Well, someone somewhere suggested that Khristian (if i am spelling it right) was a good way to refure to Christians who don’t act like it. Rather than tainting real Christians…well, I like the idea. I think it’s a neologism right up there with “santorum”.
But on to my actually pitting…NO, NUKING MECCA IS NOT A GOOD IDEA.
God, the idea of such a thought coming from some admittely immoral bastard…Stalin maybe…is sick enough. Real politick and all (never mind for the moment that bombing Mecca would be the opposit of realpolitick…would be sucide). But the thought of it coming from someone who professes the Christian faith. Which I thought has something to do with beliveing we are all God’s children. All.
But I just read a thread where the response to the idea that the US is contemplating vapourizing Mecca was:
“That would be cool”
That would be cool.
My god.
Other post in the thread (in repsonse to people pointing out the this would be an insane thing for us to do) were “Well if they attack us we can repsond…we’re more powerful than they are” Right. At the cost of how many lives and how much suffering? But it’s ok if we come out on top. Very Chrisitian.
These people scare me. That’s all a wanted to say.
Oh wait. It’s the Pit. these people fucking scare me.
If it’s of any consolation, those thinking it would be a cool idea are not, nor will they probably ever be, in a position wherein that mindset would have any bearing on the likelihood of Mecca to be nuked.
[sub]Is that sentence as ugly as I think it is?[/sub]
I agree. I do in fact take consolation that not even Bush (oh sorry are my prejudcesing showing :)) could really contemplate such an idea seriously.
Just depresses me that some people could think it might be a good idea. And partiulary people who say they have a moral structure. That’s what scares me.
And yes I like the neologism…I didn’t come up with it, but i want to promote it.
In no time at all there will be people that adopt the identity of Khristian, and will get all up in arms and consider it an insult when you refer to the bad Khristians.
Oh and…i should provide a link. But I’m leery of the the board war think. Much as I would like to sick you on the a straighten them out
Hmmmm…I was so close to writing “leering of the borad war”. Maybe that’s closer
Originally Posted by ParentalAdvisory
I think that’s the idea. To insult Kristians (Krazies), rather then the real Christians.
And how are we to tell the “real” Christians from the other kind? If someone tells you he is a follower of Christ how can you posibly refute him? Are Christ’s teachings not open to interpretation? I am not a Christian, but I would take offense at someone who presumed to judge whether my faith was “real” or not. Misguided, perhaps, for that is a matter of opinion. But real? You would gave absolutely no way of knowing such a thing.
Well I am completely unqualified to interpret Christ’s words in any way at all. My objection is this statement–
Originally Posted by ParentalAdvisory
I think that’s the idea. To insult Kristians (Krazies), rather then the real Christians.
If a person claims to be a believer in Christ, what possible mechanism exists to determine the truth of that statement? Is it required that every Christian be like Christ in every possible way? Can a Christian be like Christ in some ways and not in others? My point is that professing a belief in Christ is* by definition * the business of the one making the claim and no one else. **Tracy Lord ** believes that homophobia is indicative of a false Christian. The Catholic church has several policies that could be interpreted as homophobic. Are Catholics false Christians?
It’s not just a matter of belief. Christ also left some instructions. “Love thy neighbour”, that kind of thing. If someone professes belief in Christ but can’t even be bothered to try to follow Christ’s teachings…like the charming Mr. Savage and his apparent rejection of even the pretense of Christian charity…then perhaps they don’t deserve the label “Christian”. I’m certainly going to have no qualms not applying that label to them, comfortable as I am that I have objective reasons not to do so.
I freely admit it’s an imperfect metric. But Christianity is more than just belief, it’s a standard of action. As I said, it’s a fuzzy line but some things are firmly on the other side of it.
