Religion and Ethics

[Natural Citizen]

I know exactly who you're talking about and here's my reaction: NOOOOOOooooooOOOOOOooooooOOOOOO!!!!!



Actually, on second thought, you probably do have a good point that he would liven up the religion subforum. He's like a lightning rod for controversy. The problem, imo, is that some people wrongly assume that what he is talking about is actual Christianity, but it's not. Calvinism is wrong and demonic, iyam!

I think the moral of the story is be careful what you ask for. You just might get it. Then you have to ask yourself if you're actually ready for what you've asked for. Like his beliefs or not, he'll force you to defend your position. Well...let's say that he'd definitely invite the opportunity if one so desires that level of dialogue.

I dunno. I'll have to think on it. USMB may it be ready. But there certainly would be ample opportunity to defend one's beliefs in a strictly biblical way and to show off their understanding. Or lack thereof in some instances, without having to deal with the antics of non-believers just looking to disrupt and cause flotsam and jetsam.

I always did enjoy reading the faith based stuff back then. Of course, I egged him on a lot, too, so. lol. Boy, did he pee on everyone's Cheerios. But he was civil about it, though.

Yes, I agree that posters like him definitely force one to defend their position. So it does bring about interesting and more in-depth debates. Sometimes though, you get others who are misguided getting into it with him, so it's like the blind leading the blind. And then those who are on the fence reading the thread but not posting can get the wrong idea about Christianity. To put it bluntly, Calvinists like him tend to turn people away from God and Christianity.

Not to get off topic, but it's unfortunate that there are believers who are correct on SOME things, but they completely leave out one of the most (if not the most) important attributes of God, love. As it says in 1 Corinthians 13, it doesn't matter if one has knowledge, faith that can move mountains, gifts and talents, etc... they are nothing but a clanging cymbal without love. That's what comes to mind when I think of that dude, a clanging cymbal. haha (but maybe I'm being too hard on him?)

Yeah, those debates did get rather heated at times. I don't remember any cusses or anything lke that, though. No personal attacks or anything like that.

It's possible that some of it may have turned the casual passer-by away, but I think mainly because the dialogue was so complex. You really had to be aware of the conversation, the references and the different belief systems to follow conversation. Particularly with the Calvinist because you have to actually know your scripture to know when it's being proof-texted and when tenor is being disregarded.

I dunno. You're probably right. I'm not even on here much anymore anyway. The thread just reminded me of him for some reason.

 

[buttercup]

A hardcore Calvinist who, as NC put it, peed in everyone's cheerios

So kinda the same as the Atheists in the religion forum

In the sense of being trollish and disruptive, yes! (what I mean by that is it doesn't matter what the topic of the thread was, he would never respect that and ALWAYS try to derail it into a discussion about Calvinism) At least that's my thought on it. But yeah, it reminds me of some of the atheist trolls here who try to derail every thread, some with the same rhetoric every time, like broken records.

 

[DudleySmith]

I know exactly who you're talking about and here's my reaction: NOOOOOOooooooOOOOOOooooooOOOOOO!!!!!



Actually, on second thought, you probably do have a good point that he would liven up the religion subforum. He's like a lightning rod for controversy. The problem, imo, is that some people wrongly assume that what he is talking about is actual Christianity, but it's not. Calvinism is wrong and demonic, iyam!

I think the moral of the story is be careful what you ask for. You just might get it. Then you have to ask yourself if you're actually ready for what you've asked for. Like his beliefs or not, he'll force you to defend your position. Well...let's say that he'd definitely invite the opportunity if one so desires that level of dialogue.

I dunno. I'll have to think on it. USMB may it be ready. But there certainly would be ample opportunity to defend one's beliefs in a strictly biblical way and to show off their understanding. Or lack thereof in some instances, without having to deal with the antics of non-believers just looking to disrupt and cause flotsam and jetsam.

I always did enjoy reading the faith based stuff back then. Of course, I egged him on a lot, too, so. lol. Boy, did he pee on everyone's Cheerios. But he was civil about it, though.

Yes, I agree that posters like him definitely force one to defend their position. So it does bring about interesting and more in-depth debates. Sometimes though, you get others who are misguided getting into it with him, so it's like the blind leading the blind. And then those who are on the fence reading the thread but not posting can get the wrong idea about Christianity. To put it bluntly, Calvinists like him tend to turn people away from God and Christianity.

Not to get off topic, but it's unfortunate that there are believers who are correct on SOME things, but they completely leave out one of the most (if not the most) important attributes of God, love. As it says in 1 Corinthians 13, it doesn't matter if one has knowledge, faith that can move mountains, gifts and talents, etc... they are nothing but a clanging cymbal without love. That's what comes to mind when I think of that dude, a clanging cymbal. haha (but maybe I'm being too hard on him?)

You have the rest of us curious. What is this name that shall not be mentioned?

Borat?

 

[emilynghiem]

What you guys need in the religion section is a very persistent Calvinist.

And I might know just the one, too.

buttercup what do you think? You know who I'm talking about.

Could you imagine him on here? Oh boy! Gare awn teed the religion sub forum would be lively and everyone would have the opportunity to consistently discuss theology in an elevated manner.

I know exactly who you're talking about and here's my reaction: NOOOOOOooooooOOOOOOooooooOOOOOO!!!!!



Actually, on second thought, you probably do have a good point that he would liven up the religion subforum. He's like a lightning rod for controversy. The problem, imo, is that some people might wrongly assume that what he is talking about is actual Christianity, but it's not. Calvinism is wrong and demonic, iyam!

Whoever you are talking about, as long as they are open to mutual change that occurs by sharing and synchronizing with others, this will help reinvigorate discussion and growth in the forum.

As for the most inciteful person I ever debated with or tried to, "Troy Brooks" had a website (Biblocality where he moderated his own forum linked there as "Parture") and tried to direct traffic there from other religion or Christian forums.

It ended up being the biggest trolling trap ever. He could not handle anything than other people agreeing, or else he would denounce and cut you off. He would ban anyone who disagreed (without any means of answering or correcting the offense) thus his religious teachings were right by default with no dissension.

He absolutely could not tolerate any of my toleration of other denominations or teachings.

I was surprised to find out, after I had tried to support ongoing communications and sharing with him, that there were multiple complaints about this guy!
I was like starting a conversation online with a new person because you find them on a forum and they introduce you to their website. But then you find out this guy is famous for trolling people, trying to find recruits for his Arminianist preaching.

This was my first experience coming across someone caught up in the whole Arminianism vs Calvinism contest.

If you really wanted to sink the religion forum like the Titanic hitting the ice of hell freezing over, maybe invite that guy to debate your Calvinist friend. And watch matter and anti matter implode against each other...

Why Do Calvinists and Arminians Disagree So Strongly?

Compare Calvinism vs. Arminianism side by side and learn why these doctrines form one of the most divisive debates in the history of the church.

www.learnreligions.com

Troy Brooks

Troy Brooks from Biblocality has been a persistent critic of Matt Slick and CARM. He elevates secondary issues to the place of essentials.

carm.org

Correspondence with Pelgian Troy Brooks

www.angelfire.com

 

[emilynghiem]

Is there a possibility of moving Religious and Ethics to Zone one?

I'm tired of chasing down trolls that only want to bash religion.

Dear WillHaftawaite
How about creating a bashing zone WITHIN the Religion and Ethics section.

Anyone who exceeds 3 posts that have to be deleted by Mods, after receiving 3 warnings to stop trolling posts that attack people personally without answering the OP topic, will not be allowed to post in R&E except in the bashing subforum. So R&E could have its own "flame zone subsection". The posts that get deleted can just be moved there, so the posters who want to troll and bash can continue all they want.

Can the derailing posts and posters be separated from the good content on each thread so the whole thing isn't moved to bashing land?

Can user accounts be blocked from posting on particular threads or from the entire R&E section and be exiled to the bashing section?

Maybe we can call it the Lion's Den.
For atheists and religionists to just clobber each other there.

Is there a way to separate a place for religious and antireligious bashing WITHOUT creating more work or headaches for Mods?

 

[flacaltenn]

Clearly intent upon picking a fight, starting out blanket attacking all atheists. Were you previously aware that we have "a manuscript"? You agree with that raving lunacy? Pretty much said the same earlier, did ya?

Simple concept here GrumbleBear -- attacking one's side "platform or manuscripts" when you HAVE NONE of the SAME and refuse to see all the good qualities of religious identity is stupid and foolish. And it's never a fair fight. Let all these Atheists admit that their identity is UNFAILING CONFIDENCE in the INFALLIBILITY of human decisions and law making (AKA Secular Humanists) and we can FAIRLY make that discussion and debate into something worthwhile.

UNFAILING CONFIDENCE in HUMAN AUTHORITY on morals and ethics is a fool's errand..

Know-nothing?
Wannabe?
So this is where he's personally attacking me, though I'm not saying you should have known that. He and I did. That's certain and what a great example to choose after I had already copped to ignorantly misusing the phrase within the thread he was referring to. Oh, that flacal.. he's just being such a smart, kind, loving, tolerant, well behaved, swell guy here.. what a moral machine!

I have no freakin idea what thread you're referring to and you were not "top of mind" when I wrote about CLOWNS and JOKERS destroying threads on Religion.. I even gave an example of responding to a thread on a particular verse in Matthew about smart asses leaping in to mock faith as "believing in the spaghetti monster".. IF YOU WROTE THAT -- I was completely unaware that it was you.. You're paranoid. Must live in a gangha legal state --- EH???

Seems pretty lame to me, fearing while smearing some nonspecific "other" out loud and in ALL CAPS. A whine left begging for a quoted example. Oh well, "I agree. That was what I pretty much said earlier in the thread. It's a bunch of nonsense."

I've done NOTHING to proselytize organized religion here. Only defending "people of faith" for the HUMILITY and DISCIPLINE and their pro-active humanitarianism.. About which -- it's indisputable that they excel over the arrogance of secular humanism..

And the entire purpose was "live and let live" as far as respecting a certain forum. Or AT THE LEAST, dont leap in to destroy topics that dont involve you -- dont interest you -- and that you dont want to discuss -- just to make generalizations about the existence of God or articles of faith..

EVERYONE makes life altering decisions based on faith.. Like whether to keep your doors double locked at all times... The "spaghetti monster" might be trying to do a home invasion.. Ya never know..

 

[flacaltenn]

Can user accounts be blocked from posting on particular threads or from the entire R&E section and be exiled to the bashing section?

Maybe we can call it the Lion's Den.
For atheists and religionists to just clobber each other there

Individuals can be blocked from INDIVIDUAL forums.. We rarely use this unless the member has shown an unnatural urge to bully, threaten or constantly derail threads in that forum.. Cant FORCE a member to prefer one forum over another.

And as far as "The Lions Den:".. That's what the Religion Forum has turned into because instead of discussing religious issues, it's a Ground Hog Day of "you're stupid -- your god doesnt exist" Forum..

 

[Grumblenuts]

I even gave an example of responding to a thread on a particular verse in Matthew about smart asses leaping in to mock faith as "believing in the spaghetti monster".. IF YOU WROTE THAT -- I was completely unaware that it was you.. You're paranoid. Must live in a gangha legal state --- EH???

So your ignorance means I'm paranoid. Okay, whatever man
Apology accepted and I forgive you

Only defending "people of faith" for the HUMILITY and DISCIPLINE and their pro-active humanitarianism.. About which -- it's indisputable that they excel over the arrogance of secular humanism..

Yeah, you're entitled. There are alternative "manuscripts" and so forth, but you just keep pounding and enjoy

 

[flacaltenn]

I even gave an example of responding to a thread on a particular verse in Matthew about smart asses leaping in to mock faith as "believing in the spaghetti monster".. IF YOU WROTE THAT -- I was completely unaware that it was you.. You're paranoid. Must live in a gangha legal state --- EH???

So your ignorance means I'm paranoid. Okay, whatever man
Apology accepted and I forgive you

Only defending "people of faith" for the HUMILITY and DISCIPLINE and their pro-active humanitarianism.. About which -- it's indisputable that they excel over the arrogance of secular humanism..

Yeah, you're entitled. There are alternative "manuscripts" and so forth, but you just keep pounding and enjoy

I'll give you an apology right now for ------------------------- whatever it is you PERCIEVE i did wrong to you.. I just dont understand the case against me here..

 

[Grumblenuts]

You're graciously forgiven, regardless

Oh, and I apologize for the deficiencies you've perceived in me. All water under the bridge.

 

[emilynghiem]

I even gave an example of responding to a thread on a particular verse in Matthew about smart asses leaping in to mock faith as "believing in the spaghetti monster".. IF YOU WROTE THAT -- I was completely unaware that it was you.. You're paranoid. Must live in a gangha legal state --- EH???

So your ignorance means I'm paranoid. Okay, whatever man
Apology accepted and I forgive you

Only defending "people of faith" for the HUMILITY and DISCIPLINE and their pro-active humanitarianism.. About which -- it's indisputable that they excel over the arrogance of secular humanism..

Yeah, you're entitled. There are alternative "manuscripts" and so forth, but you just keep pounding and enjoy

^ RE: "alternative manuscripts"
I align with the Universalist and Bahai approach that each group's own Scriptures or teachings are expressions of universal laws and truth. Just relative expressions that speak to that culture, tribe or generation of history.

In addition, I believe the same spirit of Justice (which Christians identity as the central authority of Justice) fulfills all laws equally, the same way Christians embody their laws through Christ or by conscience.

There is no need to compete between these laws. All are valid for communicating and establishing agreement with members of the audience that speaks and responds to that language for the laws.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Trolling Atheists sure do make good "victims" when confronted about their behavior

 

[DudleySmith]

I even gave an example of responding to a thread on a particular verse in Matthew about smart asses leaping in to mock faith as "believing in the spaghetti monster".. IF YOU WROTE THAT -- I was completely unaware that it was you.. You're paranoid. Must live in a gangha legal state --- EH???

So your ignorance means I'm paranoid. Okay, whatever man
Apology accepted and I forgive you

Only defending "people of faith" for the HUMILITY and DISCIPLINE and their pro-active humanitarianism.. About which -- it's indisputable that they excel over the arrogance of secular humanism..

Yeah, you're entitled. There are alternative "manuscripts" and so forth, but you just keep pounding and enjoy

What do you want a 'manuscript' to say? I can type you up one made to order if you want, and in fact those are all over the innernetz. I prefer real ones, since I don't have any personal snivels that require whining and crying over what is in the original and legitimate ones, so I don't need to rewrite anything to suit myself. For an additional fee, we can even put it on a web page so you can 'link' to it; 'links' are of course proof of stuff on the innernetz.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I prefer real ones, since I don't have any personal snivels that require whining and crying over what is in the original and legitimate ones.

Asked and answered then. You see some as "real" and "original." I see others as likely far more current, helpful, and useful to people with real problems. But the old ones remain propped up by the established order to retain their dominion. So we get stuck teaching, promoting, and celebrating long outdated silliness and never adapt to our inevitable growth and change, calling for novel approaches.

 

[DudleySmith]

I prefer real ones, since I don't have any personal snivels that require whining and crying over what is in the original and legitimate ones.

Asked and answered then. You see some as "real" and "original." I see others as likely far more current, helpful, and useful to people with real problems. But the old ones remain propped up by the established order to retain their dominion. So we get stuck teaching, promoting, and celebrating long outdated silliness and never adapt to our inevitable growth and change, calling for novel approaches.

So God has told you to write some new books, because he just happens to agree with you on everything? lol okay.

 

[Grumblenuts]

So God has told you to write some new books, because he just happens to agree with you on everything? lol okay.

So your god told you to give up attempting to be decent, logical, or coherent? haha, okay

 

[Sunsettommy]

Trolling Atheists sure do make good "victims" when confronted about their behavior

Ha ha, thank you for admitting Atheists gets trolled.

 

[DudleySmith]

So God has told you to write some new books, because he just happens to agree with you on everything? lol okay.

So your god told you to give up attempting to be decent, logical, or coherent? haha, okay

I'm not religious, but sorry, next time we will try and not post over your head. This is a maybe, not a promise, so don't run and show mommy just yet.

 

[DudleySmith]

Trolling Atheists sure do make good "victims" when confronted about their behavior

Ha ha, thank you for admitting Atheists gets trolled.

Just the ones who have nothing but cut and paste rubbish and are tolling themselves, cuz one time faggots got all upset by Jerry Falwell and told them to, and all the doper lemmings are still running around babbling their fake memes. 'Libertarians' out in the Burbs are particularly gullible and fall for the

I prefer real ones, since I don't have any personal snivels that require whining and crying over what is in the original and legitimate ones.

Asked and answered then. You see some as "real" and "original." I see others as likely far more current, helpful, and useful to people with real problems. But the old ones remain propped up by the established order to retain their dominion. So we get stuck teaching, promoting, and celebrating long outdated silliness and never adapt to our inevitable growth and change, calling for novel approaches.

Yet you faux 'intellectuals' have yet to post anything remotely critical of bizarre nonsense like Hindusm or Buddhism, the latter the ultimate pursuit of mindless narcissism, you just make lots of noise over over old school Hebrewism and Christianity. Too bad that gives you all away, so we need not feel bad about your unhappiness with 'religion' as you want to rewrite for yourself.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Trolling Atheists sure do make good "victims" when confronted about their behavior

Ha ha, thank you for admitting Atheists gets trolled.

Trolling atheists have reading comprehension problems too, I see