sin to be afraid; rather it's a sin to be dominated by fear. He put aside a lot of things in order to fulfill his mission on earth. You need to find something to do that makes you feel like you're fulfilling your mission, whether it be your job or some kind of volunteering or just being a better friend to people. Once you gain some confidence and a more permanent sense of self-worth, I'm sure it will do a lot for you. And if no woman wants to be with you...that sucks, but it doesn't mean your life is no good or incomplete. Before I met my husband, I had to come to terms with the fact that I may not ever get married and be okay with that. I was headed into my great career and learned the world has a lot of doors that can be opened.

Don't get discouraged. You sound like you are a fellow Christian, and I know it's easier said than done, but you and God can work this out through prayer. That's not to say people of other belief systems can't help you out or give you good advice, but a value I as a Christian hold to is the power of prayer. You'll be okay.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Christ suffered the weight of all the sins of mankind. It was not the physical torment that caused the most suffering, but rather the sheer burden of every single misdeed that was, is, and will be.

Also, your statement about how perfection is subjective is an objective statement that is actually subjective. At least, according to your reasoning.

And mine don't seem to even slow me down. It's funny how two people expereince the same thing two different ways, isn't it?

Here I am going through life not noticing the weight of my sins and all along it's been because Christ took the bullet. Maybe this whole conversion/salvation thing would have been easier if he'd allow us to carry our own burden. Kind of like a chick that's lost a lot of weight and is then made to carry 4 bowling balls to illustrate how much fat she no longer schleps around all over the place.

Originally posted by Devil King
And mine don't seem to even slow me down. It's funny how two people expereince the same thing two different ways, isn't it?

You feel the pressure of every last one of humanity's sins?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You feel the pressure of every last one of humanity's sins?

If I say I do, then it's pretty much a fact, isn't it? Would you feel better if I wrote it down for you?

Originally posted by inimalist
eeep!

Hehe. I think we've had this talk before. There IS a clear distinction between a subjective realm (what is the best meal?) or an objective realm (what is 2+2?). While we must concede our own subjectivity in either situation, the second is undoubtedly objective in its answer, regardless of our ability to know it. Given only one viable answer thus far (4) we can treat it as truth until it is found to be otherwise.

Personally, I feel we can approximate reality to a fine degree, enough to treat things in the latter category as truths. But I don't do so blindly, and realize the asterisk that must be ever present.

Originally posted by atv2
I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer. I hear from women that I am a great person, perhaps one of the best that they have seen however they did not want me. When I think about this, I start to think about Christ. He was perfect, he gave us hope to make it to heaven. He wanted a relationship with us. He loved us so much that he died for us and you know even then he faced rejection. With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that? How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him. It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it? I believe he handled it by not thinking himself as a reject. If the story is true, of course, but if you take the opinions from others out of your equation, then you don't have to deal with such judgments. What others say cannot hurt you unless YOU make it so.

IMO, don't worry about what others think about you because only you know who you are and work with that knowing that there is no one else in the world like you, sooooooooo you are unique and people cannot comprehend aspects of you. People view things from a subjective point of view...all of them. That is a lose...lose situation.

Originally posted by atv2
I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer.

Well then, case closed. It'll never get any better. Off yourself and do the rest of us the favor of removing yourself from the gene pool.

Is there really any need for more whiny loosers to pollute the genetics of the next generation? I don't think so. I'll see you in the afterlife. (Especially since you decided to whack yourself and in this reality-based god dillusion that incurres the same penalty.)

Originally posted by Devil King
Well then, case closed. It'll never get any better. Off yourself and do the rest of us the favor of removing yourself from the gene pool.

Is there really any need for more whiny loosers to pollute the genetics of the next generation? I don't think so. I'll see you in the afterlife. (Especially since you decided to whack yourself and in this reality-based god dillusion that incurres the same penalty.)

damn your in need of a happy pill dude...

No actually that sounds more like what the thread-starter needs.

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
damn your in need of a happy pill dude...

yeah your right point taken...lol...somebody give him one then

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
yeah your right point taken...lol...somebody give him one then

What? An anti-depressant to Devil King or a gun to the thread-starter?

Originally posted by atv2
I've reached a point in my life where I feel like a reject, I've been longing for a relationship and I've tried my best to be the best man I can be but I still suffer. I hear from women that I am a great person, perhaps one of the best that they have seen however they did not want me. When I think about this, I start to think about Christ. He was perfect, he gave us hope to make it to heaven. He wanted a relationship with us. He loved us so much that he died for us and you know even then he faced rejection. With all that he did, how could a person reject him like that? How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him. It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

Brush the dust from your shoes, and keep on moving there is a woman out there for you. You may just be looking in the wrong places.... No person ever looks to God when things are going great.... perhaps you need a woman that needs you as much as you need her?

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
damn your in need of a happy pill dude...

he's just a bully.

Originally posted by CaptainStoic
Brush the dust from your shoes, and keep on moving there is a woman out there for you. You may just be looking in the wrong places.... No person ever looks to God when things are going great.... perhaps you need a woman that needs you as much as you need her?

You think this thread was a veiled way of him saying that he's going through a dry-spell?

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
he's just a bully.

I've only seen him fly off the handle (after putting up with a lot) towards Bible thumpers and homophobes.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I've only seen him fly off the handle (after putting up with a lot) towards Bible thumpers and homophobes.
Originally posted by Devil King
Well then, case closed. It'll never get any better. Off yourself and do the rest of us the favor of removing yourself from the gene pool.

Is there really any need for more whiny loosers to pollute the genetics of the next generation? I don't think so. I'll see you in the afterlife. (Especially since you decided to whack yourself and in this reality-based god dillusion that incurres the same penalty.)

Indeed...that was provoked.

The thread is obviously a joke, like "If You Were God" by TRH. So why not have fun with it?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The thread is obviously a joke, like "If You Were God" by TRH. So why not have fun with it?

Indeed...that was funny...

beer

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Indeed...that was funny...

No joke. I surely didn't get to laugh. This is something that I have suffered with for years and I am looking for deliverance from it. I not posting this thread to be God, I am posting this for a solution to my problem. I am a Christian and being a follower of Christ I know that he went through rejection. They preferred to follow idols over him. They chose to hang on to what they had instead of following him. The woman that I was pursuing told me twice that even if it was the perfect man, she wouldn't go out with him. Christ was perfect in what he did and even then, a lot of people in the world did not accept him. Seeing that he went through rejection, I can follow him. The problems I thought I had weren't the real problem(i.e.,independence). The only answer that I have is to keep moving forward. I am going to continue to work on myself, but I have to trust him. I can't give up on him, he put something great in me and I can't give up now. I got find out what it was all about. I have been dealing with this issue for a long time and I was trying to see if anyone could relate to what I have.

Dude just get over it. Maybe pop an antidepressant.

Originally posted by Jack Daniels
damn your in need of a happy pill dude...

Well, I don't see myself bemoaning my lack of relationships on an internet forum. If a happy pill will make me more receptive to whining, then I don't think I'll have any. I prefer my low tolerance to their bullshit.

Originally posted by CaptainStoic
.... perhaps you need a woman that needs you as much as you need her?

Imagine the self-asteem issues that kid will end up having. Two woe-is-me parents that stock up on duct tape when the weatherman calls for rain. I hope they name him Blanket, because his childhood died long before he was born.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
he's just a bully.

I have found that bullys are only effective when no one stands up to them.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Indeed...that was provoked.

It wasn't provoked, nor was that his point.

Originally posted by atv2
No joke. I surely didn't get to laugh. This is something that I have suffered with for years and I am looking for deliverance from it. I not posting this thread to be God, I am posting this for a solution to my problem. I am a Christian and being a follower of Christ I know that he went through rejection. They preferred to follow idols over him. They chose to hang on to what they had instead of following him. The woman that I was pursuing told me twice that even if it was the perfect man, she wouldn't go out with him. Christ was perfect in what he did and even then, a lot of people in the world did not accept him. Seeing that he went through rejection, I can follow him. The problems I thought I had weren't the real problem(i.e.,independence). The only answer that I have is to keep moving forward. I am going to continue to work on myself, but I have to trust him. I can't give up on him, he put something great in me and I can't give up now. I got find out what it was all about. I have been dealing with this issue for a long time and I was trying to see if anyone could relate to what I have.

See a shrink. Why on Earth would you as people on an internet forum for lifestyle advice?

Originally posted by Devil King
I have found that bullys are only effective when no one stands up to them.

It wasn't provoked, nor was that his point.

I was being sarcastic, let me rephrase- you Devil King are bullying the guy for no reason.

Let me guess, you suffered homophobic abuse and were seriously depressed but dealt with it on your own thus you are the Supreme Authority on the matter and you demand that everyone else keep their problems to themselves and solve them by themselves because you were capable of doing that...

Oh or is it deeper?...do you hate the idea of people asking for help when they're low because you had no one to turn to when you felt down? Thus you abhor seeing other people helped through their troubles because you somehow feel that you have been neglected?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
See a shrink. Why on Earth would you as people on an internet forum for lifestyle advice?

The answer is obvious, its a virtually anonymous service- he can get to know people online and get their advice on a topic which he might want to discuss with people he actually has to face everyday.

He could get to know people here very well and become good friends, but if he always has the power to just "turn it off" and make them disappear- it is a huge amount of security and is pretty much the basis behind all those Anonymous Helplines and such you see all over the place.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I was being sarcastic, let me rephrase- you Devil King are bullying the guy for no reason.

Let me guess, you suffered homophobic abuse and were seriously depressed but dealt with it on your own thus you are the Supreme Authority on the matter and you demand that everyone else keep their problems to themselves and solve them by themselves because you were capable of doing that...

Oh or is it deeper?...do you hate the idea of people asking for help when they're low because you had no one to turn to when you felt down? Thus you abhor seeing other people helped through their troubles because you somehow feel that you have been neglected?

No, I have suffered very little homophobia in the real world. In fact, if you were to engage in an honest character study of me based on my comments on this very forum, you'd know why the annonimity you address in your post is exactly why this is the only place I've experienced homophobia; because people are much more open about their homophobia when there is no real consequence to their expression of it. Most people are cowards in real life. And by the way, being saracstic is totally different than saying exactly what you mean.

I don't think it's laughable because I dealt with anything on my own. I find it laughable because rather than seeking the advice of a professional or the input of his obviously non-existant friends, he's turned to an internet forum and veiled it under a religious pretense. It goes hand in hand with my experience that people who think that a fairy tale god is going to be the answer to all their human problems.

I wish I was a deep as you want me to be with your comentary on my personality. And even more than that, none of your heart-felt adivce is going to change a single thing about this guy. He's not going to suddenly get laid or find his soulmate because you toned in with a god loves you, things will get better, hang in there type comment. I see it for what it is; a method for getting attention.

Hey, I have an idea. Pay less attention to how Jesus handled rejection and focus more on how he handles it. Because clearly he responds to it by running to the internet and asking a group of strangers he couldn't give a shit about for their opinion.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Thus proving my point.



Be careful not to make the objectivism fallacy, however. Opinions are subjective. Like what "perfect" is, for example. Empirical facts can be treated as objective, as there is a basis for analysis and comparison.
And therefore what is "good" can be treated as subjective, so torturing babies can be considered good in someone's paradigm.

I don't know how Christ felt the weight of it; you'd have to ask him.

Had it easy? Maybe from your perspective, a selfish "I get to be Jesus!" point-of-view. Christ picked up that burden of his own accord not because he got to be God but because he so loved every single human being, past and present and future, that he was willing to be tortured by them and die for them so that they could have the hope of salvation.

Originally posted by Devil King
And mine don't seem to even slow me down. It's funny how two people expereince the same thing two different ways, isn't it?
No, you don't feel your sins because, to you, there is no such thing as a sin. Unless it violates your own relativistic worldview where X is good because you say so whereas Y is bad because you say so. Or because you've been raised in a culture that has indoctrinated you into believing that X is good and Y is bad, so you say judge X/Y based upon these ingrained beliefs and claim that this is somehow a form of logic and reason when there is no ground upon which your moral judgments can stand because, to you, there is no such thing as a moral firmament.

Originally posted by atv2
I am a Christian and being a follower of Christ I know that he went through rejection. They preferred to follow idols over him. They chose to hang on to what they had instead of following him. The woman that I was pursuing told me twice that even if it was the perfect man, she wouldn't go out with him. Christ was perfect in what he did and even then, a lot of people in the world did not accept him. Seeing that he went through rejection, I can follow him. The problems I thought I had weren't the real problem(i.e.,independence). The only answer that I have is to keep moving forward. I am going to continue to work on myself, but I have to trust him. I can't give up on him, he put something great in me and I can't give up now. I got find out what it was all about. I have been dealing with this issue for a long time and I was trying to see if anyone could relate to what I have. Stop trying to be perfect. There isn't any perfection, not even in Christian stories. Stop trying to be like Jesus that you believe that perfection will cure all your ills. We all know we are not perfect we just , or at least I try to treat others like I would like to be treated. that doesn't make people treat you any better, it just makes you a target at times. If youre strong enough you can indure it, if not then you'll become like everyone else. Sometimes I wonder if it's not better becoming the shark instead of the goldfish, myself. But for some reason I just can't. I've tried.


maybe one day my ship will come back again and beam me up. they put me on the wrong planet. Why would they do this? Entertainment purposes? Damn them.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
No, you don't feel your sins because, to you, there is no such thing as a sin. Unless it violates your own relativistic worldview where X is good because you say so whereas Y is bad because you say so. Or because you've been raised in a culture that has indoctrinated you into believing that X is good and Y is bad, so you say judge X/Y based upon these ingrained beliefs and claim that this is somehow a form of logic and reason when there is no ground upon which your moral judgments can stand because, to you, there is no such thing as a moral firmament.

So X&Y become my own versions of sin and virtue. The secret fact that you don't want to get out is that our versions rarely deviate from each other. It's not like I have no sense of right and wrong. I think it's a cop-out to espouse the realization of the absurdity of the christian versions of right and wrong aren't based on a culture that is on one hand professed to be founded on christianity and on the other held out to have no moral barometer because it has chosen not to bend knee to the christian perspective. Even you have to realize the absurdity of saying that a cuture observes no morals because they've been tempted into not doing so. There are some very realistic morals espoused by the christian faith, but they aren't the end of it. In fact, they aren't the beginning of it. That is one of my major reasons behind dismissing it as a valid reason for subscription to the faith. It only answers the questions it chooses to and prohibits the actions the offend that sensability. I'm sorry, but the real world exists and it has little to do with what rights and wrongs have been picked and choosen by your religion. Just because you think that pedophilia is looked down upon by many people who subscribe to your religion doesn't mean that it is accepted by people who haven't drunk the same kool-aid. If I sound dismissive, it's because I absolutely am. In fact, that illustrates a major point in my position; that what is considered right and wrong is dictated more by your culture than it is by a religion that was formulated based on that culture. To you, that sounds like I'm buying in to some satan-inspired plot that has formed modern culture. But to me it sounds like an observation of the common themes in every culture. You don't have the market corned on moral certainty, you just think you do. Your religion allows you the arrogance to think it's original to your religion. Sorry, right and wrong existed long before your creation of the christian religion. And it will be around long after it's gone the way of Zeus or Ra. Humanity goes on, even if it's self-serving creations do not.

I only wish I could live long enough to see humanity get over your particular version of this fairytale.

there are no X and Y. There are only variations of that. It's subjective. When does evil on a scale become okay, good, better or best? When does cold become luke warm, warm, hotter and hot or hottest?

Were is the line drawn between evil and good. Also, who determines what is evil and good, besides the collective majority.

And when is a collective majority correct. past history shows us that it is not. Otherwise we would not have burning and torturing people alive because they thought different thoughts that were different from the majority.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
there are no X and Y.

Sure there are. That's why we create them.

in formulas of scientific values.......not in human reasoning's...imo

Originally posted by Deja~vu
in formulas of scientific values.......not in human reasoning's...imo


soley because of human reasoning. Or human need....imo.

And doesn't it all really come down to that: opinion.

Originally posted by Devil King
Sorry, right and wrong existed long before your creation of the christian religion. And it will be around long after it's gone the way of Zeus or Ra. Humanity goes on, even if it's self-serving creations do not.

I only wish I could live long enough to see humanity get over your particular version of this fairytale.

So you see Christian and Greek concepts of right and wrong on the same footing? "Turn the other cheek" and the Golden Rule isn't better than leaving infants perceived to be weak on the side of a mountain to die?

Originally posted by Devil King
So X&Y become my own versions of sin and virtue. The secret fact that you don't want to get out is that our versions rarely deviate from each other. It's not like I have no sense of right and wrong.
Really? They don't deviate? I'm pretty sure that they do. And I'm not the one who is going to strain himself trying to justify why killing is wrong. After all, we're merely animals in nature, and killing is something that animals do.

Just because America was founded by Christians for the express purpose of glorifying God and "advancing the Christian faith" does not mean that those original ideals have been held to.

Seeds of corruption bear fruit for many years.

Okay. I'll go ahead and keep on thinking that child prostitution is wrong. You can go ahead and support foreign dictators torturing people because it's right in their own culture.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
Stop trying to be perfect. There isn't any perfection, not even in Christian stories. Stop trying to be like Jesus that you believe that perfection will cure all your ills. We all know we are not perfect we just , or at least I try to treat others like I would like to be treated. that doesn't make people treat you any better, it just makes you a target at times. If youre strong enough you can indure it, if not then you'll become like everyone else. Sometimes I wonder if it's not better becoming the shark instead of the goldfish, myself. But for some reason I just can't. I've tried.


maybe one day my ship will come back again and beam me up. they put me on the wrong planet. Why would they do this? Entertainment purposes? Damn them.

I'm not perfect. He's the best guy for me. I'll continue to strive to be like him.

I have to ask then, atv2, did you know that all along, or did you really come here for sympathy rather than advice? I hardly ever agree with Devil King, but he makes a valid point. Few members of this forum are Christians, so by asking a question so specific to Christianity, you had to expect some secular responses, helpful or not.

Now that you've gotten some advice and some responses, I hope you've realized how important it is to gain some confidence.

Originally posted by Devil King
soley because of human reasoning. Or human need....imo.

And doesn't it all really come down to that: opinion. Yep, it does.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Really? They don't deviate? I'm pretty sure that they do. And I'm not the one who is going to strain himself trying to justify why killing is wrong. After all, we're merely animals in nature, and killing is something that animals do.

What in the world makes you think I think killing is not wrong and how would I get a hernia explaining why it is? "It just isn't right" are just as many words as "because god said so".

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Just because America was founded by Christians for the express purpose of glorifying God and "advancing the Christian faith" does not mean that those original ideals have been held to.

I would be pleased as peaches for you to point out where in any of the founding documents there is a reference to christianity as being the motivation for the founding of this country.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Seeds of corruption bear fruit for many years.

But see, you think it's corrupt simply because everyone hasn't decided to believe what you believe. The whole world isn't corrupt just because they aren't you.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Okay. I'll go ahead and keep on thinking that child prostitution is wrong. You can go ahead and support foreign dictators torturing people because it's right in their own culture.

Or, we can come to the conclusion that I don't support child prostitution and I don't support foreign dictators killing their citizens and neither do you. Like I said, our conclusions are rarely that far off from each other. The only think keeping you thinking they are is because I am not a christian. Sounds kind of muslim to me.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
So you see Christian and Greek concepts of right and wrong on the same footing? "Turn the other cheek" and the Golden Rule isn't better than leaving infants perceived to be weak on the side of a mountain to die?

I hear that example all the time. But I'm not sure it happened as often as most people would like for it to have to strengthen their argument. Many times, people who could have no children came and took the babies left in the wilderness and raised them as their own. If we were to go point by point through what most christians believe to be their moral code, we would end up finding counterparts for all of them in other religions and cultures. And we would find examples of christians breaking their own moral codes too. There are ups and downs to any culture's actions. How many christians get abortions? How many of them consider it murder?

Originally posted by Devil King
What in the world makes you think I think killing is not wrong and how would I get a hernia explaining why it is? "It just isn't right" are just as many words as "because god said so".
Because you, as the secular humanist, are supposed to do logical contortions trying to decide why killing a human being is wrong.

Try reading the Mayflower Compact.

And yet...I'm still going to say that the Thai child prostitutes and the sandmonkey savages are badwrong and corrupt.

But you can't logically justify those things. From a relativistic standpoint--by your own words, where culture defines morality--those things are not wrong.

Originally posted by Devil King
What in the world makes you think I think killing is not wrong and how would I get a hernia explaining why it is? "It just isn't right" are just as many words as "because god said so".


Not good enough. Explain to me how its wrong, with out god.

This is one religous rule that Atheist/seculars like to hang on to, but scoff at others.

Originally posted by Devil King
I hear that example all the time. But I'm not sure it happened as often as most people would like for it to have to strengthen their argument. Many times, people who could have no children came and took the babies left in the wilderness and raised them as their own. If we were to go point by point through what most christians believe to be their moral code, we would end up finding counterparts for all of them in other religions and cultures. And we would find examples of christians breaking their own moral codes too. There are ups and downs to any culture's actions. How many christians get abortions? How many of them consider it murder?

I really can't think of too many cultures around the world that say to turn the other cheek, or to treat your enemies as yourself. But I'm listening.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Because you, as the secular humanist, are supposed to do logical contortions trying to decide why killing a human being is wrong.

But since it's not so hard for me, then you must not be right.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Try reading the Mayflower Compact.

Try giving an example of a document that governs the United States of America. And if anyone who wrote or agreed to the Mayflower Compact was still around to sign the constitution or the delcearation on indepedence, then I'd love for you to point them out.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
And yet...I'm still going to say that the Thai child prostitutes and the sandmonkey savages are badwrong and corrupt.

And on many levels I would agree with you. I somehow managed to come to that conclusion without god. I'm not going to say the "savages" are wrong and corrupt because they have a different religion though. And I'm certainly not going to call them savages simply because they aren't christians. I'm going to say you're both wrong for letting it control how you both think and how you both act, but I'm not going to selectively choose which religion is more or less silly.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
But you can't logically justify those things. From a relativistic standpoint--by your own words, where culture defines morality--those things are not wrong.

You mean I can't logically do it with out pointing to god.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Not good enough. Explain to me how its wrong, with out god.

This is one religous rule that Atheist/seculars like to hang on to, but scoff at others.



I really can't think of too many cultures around the world that say to turn the other cheek, or to treat your enemies as yourself. But I'm listening.

It's not really that difficult. As a human being I enjoy rights. You say those rights come from god, while I say they simply exist by virtue of my existence. It's a lot like you're saying that the golden rule can only exist because of god. Well it doesn't. Rights and existence are not concepts that srung out of the christian religion. The christians and the jews called it religion. But many other cutures called it philosophy.

Originally posted by Devil King
It's not really that difficult. As a human being I enjoy rights. You say those rights come from god, while I say they simply exist by virtue of my existence. It's a lot like you're saying that the golden rule can only exist because of god. Well it doesn't. Rights and existence are not concepts that srung out of the christian religion. The christians and the jews called it religion. But many other cutures called it philosophy.

So in otherwords, your reasoning is "just because". You're a human who enjoys rights, and your mere existence brings virture with it? The Darwinian concept of "survival of the fittest" would seem to contradict that. The cheetah killing the gazelle doesn't stop to think that the gazelle has a right to live. And in Atheist/secular lines of thinking, there is very little to seperate humans from non-human animals. So "virtue of existence" doesn't really cut it. Nothing backs it.

If one person kills another its just "survival of the fittest".

----

Tell me a culture that specifically says to turn the other cheek, and then show me it does.

Originally posted by Devil King
But since it's not so hard for me, then you must not be right.
No, you must not be logical.

So you're going to shift your argument from "show me one thing that does X" to "I'll ignore what the very first settlers of America said and jump forward 150 years; therefore, what you said is invalid"?

I'm not saying they're badwrong because they're not Christian. I'm saying they're badwrong because of the way that they act.

Without a set of permanent moral values, no, you can't do it. It ends up being, "Because I think so."

Originally posted by Devil King
It's not really that difficult. As a human being I enjoy rights. You say those rights come from god, while I say they simply exist by virtue of my existence.

Being human or even simply being alive gives you no rights whatsoever whether you rationalize the claim that you have them through God, philosophy or "because I say so".

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
No, you must not be logical.

Well, I haven't hurt myself trying to justify why murder is wrong, so you are actually incorrect that doing so would require some herculean effort on my part.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
So you're going to shift your argument from "show me one thing that does X" to "I'll ignore what the very first settlers of America said and jump forward 150 years; therefore, what you said is invalid"?

No, my argument hasn't shifted at all. The Mayflower Compact is not a document that governs the United States of America, nor does it frame the intent of the founders of this nation. The Mayflower Compact was certainly a founding document, just not of this nation. I would also not hold out the tribal rules of the Native Americans as being a valid example of what this nation considers to be it's founding principles. I am not arguing the religious choices made by many founders of this country or even that many of the were christians. But they also never wrote that bias into law. In fact, the only times religion is mentioned it is done so ambiguously and addresses how it is not to interfere with the goverment of the country.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
I'm not saying they're badwrong because they're not Christian. I'm saying they're badwrong because of the way that they act.

I'm not sure the record of christian societies are unblemished. But you are blaming their behavior on their religious choices, just as you are saying we are right because of our religious choices.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Without a set of permanent moral values, no, you can't do it. It ends up being, "Because I think so."

And in this you are illustrating exactly what is so silly about your position. My morals aren't disposable just because I didn't get them from a fairytale. My morals are just as entrenched as your are. I'm not going to say killing is wrong today and then wake up tomorrow and think it's okay.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Being human or even simply being alive gives you no rights whatsoever whether you rationalize the claim that you have them through God, philosophy or "because I say so".

In this we disagree. In fact, I would say that certainty is what leads to people thinking their religion should rule the world.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
So in otherwords, your reasoning is "just because". You're a human who enjoys rights, and your mere existence brings virture with it? The Darwinian concept of "survival of the fittest" would seem to contradict that. The cheetah killing the gazelle doesn't stop to think that the gazelle has a right to live. And in Atheist/secular lines of thinking, there is very little to seperate humans from non-human animals. So "virtue of existence" doesn't really cut it. Nothing backs it.

If one person kills another its just "survival of the fittest".

----

Tell me a culture that specifically says to turn the other cheek, and then show me it does.

But I am not a cheeta. I'm sure if we were to take what your saying to the opposite extrem, we could ask ourselves why the cheeta hasn't figured out that he wouldn't have to kill a deer to eat if he would just get a job. Sadly, that's what many people thinkn evolution is; a process with a goal where everything is moving inexoribly towards some finish line. (And I'm not saying that is your position on the theory, but rather the position of many people who argue against it's validity.)

What backs it is the fact that we're all here and we all want basically the same things when we remove politics and religion from the equation.

Murder isn't survival of the fittest. Killing might be, but not murder. And the survival of the human being that murders isn't advanced somehow because he murdered another human being. The murderer isn't going to die unless he kills. The cheeta will. At least if he doesn't learn how to make a salad first.

I can't think of any society that actually turns the other cheek.

Originally posted by Devil King
In this we disagree. In fact, I would say that certainty is what leads to people thinking their religion should rule the world.

It's the belief that the world would be a better place that is behind that. My Muslim employee wants world-wide Sharia, because of that belief. Now the one thing it would do is put the world under one unarguable law, with preset punishments that are made clear in advance. But personally, I like beer and scantily clad women too much for wanting to live under Sharia.

Originally posted by Devil King

I can't think of any society that actually turns the other cheek.

I rest my case.

Christianity was (and still is) ahead of the times in that respect.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's the belief that the world would be a better place that is behind that. My Muslim employee wants world-wide Sharia, because of that belief. Now the one thing it would do is put the world under one unarguable law, with preset punishments that are made clear in advance. But personally, I like beer and scantily clad women too much for wanting to live under Sharia.

Right. they're certain the world would be better for them if no one could argue with their choices. As many problems as he might have with a non-theocratic government, I don't see him pakcing up his tools and heading for Saudi Arabia.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I rest my case.

Christianity was (and still is) ahead of the times in that respect.

No, let me rephrase that. I can't think of any society, christian or otherwise, that actually turns the other cheek.

Originally posted by Devil King
As many problems as he might have with a non-theocratic government

He doesn't.

Originally posted by Devil King
No, let me rephrase that. I can't think of any society, christian or otherwise, that actually turns the other cheek.

Christianity does. That's one of the basic tenets. Now name another that says that. Exactly, you can't.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Christianity does. That's one of the basic tenets. Now name another that says that. Exactly, you can't.

can you name a Christian nation, or even a nation with a predominatly Christian population who "turned the other cheek" for no reason other than its religious devotion?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I rest my case.

Christianity was (and still is) ahead of the times in that respect.

Buddhism.

"If an evil man, on hearing of what is good, comes and creates a disturbance, you should hold your peace. You must not angrily upbraid him; then he who has come to curse you will merely harm himself."

Sutra of Forty-two Sections


Islam:

"Let there be no injury and no requital."

Forty Hadith of an-Nawawi

Originally posted by Devil King
In this we disagree. In fact, I would say that certainty is what leads to people thinking their religion should rule the world.

Or that their philosophy should or that anything should. Nothing has intrinsic value, only the values we give to it due to our own perceptions which vary from person to person. The thought process that leads to people thinking that their beliefs should rule the world is that theirs are somehow accurate or based on something real, be it God or logic or revelation.

Originally posted by inimalist
can you name a Christian nation, or even a nation with a predominatly Christian population who "turned the other cheek" for no reason other than its religious devotion?

Easy: pick one.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Christianity does. That's one of the basic tenets. Now name another that says that. Exactly, you can't.

How many times have you turned the other cheek?

I can't think of any other culture that uses that phrase, but there are a few examples of pacafism in religion and government. There are those tenants in Buddhism and it's older. Ghandi was not christian and he was a pacifist.

And let's not forget that christianity is founded on the Jewish religion, and there aren't a whole lot of Jews that look the other way.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Easy: pick one.

so your argument is that any group of people who have a majority of Christians in the population will not use violence in response to violence?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Buddhism.

"If an evil man, on hearing of what is good, comes and creates a disturbance, you should hold your peace. You must not angrily upbraid him; then he who has come to curse you will merely harm himself."

Sutra of Forty-two Sections


The devoutly Buddhist Viet-Cong didn't seem to have a problem "upbraiding" the evil American soldiers who created a disturbance in their jungles.

Also, the Buddhist Kingdom of Thailand hangs drug-runners.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Or that their philosophy should or that anything should. Nothing has intrinsic value, only the values we give to it due to our own perceptions which vary from person to person. The thought process that leads to people thinking that their beliefs should rule the world is that theirs are somehow accurate or based on something real, be it God or logic or revelation.

Sure. But not basing it on a god allows me the freedom not to have a certainty of religion. In fact, I don't think I have more rights than anyone else. Or less for that matter. Even if people in those parts of the world where they don't enjoy the same rights I assign myself, I think they're entitled to all the same rights I have.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The devoutly Buddhist Viet-Cong didn't seem to have a problem "upbraiding" the evil American soldiers who created a disturbance in their jungles.

Also, the Buddhist Kingdom of Thailand hangs drug-runners.

Christian governments invade nations and sack villages and torture people on the rack. Governments and political ideologies rarely take their cues from religions.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The devoutly Buddhist Viet-Cong didn't seem to have a problem "upbraiding" the evil American soldiers who created a disturbance in their jungles.

Also, the Buddhist Kingdom of Thailand hangs drug-runners.

And the Christian soldiers didn't have trouble slaughtering them with far superior technology.

There are probably more recent examples of Buddhists turning the other cheek than Christians doing that.

Originally posted by Devil King
How many times have you turned the other cheek?


More than I retaliate, actually.

Originally posted by Devil King
Ghandi was not christian and he was a pacifist.

He was a huge fan of "Baby Jesus". Wanna take a stab of where he got his pacifism from?

Originally posted by inimalist
so your argument is that any group of people who have a majority of Christians in the population will not use violence in response to violence?

Originally posted by Devil King
Christian governments invade nations and sack villages and torture people on the rack. Governments and political ideologies rarely take their cues from religions.

The term "Christian government" is an oxymoron. Most, if not all, Christian-majority nations have secular governments. So Christianity doesn't come into play when they make executive decisions.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
And the Christian soldiers didn't have trouble slaughtering them with far superior technology.


American and Christian are not linked. There's a million threads about that very topic.

Originally posted by Devil King
Sure. But not basing it on a god allows me the freedom not to have a certainty of religion. In fact, I don't think I have more rights than anyone else. Or less for that matter. Even if people in those parts of the world where they don't enjoy the same rights I assign myself, I think they're entitled to all the same rights I have.

As far as I can tell religions tend to think the same thing. You just disagree with what those rights are.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
American and Christian are not linked. There's a million threads about that very topic.

There are a lot of Christians in the US. It stands to reason some of them were in the military and thus in Vietnam and thus killing people there.

Many soldiers in Vietnam (like my dad) were forced to go. He contested his being drafted, citing being a conscientious objector on the grounds of religion. The draft board laughed in his face and made his poor Mexican ass go anyways. So he was forced to kill to survive, despite never wanting to be there in the first place (Christianity).

Bottom line: many had no choice.

In such a case as Quiero's father, where there was no consent of the will in fighting an unjust war (re: invasion), he cannot be held culpable for the people he killed as a part of the war effort. Sin involves full consent of the will, and in such case as being drafted, and if he only killed as necessary to survive and complete his mission, there is no maligned sin at play here.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The term "Christian government" is an oxymoron. Most, if not all, Christian-majority nations have secular governments. So Christianity doesn't come into play when they make executive decisions.

I mentioned groups, not states

though I would challenge the argument anyways, it is totally irrelevant to what I was saying.

Are you saying a group of Christians is less likely to respond with violence to aggressions than other groups?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
More than I retaliate, actually.



He was a huge fan of "Baby Jesus". Wanna take a stab of where he got his pacifism from?





The term "Christian government" is an oxymoron. Most, if not all, Christian-majority nations have secular governments. So Christianity doesn't come into play when they make executive decisions.



American and Christian are not linked. There's a million threads about that very topic.

i think most people turn the other cheek more than they retaliate, christian or not.

I'm a fan of Jesus. I think he said some great things, or at least had some great things attributed to him. But Ghandi was no christian. If I recall correctly, he drew inspiration from any number of sources. In fact there is a famous quote of his that says a man must never stop changing his beliefs if he wasn't to be a truly knowledgable person. I'm paraphrasing, but you get my point I hope.

Sure it sounds like an oxymoron, until you listen to the rhetoric that their leaders have to spout to get elected. And I believe that Mr. Bush has said multiple times that he turns to Jesus for insight into his descisions. This is nothing new in America. And it's been worse than ever since the 50's.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
As far as I can tell religions tend to think the same thing. You just disagree with what those rights are.

I disagree with where those rights come from. As I have already said in this thread, the conclusions of what those rights are vary little. But I have also said that I believe all people deserve the same rights; that we all have them even if we were born in a nation that denies them or to a religion that espouses a different set.

Originally posted by Devil King
I disagree with where those rights come from. As I have already said in this thread, the conclusions of what those rights are vary little. But I have also said that I believe all people deserve the same rights; that we all have them even if we were born in a nation that denies them or to a religion that espouses a different set.

Why would you say in the same paragraph that the rights vary very little but that they are apparently significant enough to matter? Besides, religions tend to hold that everyone has and should have the same rights and that should have them no matter where they live. I still fail to see how your decision to pull those rights out of thin air is diffrent in any relevant way from saying that they come from God especially since you seem to hold that they're essentially the same.

Originally posted by Transfinitum
In such a case as Quiero's father, where there was no consent of the will in fighting an unjust war (re: invasion), he cannot be held culpable for the people he killed as a part of the war effort. Sin involves full consent of the will, and in such case as being drafted, and if he only killed as necessary to survive and complete his mission, there is no maligned sin at play here.



Originally posted by inimalist

Are you saying a group of Christians is less likely to respond with violence to aggressions than other groups?

Not always, but that's the philosophy.

Bad example: Crusaders. Good example: Martin Luther King's congregation. The latter observed it.

Originally posted by Devil King

Sure it sounds like an oxymoron, until you listen to the rhetoric that their leaders have to spout to get elected. And I believe that Mr. Bush has said multiple times that he turns to Jesus for insight into his descisions. This is nothing new in America. And it's been worse than ever since the 50's.

W attributes many good fortunes in his life to Jesus, such as kicking the bottle. But none of that matters. He can't have congress enact any laws on religous grounds.

Originally posted by Devil King
I disagree with where those rights come from. As I have already said in this thread, the conclusions of what those rights are vary little. But I have also said that I believe all people deserve the same rights; that we all have them even if we were born in a nation that denies them or to a religion that espouses a different set.

Based on what? Because you say so?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota

Not always, but that's the philosophy.

Bad example: Crusaders. Good example: Martin Luther King's congregation. The latter observed it.


I'd agree with you, I don't deny the moral strength people get from religion

though, I'd personally say that religion is not the most important factor in this instance. I think that is the general trend in all groups. I think its more human nature, though I can't argue that a specific idea of "turn the other cheek" might influence people, it doesn't require religion for people to practice it. For instance, I didn't swing back on the guy who broke my nose.

Originally posted by inimalist
For instance, I didn't swing back on the guy who broke my nose.

Maybe you're just a pussy. srug

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Maybe you're just a pussy. srug

religion is still not the most important factor

Originally posted by inimalist
religion is still not the most important factor

theres a difference between being a pussy and a pacifist.... right?

Originally posted by inimalist
theres a difference between being a pussy and a pacifist.... right?

Yeah, a pacifist makes an active choice not to react.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yeah, a pacifist makes an active choice not to react.

lol, safe

Originally posted by Devil King
Well, I haven't hurt myself trying to justify why murder is wrong, so you are actually incorrect that doing so would require some herculean effort on my part.
Not trying means that you don't have to exert yourself.

You're right, it doesn't govern the U.S. However, your original statement was:


Erm...no, I never said that. At all.

Your morals are allegedly based upon logic and reason, unlike my crazy, off-the-wall Bible stories. When examined, though, your own morals and values all boil down to: "Because this is how I think things should be," which is based entirely off the society in which you grew up. Which means that they are as impermanent as a vapor and just as easily dispersed.

And just like the morals imposed by the church and those that disagreed were on the outside of the majority which was imposed on also through threats.

I say if it doesn't hurt anyone then what is the problem with it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why would you say in the same paragraph that the rights vary very little but that they are apparently significant enough to matter? Besides, religions tend to hold that everyone has and should have the same rights and that should have them no matter where they live. I still fail to see how your decision to pull those rights out of thin air is diffrent in any relevant way from saying that they come from God especially since you seem to hold that they're essentially the same.

Because I see the difference in attributing those rights to a god that dictates how easily we can enjoy them and that there is no force in the heavens that can take them away. They're ours as long as we live in this world and they aren't conditional based on a stry we've made up to explain them. Only forces in this world can effect them, and even those forces don't dictate their existence, only their absence. As for pulling them out of thin air, I don't see how the idea that god gave them to us as anything different.

I know that I don't. If I was there and told my views and another person was there and told their views, they would both be quite differnt...odd, isn't it?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
W attributes many good fortunes in his life to Jesus, such as kicking the bottle. But none of that matters. He can't have congress enact any laws on religous grounds.



Based on what? Because you say so?

No, we don't attribute those things to Jesus; Bush does.

Based on the common themes we all desire and in some cases enjoy. Our rights are a resut of the common ideals that unite all of us as human beings. Not because we were born in the right country or because we were baptised as christians.

Jesus never spoke of hate to my recollection or even isolation.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Not trying means that you don't have to exert yourself.

You're right, it doesn't govern the U.S. However, your original statement was:


Erm...no, I never said that. At all.

Your morals are allegedly based upon logic and reason, unlike my crazy, off-the-wall Bible stories. When examined, though, your own morals and values all boil down to: "Because this is how I think things should be," which is based entirely off the society in which you grew up. Which means that they are as impermanent as a vapor and just as easily dispersed.

How hard are you trying by using a cop-out like "god said so"? Which, if I recall, he did not.

right. My statement said of this country. The mayflower compact is no such a thing.

If you said no such a thing, why are they savages and sandniggers?

No, you imply the permanance of your values and morals (I like the sudden inclusion of the first half of that) because you got them from what you believe to be god; as though there isn't a conscious descision to subscribe to them. It isn't like your validation is greater than mine. It's not my fault your religion is a product of the society that formed it. If anything, I didn't have to bend knee to a mythological character that is nothing more than a retelling of a theme that has existed for thousands of years to draw my inspiration for doing the right thing or not doing the wrong thing. I'm not saying there aren't lessons to be learned from the christian belief system or it's mythology I'm saying it's not the only one that espouses the same rhetoric. And what are those common themes if not evidence that the man-made religions we ascribe to aren't representative of our kinship and the rights we should all enjoy? The only problem is that there are few religions that are willing to admit it, and it's followers would rather spend 2000 years killing each other over how they're espoused.

Originally posted by Devil King
And what are those common themes if not evidence that the man-made religions we ascribe to aren't representative of our kinship and the rights we should all enjoy?

What common themes? And why "should" we?

DK makes me giggle. Not in the sarcastic way, mind you

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What common themes? And why "should" we?

We "should" because we all deserve to have them and it's unfortunate that in some places in this world people are denied rights or live under the oppression of theocracy.

Common themes; happiness, love, what we shouldn't do, etc.

Originally posted by chithappens
DK makes me giggle. Not in the sarcastic way, mind you

I'm only here to entertain.

Jesus was probably a cool dude, a smokin dude, the one that hung out in water holes.......sippin the new wine of truth, chewing the fat and for some reason people wrote it down. I can be enlightened too after I've had a few.

1100775297_341672895

who said he did???
and do you really think they report it if he handled like a deranged psychopath

Originally posted by atv2
It takes a lot of strength to withstand what he did. Wow, how did he do it?

There were no emos in biblical times. That's how.

Originally posted by atv2
How did he deal with rejection because I know that there were many that did not have faith him.

He cried in the garden of Gethsemane, "My Father, if it is possible, do not let this happen!" cry

Needless to say, he did not handle it very well.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He cried in the garden of Gethsemane, "My Father, if it is possible, do not let this happen!" cry

Needless to say, he did not handle it very well.

That was about not handling death well . . .

"he was rejected and despised of men"--one of the most beautiful and pogniant parts of Handels Messiah

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
He cried in the garden of Gethsemane, "My Father, if it is possible, do not let this happen!" cry

Needless to say, he did not handle it very well.

He handled it better than you could..,

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
He handled it better than you could..,

That is quite a feat considering that he is fictional.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That is quite a feat considering that he is fictional.

Irrelevant- he still handled the situation better...

the Character of Jesus (real or otherwise) still proved to be able to handle the rejection...you could say that the Character of Gandalf would also be able to handle it...the fact that they are or are not real doesn't matter- they still have character.

If you get my meaning...

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Irrelevant- he still handled the situation better...

the Character of Jesus (real or otherwise) still proved to be able to handle the rejection...you could say that the Character of Gandalf would also be able to handle it...the fact that they are or are not real doesn't matter- they still have character.

If you get my meaning...

Actually, it is quite relevant. Comparing the behavior of a fictional character in a fictional story to the possible behavior of an actual person in a potential situation is quite different. Not to mention that you presume to know how I would behave when faced with death. I have dispassionately stared down the barrel of a gun, and I am not even the supposed son of God. Quite a stark contrast to begging for your life the night before your execution.

Im sure you did and you are incorrect.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Im sure you did and you are incorrect.

Simply stating that I am incorrect does not make it so.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Simply stating that I am incorrect does not make it so.

I apologise, but I tend to loose interest in debates when someone starts listing their qualifications or says they have bravely stood in the face of a loaded weapon and not even batted an eyelid.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I apologise, but I tend to loose interest in debates when someone starts listing their qualifications or says they have bravely stood in the face of a loaded weapon and not even batted an eyelid.

Interestingly, you have no difficulty presuming to know how a stranger would behave in a hypothetical situation, but when faced with how a stranger did behave in an actual situation, you suddenly lose interest in supporting your argument.

Yes, I am sure you are not telling fibs.

Oh, btw it would be unreasonable for you to expect me to take your word at face value...I mean, thats less than the Bible does (for some people).

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
I have dispassionately stared down the barrel of a gun, and I am not even the supposed son of God.

So have I. That doesn't say anything about our ability to handle rejection.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So have I. That doesn't say anything about our ability to handle rejection.

Would it matter, if you knew you were going to get shot...sobbed abit in your room alone, then put on a brave face and went out and faced your fate without regret?

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Yes, I am sure you are not telling fibs.

The event is a matter of public record with Winnebago County police department; I stood between a gunman and my younger brother and sister in order to shield them, and he pointed the gun in my face.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So have I. That doesn't say anything about our ability to handle rejection.

Apparently, that is not what we are talking about:

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That was about not handling death well . . .

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The event is a matter of public record with Winnebago County police department; I stood between a gunman and my younger brother and sister in order to shield them, and he pointed the gun in my face.

I don't suppose they have a list of things like that on their website or that you can prove your identity online.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Apparently, that is not what we are talking about:

Thread's about rejection.

You brought up a quote out of context because you had nothing relevant to say and found some famous Bible verses.

I called you on it.

The conversation was taken on a tangent by another person.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Thread's about rejection.

You brought up a quote out of context because you had nothing relevant to say and found some famous Bible verses.

I called you on it.

The conversation was taken on a tangent by another person.

Which I am allowed to do.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The event is a matter of public record with Winnebago County police department; I stood between a gunman and my younger brother and sister in order to shield them, and he pointed the gun in my face.

Please make this source available or desist claiming you stood infront of a man's gun in order to protect your siblings.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Would it matter, if you knew you were going to get shot...sobbed abit in your room alone, then put on a brave face and went out and faced your fate without regret?

Yes, it would matter. The mortal who is uncertain what will happen to him after he dies, who faces death resolutely, certainly handles death better than the son of God who is certain that he will spend in eternity in heaven, who cries and begs for his life.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Yes, it would matter. The mortal who is uncertain what will happen to him after he dies, who faces death resolutely, certainly handles death better than the son of God who is certain that he will spend in eternity in heaven, who cries and begs for his life.

He clearly wasn't certain, "God why hath you forsaken me?"

Jesus was the son of God, but he was also the son of Mary- he had humanity in him also.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I don't suppose they have a list of things like that on their website or that you can prove your identity online.

I do not know, I have never visited the site in question. As far as substantiating my identity, my profile is fairly complete.




Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Please make this source available or desist claiming you stood infront of a man's gun in order to protect your siblings.

That may be difficult to accomplish considering that I have lived in San Francisco county, California for over two years, and that Winnebago county is in Illinois; or you could simply ask my former-partner, David (Devil King), for corroboration.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That may be difficult to accomplish considering that I have lived in San Francisco county, California for over two years, and that Winnebago county is in Illinois; or you could simply ask my former-partner, David (Devil King), for corroboration.

This is quite convenient.

The only evidence you have that the event took place is the word of a close friend...

I apologise but I must conclude, that said event never took place and your are therefore either deluded or a liar.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
This is quite convenient.

The only evidence you have that the event took place is the word of a close friend...

I apologise but I must conclude, that said event never took place and your are therefore either deluded or a liar.

There is nothing "convenient" about my inability to substantiate an event in 2008 that I did not know I would need to substantiate in 2006 when I moved to a state where I would no longer have access to the evidence.

Furthermore, you have yet provide any evidence to substantiate that you have any knowledge of how I would behave when faced with the possibility of death, let alone as compared to a fictional character in a fictional story, for which my anecdote is a retort in the first place.

What is truly convenient is your attempt to detract from your inability substantiate your own argument by focusing on a point that is incidental to mine.

Oh, well in that case- i apologse for assuming to know how you would act- indeed I would not, it was wrong of me to state that I did.

Anyway, back to business.

So, you have no evidence to support the claim that you "dispassionately stared down the barrel of a gun". Do you not agree then, that I must conclude you are lying? Perhaps in order to retort my statement that you would be just as worried as Jesus? Perhaps to make yourself look like a hero?

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Oh, well in that case- i apologse for assuming to know how you would act- indeed I would not, it was wrong of me to state that I did.

Anyway, back to business.

So, you have no evidence to support the claim that you "dispassionately stared down the barrel of a gun". Do you not agree then, that I must conclude you are lying? Perhaps in order to retort my statement that you would be just as worried as Jesus? Perhaps to make yourself look like a hero?

You have no conclusive evidence to substantiate that God exists. By your reasoning, I must conclude that God does not exist, and that by extension, you are either deluded or a liar. Case in point; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You have no conclusive evidence to substantiate that God exists. By your reasoning, I must conclude that God does not exist, and that by extension, you are either deluded or a liar. Case in point; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Exactly! Thus you have proved my point to be correct. Now please espouse that to the world.

Thank you.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Exactly! Thus you have proved my point to be correct. Now please espouse that to the world.

Thank you.

While indicating that the absence of evidence for the existence of God is not evidence that God does not exist, it also does not follow from this that God does exist. Therefore, this does not prove any point that you have attempted to make in this thread or otherwise.

Moreover, you continue to evade that your original argument attempts to draw a comparison between two dissimilar things, i.e. the behavior of a fictional character in a fictional story and the possible behavior of an actual person in a potential situation; and my argument, i.e. that a mortal who faces death resolutely handles death better than a god who cries and begs for his life.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
I apologise, but I tend to loose interest in debates when someone starts listing their qualifications or says they have bravely stood in the face of a loaded weapon and not even batted an eyelid.

Then perhaps we should turn to your other example. When faced with death, Gandalf didn't fall to his knees and cry. He simply let go.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
While indicating that the absence of evidence for the existence of God is not evidence that God does not exist, it also does not follow from this that God does exist. Therefore, this does not prove any point that you have attempted to make in this thread or otherwise.

Moreover, you continue to evade that your original argument attempts to draw a comparison between two dissimilar things, i.e. the behavior of a fictional character in a fictional story and the possible behavior of an actual person in a potential situation; and my argument, i.e. that a mortal who faces death resolutely handles death better than a god who cries and begs for his life.

So you confirm, your a liar then?

Originally posted by Devil King
Then perhaps we should turn to your other example. When faced with death, Gandalf didn't fall to his knees and cry. He simply let go.
That would have been the easy thing to do rather than pretending to be some sort of hero who stood in the face of death without fear or worry...

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
or you could simply ask my former-partner

I think you've said too much already. I know it happened, but I think revealing it to strangers is a bit much.

That he stood up to a gun-toting nutcase?

Originally posted by Devil King
I think you've said too much already. I know it happened, but I think revealing it to strangers is a bit much.

For the record, I actually believe him. However, I think the point was still valid.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
That he stood up to a gun-toting nutcase?

He never said he stood up to this person. He simply said he wasn't afraid.

Originally posted by Devil King
He simply said he wasn't afraid.

Do you believe him?

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Do you believe him?

He said it to you. Whether or not I believe him is not in question.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
So you confirm, your a liar then?

In other words, you acknowledge that your argument draws an invalid comparison between two dissimilar things; and that you are unable to defeat the argument I presented; so you choose instead to focus on a point that is incidental to my argument in order to detract from this.




Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
That would have been the easy thing to do rather than pretending to be some sort of hero who stood in the face of death without fear or worry...

"Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear," Ambrose Redmoon.

Originally posted by Devil King
He said it to you. Whether or not I believe him is not in question.
Yes it is...I just asked you...I assume that means "no but I won't undermine him."


Yes I do, are you a liar?


"Courage! What makes a king out of a slave? Courage! What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage! What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist, or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage! What makes the sphinx the seventh wonder? Courage! What makes the dawn come up like thunder? Courage! What makes the Hottentot so hot? What puts the "ape" in apricot? What have they got that I ain't got?"
-The Cowardly Lion

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Yes it is...I just asked you...I assume that means "no but I won't undermine him."

No, it means my understanding of the truth of the matter is beyond reproach. I know it's true. You're the one who asked for qualification. I can do that. But it means little more to you than his original statment in this thread, which was addressed to you.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
"Courage! What makes a king out of a slave? Courage! What makes the flag on the mast to wave? Courage! What makes the elephant charge his tusk in the misty mist, or the dusky dusk? What makes the muskrat guard his musk? Courage! What makes the sphinx the seventh wonder? Courage! What makes the dawn come up like thunder? Courage! What makes the Hottentot so hot? What puts the "ape" in apricot? What have they got that I ain't got?"
-The Cowardly Lion

This really doesn't help my accusation that you're gay.