Christianity

[Immanuel Can]

You'd simply left me no term on which a reasonable answer was possible.

Look, dude, write out your damn answer as an essay like AJ does if you want to explain your convoluted defence of the indefensible on your own "reasonable" terms.

A "damn answer," eh?

Well, so now we have anew set of demands. Now you'd like an extended monologue?

I must say, Harry, it's a funny way to establish a philosophical discussion or arrive at any mutual understanding.

But perhaps that was never the goal in the first place...

[Harry Baird]

I repeat: Engage with my question directly and honestly or don't. It's clear at this point that so far you've chosen "don't". In that case, quit complaining and find something else to do.

[seeds]

Is it loving to condemn a person to an eternity of a hell which is, in your own words, "considerably worse than most people can even imagine"?

Yes/no answer preferred.

Well, would [...]

That's not an answer. Like henry, you dodge the question. Please answer directly.

Harry, you need to realize that because Mr. Can does not believe in or accept the very premise upon which Christianity is founded,...

(that being an inherited guilt derived from an "Original Sin" committed by Adam and Eve - an inherited guilt that needs a "savior" to wash clean from one's soul before dying)

...he therefore is not actually a Christian.

Now I'm not saying that he is wrong to deny the silly nonsense that humans can somehow inherit the guilt of an ancient ancestor's crimes (especially a mythological ancestor), for on that point I completely agree with him.

No, I'm just saying that it is somewhat disingenuous of him to quote the Bible and discuss the concept of Hell as if it was coming from the perspective of a bona fide (true) Christian.

In other words, like that extremely devout and pious Christian ✝ Donald Trump ✝ likes to call certain republicans "RINOs" (republicans in name only), Mr. Can appears to be a "CINO".

And when it comes to henry's take on the situation, he simply hasn't applied enough (if any) critical thought to the issue, for if he's going to insist that unrepentant murderers and thieves deserve an eternity of unimaginable torture,...

...then he needs to understand that because he is an American citizen and reaps the benefits of being a card-carrying member of an unrepentant society whose imperialistic government, murders vast numbers of humans all over the planet and then steals their resources,...

...then he's in for a big surprise come "judgment day" if he's under the impression than he's an innocent little angel just because he's not directly (hands-on) involved in the murders and thefts committed on his behalf in order to provide him with plenty of oil and gas, or anything else he might need.
_______

[Harry Baird]

Mr. Can does not believe in or accept the very premise upon which Christianity is founded,...

(that being an inherited guilt derived from an "Original Sin" committed by Adam and Eve - an inherited guilt that needs a "savior" to wash clean from one's soul before dying)

Huh. I didn't know that.

And when it comes to henry's take on the situation, he simply hasn't applied enough (if any) critical thought to the issue, for if he's going to insist that unrepentant murderers and thieves deserve an eternity of unimaginable torture,...

...then he needs to understand that because he is an American citizen and reaps the benefits of being a card-carrying member of an unrepentant society whose imperialistic government, murders vast numbers of humans all over the planet and then steals their resources,...

...then he's in for a big surprise come "judgment day" if he's under the impression than he's an innocent little angel just because he's not directly (hands-on) involved in the murders and thefts committed on his behalf in order to provide him with plenty of oil and gas, or anything else he might need.

I 100% affirm your condemnation of US imperialism and the selfish horrors committed by US imperialists. Complicity is a trickier question, but it's certainly possible to argue that if one had the reasonable means of acquiring the understanding of the perverse deeds that were committed in one's name and on one's behalf by the imperialists, but either chose not to acquire that understanding, or, when one acquired it, chose not to do anything about it, then one is complicit in those deeds, and shares in any punishment meted out by the infinitely-more-than-sadistic God in which Christians like Mr. Can believe.

[Immanuel Can]

Mr. Can does not believe in or accept the very premise upon which Christianity is founded,...

Seeds, I've straightened you out on this twice, in my memory...but you don't seem to stay straight.

I think a third time is unnecessary...and probably futile, anyway. I'll forego the pleasure, and let you go back and re-read, on the very slim chance you're sincerely interested in getting it right.

[Immanuel Can]

I repeat: Engage with my question directly and honestly

I was.

You didn't like it. What you wanted was for me to capitulate to your suppositions, instead, it seems.

[Harry Baird]

But no. He just keeps on whinging. Can anybody believe this guy?

[henry quirk]

Anyhow, we've probably hashed this out as much as we can without endless repetition, so, unless anything new comes up, it seems best for me to leave it at that.

Okay.

[Immanuel Can]

But no. He just keeps on whinging. Can anybody believe this guy?

We can be done. I'll leave it there.

[Age]

No...name one.

I'm sure you can find one yourself...

No, you. Name one.

You cannot.

All your ancient "preachers" are gone and forgotten. None of them had any impact at all. You can't even remember one name.

But Jesus Christ...that's a name you won't forget. And after all this time, you should ask yourself why...

Because people like you keep using that name.

[Age]

He set the consequence, yes

Yes, according to the Story. The point is that this consequence is manifestly outrageous; totally incompatible with any reasonable conception of God.

And the Christian God probably thinks murder, rape, and slavin' is outrageous and totally incompatible with what He envisioned human beings to be. You see finite crime, He sees an affront to Creation.

LOL

God KNOWS EXACTLY the reason WHY 'you', adult human beings, were created and have evolved doing the Wrong things in Life, which 'you' ALL DO.

What 'you' do is NOT outrageous, NOT totally incompatible, NOR an affront AT ALL.

In fact that 'you' ALL do Wrong was and still IS a very specific and very purposeful part of Creation, Itself. Of which you are YET to SEE and UNDERSTAND.

[Immanuel Can]

I'm sure you can find one yourself...

No, you. Name one.

You cannot.

All your ancient "preachers" are gone and forgotten. None of them had any impact at all. You can't even remember one name.

But Jesus Christ...that's a name you won't forget. And after all this time, you should ask yourself why...

Because people like you keep using that name.

Our whole culture, our literature, our ethics, our history, our conversation, our art, our social structures, our foreign relations, even our science and medicine, and our religiosity are all rife with mention of Him, far more than anybody else. Even when our crude folks swear, they resort to His name...precisely because it's the most sacred thing they can purport to defile. Ironic, isn't it?

So it isn't just "people like me." It's everybody in Western culture, and a whole lot of other people, too.

[promethean75]

"Even when our crude folks swear, they resort to His name...precisely because it's the most sacred thing they can purport to defile. Ironic, isn't it?"

in fact, when one blurts out 'goddamit' or 'the goddamn thing, etc.', they are actually expressing a request that god appear and condemn the thing or situation one is in. think about the phrase: god damn it! shorthand for 'damn it to hell!' it's aksing if god would damn the thing, make it stop, curse the thing, destroy it, sumthin, but get rid of it. the phrase is a call for god's aid and not blasphemous at all.

You silly christians come up with some crazy stuff bro.

[henry quirk]

henry's take on the situation...

...is hypothetical. I'm not a Christian, I do not believe we have an afterlife waitin' for us with eternal rewards or punishments, and my God (who I believe is the God), well, He's absent (we're on our own).

Unlike you fellas, I'm not lookin' to dismantle or reform or discredit (formal) Christianity. I just take it as it is and have argued from what I find there.

-----

he needs to understand...

What I know is: I'm a free man with a natural, inalienable, right to my, and no one else's, life, liberty, and property.

What I know is: I didn't create The State, I don't support The State, and I'm not responsible for the actions of The State and its agents.

What I know is: I don't profit offa The State.

So, seeds, my good, good friend, you can peddle that wagonload of manure elsewhere cuz I ain't buyin' it.

[Immanuel Can]

"Even when our crude folks swear, they resort to His name...precisely because it's the most sacred thing they can purport to defile. Ironic, isn't it?"

in fact, when one blurts out 'goddamit' or 'the goddamn thing, etc.',

I wasn't referring to that particular utterance. I was speaking of other specific uses of the Name.

But now that you mention it, talking like that, condemning people and things, is also forbidden. Rather, one is expected to "Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse." (Romans 12:14).

Of course, those are instructions to Christians, primarily...