Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #101
What about those who actually follow (what we are supposed to believe are) the teachings of their god?
For example, Nuns on a Bus?
No Wonder The "christians" Are So Full Of Bitter Hate
- Thread starter Luddly Neddite
- Start date
What about those who actually follow (what we are supposed to believe are) the teachings of their god?
For example, Nuns on a Bus?
Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #102
Again, you've nailed it.
Why are the supposedly real Christians defending those who do so much harm?
And, why do they seem to be so threatened by my words and my opinions?
Because if push comes to shove and most of the Christians you like go to their preachers and demand an answer to the question, "are non christians going to hell?", most of them are going to be shocked that most of their preachers are going to say yes they are going to go to hell.
Most Christians are cherry pickers. They pick the parts of their religion they like and throw out what they don't like. It's what everyone does.
emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Yes and no DT.
I know what it takes to bring those Christians under check
and it ISN'T the "same rejection and condemnation" that they are accused of doing, that doesn't work either!
we agree that doesn't work on us, why wouldn't we see it doesn't work on others either?
If you and DT and LN and others don't like when Christians preach to you that you are "wrong and contradictory"
what makes you think that is working for them? It doesn't, it makes the rejection worse, on both sides. Is that not obvious?
What does work is to address people as peers SUPPORTING each other in achieving goals EFFECTIVELY.
So yes, where you are doing that here, sincerely trying to correct a misperception from coming across negative,
I can see you are trying. THAT'S what it takes, but it must be done in the spirit of Inclusion not Rejection
or that creates a mutual fight.
And I see LN tries with me, because I do respond likewise.
But I don't see LN doing that with others. It takes so much to align on even one or two points of agreement.
LN struggles to do that with me, when I do reciprocate.
Of course it takes even MORE work to connect with others who DON'T reciprocate yet but reject!
You cannot rebuke a peer by standing above them and slapping them down. Both sides try that and it fails.
When we reach across and lend each other a helping hand to get out of the mutual mud,
maybe we have a chance to build trusting relations and common goals, and succeed.
That's the tougher path, but it works and as hard as it is, the rewards far outweigh the struggle.
The harder you have to work to restore a relationship from conflict, the greater benefits come from that reconciliation.
Thanks for being one who reciprocates and does try. We can only help others by example or it's so hard no one would try.
LN tries with me but it is very very hard. And I consider myself sympathetic compared with others.
LN and I see each other as going too far and taking one side to some negative extreme.
We have a lot of work to do, so can you imagine how much work it would take to reach these other people?
Just saying that those people are wrong is as futile and divisive as when they say the same.
You end up with angry people on both sides, thinking the other is being hateful and impossible to work with.
There are no shortcuts to making the necessary changes
that are mutual and deeprooted, not external but internal first.
We have to connect as equal peers on level ground of mutual respect.
And THEN after we agree to include each other, we can hash things out as equals.
without losing our footing and threatening to dump the other off the rope bridge we both depend on.
Why not struggle together on solid common ground.
But not as people fighting for positions in the pecking order of who has standing to say the other person is worse,
more hateful, wrong, etc. let's get off the jungle gym and stand on level ground if we are going to see eye to eye,
talk heart to heart and have a meeting of the minds.
We all have that drive for truth and justice and potential for great change,
but it takes a lot more effort than just pointing fingers and faults out at each other's expense.
What are we willing to invest in change, if we are asking others to?
I know what it takes to bring those Christians under check
and it ISN'T the "same rejection and condemnation" that they are accused of doing, that doesn't work either!
we agree that doesn't work on us, why wouldn't we see it doesn't work on others either?
If you and DT and LN and others don't like when Christians preach to you that you are "wrong and contradictory"
what makes you think that is working for them? It doesn't, it makes the rejection worse, on both sides. Is that not obvious?
What does work is to address people as peers SUPPORTING each other in achieving goals EFFECTIVELY.
So yes, where you are doing that here, sincerely trying to correct a misperception from coming across negative,
I can see you are trying. THAT'S what it takes, but it must be done in the spirit of Inclusion not Rejection
or that creates a mutual fight.
And I see LN tries with me, because I do respond likewise.
But I don't see LN doing that with others. It takes so much to align on even one or two points of agreement.
LN struggles to do that with me, when I do reciprocate.
Of course it takes even MORE work to connect with others who DON'T reciprocate yet but reject!
You cannot rebuke a peer by standing above them and slapping them down. Both sides try that and it fails.
When we reach across and lend each other a helping hand to get out of the mutual mud,
maybe we have a chance to build trusting relations and common goals, and succeed.
That's the tougher path, but it works and as hard as it is, the rewards far outweigh the struggle.
The harder you have to work to restore a relationship from conflict, the greater benefits come from that reconciliation.
Thanks for being one who reciprocates and does try. We can only help others by example or it's so hard no one would try.
LN tries with me but it is very very hard. And I consider myself sympathetic compared with others.
LN and I see each other as going too far and taking one side to some negative extreme.
We have a lot of work to do, so can you imagine how much work it would take to reach these other people?
Just saying that those people are wrong is as futile and divisive as when they say the same.
You end up with angry people on both sides, thinking the other is being hateful and impossible to work with.
There are no shortcuts to making the necessary changes
that are mutual and deeprooted, not external but internal first.
We have to connect as equal peers on level ground of mutual respect.
And THEN after we agree to include each other, we can hash things out as equals.
without losing our footing and threatening to dump the other off the rope bridge we both depend on.
Why not struggle together on solid common ground.
But not as people fighting for positions in the pecking order of who has standing to say the other person is worse,
more hateful, wrong, etc. let's get off the jungle gym and stand on level ground if we are going to see eye to eye,
talk heart to heart and have a meeting of the minds.
We all have that drive for truth and justice and potential for great change,
but it takes a lot more effort than just pointing fingers and faults out at each other's expense.
What are we willing to invest in change, if we are asking others to?
Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #106
Yes, Cafeteria Christians - we see that here every day. And, what catholic does not use birth control and many have had abortions.
But, IMO, they're welcome to believe that.
It doesn't affect me. Its just not part of my world in any way that I can think of.
I just sort of shrug my shoulders and shake my head.
Derideo_Te
Je Suis Charlie
- Mar 2, 2013
- 20,461
- 7,961
- 360
Perhaps Avatar can shed some light on why he feels threatened.
Of course that assumes that he does feel that way but judging by his posts he does.
Perhaps it is that "group" mentality thing. If you attack one then the rest automatically close ranks even though they are defending the indefensible. Can't say that I ever bought into that approach myself. If I make a mistake I admit it and don't need others to "defend" me. Then again I am self confident enough to not need to belong to a "group" so perhaps it is just a matter of those that do belong to religions lack self confidence.
If that premise is true then it would explain the antipathy towards public education where building self esteem improves test outcomes. Those with self esteem have less need to belong to "groups" which would mean they would be less likely to belong to a religion.
Be interesting to hear Avatar's take on this but I am going to go out on a limb here and predict that he will claim that he is not "threatened".
emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Hi Sealybobo thanks for your clarification.
I agree that secular laws are the key to resolving conflicts, but that the natural laws
INCLUDE all religions as the free choice of the person's spiritual or social identity.
because in practice the COMMUNICATION among the groups, and the entire human population
depends on the hierachies and structures that USE Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Left and Right politics
as their Language for forming Agreements among members of that IDENTITY. People's thinking
IS embedded with their language, and their natural or native religion IS part of their language, perception and identity.
If it is someone's native CULTURE, you can't reach that person as well by imposing a new one.
For example, when my mother didn't understand forgiveness as symbolized in Christianity,
she FINALLY got it when a Buddhist monk explained it as having "equal compassion for all people
REGARDLESS how they acted" because the point is to focus on ones own compassion that we can effect.
This is a spiritual connection that had to be made, and it happened using her Native Vietnamese Buddhist language
and commitment to following principles in Buddhism.
So I am not going to take someone's spiritual path in life and say it has to be taught through secular laws.
If someone understands forgiveness through Jesus on the Cross, and they need to use that symbolism, fine!
yes, the languages are made by man, but the divine spiritual connections are not something we can replace.
So I agree with you that YES the rise of the secular gentiles is the coming of the spirit of truth to be established
and this does happen through secular/natural laws.
Please remember we cannot take natural laws out of context with the whole set:
people's religious and spiritual paths and identity do require free speech and free exercise of religion
so this cannot be dictated just because we prefer other shortcuts. Not everyone thinks in our terms!
many groups NEED to connect and communicate through this religious channels to function within their communities.
Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #109
I agree that, FOR ME as well, "religion is made up and unnecessary". But some need it so much that they're able to get past the very obvious mental hurdles of the whole invisible sky fairy thing.
But then, these are the same people who believe in ghosties and ghoulies and long legged beasties. Referring again to the OP, I'm saying that I don't think its all that surprising that some actually believe zombies are a real thing and a real threat, for crying out loud!
Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #110
Perhaps Avatar can shed some light on why he feels threatened.
Of course that assumes that he does feel that way but judging by his posts he does.
Perhaps it is that "group" mentality thing. If you attack one then the rest automatically close ranks even though they are defending the indefensible. Can't say that I ever bought into that approach myself. If I make a mistake I admit it and don't need others to "defend" me. Then again I am self confident enough to not need to belong to a "group" so perhaps it is just a matter of those that do belong to religions lack self confidence.
If that premise is true then it would explain the antipathy towards public education where building self esteem improves test outcomes. Those with self esteem have less need to belong to "groups" which would mean they would be less likely to belong to a religion.
Be interesting to hear Avatar's take on this but I am going to go out on a limb here and predict that he will claim that he is not "threatened".
I believe that's why organized religion is so successful. If they didn't share some of these outrageous beliefs with others, how long would those beliefs last?
I remember, as a kid, when I first decided I could not share in the beliefs of those around me. I was swimming upstream and they felt threatened in the same way we have seen here. As a child, I wanted to fit in and be accepted but I just could not go along with the herd mentality that religion requires.
To each their own.
Derideo_Te
Je Suis Charlie
- Mar 2, 2013
- 20,461
- 7,961
- 360
Your approach is correct as long as you are dealing with reasonable and sane people, Emily.
But many of those that we are talking about don't fit that description. Trying to reason with the inreasonable is a fool's errand in my opinion. I no longer have the patience or time to waste for that matter. I have dealt with alcoholics in the past and they are all liars. They will agree with every word you say and then find another bottle to crawl inside. Those addicted to religion are no different in my experience.
So while I admire your willingness to reach out to all and sundry I am not that generous. Once I make a determination that I am dealing with a waste of time and bandwidth I buy them a one way ticket to Cyberia and move on.
Peace
DT
emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Perhaps Avatar can shed some light on why he feels threatened.
Of course that assumes that he does feel that way but judging by his posts he does.
Perhaps it is that "group" mentality thing. If you attack one then the rest automatically close ranks even though they are defending the indefensible. Can't say that I ever bought into that approach myself. If I make a mistake I admit it and don't need others to "defend" me. Then again I am self confident enough to not need to belong to a "group" so perhaps it is just a matter of those that do belong to religions lack self confidence.
If that premise is true then it would explain the antipathy towards public education where building self esteem improves test outcomes. Those with self esteem have less need to belong to "groups" which would mean they would be less likely to belong to a religion.
Be interesting to hear Avatar's take on this but I am going to go out on a limb here and predict that he will claim that he is not "threatened".
I believe that's why organized religion is so successful. If they didn't share some of these outrageous beliefs with others, how long would those beliefs last?
I remember, as a kid, when I first decided I could not share in the beliefs of those around me. I was swimming upstream and they felt threatened in the same way we have seen here. As a child, I wanted to fit in and be accepted but I just could not go along with the herd mentality that religion requires.
To each their own.
Well explained. For some people dealing with liberal politics feels like that,
like a bunch of brainwashed sheep herding.
It's not just religion but the abuse happens in politics.
I run into this constantly with my fellow Democrats.
but luckily, as with Christians I can talk with one on one,
I can do the same with fellow liberals and Democrats
and not get AS frustrated as people who give up and say they are mentally insane with denial.
I just ask that we be fair and inclusive.
if one person is going to say more of the religious right goes too far with the mob mentality/brainwashing herd mentality,
can we admit the far liberal left POLITICS (not the liberal members who remain independent)
but the Mob Minded Democrats who only care about electing a eprson with a D behind the name
also come across as cultish crazies who will not listen to reason but only push
agenda -- using the same "peer/group pressure" you complain about in religion.
Whatever this is, this "collective mentality" that is so easily abused in religions
is also criticized in politics: the left by the right, and the righ by the left.
can we agree it is caused by "collective numbers of people joining in sync"
and is not just the fault of religions, but any group that does this.
Heck the marketing trends to get little kids ramped up
or teens going crazy about this fad or that celebrity
also work on "mob mentality.' How is this only in religions and not
ANY collective institution involving masses of people connected by conscience.
Look at the media, isn't that abused the same way to herd people
around and get them to jump up and attack upon hearing a command word?
emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Well maybe you're right, and I've been taking for granted I have an automatic screening device.
Crazy people will run away and not bother with me.
Only nice sincerely committed people will finish a conversation with me
if they either CARE about the real solution and not just griping about the problems
or they are truly concerned I am off-base and need their help to fix that fault.
So maybe the only people I end up not chasing off
are the best of the best, the most sane, rational people
who are not only intelligent enough to explain and clarify points
but have personal integrity, commitment and compassion/forbearance/tolerance
to deal with the likes of me, and my holistic reforms that combine multiple problems into simpler solutions.
Anyone who isn't serious won't get far, but will likely
run off and write me off as the crazy person not worth hassling with.
Thanks DT
the fact that you look at points we can agree on
and help me clarify or fix the faults, is the right approach.
if you can help me, anyone can learn to work with anyone else.
I'm as taxing as the next person, and I am TRYING to work together.
so people afraid to even try, how impossible is that going to be?
Yarddog
Diamond Member
- Jun 13, 2014
- 20,265
- 15,053
- 2,405
If only people could get along , those are good ideas but the politicians thrive on pointing out our differences in order to get elected. In a way its just a lazyness on their part.
ninja007
Gold Member
Luddley- honest question. If we are so full of hate, why are you here every day? To srtaighten us out with MORE hate (of your own)?
Luddly Neddite
Diamond Member
- Sep 14, 2011
- 63,975
- 9,998
- 2,040
- Thread starter
- #116
That's hardly an "honest question" because I've never said anything even remotely like that. In point of FACT, I have repeatedly said that I have respect for real Christians and nothing but contempt for fraudulent, lying bible thumpers.
If you actually READ the OP and this thread, it concerns what I consider to be a very radical, anti-christian website that says it IS christian. I disagree.
If YOU say that I have said this website represents ALL christians, you are lying. Further, if you believe I am talking about you, I can only conclude you agree with the website I posted in the OP and which this thread is about.
You can lie and twist what I have actually said but that won't change the truth.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
There's a case to be made that inexperience and ignorance lead us to war.- Started by berg80
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Zone1 Are Leftists advancing Islamic lies guilty of treason?
- Started by Lisa558
- Replies: 9
-
Zone1 Beauty Culture and Works-Based Religions: Mormons and Amish- Started by SweetSue92
- Replies: 0
Latest Discussions
-
-
Government Control in the Digital Age ,.... Is it Truly "All Good"?
- Latest: TruthSeeker112125
