The New Christian Thread 3

[MuscleXtreme]

Finished up that White debate.

White went at it hard and demolished Shabir on his final cross - examination. All Shabir could do was point to the OT, which White had already handled in his opening monolog.

[Harbinger]

A couple questions for you; 1.) So miracles cant happen because other people die? And, 2) whats the point of a miracle?


*Not looking for a right or wrong answer, just looking for your thoughts...

I guess big picture, I'm thinking that the universe behaves like there is no omnibenevolent being watching over us. That things good and bad just seem to happen randomly.

[lasher]

Finished up that White debate.

White went at it hard and demolished Shabir on his final cross - examination. All Shabir could do was point to the OT, which White had already handled in his opening monolog.

according to uwootm8 white didn't address any of Shabir's points

[MuscleXtreme]

according to uwootm8 white didn't address any of Shabir's points

Shabir: Matthew didn't write Matthew

White: Who did?

Shabir: Well scholars say Matthew didn't write Matthew, because scholars say Matthew came after Mark and has similar wording to Mark.

White: Which scholars?

Shabir: Dutton


I'm surprised White didnt bring up when Thomas said, "My Lord and my God".

[MuscleXtreme]

So self-defense is something that I've struggled with Scripturally. I'm hoping my Catholic brah's can help me out with this; perhaps even an Orthodox brah if the Orthodox Church has anything to say about it.

I was digging through the Catholic Church's Catechism and I came across:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p3s2c2a5.htm

Legitimate defense

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68

I was curious to see where these were grounded in Scripture? Thanks for the help!

[GreatOldOne]

There is no need for self defense. Otherwise, Jesus would not have been crucified.

Matthew 6:26 "Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they?"

What could you do in your own defense that God could not?

[Turbomunkey]

Anyone on here follow walter vieth?

Checking hm out now. Just finished white debate

[MuscleXtreme]

Checking hm out now. Just finished white debate

What did you think?

[Turbomunkey]

What did you think?

It seems the debate was an exercise in futility for Shabir. But I suppose if he chooses to be an activist for his faith he has to somehow grasp at straws and compile an argument even when its quite clear he was wrong.


Then again I am far from being a scholar in theology or philosophy. Im just a mere child

[Tamandua]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

[Harbinger]

Then again I am far from being a scholar in theology or philosophy. Im just a mere child

If you don't mind discussing it, are you voting for Rauner in the primary?

[lasher]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

I guess it depends on how old you are.

[Harbinger]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

You should be fine, Christians definitely don't judge people. I think you should do it.

[Turbomunkey]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

If you don't mind discussing it, are you voting for Rauner in the primary?

I didnt know you still reside in illinois. Why is Rauner your stick? I have honestly not given it much thought. I know I am not voting for that clown Durbin

[MaximosJ]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

What's the event? A descent number of young evangelicals have tattoos and such these days.

[MuscleXtreme]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

[lasher]

lol @ whatisbro trying to bait a response with his Jesus thread.

After the last fiasco of 30 pages with him (and then the freakin' thread being deleted) no thx jeff.

[MuscleXtreme]

lol @ whatisbro trying to bait a response with his Jesus thread.

After the last fiasco of 30 pages with him (and then the freakin' thread being deleted) no thx jeff.

Lol, the only posters in that thread are non-christians. That thread that got deleted was a verbal beat down, and ended with him essentially conceding with his, "I'll be back" statement.

[sawoobley]

Lol, the only posters in that thread are non-christians. That thread that got deleted was a verbal beat down, and ended with him essentially conceding with his, "I'll be back" statement.

Cliffs?

[Fiyero]

What's the event? A descent number of young evangelicals have tattoos and such these days.

Leviticus 19:28 ��Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord."

[Tamandua]

I guess it depends on how old you are.

22, but I look younger

You should be fine, Christians definitely don't judge people. I think you should do it.

lulz

What's the event? A descent number of young evangelicals have tattoos and such these days.

It's a mostly protestant christian event, a few years ago they created a lot ruckus for bashing gays during one of the speaks.

Yeah this dude is a member of a pretty famous evangelical church here(bola de neve church) that has a lot of young kids with tattoos and such, their goal is to show that you can be a christian regardless of your looks

[Tamandua]

Leviticus 19:28 “‘Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord."

Mark 7

5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”

6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[b]

8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

[MuscleXtreme]

Cliffs?

Pages 1-5, arguing with uwootm8 on how boys can cry
Pages 6-30 arguing with whatisbro on jehovah witnesses not knowing how to translate Greek.

[cheerupemokid]

There is a huge christian event happening in my town, I'm considering going with one of my christian shirts just to see how people will react to my tattoos, ear plugs and long hair. Should I do it for the lulz?

I guess (I don't know exactly why they made this since it was made before I started going there) so many of the members of my church have tattoos they decided to make a mural out of photos of everyone's tattoo's (each square is a picture of a person's tattoo):



So you'd not stick out at all there. Not all Christians are clean cut and conservative looking, brah. But I guess it might depend on where you are.

[lasher]

[tallguy29]

The quote below is from the Buddhist scripture and an excerpt from the book "The Buddha and His Dharma": by B.R. Ambedkar, pp. 147-148.
Buddha lived as you would know in 500 BCE and this was his dismissal of the Kalam Cosomological Argument, which used to be the argument used for "why god" in India. (The KCA may have originated in India as Al-Kindi who "propounded" it was in contact with India.)

MaximosJ, Lasher, others - what do you guys think of Buddha's points?

After taking his seat Anathapindika expressed a desire to hear a discourse on some religious subject.

The Blessed Lord, Buddha, responding to his wishes raised the question,
"Who is it that shapes our lives? Is it God, a personal creator? If God be the maker, all living things should have silently to submit to their maker's power. They would be like vessels formed by the potter's hand. If the world had been made by God there should be no such thing as sorrow, or calamity, or sin; for both pure and impure deeds must come from him. If not, there would be another cause beside him, and he would not be the self-existent one. Thus, you see, the thought of God is overthrown.

Again, it is said that the Absolute cannot be a cause. All things around us come from a cause as the plant comes from the seed; how can the Absolute be the cause of all things alike? If it pervades them, then certainly it does not make them.

Again, it is said that the self is the maker. But if self is the maker, why did he not make things pleasing? The cases of sorrow and joy are real and objective. How can they have been made by self?

Again, if you adopt the argument, there is no maker, or fate in such as it is, and there is no causation, what use would there be in shaping our lives and adjusting means to an end?

Therefore, we argue that all things that exist are not without a cause. However, neither God, nor the Absolute, nor the self, no causeless chance, is the maker, but our deeds produce results both good and evil.

The whole world is under the law of causation, and the causes that act are not un-mental, for the gold of which the cup is made is gold throughout.

Let us, then, surrender the heresies of worshipping God and praying to him; let us not lose ourselves in vain speculations of profitless subtleties; let us surrender self and all selfishness, and as all things are fixed by causation, let us practice good so that good may result from our actions."

[sawoobley]

The quote below is from the Buddhist scripture and an excerpt from the book "The Buddha and His Dharma": by B.R. Ambedkar, pp. 147-148.
Buddha lived as you would know in 500 BCE and this was his dismissal of the Kalam Cosomological Argument, which used to be the argument used for "why god" in India. (The KCA may have originated in India as Al-Kindi who "propounded" it was in contact with India.)

MaximosJ, Lasher, others - what do you guys think of Buddha's points?

Poverty argument. He's ignoring the possibility God made things the way they are for a good reason or allowed them to become this way through the fall of Adam and Eve. So, instead he argues that karma will reward the good and the bad? Yeah, how is that working out? Not well as a lot of bad people get away with things in this life while good people suffer through no fault of their own in many cases.

[GreatOldOne]

The quote below is from the Buddhist scripture and an excerpt from the book "The Buddha and His Dharma": by B.R. Ambedkar, pp. 147-148.
Buddha lived as you would know in 500 BCE and this was his dismissal of the Kalam Cosomological Argument, which used to be the argument used for "why god" in India. (The KCA may have originated in India as Al-Kindi who "propounded" it was in contact with India.)

MaximosJ, Lasher, others - what do you guys think of Buddha's points?

Afaik, the closest you will find in the Christian Bible is the book of Ecclesiastes, wrecking the human idea of cause...and searching for 'purpose'...recommending at the end to do what is natural 'obeying Gods commandments'.

I'm not sure how this book made it into the bible, to be honest.

Poverty argument. He's ignoring the possibility God made things the way they are for a good reason

But it doesn't appear that way. Looks like a 'bad reason'.

or allowed them to become this way through the fall of Adam and Eve.

God is omnipotent. He sustains all nature, including human nature. Every humans nature..at every moment.

So, instead he argues that karma will reward the good and the bad? Yeah, how is that working out? Not well as a lot of bad people get away with things in this life while good people suffer through no fault of their own in many cases.

No real comment on karma, but a guess. I'm guessing the root of the idea is predicated on monism of some kind...everything as 'self'. A backdoor so-to-speak to the 'golden rule', and 'universal justice'.

[MuscleXtreme]

The quote below is from the Buddhist scripture and an excerpt from the book "The Buddha and His Dharma": by B.R. Ambedkar, pp. 147-148.
Buddha lived as you would know in 500 BCE and this was his dismissal of the Kalam Cosomological Argument, which used to be the argument used for "why god" in India. (The KCA may have originated in India as Al-Kindi who "propounded" it was in contact with India.)

MaximosJ, Lasher, others - what do you guys think of Buddha's points?

Problem of evil is not an attack on the cosmological argument.

Also, Alvin Plantinga has already shown that it is deductively possible for God to exist and evil to be aboundabound in the world.

[tallguy29]

Poverty argument. He's ignoring the possibility God made things the way they are for a good reason or allowed them to become this way through the fall of Adam and Eve. So, instead he argues that karma will reward the good and the bad? Yeah, how is that working out? Not well as a lot of bad people get away with things in this life while good people suffer through no fault of their own in many cases.

Not getting into karma vs no karma debate but why can you believe Adam & Eve and not karma and rebirth as per Buddha?