Originally posted by @sonshipUnlike you, I stand by everything I have said. There is the question I asked, still: I am not asking you to "stand in for Dasa". I am saying you have chosen to debate "Christian morals" with me by comparing me to various animals, just like Dasa used to. Do you think he was right to do so? Or does he have to have YOUR religious text to back up such comparisons ~ and not his own?
Instead of me standing in for Dasa (I am not Hindu), how about you consider was it right for you a dozen or so times to characterize my posts as you have ?
Originally posted by @sonshipI think, when it comes to "morality", you are an utterly vacuous commentator. It stems from your own Orwellian definition of "perfect morality".
You eloquently crafted pretty bad characterizations of my posts here.
Here you had the chance to nail down a real world, real lives, action-behaviour-conduct definition of "Christian morals" and you've talked, instead, about little else other than your 'thoughts about stuff' and fling up some long include-the-kitchen-sink texts that you could have flung up in 'answer' to any topic on any day.
When your evasions didn't do the trick, you moved on to some of your go-to stuff about "poison", and the "cancer" and the "nasty swine" and the "vicious pigs" and the "hate speech" and the "dogs". I think all this is a pretty good characterization of your posts here.
Originally posted by @sonshipLook, I don't much care if your religious fervour makes you a rather vain and bitter little ideologue who quite often says stuff he wishes he 'had phrased somewhat differently'.
Okay, some posts I wish I had phrased somewhat differently.
I'll take responsibility for those posts.
Don't ask me which ones. Its a thing of the past.
If you regret some of your posts in the past [and want to keep which ones you mean secret] I really do not care.
You have claimed that Jesus and the "Holy Spirit" are working through you. So, I will assume that the demeanour you display has got something to do with your perception of who those supernatural beings are, and how you think they want you to conduct yourself.
Meanwhile, I too take responsibility for all my posts.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @fmfI think, when it comes to "morality", you are an utterly vacuous commentator. It stems from your own Orwellian definition of "perfect morality".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The significant thing is this pesky person in human history, Jesus Christ.
Now you are welcome to submit here who YOU think was a more impressive example of human virtue.
Do you have someone else from the annals of human history as a more perfect display of man's highest moral virtues?
Here you had the chance to nail down a real world, real lives, action-behaviour-conduct definition of "Christian morals" and you've talked, instead, about little else other than your 'thoughts about stuff' and fling up some long include-the-kitchen-sink texts that you could have flung up in 'answer' to any topic on any day.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And your next eloquently phrased diatribe will directly address my question.
WHO ELSE in the annals of human history other than Jesus would you submit was a more perfect display of the highest of human morality?
When your evasions didn't do the trick, you moved on to some of your go-to stuff about "poison", and the "cancer" and the "nasty swine" and the "vicious pigs" and the "hate speech" and the "dogs". I think all this is a pretty good characterization of your posts here.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lastingness of the Christian church through turmoil and persecution, troubles within and without is a testimony of the durability of the high ethical living of its constituents.
Now, you're going to tell us the other most striking example of a splendid display of the very best in human beings beside Jesus Christ.
I am open to your candidates.
And if you HAVE NONE or you DODGE or you EVADE or some other trick, I give you my reply in advance -
THAT is precisely why it behooves me to listen so intently to the words of Jesus and let them impact my heart and living. No one else compares to Christ.
Now you're going to hold forth another candidate which demonstrates that Jesus was no big deal in the area of the manifestation of the highest ethical living.
You submit ___________ ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @fmfYou have claimed that Jesus and the "Holy Spirit" are working through you.
Look, I don't much care if your religious fervour makes you a rather vain and bitter little ideologue who quite often says stuff he wishes he 'had phrased somewhat differently'.
If you regret some of your posts in the past [and want to keep which ones you mean secret] I really do not care.
You have claimed that Jesus and the "Holy Spirit" are working th ...[text shortened]... k they want you to conduct yourself.
Meanwhile, I too take responsibility for all my posts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusively ME as if I am a special prophetic voice ?
Nice try.
Whoever receives Christ has in principle the same Spirit of Christ.
So, I will assume that the demeanour you display has got something to do with your perception of who those supernatural beings are, and how you think they want you to conduct yourself.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As hard as you try to say "Its WEIRD to believe in God" and weirder still to be enthusiastic about God, it comes over pretty vacuous. (thanks for a useful word).
Sorry FMF, there is a spiritual dimension to human life.
If you work on trying to prove fellowship with God is weird and superstitious you are only short changing your own total humanity.
Normal human living includes fellowship with God.
One can learn the difference between God contacting faith and presumption.
Your line of criticism is that ALL such belief in fellowship with God is false assumption.
That is a short changing of your own healthy human experience.
That's your, like, taking a six cylinder car and insisting that only two or three cylinders make it operate normally.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Elizabeth Elliot's husband (Jim Elliot) was speared to death by indigenous people in Ecuador. With him three other missionaries were murdered by the men. They didn't want to be bothered by the outside world.
In her book Through Gates of Splendor she tells the story of how she then took her little daughter and went into the forrest of these dangerous people to finish the work of teaching them about Jesus.
The man who killed her husband became her friend. She also led him to Christ.
I think she showed an impressive example of the power of Christ's love and forgiveness working in her life.
I expect old FMF to get busy working now to suspiciously discredit Elizabeth Elliot's experience of deep consecration to living by Jesus Christ.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
That's three examples now of Christian living I consider unique.
Stay tuned for FMF's ONE example hopefully of a name more impressive in history in displaying the most ethical human living.
Now you're going to hold forth another candidate which demonstrates that Jesus was no big deal in the area of the manifestation of the highest ethical living.
You submit ___________ ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
The unique lives and deaths of the first apostles.
A few disclaimers;
1.) I do no know this history other than it is traditionally recorded.
Only James and Stephen we are told of the manner of his death in the New Testament.
2.) This video is conveyed with an artist's imagination.
We have no idea what these men looked like.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerIs it ok to be in the “don’t know” camp now?
Do you know that he is not?
Originally posted by @dj2beckerReady when you are Fetchmypecker.
Still no answer from you.
Originally posted by @sonship
The whole world is said to lie IN the evil one - Satan.
That's why the whole world needs the Savior Christ.
The whole world has also been deceived by Satan.
[b] " ... the ancient serpent, he who is called the Devil and Satan, he who deceives the whole world ... " (See Rev. 12:9)
Of course the New Testament does not make belie ...[text shortened]... e. Say it that Jesus died for me. Stop dodging my questions. Say it again Jesus died for WHO ??"[/b]Or maybe it would be better if you dialled back the pious pretence and just admitted that all this nonsense you spout about who is and who isn’t Satan followers, is just a way for you to throw insults at people you disapprove of.
Originally posted by @sonshipThe degree to which you are personally impressed and obsessed by the cult of personality that has been built up around Jesus is of no importance to me, nor to the questions of mine that have so ruffled your feathers.
Do you have someone else from the annals of human history as a more perfect display of man's highest moral virtues?
I am asking you questions about what you are claiming "Christian morals" are, and you are going to great lengths to deflect and dodge.
Just because you are a superstitious man, it does not mean I have to trump your religious doctrine with some religious doctrine of my own that you might like even more.
I do not have to compete with elaborate, convoluted and often incoherent stories about supernatural beings communicating with you with some elaborate, convoluted stories of my own.
You are here propagating an ideology on a debate and discussion forum. Your reaction to dissent and scrutiny ~ which a Muslim or a Jew or a Hindu would be subjected to as well if he or she were seeking to preach in the same way~ from time to time boils over in a cloud of dented vanity just like this.
Your inability to answer my questions [and the furious indignation and tangential lashing out that are the upshot] is not mitigated or disguised one little bit by you touting what you see as the"highest moral virtues" of a quasi-historical figure about whom the only information we have was written by people trying to build a breakaway religion.
Nor do any of those "highest moral virtues" seem to have rubbed off on you.
Now, you've used this rhetorical 'who do you reckon is better than Jesus' device many, many times before. And you know what I think of it. I do not have to offer you an alternative religion, or an alternative supernatural explanation, or an alternative religious figure that you like more than the ones you already like in order to tackle you on claims you make in public.
Read this and understand it. There is no need for you to repeat your deflecting question related to how impressed you are by the Jesus story over and over again. It does not address my questions on "Christian morals".
Are "Christian morals" just ordinary morals but applied while thinking stuff about yourself and thinking about Christ?
Originally posted by @sonshipHow does your story about Elizabeth Elliot answer my questions about "Christian morals"?
Elizabeth Elliot's husband (Jim Elliot) was speared to death by indigenous people in Ecuador. With him three other missionaries were murdered by the men. They didn't want to be bothered by the outside world.
In her book [b]Through Gates of Splendor she tells the story of how she then took her little daughter and went into the forrest of these dange ...[text shortened]... iciously discredit Elizabeth Elliot's experience of deep consecration to living by Jesus Christ.[/b]
Originally posted by @sonshipYou have quite proudly stated that you don't read anything I write - or any threads I start - about spiritual matters. If you did, you'd know that I believe it is exactly the other way around vis a vis your six cylinders v two or three cylinders analogy.
Your line of criticism is that ALL such belief in fellowship with God is false assumption. That is a short changing of your own healthy human experience. That's your, like, taking a six cylinder car and insisting that only two or three cylinders make it operate normally.
Being the vain and oblivious soliloquist that you are, you have never shown any interest in discussing what I [and several others here, I imagine] see as the "shortchanging of [what should be] the healthy human experience" that being a religionist involves.
It's ironic that you should use that turn of phrase, as it is almost exactly the same way as I put it in many of those sincere efforts to discuss such matters with various people here, all of which you took great care to ignore and avoid.
If being superstitious and religious brings you solace and gives you purpose in life, then good for you.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @fmfMeanwhile, I too take responsibility for all my posts.
If you regret some of your posts in the past [and want to keep which ones you mean secret] I really do not care.
You have claimed that Jesus and the "Holy Spirit" are working th k they want you to conduct yourself.
Meanwhile, I too take responsibility for all my posts.[/b]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I take responsibility for mine.
Look, I don't much care if your religious fervour makes you a rather vain and bitter little ideologue who quite often says stuff he wishes he 'had phrased somewhat differently'.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like I await your approval ?