Total Posts:106|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why are so many religious abusive?

Looncall
Posts: 459
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
Dogknox
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 10:50:46 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Can you direct me to a racist post. I've read a lot of steam being blown off, but racist remarks?

Obliged.
AtheistBrony
Posts: 83
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 11:02:01 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

God killed the innocent.
Animals god made have homosexual relations and some even require it for reproduction.
Who said it was?
In some states its legal.
Same for abortion. Also god wanted some babies killed before, pretty sure.
They say they want to save people from hell, but I see them trying to save people with hell. They deny science when on a computer. They say the bible is metaphors for some parts and not others, and follow some parts and not others. They believe their culture more than their bible they supposedly follow, and will deny any contradictions of the bible. Then say we are the dishonest ones? Since we don't believe in a deity which is equally as convincing as any other then god made the devil knowingly?
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 11:02:16 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!

Good, we agree.
The God of the Old Testament drowned innocent foetuses and infants to death.
Ergo, He is immoral.

It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

So you say.
Why?

It is NOT moral to have sex with children!

No dispute here.
A certain prophet is said to have consummated marriage with a 9-year old. He cannot possibly be held as a moral guide, at least with regard to sex.

It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!

Personally, I find it repugnant.
We can have a discussion on whether or not it is moral.

It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

Then why did the Christian God did it?
Why does the Bible, Numbers 5:11-31 - The Test for an Unfaithful Wife , describe a Godly endorsed abortion?

The Wikipedia entry has this to say:

"
Several commentaries on the Bible maintain that the ordeal is to be applied in the case of a woman who has become pregnant, allegedly by her lover.[13][29] One reading is that the ordeal results in a prolapsed uterus if she is guilty.[30] Some interpretations of the ordeal describe the bitter potion as an abortifacient, which induces a purposeful abortion or miscarriage if the woman is pregnant with another man's child, and which confirms her innocence if no miscarriage is observed
"
https://en.wikipedia.org...

You don't get to dictate what's morally imperative for the whole of mankind.
Looncall
Posts: 459
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 11:03:57 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:50:46 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Can you direct me to a racist post. I've read a lot of steam being blown off, but racist remarks?

Obliged.

There was a discussion involving hinduism, possibly a thread derail, where the statement "You must be mixed race." was clearly used as an insult.

(If anyone has pointers on tracing posts on this forum, I'd be grateful for them.)
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 11:07:50 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!

In numbers 31, Moses commanded his men to kill all women, men, elderly and young children.
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

Says you.
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!

That's what we have been telling catholic priests! ;)

In Numbers 31, after the men killed all the innocent people, they kept the young virgins for themselves. Since girls got married right after they were sexually mature, they were considered children by todays standards.
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!

Ok, thank you for that clarification.
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

In the old testament, the Israelites killed the babies of their enemies.

Sounds to me that you are agreeing with us secularists that the bible is immoral.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2016 11:58:32 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

It is NOT moral to live life according to something you can't prove and never will.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:03:54 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 11:03:57 PM, Looncall wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:50:46 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Can you direct me to a racist post. I've read a lot of steam being blown off, but racist remarks?

Obliged.

There was a discussion involving hinduism, possibly a thread derail, where the statement "You must be mixed race." was clearly used as an insult.

(If anyone has pointers on tracing posts on this forum, I'd be grateful for them.)

See that with searchy thingy with the magnifier thingy. Go to that and type in key words type in you must be of mixed race . And scroll through the responses
Dogknox
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 4:16:46 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 11:02:01 PM, AtheistBrony wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

God killed the innocent.
Animals god made have homosexual relations and some even require it for reproduction.
Who said it was?
In some states its legal.
Same for abortion. Also god wanted some babies killed before, pretty sure.
FACT: It is not moral!
It is lowering yourself to that of an animal.... To debase/ degrading yourself!

Abortion is evil.. direct from Satan.. An UNLOVING act!
Dogknox
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 4:34:49 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 11:02:16 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!

Good, we agree.
The God of the Old Testament drowned innocent foetuses and infants to death.
Ergo, He is immoral.

It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

So you say.
Why?

It is NOT moral to have sex with children!

No dispute here.
A certain prophet is said to have consummated marriage with a 9-year old. He cannot possibly be held as a moral guide, at least with regard to sex.

It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!

Personally, I find it repugnant.
We can have a discussion on whether or not it is moral.

It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

Then why did the Christian God did it?
Why does the Bible, Numbers 5:11-31 - The Test for an Unfaithful Wife , describe a Godly endorsed abortion?

The Wikipedia entry has this to say:

"
Several commentaries on the Bible maintain that the ordeal is to be applied in the case of a woman who has become pregnant, allegedly by her lover.[13][29] One reading is that the ordeal results in a prolapsed uterus if she is guilty.[30] Some interpretations of the ordeal describe the bitter potion as an abortifacient, which induces a purposeful abortion or miscarriage if the woman is pregnant with another man's child, and which confirms her innocence if no miscarriage is observed
"
https://en.wikipedia.org...



You don't get to dictate what's morally imperative for the whole of mankind.

It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

You say... So you say.
Why?


I reply: Way???? ... Because it is not natural, it lowers man to that of Animals... Animals can't restrain themselves Pigs are not human, pigs are less then man!!
Man is greater then the pig!!
It is not moral.... It is filthy disgustingly dirty, the act of sex creates LIFE.. It is sacred and holy! With the same gender it is not an act of love or of creation!

It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

You say ;Then why did the Christian God did it?
Why does the Bible, Numbers 5:11-31 - The Test for an Unfaithful Wife , describe a Godly endorsed abortion?

I reply: WRONG.... It does not endorse abortion!
It punishes the unfaithful not the baby!

Scriptures point out the evils of MEN and MANS acts done against babies and children!
Dogknox
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 4:42:34 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 11:07:50 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!

In numbers 31, Moses commanded his men to kill all women, men, elderly and young children.
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

Says you.
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!

That's what we have been telling catholic priests! ;)

In Numbers 31, after the men killed all the innocent people, they kept the young virgins for themselves. Since girls got married right after they were sexually mature, they were considered children by todays standards.
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!

Ok, thank you for that clarification.
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

In the old testament, the Israelites killed the babies of their enemies.

Sounds to me that you are agreeing with us secularists that the bible is immoral.

Morals.... cannot be changed it is WRONG to have sex with people of the same gender, or Animals!
It is WRONG to kill babies!
Point your finger.. all you do is point towards MEN pointing out history of unmoral men!!

Man is to protect the innocent the infant the weak, not kill them! To kill the baby is to kill yourself.. It is a selfish act against love and against all that is good!! Satan's children kill babies!
Dogknox
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 4:47:02 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 11:58:32 PM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

It is NOT moral to live life according to something you can't prove and never will.

I can PROVE it is wrong to kill babies!!!
Killing the baby is killing mans future, self defeating! Not logical not moral!!!
Nature does NOT kill her young, simply because to save the young, to protect the young at all costs protects nature!
AtheistBrony
Posts: 83
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 4:47:31 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 4:16:46 AM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 11:02:01 PM, AtheistBrony wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

God killed the innocent.
Animals god made have homosexual relations and some even require it for reproduction.
Who said it was?
In some states its legal.
Same for abortion. Also god wanted some babies killed before, pretty sure.
FACT: It is not moral!
It is lowering yourself to that of an animal.... To debase/ degrading yourself!

Abortion is evil.. direct from Satan.. An UNLOVING act!

You know whats unloving, stoning your kids to death like the old testament says to do, and inb4 you only believe the new testament what about the ten commandments huh? Thought so. And saying its legal I never commented on its morality or lack of. Also you ignored my other points that others also made, about god wanting dead babies and stuff. Are you sure you aren't joking?
They say they want to save people from hell, but I see them trying to save people with hell. They deny science when on a computer. They say the bible is metaphors for some parts and not others, and follow some parts and not others. They believe their culture more than their bible they supposedly follow, and will deny any contradictions of the bible. Then say we are the dishonest ones? Since we don't believe in a deity which is equally as convincing as any other then god made the devil knowingly?
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 5:00:44 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 4:47:02 AM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 11:58:32 PM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!
It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!
It is NOT moral to have sex with children!
It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!
It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

It is NOT moral to live life according to something you can't prove and never will.

I can PROVE it is wrong to kill babies!!!
Killing the baby is killing mans future, self defeating! Not logical not moral!!!
Nature does NOT kill her young, simply because to save the young, to protect the young at all costs protects nature!

According to whom ?
What's a baby ?
I believe it's not wrong it's not right. Things happen ,
If it is this thing as you say . Not moral, and you do it. What's the punishment if it's within the law.?
And in saying this , I respect your point of view.
Let's have a hug.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 8:22:06 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 4:34:49 AM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 11:02:16 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:44:25 PM, Dogknox wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

superior morality?
Either moral or NOT moral!
It is NOT moral to kill the innocent!

Good, we agree.
The God of the Old Testament drowned innocent foetuses and infants to death.
Ergo, He is immoral.

It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

So you say.
Why?

It is NOT moral to have sex with children!

No dispute here.
A certain prophet is said to have consummated marriage with a 9-year old. He cannot possibly be held as a moral guide, at least with regard to sex.

It is NOT moral to have sex with animals!

Personally, I find it repugnant.
We can have a discussion on whether or not it is moral.

It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

Then why did the Christian God did it?
Why does the Bible, Numbers 5:11-31 - The Test for an Unfaithful Wife , describe a Godly endorsed abortion?

The Wikipedia entry has this to say:

"
Several commentaries on the Bible maintain that the ordeal is to be applied in the case of a woman who has become pregnant, allegedly by her lover.[13][29] One reading is that the ordeal results in a prolapsed uterus if she is guilty.[30] Some interpretations of the ordeal describe the bitter potion as an abortifacient, which induces a purposeful abortion or miscarriage if the woman is pregnant with another man's child, and which confirms her innocence if no miscarriage is observed
"
https://en.wikipedia.org...



You don't get to dictate what's morally imperative for the whole of mankind.

It is NOT moral to have sex with those of the same gender!

You say... So you say.
Why?


I reply: Way???? ... Because it is not natural, it lowers man to that of Animals... Animals can't restrain themselves Pigs are not human, pigs are less then man!!
Man is greater then the pig!!
It is not moral.... It is filthy disgustingly dirty, the act of sex creates LIFE.. It is sacred and holy! With the same gender it is not an act of love or of creation!

It is NOT moral to kill babies to solve your problem!

You say ;Then why did the Christian God did it?
Why does the Bible, Numbers 5:11-31 - The Test for an Unfaithful Wife , describe a Godly endorsed abortion?

I reply: WRONG.... It does not endorse abortion!
It punishes the unfaithful not the baby!

Scriptures point out the evils of MEN and MANS acts done against babies and children!

I'm sorry but your drivel doesn't count as a valid reason. You're entirely free to think and do as you choose. Just don't think for a second that what you were able to write is anywhere near compelling.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it. That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 9:52:55 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it. That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

Christ never held back , that's why he was bluntly honest.

I don't know where he learned to be blunt .
Cause His father , was not at all like that. I mean , he would beat around the bush.
And speak in a somewhat of a DaVinci code manner. Or what you like to call ,
Scripture.
Hi mcb .
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 9:57:25 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

How would you know that they know "they hold a position they cannot really defend"?
Do you have access to their thoughts?

No, you're making things up, which is what you do continuously. And this, of course, from you, surely one of the most inept debaters around here, in fact, one of the most inept debaters I have ever witnessed.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t

According to the JW theology, you, as a disfellowshipped individual cannot possibly claim to have the Holy Spirit on your side. Isn't it ironical beyond belief that you would contradict official JW theology while attempting to defend official JW theology? Here you are telling us we should all follow the Faithful and Discrete Slave's directions, while at the very same time you disregard their advice to not engage in this sort of internet debate forums. How hypocritical you are.

Furthermore, if your track record around here is anything to go by and it testifies to what you've been able to achieve with the Holy Spirit on your side as a debater, then the Holy Spirit is not of much help.

You are, simply put, terrible.

have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.


Facts show otherwise. It's easy to recall how easily some ardent Christians around here stoop to insults not only to the individual they're responding but to whole classes of people, such as atheists in general. You yourself have made silly generalizations about what atheists presumably think, something which you cannot possibly claim to know unless they themselves express it. Case in point, see your opening paragraph.

If I ever want to show beyond refutation how cults harm one's ability to transcend stupidity I will just direct people to your posts. What you're doing is nothing short of public service.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it.

Please have that in mind, whenever I call attention to the unparalleled stupidity and ignorance in some of your posts.

That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

I do not hold Christ, or the Bible, as moral guides. In numerous instances, they are demonstrably atrociously immoral.
bulproof
Posts: 25,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 11:04:25 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 4:16:46 AM, Dogknox wrote:
FACT: It is not moral!
It is lowering yourself to that of an animal.... To debase/ degrading yourself!
Actually it's raising yourself to the level of your non-existent life.
Allegedly your god aborts in excess of 60% of all abortions world wide.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Looncall
Posts: 459
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 11:50:46 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it. That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

I was not referring to blunt honesty, as I am sure you are aware. I was referring to unnecessary invective, especially in forms that are socially unacceptable.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:00:58 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 9:57:25 AM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

How would you know that they know "they hold a position they cannot really defend"?
because they can't defend it, all the evidence is against them, if only they cared to acknowledge it.

Do you have access to their thoughts?

I don't need to, they show them, and especially their thinking in every post. We all do.


No, you're making things up, which is what you do continuously. And this, of course, from you, surely one of the most inept debaters around here, in fact, one of the most inept debaters I have ever witnessed.

I have no need to make anything up, it is all there for any to see who wish to see it.


However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t

According to the JW theology, you, as a disfellowshipped individual cannot possibly claim to have the Holy Spirit on your side. Isn't it ironical beyond belief that you would contradict official JW theology while attempting to defend official JW theology? Here you are telling us we should all follow the Faithful and Discrete Slave's directions, while at the very same time you disregard their advice to not engage in this sort of internet debate forums. How hypocritical you are.

It is only advice, to a command, and the mission of all servants of Jehovah and Christ is to reach out to people wherever they may be found. After all Paul preached in amongst a whole raft of Greek Idols.

After all, some active JWs come on here from time to time, but sites like this are my only territory because I am disfellowshipped.

If Jehovah's spirit did not direct me on to here I would not bother, I would enjoy the quiet life.

No-one can be debarred from receiving Jehovah's spirit on the word of any human.

Whether or not we get holy spirit is dependent on Jehovah's will, and his sons, not on any human, whoever well intentioned.

You obviously haven't looked closely enough into JWs teachings on disfellowshipping.


Furthermore, if your track record around here is anything to go by and it testifies to what you've been able to achieve with the Holy Spirit on your side as a debater, then the Holy Spirit is not of much help.

Oh it is a great help, but anyone who knows scripture doesn't expect many, or even any to listen unless Jehovah opens their eyes to the truth.

1 Corinthians 3:5-9
5 What, then, is Apollos? Yes, what is Paul? Ministers through whom you became believers, just as the Lord granted each one. 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God kept making it grow, 7 so that neither is the one who plants anything nor is the one who waters, but God who makes it grow. 8 Now the one who plants and the one who waters are one, but each person will receive his own reward according to his own work. 9 For we are God"s fellow workers. You are God"s field under cultivation, God"s building.

This site is my "field" my "building" it is up to Jehovah whether he finds any fertile soil or not to make the word I sow, grow, or again not.


You are, simply put, terrible.

I am sure many of those who refused to follow Jesus said the same about him, in fact I know they did.


have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.


Facts show otherwise. It's easy to recall how easily some ardent Christians around here stoop to insults not only to the individual they're responding but to whole classes of people, such as atheists in general. You yourself have made silly generalizations about what atheists presumably think, something which you cannot possibly claim to know unless they themselves express it. Case in point, see your opening paragraph.

To an extent one can only make generalisations, but I would rather you did not lump me in with those who claim to be Christian but do not live up to their claim, which means the vast majority of such claimants.

Ther is only one way to be a follower of Christ and that is to do his father's will, which I, and the JWs strive to do:

Matthew 7:21-23
21 "Not everyone saying to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?" 23 And then I will declare to them: "I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!"

Whatever one may claim one is only truly Christian if one observes the Ts ad Cs of qualifying for that claim, and few do.


If I ever want to show beyond refutation how cults harm one's ability to transcend stupidity I will just direct people to your posts. What you're doing is nothing short of public service.

That is your opinion.


I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it.

Please have that in mind, whenever I call attention to the unparalleled stupidity and ignorance in some of your posts.

Oh I do. I also respect the fact that you are welcome to your opinion however ignorant of the facts you may be.


That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

I do not hold Christ, or the Bible, as moral guides. In numerous instances, they are demonstrably atrociously immoral.

Not in any instance, though I admit it may often seem so on a surface level.

But if you are so shallow as to go only y surface appearance you will never understand truth which is much deeper than mere appearances.

There are no beings in existence more infinitely moral than Jehovah and Christ.

Everything they do is for the greater good of their creation, not individuals, not even uniquely human but all of their creation equally, and they are the only ones who know what that is.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:02:15 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 11:50:46 AM, Looncall wrote:
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it. That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

I was not referring to blunt honesty, as I am sure you are aware. I was referring to unnecessary invective, especially in forms that are socially unacceptable.

I am sure your were, but you did not point out the difference, or even that there is one, so I took it on myself to do so.

I agree with you totally.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:22:19 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 12:00:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are, simply put, terrible.

I am sure many of those who refused to follow Jesus said the same about him, in fact I know they did.

You're comparing yourself to Jesus?!
Pure gold.

In a nutshell, here we have a disfellowshipped JW who does not follow the Faithful and Discreet Slave's explicit guidance to not mingle in online religious discussions mingling in online religious discussions to claim that we should all strictly follow the direction of the Faithful and Discrete Slave!

Ladies and gentlemen, this is precious!

Let me remind you all this is the same brilliant mind who said that mankind's refusal to accept a God in most cases they don't even believe exists and said God's subsequent and alleged decision to murder more than half of it, some 3500 000 000 people, is tantamount to mankind's committing suicide.

Suicide, people.
This isn't just the apex of criminal stupidity. Not just that.

This is vile repugnant manure that only a sick twisted perverted mind would come up with and so I am going to say something you will always be able to quote me on whenever you claim I merely resort to gratuitous insults:

If you stand by the aforementioned lunatic statement of yours, then you're guilty of high treason to humanity. Your internet persona is either thick as a brick and spineless as a centipede, or it is morally equivalent, if not worse, to Hitler himself.

Got that?

Now go fuckk yourself.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:27:00 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

So many religious are abusive , because they can't use logic and commonsense, to get their point across. And their Gods ain't the nicest of beings.
It almost seems like the religious and non religious are just everyday people with strong opinions on one subject. And in all fairness non religious are as equally abusive. In this here Religion forum.
Good game
Good game
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:46:07 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 12:27:00 PM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

So many religious are abusive , because they can't use logic and commonsense, to get their point across. And their Gods ain't the nicest of beings.
It almost seems like the religious and non religious are just everyday people with strong opinions on one subject. And in all fairness non religious are as equally abusive. In this here Religion forum.
Good game
Good game

Here's the thing though.

A religious member of this forum said that since mankind hasn't accepted God, a God most don't even believe exists, in God's Terms, God is justified in murdering at least more than half, some 3500 000 000 people. He then went on to claim that was tantamount to mankind committing suicide.

Suicide.

If this sort of vile nauseating remark, such abysmal stupidity, isn't worth getting emotional over, I honestly wouldn't know what would be.

Obviously, I had to tell him to go fuckk himself.
Insults were created to be used in rare special occasions, otherwise they lose their potency and become just as disposable as semicolons.

Until said member retracts from his abhorrent statement, I shan't take back a single syllable.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:47:39 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 9:52:55 AM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
At 7/5/2016 9:27:45 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/4/2016 10:31:37 PM, Looncall wrote:
We seem to have an epidemic of religious posters using abusive, ablist, racist and casteist language. Why is that?

Do they somehow think that everyone is obliged to agree with them? Is their position populated so largely of foul-mouthed primitives?

I find this surprising since the religious claim superior morality.

Precisely the same reason so many Atheists are.

Getting overly defensive about a position they know they cannot really defend.

However, those of us who have the advantage of holy spirit wiith us know we don;t have to get abusive beyond the level of blunt honesty such as Christ displayed, and we have the spirit to help strengthen us not to.

I suppose the point is that blunt honesty may be painful to the recipient, but it is not truly abusive because if the recipient stops to think why it is being said there is always a chance they may learn something positive from it. That is why Christ never held back when blunt honesty was the only course left to him to wake people up.

Christ never held back , that's why he was bluntly honest.

I don't know where he learned to be blunt .
Cause His father , was not at all like that. I mean , he would beat around the bush.
And speak in a somewhat of a DaVinci code manner. Or what you like to call ,
Scripture.
Hi mcb .

Wrong Jehovah has always been precisely like that.

When making the promises he made, he also made the conditions for qualifying clear.

True, when dealing with someone who was clearly capable of learning he did try to draw the answer out of the person concerned, but then so did Christ, and in fact it was usually Jehovah's son who was doing it on his father's behalf in the Hebrew Scriptures, since Jehovah has had no direct dealings with humans since Adam's fall, he can't he is too holy and we aren't holy enough yet.

His son will get us back there exactly as per the plan.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 12:55:23 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 12:22:19 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/5/2016 12:00:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are, simply put, terrible.

I am sure many of those who refused to follow Jesus said the same about him, in fact I know they did.

You're comparing yourself to Jesus?!
Pure gold.

I am doing my best to imitate him in every way humanly possible

I can only do so by constantly measuring what I do against what he did.

That is the role of any who wish to call themselves Christian.


In a nutshell, here we have a disfellowshipped JW who does not follow the Faithful and Discreet Slave's explicit guidance to not mingle in online religious discussions mingling in online religious discussions to claim that we should all strictly follow the direction of the Faithful and Discrete Slave!

As I said, it is adie, not a hard and fast rule.


Ladies and gentlemen, this is precious!

Let me remind you all this is the same brilliant mind who said that mankind's refusal to accept a God in most cases they don't even believe exists and said God's subsequent and alleged decision to murder more than half of it, some 3500 000 000 people, is tantamount to mankind's committing suicide.

Suicide, people.

Well what else do you call deliberately doing something which brings about your own death?

Deliberately ignoring Jehovah is doing just that.

That is the very definition of suicide.

This isn't just the apex of criminal stupidity. Not just that.

This is vile repugnant manure that only a sick twisted perverted mind would come up with and so I am going to say something you will always be able to quote me on whenever you claim I merely resort to gratuitous insults:

If you stand by the aforementioned lunatic statement of yours, then you're guilty of high treason to humanity. Your internet persona is either thick as a brick and spineless as a centipede, or it is morally equivalent, if not worse, to Hitler himself.

Got that?

That is the most twisted, sick comparison I have ever rad.

Everything I do is to benefit humanity in the long term, that is why Jehovah wants it done.


Now go fuckk yourself.

Which betrays for all to see the extremely low level of your intellect, your lack of ability with language, and your gutter level thinking.
Omniverse
Posts: 973
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2016 1:08:01 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 7/5/2016 12:55:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 7/5/2016 12:22:19 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/5/2016 12:00:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

You are, simply put, terrible.

I am sure many of those who refused to follow Jesus said the same about him, in fact I know they did.

You're comparing yourself to Jesus?!
Pure gold.

I am doing my best to imitate him in every way humanly possible

I can only do so by constantly measuring what I do against what he did.

That is the role of any who wish to call themselves Christian.


In a nutshell, here we have a disfellowshipped JW who does not follow the Faithful and Discreet Slave's explicit guidance to not mingle in online religious discussions mingling in online religious discussions to claim that we should all strictly follow the direction of the Faithful and Discrete Slave!

As I said, it is adie, not a hard and fast rule.


Ladies and gentlemen, this is precious!

Let me remind you all this is the same brilliant mind who said that mankind's refusal to accept a God in most cases they don't even believe exists and said God's subsequent and alleged decision to murder more than half of it, some 3500 000 000 people, is tantamount to mankind's committing suicide.

Suicide, people.

Well what else do you call deliberately doing something which brings about your own death?

Deliberately ignoring Jehovah is doing just that.

That is the very definition of suicide.

This isn't just the apex of criminal stupidity. Not just that.

This is vile repugnant manure that only a sick twisted perverted mind would come up with and so I am going to say something you will always be able to quote me on whenever you claim I merely resort to gratuitous insults:

If you stand by the aforementioned lunatic statement of yours, then you're guilty of high treason to humanity. Your internet persona is either thick as a brick and spineless as a centipede, or it is morally equivalent, if not worse, to Hitler himself.

Got that?

That is the most twisted, sick comparison I have ever rad.

Everything I do is to benefit humanity in the long term, that is why Jehovah wants it done.


Now go fuckk yourself.

Which betrays for all to see the extremely low level of your intellect, your lack of ability with language, and your gutter level thinking.

So you get to pick and choose which advice from the Governing Body you follow?
No wonder then you're still disfellowshipped and even the witnesses won't have anything to do with you.

Insults were created to address comments such as yours. They are not to be used randomly or gratuitously. But there comes a time when enough is enough and one is justified in using the F-bomb. If rationalizing the mass murder of more than half of Mankind plus labelling it suicide - something which even the Jehovah's Witnesses don't do - isn't one of those rare occasions I wouldn't know one to begin with. I'll retract as soon as you take back the statement.

You don't take it back?
Neither do I.
Do go fuckk yourself.

Ability with language?
Your prose is of Shakespearian calibre.
You read like a highschool dropout, but that would be excusable if the content in itself wasn't so abysmally crass.