"Three Things You've Learned"

Jaywill/Sonship has a thread called 'the defeated Christian' on that topic. Its mostly nonsensical reasoning but its the kind of thread/doctrine that would appeal to those looking for justification for their sinful lifestyle.

Originally posted by Paul Dirac II
This is not quite on topic, but it might be worth mentioning.

I have read about twenty of Ann Rule's true crime books. I am no longer surprised when I read her saying that someone who attends Christian services and reads the Bible cheats on a spouse sexually. Most recent case was Diane Downs, in 'Small Sacrifices.'

Is there any real way for a Bible believer to rationalize that kind of behavior?

Originally posted by sonship

Jaywill/Sonship has a thread called 'the defeated Christian' on that topic. Its mostly nonsensical reasoning but its the kind of thread/doctrine that would appeal to those looking for justification for their sinful lifestyle.

The topic of [b]Gehenna and the defeated Christian is anything but what you say. It is rather the war ...[text shortened]... justifications for a sinful lifestyle ? Go over to the thread and demonstrate this absurdity.[/b]

Originally posted by Rajk999
Actually NO. The warning and incentive to be an overcoming Christian comes clearly from Christ in Matt 25 and all over the New Testament from the Apostles. Those who are obedient to the commandments of Christ [the sheep or those with oil in their lamps] get eternal life. Others get eternal damnation in the lake of fire.

You are claiming that there is a th ...[text shortened]... punished and then they are given eternal life. Thats your justification for the evil Christians.

1. That people can argue with one another, even sharply, and yet retain a cordial and even friendly relationship in their disagreement(s)—even over years or argument.

2. That Wittgenstein was right about (a) our ability to bewitch our minds with our own language, into thinking that what we are saying makes sense when it does not; and (b) such bewitchment often occurs when words that make perfect sense in one domain of discourse (“language game” ) are transferred to another domain of discourse (e.g., from poetry to propositional truth claims), without recognizing that the same sense (or perhaps any coherent sense) does not survive the transfer.

—This is not the fault of language, or the varying language games—the fault lies with our failure to distinguish the different usages. Wittgenstein also realized that there is no “perfect language” (and that he was wrong in his earlier work (the “Tractatus” ) to hold out for one; various language games, with different usages for the same words/phrases, may each valid for their purpose.

—Valid language games include such as: poetry/metaphor, story/myth, descriptive/factual, propositional, evocative/elicitive.

3. That there seems to be a positive (though not perfect) correlation between the capacity to (i) reject logic as the guarantor of coherence, and (ii) sling nasty responses at anyone who shows that some dearly-held belief or claim is, in fact, illogical (and hence senseless or absurd).

—2 and 3 often seem to be related.

Those are just three that come to mind today. I do not exempt myself from making the errors described in 2, at least on occasion.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Actually NO. The warning and incentive to be an overcoming Christian comes clearly from Christ in Matt 25 and all over the New Testament from the Apostles. Those who are obedient to the commandments of Christ [the sheep or those with oil in their lamps] get eternal life. Others get eternal damnation in the lake of fire.

You are claiming that there is a th ...[text shortened]... punished and then they are given eternal life. Thats your justification for the evil Christians.