Christianity is a personality cult and not a religion

[attofishpi]

Woteva. Unlike you I know GOD very personally. Odd that he allowed Islame to flourish and Muzzlems to exist - but, maybe there is a reason pertaining to Revelations and 666 with that. I don't think the Muslim Pakistani Rape Gangs are going to be looked upon too kindly on their day of judgement.

I hope they get reincarnated as pigs, that's what they are. And we Christians love our bacon for breakfast, yum yum.

[godelian]

Woteva. Unlike you I know GOD very personally. Odd that he allowed Islame to flourish and Muzzlems to exist - but, maybe there is a reason pertaining to Revelations and 666 with that. I don't think the Muslim Pakistani Rape Gangs are going to be looked upon too kindly on their day of judgement.

I hope they get reincarnated as pigs, that's what they are. And we Christians love our bacon for breakfast, yum yum.

You see it as "the Muslims". I really don't. I just see it as the axiomatization of the Quran which yields a particular moral doctrine.

You have people who for some reason choose to use Peano Arithmetic for their axiomatization of the natural numbers. You would insist on calling these people the "Pianists". They are not. They just use that theory when it is useful to them.

As I have pointed out already, you can adopt a moral doctrine by axiomatizing the Torah into Jewish law or the Quran into Islamic law.

You cannot do that with Gospels because they do not propose new rules. Instead, you are supposed to somewhat axiomatize the Torah for that, but not even because non-Jews are only supposed to use the Noahide core rules.

In fact, Christianity does not axiomatize anything, because in reality it is just an absurd personality cult. It is about praying to Christ as if he were a god. In what way is that different from worshipping the Emperor of Japan as a god?

[accelafine]

Woteva. Unlike you I know GOD very personally. Odd that he allowed Islame to flourish and Muzzlems to exist - but, maybe there is a reason pertaining to Revelations and 666 with that. I don't think the Muslim Pakistani Rape Gangs are going to be looked upon too kindly on their day of judgement.

I hope they get reincarnated as pigs, that's what they are. And we Christians love our bacon for breakfast, yum yum.

You see it as "the Muslims". I really don't. I just see it as the axiomatization of the Quran which yields a particular moral doctrine.

You have people who for some reason choose to use Peano Arithmetic for their axiomatization of the natural numbers. You would insist on calling these people the "Pianists". They are not. They just use that theory when it is useful to them.

As I have pointed out already, you can adopt a moral doctrine by axiomatizing the Torah into Jewish law or the Quran into Islamic law.

You cannot do that with Gospels because they do not propose new rules. Instead, you are supposed to somewhat axiomatize the Torah for that, but not even because non-Jews are only supposed to use the Noahide core rules.

In fact, Christianity does not axiomatize anything, because in reality it is just an absurd personality cult. It is about praying to Christ as if he were a god. In what way is that different from worshipping the Emperor of Japan as a god?

You aren't exactly a good advertisement for your death cult. In fact you are all its most vile attributes rolled up into one odious person. Rabidly misogynistic: tick. Child-rape apologetics: tick. Murderous threats: tick. Some 'moral doctrine'... How about just using your brain instead of a crappy little rip-off book?

[attofishpi]

Oh, absolutely.

Not only the misogyny. But now he’s trying now to blow smoke up your arse in a way that unless your life involves coding & LOGIC, you may be a tad ‘bamboozled’..

He states below (*which he ignored addressing with me, rather to spew bollocks at U):
“the Quran which yields a particular moral doctrine”

To which I state:
Islam doctrine is amoral since it is not ALL moral, thus FAILS AS A "MORAL" DOCTRINE. Child sex is not moral.

IGNORED by this Muzzlem.

[godelian]

Some 'moral doctrine'... How about just using your brain instead of a crappy little rip-off book?

You could say the same about Peano arithmetic theory:

Some 'arithmetic theory'... How about just using your brain instead of a crappy little rip-off book?

So, yes, good question, why would anyone be interested in adopting an existing axiomatization instead of just inventing his own?

Reinventing the wheel but poorly, is actually not considered to be a particularly intelligent use of your time. It is, in fact, not considered to be a particularly smart use of your brains.

Furthermore, improving on an existing solution, first and foremost, requires the ability to proficiently use the existing solution. Seriously, what makes you believe that you can build a better version, if you are not even capable of using the existing one?

You sound like someone who struggles with using an existing C++ compiler but who is at the same time convinced that they can create a better programming language and associated compiler for the task. You obviously can't, and the very fact that you are incapable of using the existing solution, clearly proves it. Someone who cannot even just use a C++ compiler, will not be able to write a new one, not even to save themselves from drowning.

In other words, you are convinced that you have good brains but in reality, from your behavior, we can all see that you have poor brains. If you had real knowledge or real mastery of any subject at all, you would not suggest such approach.

[accelafine]

Some 'moral doctrine'... How about just using your brain instead of a crappy little rip-off book?

You could say the same about Peano arithmetic theory:

Some 'arithmetic theory'... How about just using your brain instead of a crappy little rip-off book?

So, yes, good question, why would anyone be interested in adopting an existing axiomatization instead of just inventing his own?

Reinventing the wheel but poorly, is actually not considered to be a particularly intelligent use of your time. It is, in fact, not considered to be a particularly smart use of your brains.

Furthermore, improving on an existing solution, first and foremost, requires the ability to proficiently use the existing solution. Seriously, what makes you believe that you can build a better version, if you are not even capable of using the existing one?

You sound like someone who struggles with using an existing C++ compiler but who is at the same time convinced that they can create a better programming language and associated compiler for the task. You obviously can't, and the very fact that you are incapable of using the existing solution, clearly proves it. Someone who cannot even just use a C++ compiler, will not be able to write a new one, not even to save themselves from drowning.

In other words, you are convinced that you have good brains but in reality, from your behavior, we can all see that you have poor brains. If you had real knowledge or mastery of any subject at all, you would not suggest such approach.

Right. That's exactly the same thing

[godelian]

Right. That's exactly the same thing

We all know the natural numbers. It's just the sequence of 0,1,2,3 ...

We all know first-order logic. It's just propositional logic along with some symbols to express "for each" and "there exists".

Of course, you can now trivially invent your own quickly concocted version of first-order arithmetic.

No need for Peano's axiomatization. Everybody and their little sister can now do it between breakfast and lunch!

Why even read a book on it, indeed?

That would just be a "rip off book"!

You see, you somehow think that you can quickly invent your own axiomatization for morality, because at first glance it looks simple to do. However, anybody who has actually investigated the problem, knows exactly why it is not that simple.

You are incompetent. That is what explains your approach. You don't believe that it is needed to look at existing solutions, and learn from those, because you can just quickly concoct your own. No, you can't. You are a born idiot.

[accelafine]

You would be better off getting your 'moral code' from old Star Trek episodes.
Imagine getting your 'moral code' from an ideology that promotes paedophilia and the murder of 'infidels'. Treats women even worse than it treats dogs. Hates music. I can see why a monster like you would be attracted to it.
Christians don't get their 'moral code' from the OT. They know that would be silly. If they did then they would be killing their neighbour for mowing their lawns on a Sunday, or doing what your death cult does and kill people for burning it. That would be ridiculous don't you think?

[godelian]

They know that would be silly. If they did then they would be killing their neighbour for mowing their lawns on a Sunday, or doing what your death cult does and kill people for burning it. That would be ridiculous don't you think?

Christians only use the small Noahide core of the Old Testament's Jewish law. However, Orthodox Jews use the complete Mosaic law. Do they kill their neighbour for mowing their lawns on a Sabbath? Not that I know of.

Concerning reprisals for disrespect of religion, only disrespectful people complain about that. Approximately everybody else doesn't give a flying fart.

For example, if you talk shit to your man, which I reasonably suppose that you do, given the fact that you talk shit all the time, do you think that I care if he retaliates with a "fistful" of "domestic violence"? Of course, I don't.

I don't live in the West. I live in SE Asia. The rules are very natural here. People are friendly here, but if you insist and ask for shit, they'll definitely give you some, as they should.

[accelafine]

Master of deflection. It's just boring and pointless

[promethean75]

Oh thank Allah godelian isn't dead. I turn on the TV and 10,000 people have died in one of Allah's awesome southeast asian earthquakes. I'm like holy shit G's over there somewhere! So I race over here to make sure he's still going.

[godelian]

Master of deflection. It's just boring and pointless

I don't care that disrespectful people get roughed up disrespectfully. Seriously, why would I?

If they beat the shit out of you, the first question that you should ask yourself, is: Did I somehow ask for it?

If yes, then there is your answer!

[godelian]

Oh thank Allah godelian isn't dead. I turn on the TV and 10,000 people have died in one of Allah's awesome southeast asian earthquakes. I'm like holy shit G's over there somewhere! So I race over here to make sure he's still going.

I missed the ball by just a few hundred miles!

[promethean75]

i was in the 91 San Jose CA Sierra Madre earthquake 5.something one. Was in the shower when it hit. Threw me through the curtain and into the door. My african grey parrot is going nuts in the other room. Didn't bust anything up, but it did put me on my ass. Only quake i was ever in.

[accelafine]

'5' lol. A five is a slight, barely noticeable jolt. I've been in a 7.8. It was in the middle of the night and there was no point of reference so it just felt like the house turned upside down. Incredibly no damage to my house. It was all the shitty 'new builds' that suffered damage and became uninhabitable. With those countries where they have huge death tolls from the same sized quakes it's because of the shitty, corner-cutting building methods.