H4E, how would you like it if I said, “Christians practice unholy rituals and are unpatriotic, and I know this because the Roamn historian Tacitus said so in The Annals.” You know I’ve got my facts wrong, so you ask me to read the Bible and listen to people who are practicing Christians, not to convert me but just to give me accurate information so I’ll know what I’m talking about.
But I refuse, saying, “I know what I know, and my sources are as good as yours.”
Sound familiar? We don;t necessarily want you to change your convictions that Catholics are wrong, but you are basing you opinion on inaccurate info.. If you want to say Catholics are wrong based on Scripture, then do it. If you want to say Cathlics are wrong because of Luther’s teaching that all men stand in equal relation to God, fine. but when you say Catholics worship saints, you are saying something that is not true..
Sources sources sources. You have some old biddy who wrote a “I got me saved from them there cult!” book, and comic books. We have the official and clearly written doctrines of both the Mormon and Catholic Churches, and you’re arguing about sources?
Look, I don’t agree with her. But neither am I referring to her as a “waste of humanity” or a “waste of skin.” Why? Because disagreeing with her while acting like a childish asshole throwing a raging tantrum cedes to her the high ground of civility, and leaves to you the mud puddle where, right or wrong, your point will be at best smeared with your distasteful vitriol or at worst lost entirely.
So why should she pay any attention to anything you say? For that matter, why should any of us? Other people have made the same points you do (or I assume you do – I quit reading after the invitation to fuck off – life is short, y’know?) without the gratuitious invective. The key question is not why she doesn’t respond to you – heck, seems clear enough why she wouldn’t respond to you – but why she doesn’t respond to those of us who have not heaped her with invective, contempt, and worse – who have in fact been perfectly civil throughout.
The fact that she doesn’t defend her position to those people either indicates to me she either cannot (because the argument is flawed and weak) or will not (because she doesn’t care about it as much as she professes to). I draw the obvious conclusions therefrom. I do not consider her arguments to be persuasive and I do not consider her beliefs to be worthy of respect.
But then, I could just as easily say the same about you.
I just don’t know what she thinks she’s ac
Hate to tell you this, P.T.; however, that’s essentially an invalid assumption. The “blurb” for the Great Debates forum indicates that forum is also for those who feel compelled to witness on this site. Now, it’s incredibly obvious that H4E is witnessing. It also appears that she considers that witnessing to be debating since the forum title is Great Debates. It’s not debating, though. It’s merely witnessing. And not very effective witnessing at that.
On the one hand, we’re all wastes of skin. But then again, what the hell else is skin going to do? The nature of nature is to be prodigal. Can’t blame dust for wanting to take a detour in the great carbon cycle.
In the absence of my mind-reading machine (the company is notoriously bad on fulfilling orders), I can only hazard a guess. It’s because she literally doesn’t see you (“you” being the reasonable, civilly-toned majority).
In her world, there are two options: you’re fully in agreement, or you’re totally opposed to her entire belief system and will only be satisfied if she throws out the baby with the Jack Chick bathwater (although, if the baby’s an Amelekite, there should be no problem with smashing it to pieces against rocks, but I digress). If words simply don’t fit into one of those two narrow filter holes, they don’t get into her brain.
That’s a helluva world to live in. If that’s not the one she’s in, she should probably act as if she’s not in it. But yet, she doesn’t.
So, I’ve got a large sum of quatloos riding that she doesn’t, though. Some people are locked into their courses more surely than any slot car; and while that’s a pity, vitriol does seem like wasted energy. But then again, what the hell else is energy going to do? Both it and skin return in due course.
At any rate, I urge all parties, but especially H4E, to consider the words of Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector of England, from a letter written to the Presbyterians of Scotland:
“I beseech you in the bowels of Christ think it possible you may be mistaken.”
His4ever, I try to give new posters the benefit of the doubt and I get a bit upset when some people jump down the throat or a newbie right off the bat. I think that it’s better to just assume that perhaps a post wasn’t worded as clearly as it could have been. After reading all of these threads, I had pretty much decided that you didn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore. But let’s try one more time. (BTW, this is my first post to any of the threads that you have been involved in.)
Last year my Pentecostal sister and I got involved in some email debates about religion. We both love and respect each other, but I would sometimes get frustrated with her just as many of the posters here are frustrated with you. For example, if I was going to ask her to reconsider some small part of her belief system, she would often end up defending the 99% that I had granted her as A-OK in advance. It took a while but I finally got her to understand that by questioning belief X did not mean that I was questioning her entire belief system from A to Z.
I think I see the same thing going on here. Look at the part of the quote from you that I underlined above. If you will go back and reread this or some of the other threads, I think that you will see that most people are not asking for you to change your entire belief system. I think that you are just averaging the many calm reasonable posts with the ones that are harsh and condemning and responding as if everyone is attacking all of your beliefs. You don’t need an ignore list, just skip over the posts that you feel are attacking you and reread the other ones. Read them carefully, keeping in mind that asking you to reconsider X is not the same as asking you to reconsider A through Z. There are many posts that people have put a lot of time and effort into who are not attacking you. Please give them the respect to calmly consider what they have to say.
His4Ever, you and I share a belief in the One True God, and in the salvation given us through the ministry of Jesus Christ His Son.
So, dear, do Kirkland, Guinastasia, and Monty.
What the problem here is, is that some devout and loyal Christians (and also people who may not even believe in God but have a respect for the truth) are calling you on particular points you have been making based on your misunderstandings of teachings of some branches of Christianity.
In a case where somebody (even Jack Chick or the ex-Mormon lady) has told you that “Catholics, or Mormons, believe such and such” and a good Catholic or Mormon tells you otherwise, giving you reference to Church teachings along the same line, you would be well advised to believe that the latter are telling you the truth. The example of the Roman historian Tacitus and his misunderstanding of early Christianity is one excellent example. (Note to grienspace: I can see your point on the veneration of saints, but if Catholics see a difference in latria on the one hand and dulia and hyperdulia on the other, and distinguish one as worship and the other as respect, who are we to disagree? BTW, I don’t recall you ever mentioning your denominational affiliation, and based on previous remarks in this thread I for one am very curious. Care to reveal your secret identity? ;))
Second, His4Ever, many people have tried to disagree with you without slamming you personally. In another post today, I politely informed you that your use of John 14:6 was something that I found offensive, and would be happy to explain why if you wished.
For the record, God never used the word “abomination” (unless you happen to believe in the verbal inspiration of the KJV translators, as a vanishingly small number of conservative evangelicals do). It’s the word that the KJV translators used to translate a particular Hebrew word with a quite different meaning in context. (The same, BTW, goes for “unclean.”)
JFTR, I was deeply moved by the spectacle of gobear preaching the Gospel here:
Very nice job, sir. The one thing I would add is the need to, while maintaining a personal holiness of life as God leads you individually (and through the teaching of the church), to fight the temptation to attempt to impose that same standard of behavior on somebody else’s life, to stand in judgment over them. (I’m still thinking over the implications of quixotic’s chastising of me for doing exactly that over the neo-Pharisees who are trying to do just that themselves.)
His4Ever, do you see any error in what gobear had to say? If not, then do you feel it a good rule of life to follow?
Eve’s original introduction of you made sure to associate you in the thread title with Jack Chick, who is considered both the epitome of evil and a ridiculous figure here on the SDMB."
—Oh, ba-nanner oil. His4ever mentioned in another thread that she was an adherent of Jack Chick, so—rather than hijack that thread—I opened it up as its own topic (and genuine, polite welcome) in GD about the, ummm, finer points of Chick Tracts (not, you’ll notice, in the Pit). A thoroughly valid thread topic, and I also suggested that H4E contribute to other, nonreligious, threads as well. So don’t try t’ pin dis on me, y’hear?
—Eve (who naively thought people could discuss this without getting their respective panties in a bunch)
H4E, I went to the library during my lunch break and picked up Bruce Bawer’s Stealing Jesus: How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity. Bawer’s thesis is that legalistic Christians have replaced Jesus’s gospel of love and redemption through their emphasis on the harshest edicts from the five books of Moses, the epistles of Paul, and the Bok of Revelation.
(Bruce Bawer, Stealing Jesus, (Crown Publishers, New York, 1997), p. 12)
H4E, Jersey Diamond, and their cohorts worship a God that disdains freedom and independent thought, that takes delight in suffering, and encourages hatred of those who do not believe as they do. As far as I can tell, there is no difference between their form of Christianity and devil worship, for that is what one must call the worship of power divorced from goodness and compassion.
Can’t you see that the way you come across changing their whole belief systems is exactly what you’re asking everyone else on this board to do? When you tell Catholics or Mormons that they are going to hell because they are not members of your branch of Christianity, when you tell someone like me who does not believe in Creationism or that the Bible is the literal, inerrant Word of God that we are going to hell for those beliefs, how do you expect us to react?
I am a devout Christian, and that religion has saved my butt on more than one occaision. The Saviour I follow preached love and acceptance. When you come on this board supporting a man who promotes hatred and intolerance, you drive people away from the very faith you claim to profess. I repeat, you are driving people away.
I’m not asking you to change your entire belief system. I’m asking you to look at the way you present yourself and this glorious, life-filled, abundant faith that adds so much to both of our lives. Please, if you must preach, preach the joy. Otherwise, you’re not going to give others much reason to follow it.
I’m sorry I yelled at you. It just pisses me off that certain people seem to be claiming that His4Ever is under attack, when she came here calling those of us who are not heterosexual Christian fundamentalists names. She is the one preaching hate, she is the one refusing to listen to reason. Yet she has defenders like grienspace playing disengenuous games in an attempt to paint her as pure as the driven snow.
His4Ever came here on the attack, spewing the type of vile hate that has real world consequences for some of us, yet some posters choose to ignore that, ignore the fact that us mean, hateful evil homos, papists and whatnot didn’t start a pit thread to attack her- she started a pit thread to whine about being asked to support her positions in debate. I hope you’ll forgive me for losing my temper, but it is extremely aggravating to be attacked and then have people claim you are the bad guy when you strike back.
It is honestly hurtful that poeople are ignoring her attacks, and claiming that those of us who (while certainly intemperate) were defending ourselves are somehow the bad guys.