I dunno. I always figured Ratsy declined to join LeFebvre simply because it meant less competition for him in the Curia.
, I guess.
I’d like to lurk in a GD thread on Spong, being interested in objections to him other than the most obvious fundamentalist ones.
JD,
It seems that sometimes you and J_C are just as much in ‘personal attack mode’ here as these others who are negative towards you.
That is why I would be timid about meeting you.
It’s not your views.
It’s the put downs. You know, changing someone’s screen name in a quote to ‘little girl’, bolding the word ‘ass’ in a word as a nice way of calling someone an ass…
I’m probably more likely to notice the negativity in your posts, because I’m READING your posts (not just skimming as I tend to do elsewhere). You have a different point of view than I do, I want to read and learn and explore my horizons…but…I tend to feel shaken and sad after reading your posts. shrug Shaken by the hostility, sad that the negativity just keeps going and going and going…
The problem, as a mutual friend of theirs and mine said to me in a phone conversation, is that Joe and Jersey’s perspective seems natural to them, and they say something (e.g., Joe’s comment that it was unjustifiable to condemn Daryl’s parents on the basis of a relayed account of what he said about them before his suicide) in a blunt fashion, which arouses hostility in others, and while everybody else see their comments in attack mode, they are seeing it as defending themselves against a pile-on.
I’ve tried to bear this in mind, and disagree with them in a way that doesn’t call for this us:them confrontational problem. Doesn’t always work, but I try. I’ve seen gobear in his calmer moments, and cjhoworth, lel and a couple of others trying to do the same thing.
But IMHO it’s something that all of us, including Joe and Jersey (as well as myself!) need to keep in mind.
I ask this in all sincerity so don’t think I’m flaming anyone here:
If after 20 years of being a Christian, as Joe has boasted, and after however long you’ve been a Christian, you two are no better at being meek, turning the other cheek or demonstrating Love than Gobear or any other atheist, what exactly is the benefit of Christianity?
I’ve heard so many claims that Christianity “Transforms Your Life”, but I’ve actually seen little evidence.
If after 20 years of eating healthy and excercising and not smoking, so-and-so had a heart attack, what exactly is the benefit of these practices?
Your sample size is too small. It is silly to expect every Christian to be better than every non-Christian, whatever the benefits of Christianity overall.
(And this is all assuming that your assessment of them is valid - a highly questionable assumption, IMHO).
Yes, it is silly to expect every Christian to be better than every non-Christian.
But given the supposed life-changing transformation that happens to Christians, one would typically expect a long time Christian to be more “Christ-like” than the typical unbeliever.
And Izzy, all most of us have to go on is the content of poster’s posts, yes? How else would 'Brew assess JC & JD?
Proper measure is between “before” and “after” on the same individual, not as between individuals.
Some people are naturally irenic and peaceful, some acerbic and polemic.
There are women who complain regularly in the Pit of being judged on the basis of their obesity. I happen to have a quite high metabolism and have for the most part been underweight. (I’m marginally over optimum for my height and build right now.)
The question of whether a diet is working for them is not on whether they’ve become as skinny as I am (or was) but whether they’ve lost weight in a healthy manner for their body build and size. As it would be for me. Comparing an endomorph’s 250 pounds to my 150 is not reasonable – instead, note that she made the remarkable gain from 320 to 250, while I should be at 140 or so.
These two statements are contradictory (as applied here). If in fact there are many Christinas who are not better than non-Christians, you cannot point to any random pair and make a meaningful comparison. One would “typically expect” the average NBA player to be taller than the average non-player, but you cannot point to a short player and tall non-player and “prove” that the generalization is not valid.
'Brew can assess all he wants. I merely noted my disagreement.
Weirddave:
Both appearances you’ve noticed are the ‘real’ Joe_Cool and Jerseydiamond. What you see here online is representative of my real beliefs (provided you focus on what I really say, and not on the remarks from others that purport to characterize my beliefs, but tend to put words in my mouth more often than not – such as gobear’s recent remark implying that we believe Catholics aren’t “real Christians”). I am a Christian, and I hold the words of the Bible to be sacred, but not just a set of rules to live by. I see it as a revelation of God’s character and plans for us.
The Joe_Cool you met IRL is also the real me. I’m a real person with more than one facet. I like to have fun. I like to read. I like mathematics, computers and physics, and I hate chemistry. I enjoy kickboxing and drag racing, and do my own automotive work when I’m able. I like action and science fiction movies, I like bad, poorly made movies like Manos, The Hands of Fate, and stupid comedies, like Real Genius. I even like horror (Stephen King is one of my favorite authors, particularly when he was younger and wrote scary stuff, rather than just weird), and have a particular love for Zombie movies, especially the Living Dead sextet. I like to have a couple drinks from time to time (my favorite beer is Corona), and hang out with friends having a good time. The fact that I am a Christian doesn’t mean I sit in a rocking chair all day long chanting Bible verses and cursing anybody who doesn’t. Everybody seems to get pigeonholed into caricatures. With us, the thought process seems to be “You are christians. You believe the bible. I think christians who believe the bible hate science and catholics, and want to burn homosexuals. Therefore, you do, too.” The fact that I have never said any such thing (and it’s not true) gets no consideration at all. It’s not pleasant getting lumped into an imaginary group, then having that group’s imaginary characteristics projected onto me.
Being a Christian means that I have a relationship with my Creator and try to please him with my life. It doesn’t mean that I have no other life. It’s kind of like being married: I love my wife, and I want to make her happy, but that doesn’t mean I am nothing more than just a husband.
The problem is that we get shoehorned into a misleading category online, partly because of the type of discussions that are common here, but also because of a pervasive atmosphere of dislike for Christians who hold to traditional ideas and the sanctity of the Bible. Because of this atmosphere, we’re perceived as “fundies” and nothing else. Unfortunately, this is reinforced by the fact that questions are put forth which are designed to start that kind of conflict, and when one of us gives the answer you KNOW we’re going to give, the flamefest begins. And then in other threads, like the Daryl one, conversations get totally sidetracked by nothing more than the fact that I’m there. I didn’t want to discuss theology, homosexuality, NOTHING. Only what I saw as unfairness in making unfounded accusations. But the whole thread derailed into bashing “Fundies” and snide remarks about sin, homosexuality, and christianity. Utterly ridiculous. Then after seeing that happen time after time, I get accused of having a martyr complex. :rolleyes:
The funny thing is the way my posts regarding Christian theology are singled out in building my caricature, as if that’s all I do. Nevermind the fact that I’ve made posts in GQ that are considered “classic” by some people and have been cited as definitive answers in other GQ threads, I’ve posted at least as much about gun control as about religion, and quite a bit in Cafe Society as well. I actually consider myself a GQ poster primarily, and in GD I see myself as a Gun (and other political) issues poster, with religion threads just a sideline. But so many big fights start around religion with beliefs I hold at their centers, that that’s where I end up unwillingly spending my time. And as in so many other threads all over the board, when the minority don’t “come around” to the popular view, the thread degenerates into namecalling by the majority. As you can see in the recent ones.
I don’t think it is wrong. IF Jesus is God and if his Holy Spirit transforms a person, I think it’s called being Born Again, then it is reasonable to expect that transformation to mean something. If Christians don’t have to be Christ-like, then what’s the point?
My apologies, Joe_Cool. It’s just that you tend to side with His4ever in so many debates that I thought you shared her views. (And she is on record as buying into the whole Jack Chick “death cookie” anti-Catholic trip).
That’s not why you were being piled on. In your sincere efforts to defend the dead man’s parents from being blamed for his death. you outraged many, including me, by labeling suicide as a selfish act and refused to understand the depth of despair that can drive some to such a desperate act. You also refused to understand the negative effect fundamentalist beliefs have had on acceptance of gay people by their families.
You are perceived as lacking empathy or concern for others, Joe, and that’s why you get jumped on.
Joe and Jersey I just do not understand this at all. I probably believe many of the things that you do, many people would probably call me a ‘fundie’. I’ve posted in quite a few of the religion/faith/Christian threads but I’ve never been attacked the way that you two have been. Granted I do not post to many of them, but I’ve posted in enough that other dopers pretty well know where I stand. This leads me to believe that it has to be the style that you post in and the way that you state your opinions that makes people attack you. You can state an opinion in a loving, caring and opinionated manner without pulling the world in on top of you.
You like Manos: the Hands of Fate?
:eek:
(Of course, if you like the MST3K version, that’s okay…)
But gobear, don’t you see that that’s exactly my complaint? You assume my beliefs instead of reading them from what I’ve written or asking me. That’s not an isolated incident, either. You and I, not even counting the rest of the board, have a history rife with false assumptions about what I believe – simply because you’ve branded me with your “fundie” label – and post after post of my defense against your assumptions. But defense doesn’t matter. Once the accusation is made, it floats out there, and all anbody remembers is “I read…” Just like in a newspaper. Everybody sees the front page news. Nobody ever sees or remembers the retraction on page 2.
Ultress, That’s usually true, but not always. His4ever tried to lighten her posting style, and you see how well that went over. Personally, I don’t care all that much if people like me here, as long as they dislike me for what I’ve actually said and done, not because they falsely see me as a member of landover baptist.
Guinastasia, I prefer the MST3K version, but I like the original too. I just appreciate bad movies. More as comedy than how they’re intended, but a bad film has a certain appeal unique to bad movies.
No, His4ever did not lighten her style, not much.
Sorry, but you do come off as very confrontational and defensive.
Doesn’t count. The point is that if you continually and forcefully defend a fundamentalist position on these boards, in the exact same manner that others continually and forcefully defend other positions, you will be savaged. Someone who on rare occasions expresses a timid opinion on these matters will be spared.
A timid opinion is not something that is associated with me and my posting style. It’s more along the lines, after having read the boards enough and learning the posting styles of many dopers, of picking your battles…when and how. But you are right on one point, stating your opinion once is usually enough. Dopers have long memories and they don’t forget.
IzzyR - I agree with this part:
HOWEVER I would NOT agree with a statement like this: “The point is that if you continually and forcefully defend a Christian position on these boards, in the exact same manner that others continually and forcefully defend other positions, you will be savaged.”
Why? Look at Poly, Tris, Mange, Lib, cj, et. al. They continually and forcefully defend Christianity, and you don’t see them being savaged.
There is a visceral reaction on this board to fundamentalism, and IMHO it’s for a good reason. This board is dedicated to fighting ignorance, and fundamentalists by nature are highly dedicated to their religious cause, and perceive their religious beliefs as superior in “truth value” to anything that contradicts that belief. Science? Psychology? Biology? Bah! Where they contradict Holy Writ, they are wrong.
And in the minds of (IMHO) a majority of posters on this board, that represents an ignorant position.
QED
Try, then, exploring the nexus of religion and science, which are both subjects I know Joe to be well informed on, and in which I have a hunch you’ll find his opinion to not be the “knee-jerk ignorance” you identify with fundamentalism.
I disagree – strongly and vehemently – with Joe and Jersey’s stances on many significant issues. But I can see that they do think things through, and arrive at their opinions in an informed manner.
And, having had limited off-board contact with Joe, I can testify that our picture of him from the “religion” threads (which is where I have most of my online contact with him) is not anything like a complete picture. I’m going to direct the attention of all to my post of 11:13 today (2/27) and to ultress’s post above, in an effort to point out that much of the problem is one of perception and style/tone of expression.