Category: Let's talk
My friend is making some bad choices that could hurt her in the long run and the worst thing is she isn't a Christian and she says she doesn't believe in God, I've been praying that she will come to know Him but I want to know if there's anything else I can do? Please give me some advice.
Realize that everyone doesn't appreciate your attempts at introducing religion, no matter how well-meaning they are. Try concentrating on these things she's doing.
Not everyone believes that God is the answer. You have to remember that the way you believe is your belief, and not everyone will share those beliefs. And it's wise to remember that people who do not believe will only resent having others' beliefs forced upon them and this may only drive your friend further away. Just be supportive to her as a friend, and perhaps try to leave God out of it.
I agree. If you really want to be supportive to your friend, try not to focus too much on the religious aspect. Just be there to talk to them and leave religion out of it because as others have said, forcing your own religious beliefs on them isn't going to help, and if things are fragile, it could only push them further away from you. You can certainly pray for them if you like, but not everyone believes that God is the answer. I know that's probably not what you want to hear, but it's true. just be there for them and support them when they need a hand. That's the best way to handle things in this situation.
All these replies are all great replies. People hate beliefs being forced down their throughts. I know that is not what you mean, but people are quick to see things in there way if you know what I mean[I don't make sence sometimes, lol]
P.S. I love AIO!
Be supportive,
You can't talk to someoen who won't listen, you really can't, I know from personal experience, just always be there
why must this person agree with you cant you accept her atheism and leave her alone...after all she has the right NOT to believe so why are you unable to see that.
Tony, most people who don't believe don't have a problem with Jesus Himself, my youth pastor says; they have problems with, maybe, pastors, or televansialists, etc, who have misrepresented Christianity, and those people who do not believe, some of them just don't wanna be like the Christians who may have misrepresented the whole deal. I pray to God every day that He help me to be loving and kind to people and not judgmental, for I can be like that sometimes without even meaning to, I have noticed. Anyway, some people just don't wanna hear it after what they might have experienced, and all you can do, really, is just pray for them that they may come to believe in Christ and accept Him as their lord and savior and that their name would be written in the Lamb's Book of Life. For a while I had some lost friends who just wouldn't listen, and I felt like I was doing something wrong, and I knew praying was all I could do. Praying was all I could do, and I felt stupid 'cause I couldn't do anything. Little did I know that I was, in fact, doing something; praying works and is very powerful; the answer may be a yes or a no or a wait, but there is always an answer. Just don't go the way I did for a while, the way that I felt like it was my fault. I just had to give it to God and have faith.
Much Love to You and God Bless,
Mel
XXX
You spread the word much better by being an examplery character, being a true friend and, well doing God's will, helping your friend out of the current prediciment and make her feel better. Preaching the gospell is, in itself, not always the solution or the right way to go. I respect my friends' decission to even be atheists, if they see me happy and consistently a good person they'd start taking more note of my beliefs. Religion is a choice, pure religion doesn't solve anything, it can help you make the right decissions but God helps those who help themselves, so in this case that person needs your help, not your avengelism, that can wait, so be a friend, help out and that way you are acting out God's will, if you prove to be a good friend and the person feels you are really being a friend, not just trying to be nice so that she may accept God into her life then you're doing something right.
I had a good friend in university but we've fallen out because whenever I talk to her she insists on me improving my ways and going to church more and reading the bible to people and spreading the word. Tht's not my life style I don't want my religion to become all I live for or all I talk about with friends. She didn't accept it and so we've stopped talking more or less, it's sad but that's life, if she had been more accepting I think her faith and practices might have had a better chance of influencing me.
cheers
-B
I hope your friend is sensible enough to dispose of your friendship for you are obviously of evangelical intentions which may pose a risk to the freedom of your friend. People like you and people who to any extent agree with your actions are evil and don't deserve friends. You clearly don't know the difference between believing and knowing and you have no respect for the right of every individual to choose for themselves which ideology they follow. You have no respect for the alternative views of your friend but expect your friend to respect your views. How hypocritical! People like you are what create terrorists like the ones who carried out 911. It is people like you who forced their ideology on black slaves before the slave trade was abolished just like you are trying to force your beliefs on your friends. People who dare to impose their beliefs on people who offer them friendship are obviously too passionate about what they believe, too convinced that they're right, and too narrow-minded to be able to live freely. I suggest you get your head examined and hope that you'll be cured and become normal, and if God does exist then he should be thanked that not all religious people aren't as inconsiderate as you.
songwriter that's a great answer, I'm so so glad that you realize that it's not every Christian's mission to force Jesus down other's throats.
James
tony, being a friend, and supporting her is the best you can do. if she eventually sees god through you, thats great, but if she doesnt, you have to accept that too. trying to force your religious beliefs on people is the worst thing you could do, it will bring you farther away from her.
You wrote: "My friend is making some bad choices that could hurt her in the long run and the worst thing is she isn't a Christian and she says she doesn't believe in God" but you know something? The worst thing actually is that you are so obcessed by your religious beliefs that you can't see anything else than that! Geez!!! you think that the worst thing is that she is not a Christian? Why? is being a Christian the most wonderful thing a person can be? Not a Buddhist or a Moslim or even a Taoist? What kind of self richeousness crap is that? Just because you have been brainwashed to believe that being a Christian is OH! THE ONE AND ONLY WAY to get to heaven, doesn't mean that you or they who told you that are 100% right. Also, you are only 17, how can you judge someone else's choices? I am sure you make plenty of bad choices yourself in spite or despite your being a 'Christian'. At least be a good christian and allow your friend to have you as a friend not a someone who is constantly judgemental about what she does or what she believes in and doesn't believe in.
I have had a lot of experience just at school. I am not saying you all haven't, yet my school is sooooo small that you can notice more of each person's aditude than in a big school. I know one boy who takes God's name in vain every day, and just about every sintence of his is cussing. The way I handle it is for one, set a good example by not saying such cruel words, in which I do not like to say any cuss words. I am not saying that I am oh so perfect. HNo! I am far from perfect! I hav unwanted thoughts enter my head, and I do lose my temper quite a bit. What I am trying to say is that we should show love and kindness towards others. The Bible says that the fruit of the Spirit is "Love." Not plural "fruits," but singular, "fruit." From showing love towards others, it will show the person that you care about them, and one day when you are least expecting it, they will ask you: "what makes you so kind?" or, "how come you are so pationt with others?" And your reply would be: "The reason I am so pationt is because I have the joy of the Lord in me." If you are having a hard time showing love in your life, go to God and ask Him ot help you. It is always good to have a relationship with God our Heavenly Father. He loves each and everyone of us, and He is here to help us in are troubles.
I hope I have helped you Tony. I have like i said, gone through the same situation. Infact, I am still in that, but, just give it all up to God and give it time. God does work in mysterious ways.
Always smiling,
Lordlover
Well, here's the way I see it. If your friend is going down the wrong path as you see it, all you can really do is be supportive and listen if anything. I understand you are concerned for this person's spiritual health, but much as you wish everyone you knew would know and feel what you do spiritually, talking to some people about God is like trying to explain why you like Star Trek to an avid football fan. I personally feel people, especially young people need to figure out what spiritual path they want to follow if any. You may be concerned that that person does not know God the way you do, but you may end up alienating this person and they might feel you're wanting to get them into something they either don't understand, don't believe in, or don't feel connected with. Spirituality is a very personal and individual thing.
Wangel I agree there is nothing worse than a rabid religious zealot Tony is obviously blissfully ignorant, of the damage he is doing in force feeding his friend.. personally these people are safer on their own...
...and that's exactly where you will be if you don't wisen up sonny boy!...
I had this experience with my sister. My sister was once an atheist and she tried to brain wash me to be an atheist. She told me she didn't believe in God or Jesus. She would get the bible that Moslims would read and study her Atheism lessons. She called herself the 5 percenter, not sure if that's what your friend call it. She not only didn't believe in God but she also didn't believe that doctors can heal the sick. She believed that man was God and the doctor. And you know who influenced her? My brother, who is not a good role model. So I just left her alone, let her do her thing, and then she realized that people weren't paying her fake religion no attention and that it was worthless, so she changed. Now she tells me she believes in God, I was shocked when she told me this. Sometimes when you have people like that, the best thing to do is to be there for them no matter what, and if they see that nobody's not falling into their level, they'll find themselves and straighten up.
Brainwashings - Atheists: 1, Christians: too many times to count
I guess that wasn't that witty after all.
James
Wow, LordLover's faith amazes me. I wish I could have faith like that. People always read the bible eyet this task ii is daunting. I have no idea how, as it is hard to read and I have yet to find one on-line that is easy language r wise. Its beena long time since I reead it. As for your friend, I agree with most. Just prey. That is the best anyone can do really. God is always open and if your friend wil except, it'll be upt o God and her as to when. Keep perying and I wish you luck. GoGod bless, John
Can one individual brainwash another? I thought brainwashing was a complicated process. How does this happen?
I agree with James in saying that, thansk to Melmel, I've learned not all Christians wanna cram the religion down peoples' throats but just be kind and accepting and things. And I agree with Wilde I think it was when he said that to be an example of kinness and a good friend is more helpful to showing how yoru religion is a good one than trying to force people into it.
Ok. I wasn't going to weigh in, but I feel the need to. Tony, you definitely won't succeed by cramming Christ down somebody's throat. If anything, it will turn them off, and what you have will never appeal to them, simply because of the way you presented it. Live it, and be a friend, and when God leads you to, then you can move to the next step.
Secondly, I gotta say that a few of the posts here have been very intolerant of people who have a religion. It seems as though in your quest to be open-minded, you have closed your mind off to God, or anything moral, and that is, in itself, just as dangerous as the terrorists who caused 9/11. Remember, not everyone holds your views, either, and most people don't appreciate your hate speech.
Kragiel its not about hate, nor is this topic relevant to 9/11,christ! I'm so sick of the yanks referring to that in every feckin conversation .
..we are simply expressing our disgust at Tony's intolerance of his friends atheism...he cannot and will not, accept her lack of belief, which is her inalienable right...so I would say he is more closed minded than any of us.. I am willing to listen to a christian but only until they start preaching and I'm sure we are all capable of assesing our own morailty thankyou...
Easy now, Gobby! I wasn't directing that at anything you said. However, The Waynderful Wangel's post was just a bit harsh, really. You are correct in saying that everyone has he right to believe as they so choose, but nobody has the right to shut somebody else down for their beliefs, unless they want to do crazy things like sacrificing children, or using them as sex slaves, which, some of the religions in this crazy world want to do. However, to say that somebody should "dispose of" one's friendship simply because he believes in God, and is concerned enough to try to share his faith with his friend is totally out of line, insensitive, and myopic!
ok you have a point I'm just touchy abour religion for personal reasons..ah but Tony is not trying to share his faith..he is actively ramming it down his friend's throat...that is disrespectful,ignorant,and definately not the act of a loving caring chrisitan, it does highlight however the insecurity of a desperate zealot,who feels threatened, by his friend's lack of belief
....If I was in this girl's position,I would sever all contact with Tony, until he was able to respect and accept my right to disbelieve..
I think that's maybe a bit harsh? after all if you are a true friend you will be friends with that person despite their beliefs. I for instance have a friend in south africa who is deepy religious. to the extent she broke off a relationship with a guy because he "game between her and god", but when she's not talking about God, she is a genuine and caring person, and as long as I ignore the preachings, I have no issue with what she is like as a person. and believe me, she has tried to convert me on more than one occasion.
I didn't get that he's cramming his faith down his friend's throat though. It sounded like he told her what he wanted to tell her, and then backed off of it. If you have something you feel passionately can help a person to avoid trouble, which, apparently his friend is getting in to, if you love your friend, you'll tell them. If they tell you to stop, however, then you should respect their wishes, obviously, and it really didn't sound like any reason for a few people who don't choose to believe in Christ to treat him this way.
that's the whole point these people want to turn us all into robots! Religion is fundamentally about control of 1's thoughts, morality and conscience,
.it is true agenda is brilliantly dressed up in the disguise tolerance,acceptance, love ect but let me ask this why if the christian religion is based on the above why are the gay/bi lb community still shunned by the religious groups aren't we all equal under your god?.
...Furthermore not once is intelligence mentioned in the gospels,not once is freedom of thought mentioned in the bible,why does no one question that hmm? because the weak need and want to be controlled and religion gives them that...
Weak-minded? It sounds like the people who get offended by he mere mention of God, religion, etc. are the weak-minded ones. As for mind conrol, that's not the way it goes. God gave all of us a free will, and we can believe and think how we want to, even if not to believe in Him! It's our choice what we do, and it is a personal choice, one which I can't make for you, and you can't make for me. I'm far from controled. I totally understand how some people are, and organized religion of any form turns me off totally, but I'm happy to be a follower of Christ.
I know people have the right to believe what they want, but some people make bad decitions and I think if they had God in there life they wouldn't make so many. And no I am not trying to force my religion down my friend's throat. Love to all Tony
I'm not at all weak pal as not once in my life have I ever prayed to your god, or any other,for the strength to carry on...why because I don't need the crutch of religion to support me....
..Tony you just suggested that others would be better off believing in your god,even now, you cannot understand that some of us are happy as we are...people screw up regardless of their religion or lack of it,
your president is a good example he claims to be christian and look at his colossall mistakes.....
no goblin you tend to rely on public message forums on the internet ...
I hate to point this out, because sugarbaby you're absolutely right, but I'm afraid the plural of forum is fora. That said, Goblin you do tend to be a bit of an E-nutcase when it comes down to it.
My stance on the general theme of this topic is essentially this: I detest fundamentalism of any kind; I detest people going to court in order to fight to cover themselves from head to toe in bits of cloth; I detest fanatical Christian groups trying to close down abortion clinics and influence what should be shown on TV; I detest Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, who ram their faith down the throats of instinctively secular people or people of another faith; I even detest the way that some children end up under-nourished due to the religious convictions of their parents (Take Jehovah's witnesses, for instance, who are meant to be vegans). However, I have no problem with people being deeply religious and holding their own strong personal faith. I admire it, in fact, and it can't be denied that people like Louisa of Fatima and St Bernardette of Lourdes sincerely believed that they saw the visions they profess to have seen. In short, religion is not a string of make believe nonsenses without any foundation, nay, religions have stood the test of time and should be respected for that, and I can readily understand why many draw inspiration from such beliefs. But it must always be remembered that religion is ideas: ideas are about what we do, not what we are; religion is about what we do, not what we are. So fundamentalist nutcases who claim that unbelievers are worse than themselves, who do everything in their power to coerce unbelievers in a sort of intellectual jihad, whilst all the time masquerading behind the self-righteous banner of the common good, it is they who don't deserve the time of day.
Thanks, Lawlord! Well said.
Let's get one thing straight Gobblin. No one on this Earth is perfect. Not even Christians! We are all human, and we all make mistakes! Being a Christian does not mean we are "oh so perfect," but it means that we have chosen to be "followers of Christ." You can believ3e what you believe, but let me just tell you this. One day, you will see that God loves every single person on Earth. Yes, the "good, and the bad." We as humans have the free will, the right to choose who we are going to serve, or who we are going to follow. We are far from robots. God loves us all sooooo much that He sent His one and only Son to die for our sins. Not jsut some of our sins, but all of our sins. We all as humans "whom God loves, have the chance to believe in Him. We have the freedom of religion. Not the freedom, from, religion, but, the, freedom, of, religion. And, you might be thinking: "but Jesus does not live anymore because He died," but I say to you, He has risen, and now sits at the right hand of God. One day, He is going to come back and take us all up to live with Him forever.
And, Tony is not forsing religion on his friend. He wants his friend ot know the Lord, so he has asked his friends to give him some good feedback on what to do.
Cheers,
Lordlover
Lordlover I fear that this is the sort of blinkered nonsense that I'm afraid is on the wrong side of the line. You should preface all assertions that you make with 'it is my belief that', 'we believe that' or even 'I am sure that'. But to tell someone that one day they will realise that god loves us all etc. is to presume their ignorance and to talk down to them in a manner I associate with fanatical fundamentalists. Now, Lordlover, remember that religion is ideas, no more, no less. No idea can claim exclusivity in the market-place of ideas, to use the terminology of John stuart Mill, so before you issue your next bulletin of pious exhortations bear this in mind. I admire your personal faith, Lordlover, but that personal faith does not come with a transmissible warranty of quality as it were. To put it another way, to say that 'one day you will realise' etc. is evangelical fundamentalist nonsense and is forcing your faith on others which, as you rightly say, is not what we should be aiming to do, whatever religion we may follow.
As Lawlord has just pointed out, to say that "one day you will realize" is forcing your religion and beliefs on others. yes, I admire you for having such strong beliefs, but not everyone shares those beliefs. How would you feel if a total non believer came to you and said "one day you will realize that all this believing in god is total claptrap and one day you will realize that actually he doesn't exist and that the only reason people believe in religion is because they don't want to admit there's no afterlife". Just for the record, that's not what I personally think, but there are many who do, and their beliefs are no less signifficant than your own. You choose to prey to what you believe is a higher being than yourself, but actually, there is no proof that God is real, any more than there is proof that he isn't.
Nobody knows if one day we'll see Gods love no matter if we're good or bad, and you Lord Lover have no proof that you're right. Just because something is written in a book dowesn't make it fact. Goblin totally agree with everything you've said, and the fact that Cragiel and Lordlover seem willing to justify Tony's actions suggests that they probably endorse those actions and do similar things to their friends. Some people may think it is harsh of me to encourage the disassociation of Tony's friend from him, but noone needs friends like him and trying to inflict an ideology on someone isn't the actions of a good friend. These Jesus Freaks and equavelent persons of other ideological backgrounds should not be tollerated and all preaching outside religious buildings should be outlawed with anyone found guilty been prevented from preaching again!
I would also like to say that what Goblin says is cforrect. A strong person can rely on itself for inspiration for encouragement and determination. They don't need to turn to religion. Also people like Tony feel that it is their duty to somehow make sure people follow their ideology that's why they offer them the chance to convert and that in itself is a form of preaching. These people are dangerous, they cannot think clearly that's why most of what they do is determined by a book written thousands of years ago. That's why it is essential for the safety of everyone else that these people are prevented from preaching, religion ramming, and bringing up kids who will either be like them or severely rebel to such an extent that those kids make themselves vulnerable.
thankyou Wangel that's exactly the point I was trying to get across.
Just a moment you two viz. Wainderful wangle and Goblin: I consider myself to be a strong person, nay, a very strong person who has had to put up with a lot and who has had to work to get where he currently is. I know, moreover, that I'm going to have to be a lot stronger even than now in order to succeed to the level that I wish to succeed at the bar. However, I am a Roman Catholic. Very definitely a secular Roman Catholic, and by no means orthodox, but a Catholic nonetheless. I don't see turning to religion as you put it as a sign of weakness. The idea that if one is a strong person, religion becomes superfluous is a complete non sequitur, with all due respect. You are both guilty all too often of resorting to rather sweeping statements and I hope that on this occasion, you will concede the illogical nature of this oen.
Well lawlord, If you use your religion to help you make decisions, then you are weaker than someone who is capable of making decisions without refering to some book written thousands of years ago!
Nonsense. The stronger people are those that take the difficult option, the motive matters not. are you really saying that people like Pastor Fortunata, Mother Theresa, Sir Thomas More and Sir thomas Becket were weak people? Dear me, what started out as a somewhat borderline non sequitur is now a non sequitur of the highest order.
Ok, first of all, Toney, where the hell do you get off shoving your beliefs down your friend's throat? second of all, to the person who said that doctors can't heal the sick, why don't you go and tell that to Jeni Stepanek, that woman just lost a fourth child to mitochondrial myopathy. She prayed to god to make him well, but she also relyed on doctors to help. i
Well, i am sorry if I have come across as preachy. I do not mean to sound rude, or forse my faith at anyone. Good luck to you Tony, and, I do hope all works out for you.
God bless,
Lordlover
No Lordlover I didn't mean to imply that you were deliberately sounding preachy, but I think that for your benefit you should make it clear that these are your beliefs, however strong they are. Read back over your post and you will see that, from time to time, you say things like 'One day you will see that god loves us all' or words to that effect. That is pure conjecture on the one hand, and very condescending on the other, not to mention claiming exclusivity for your ideology which, however strong your personal faith may be, you cannot do in a general manner.
Some of these religious nutcases believe when their kids recover from illness, it's because God saved them when actually, they recovered from those illnesses because of the medical assistance they were given by the doctors but for the rest of their lives, those kids are told that they should be thankful that God saved them. This happens especially when those kids become adults and wish to behave in a harmless way which the religion they were brought up with doesn't encourage. That type of behaveour by parents is totally irresponsible. All of those people who Lawlord named, needed an ideology to drive them to do what they did, that doesn't mean they don't deserve credit for it, but if someone did what they did without the motivation of an ideology, that person would be stronger.
Agree with LL is his post above and basically just want to say that if someone doesn't want to listen to you talking about God, then don't try to make them... Easy isn't it eh?? Frey.
Agree with LL is his post above and basically just want to say that if someone doesn't want to listen to you talking about God, then don't try to make them... Easy isn't it eh?? Frey.
Oh WW, did that sleeping with someone really mess so much with your life (or that person's life you refer to) you've practically referred to this in 95% of your posts to message boards lately, I hope the sex was good .. I really do .
But, well, someone was saved by medical staff, some are not .. what's the difference, some put it down to luck, some to medical science, some to God, some to a combination of all of these things. When I was little and my parents were seeking cue I know they went to our preast as well as a medium and countless surgeries. I believe that their faith and the blessings helped the medical staff in one way or another, no one can disprove it. And, mind you, I'm pretty secular, religion does not permiate my life, I don't believe in fasting and sex before marriage is fine with me but I still consider mysefl a Christian and a follower of that idiology and that faith has done a lot for me in hard times and, well, I've made it to where I am and I hope it'll carry me through to where I want to be, there's nothing negative about it.
Just a moment Wainderful wangel: you say that people deserve credit for deciding something on the basis of an ideology, but that people who make the decision without being motivated by any ideology at all are stronger. Again, that's a complete non sequitur if indeed you know what a non sequitur is. The decisions of which we are talking are decisions of principle, and people make decisions of principle because they believe something is right, that something ought to be done, that it would be morally iniquitous not to do anything. In short, they are motivated by a desire, an ideology that one ought to do right, whether right is determined by a pre-ordained conception based on faith, or whether it is determined by their own perceptions of social norms. How, I ask, can a decision be made without reference to a motivating ideology? How on earth does that happen, wainderful Wangel? I just don't see how someone can resolve a conflict of ttwo or more moral principles without being motivated by some sort of ideology determining what ought to be the answer to the conflict! You really don't think things through, do you? even if we accept that some people make decisions without any motivation at all, that doesn't make them stronger people. Nay, it makes them brainless, impulsive automatons who lack courage in their own convictions. Wainderful wangel if you want to take me on directly, I suggest you arm yourself far better intellectually than you have done thus far. AS for children being healed, Wildebrew's observations are quite right and there is not a great deal I can usefully add. I do believe that a child should be able to make his own choice as to a religion when he becomes an adult, but there is nothing wrong with parents choosing to bring a child up according to a particular faith provided that the child's physical and social well-being are not harmed thereby.
OK, you all people listen. First, you should not blame at religious stuff not because the world is going to end nor because I am trying to be protective. If you dn't like religion then get over it as I did not like swearing in the zone, i had just to bypass it, even in real life. I don't use that kind of language and if someone curses at me well i don't even care about it. Secondly be mindful of what you say. Asking for help is not the same as putting someone's religions in others throats. I am a catholic and I make mistakes. But being religious doesn't mean being robots is a belief as many other beliefs. Thats what you choose, you may even not be cristian or catholic but you choose if you want to be a good person or a bad person. But there also are other caces where yes, as many posts said people become too obsest with their religion and thats where they start to force others into it. iN the other hand well Tony what you can do as everyone says just try to help her, support, always be there. Of course if she asks you to stop then just stop and just be positive about the situation. I know its hard as I have had the experience.... and well sometimes people makes even fun of you just for having a belief. I don't believe that god will one day come to judge living and dead but i believe in that invisible someone whose always there to give me strength, I might not even believe in god but its also the way you want to be yourself.... if you decide not to give up and really have a desire for your goals and take advantage of every oportunity you get then go for it. I may trow more annoying things to say later, erhrh... good luck.
Good lukc with what? Interpreting your post? We'll need it!
Tony's friend shouldn't have to say no, because that friend shouldn't be encouraged to change their ideology in the first place! Lawlord, desire, inner strength and determination are what motivate me, I don't need to turn to any book written thousands of years ago for inspiration! When I make decisions, of course there are things I want to happen as a result, but my dedcisions aren't determined by books which feature unproven statements, encourage homofobia, and encourage intollerence of people who are causing no harm to themselves or to anyone else, simply because they are not behaving in a way which that book encourages. Also, if the bible doesn't support sex before marriage, any christian who does, cannot claim to be a true christian, but instead is one who has adapted to life in the twenty-first century and puts secular values before their religious ones. If you're not going to follow every instruction written in the bible, why follow any instruction written in the bible? Same for all other religious texts too, The twenty-first Century Christians should just become more secure so that they don't feel the need to be attached to an ideology they don't fully follow.
Ah now I see. You have retreated very embarrassingly from your former position. Now you are saying that people who follow an ideology are only weak if it's based on a religious text, which gets us back to the non sequitur of before. You incidentally, I hope, know what a non sequitur is. How are people like Mother Theresa said to be weak? I don't think anyone follows all the instructions in the bible, because connaisseur that you claim to be you'll surely have spotted that the bible contradicts itself in many places. so nothing follows from what you say. i should add that it's difficult to take your talk about tolerance seriously, given that in other posts to the boards you act as though you were a medical expert or scientist commissioned by goering.
*In general*, in my experience, decisions made based on logic are better than those made based on emotion (which includes any kind of evidenceless faith). I believe this because when we make well-reasoned decisions, we consider the consequences of our actions, both upon ourselves and upon others. If someone seems to be making bad choices, I ask them for the reasons for their choice, and assess the logic of those reasons. Sometimes they see the error of their ways, sometimes I see the error of mine in believing their choice was harmful, and sometimes neither one happens, but at least we've tried. I'm not religious in any way, but I am not going to discount all religious faith as being without sufficient evidence either, as i can't possibly know that. Also, it sounds like Tony is not trying to cram religion down anyone's throat, just trying to be heard.
Also, those who don't follow every instruction in the Bible may believe that it was written in another time, but they have faith that there was *some* message from the divine that was preserved, even amid all the cultural laws and human error.
I repeat, even if you wanted to follow every instruction in the bible, you couldn't! even if you were a member of the most devout monastic order, you couldn't! Why? because the bible contradicts itself! Now, with 1800's fondness for logic let me ask him this: how can one follow every single instruction in a document that contradicts itself? that's a complete non sequitur.
I agree Lawlord; one cannot follow every instruction in a book that contradicts itself. I really don't understand believers' strong faith in the Bible when it is so hard to follow, and if they have no prroof. Put another way, I don't understand strong faith.
Mother Theresa was an enspired person who did a lot of good things. I'm not saying she wasn't strong, but if someone did all Theresa had done without been enspired by faith that person would be stronger. The Bible controdicts itself, and by doing so highlights it's inaccuracies. Also by controdicting itself, it shows the stupidity of all those who follow it claiming Christianity is right. Obviously where there are controdictive statements in Christianity one is right and another is wrong. How are Christians supposed to determine which of the 2 is right or wrong? Also if the bible adopts opposing positions on issues, than no Christian could ever be right about that issue if they use the bible to justify their position. Any Christian who doesn't realise this is stupid as not as week.
That's nonsense again, Wainderful wangel. it matters not what the motivation behind Mother Theresa's deeds were. And what about Sir Thomas More? What about sir Thomas Becket? You haven't yet addressed yourself to the cases of either of those people, because they directly call into question the thesis that you're advocating. Do you actually know who they are, I ask myself? Do you know what a non sequitur is? Of course the bible is going to be inaccurate, it has multiple authors! But many of the documents that guide our actions are that way, it doesn't mean you can write people off as weak because of it. I fear that in fact, you have shown yourself to be rather weak not only with your disturbing views on experimentation on humans and disproportioate responses to provocation, but with your apparent inability to challenge the most fundamental assertions I put to you.
Well if someone did what all those people you name did and weren't motivated by religion, those people who weren't motivated by religion would be the stronger because they wouldn't need to look to a book written thousands of years ago for encouragement. Why do people insist on beeing guided by inaccurate books? I think that some of them are too stupid to realise that guidance from inaccurate books is itself inaccurate especially where the guidance from those books controdicts itself. Also I think some of them are too weak to guide themselves, that's why they need books like the bible in the first place. A person who is guided and motivated by an inaccurate book which controdicts itself is weaker than someone who is guided and motivated by an accurate book which doesn't controdict itself.
So, if the bible were written by one man, and didn't contradict itself, it would be perfectly acceptable to follow it, but because it is written by many and over time it contradicts itself, it is rendered completely worthless? That's a complete non sequitur and I'm still not convinced that you know what a non sequitur is. Nor am I convinced that you know anything about either More or Becket. Also another thing wainderful wangel that you probably haven't considered: we follow the law, don't we? And law is made up of cases and statutes, isn't it? Well, since the origin of legal memory in 1189, many cases have contradicted each other but still remained good law. Similarly, even acts passed by parliament contradict each other and it seems difficult to resolve the conflict. Take, for instance, the Human rights act 1998 and the Terrorism Act 2005. are you really saying that because these texts contradict each other, we are weak-willed if we follow the law? Are you saying that just because cases contradict each other, the whole system of English precedent is useless and writ in water? How incredible, almost as incredible as not knowing who Sir Thomas More was or sitting in your ivory tower considering yourself stronger than all the rest because of your secular wisdom, or attempting to resurrect the penology of Goebbels, Himmler and Hitler.
We don't follow the law, we obey the law to avoid been punnished. We don't have to obey religion to avoid been punnished. Also, we don't worship the law. Laws and religions are different. We can chose which religions we follow and whether to follow them or not, we cannot choose what laws are going to apply to use though. If laws controdict each other, that's a problem for the law makers to deal with, not the law abiding citizen. We just have to obey the laws if we don't want to be punnished.
So you think that all laws are commands backed up by the threat of a sanction do you? what about enabling laws or laws without a sanction? To put it another way, if we merely obey the law to avoid being punished, how do you explain laws that don't carry punishments with them? For instance, laws relating to the age at which one can drink, or drive? Or laws relating to the validity of a will? There are no punishments attached to these laws, and yet people still follow them! I'm afraid wainderful wangel that you've been reading too much John Austin. Like you, he thought that laws were commands backed up by the threat of sanctions, hence his so-called command theory of law. That, however, was in the 1860's when he was doing his lectures on jurisprudence at UCl in London. Since then, his theory has fallen into obscurity and I recommend that you read the discussion thereof in H. L. A. Hart's "The Concept of Law" in which he makes the same point I have made here, albeit in a far more learned, erudite and scholarly fashion than I ever could. The upshot Wainderful Wangel is that you're wrong about laws and as for religions, some people think that disobedience to religious norms is indeed backed up by the threat of a sanction, just as some people think that breach of norms of morality is backed up by the threat of a sanction, even if that sanction is what you or I might consider trivial, like disapproval from one's peers. The ideas that you propound are non sequitur after non sequitur after non sequitur, but you may not be aware what a non sequitur is.
Wow LL, you have no punishments over there for the age of drinking and driving, and following someone's will? That's *really* scary! Anyway, Wangel's belief could also be thought of as a tautology--just his definition of the word "strong". In his definition of the word, he seems to believe that to be "stronger", one must think for oneself rather than blindly following something that someone wrote. I think arguing about a definition is pretty useless. You wrote: "So, if the bible were written by one man, and didn't contradict itself, it would be perfectly acceptable to follow it, but because it is written by many
and over time it contradicts itself, it is rendered completely worthless?" I reply that he also said, "an accurate book". Of course, he then has to define "accurate" in this context.
What I meant 1800 was this: those laws are not expressed in the form 'If you drive under seventeen you shall go to prison for fifty years' they're not like 'he who dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another shall be sent to prison for not more than fourteen years'. They're not like that, they're what we call enabling laws. But you're right about the Wainderful Wangel's other rather less astute observations.
And while I'm here, just something about the title of this topic: 'How do you talk to someone about god who won't listen?' bit ambiguous isn't it? is it god who isn't listening, or the someone you're trying to talk to? If it's god, then I wouldn't listen either if I were him. Bloody fed up I'd get I can tell you! People moaning to me all the time, and yet when I sort things out, they don't wanna know!
Oh well. I hate to say it, but it is, in fact, Wangel and Goblin who have, in the course of this topic, proved their insecurity. Here's my question though...What if the Christians are right about what they believe? If their right, they've won. If not, they haven't lost anything, and many have lived moral lives. Does morality help, or harm the world? Whether you follow the Bible or not, there are still some very moral codes and practices one may follow, which are outlined therein. For instance, what is possibly wrong with the 10 commandments? You may not subscribe to the first few, and in fact, the one about the sabbath is not one which I keep, but "Thou shalt not kill, thou shall not steal, and thou shalt not covet hardly seem harmful!
I think it is right to say that the 10 commandments, or part of the 10 commandments, form the basis for a lot of the laws of the world. Whether you believe in God or not, not killing people, not stealing, and living a moral life is a principle which people generally abide by. As for people being christians, well I think we need to ask ourselves what is a christian, because I do think that some people do get confused. I think that generally there are two types of Christian, or should I say, two types of religious people, because lets not forget that there are many religions out there with the same basis, but different beliefs ...
I think that there are those who believe that there is a higher power than ourselves out there, who is responsible for the creation, and consequently the extermination of life, and that when we die, we will be held accountable for the life we have led. But this type of christian leads a fairly normal life, maybe not even a totally virtuous one. doesn't necessarily go to church on Sunday, doesn't necessarily say grace before every meal, just believes in god, but doesn't enforce that belief on others.
And then, and these are the types of christians that generally cause the feelings of animosity from non believers, the ones who feel they have to convert every potential non believer, who feel that everything we do should be run past god for his approval first, who go to church twice on a sunday and read the bible every night before they go to bed, who tell people that if they do not accept god into their lives they will burn in hell. And these people, quite frankly, invariably have nothing else in their lives which is why they often feel the need to be all consumed by their beliefs.
I think there is nothing wrong with believing in God, or Ala, or whatever higher power you choose to worship, as long as such beliefs are restricted to your life, and are not forced on to others (your children excluded as how you choose to bring up your own children is none of anyone else's concern but your own), and at the end of your life, if you are happy with the way you have lived that life, morally or otherwise, then in all reality, the only person you are accountable to, is yourself.
Sugarbaby I'm going to take issue with you on a very important point. how you bring up your children is not merely your affair, and in terms of religion it is important to observe and realise this. Imagine, for instance, a Christian mother and Muslim father. The Muslim father wants the male child circumcised, but the Christian mother does not. The parents are separated and the child spends 50-50 time with mother and father. Now, the question is this: should the mother be able to stop the circumcision? The court of appeal have said yes, she should. They have also said that decisions as to circumcision etc. where there are conflicting interests will rarely be granted in favour of the person wanting it to go ahead. Other factors such as state intervention to prevent naturists wearing no clothes in front of their children amply demonstrate that how one brings up one's children, even if one prays in aid one's beliefs, is very much the concern of others as well as the person doing the bringing up. Sorry about that last sentence's lack of eloquence or style or both. I would say, however, that in all other respects sugarbaby is correct, apart from the fact that Allah has an H in it.
I am, to a great extent, part of the second group of Christians Sugar-Baby spoke of. I do go to church 3 times a week, and read the Bible every morning, and try to live a moral, clean life, belieing I will answer to God for it. The Bible does dictate many of my thought patterns, which I feel has saved me from some trouble I otherwise would've encountered. However, if a person does not want to hear about Jesus Christ, I don't shove him down their throat. I feel that does more harm to the cause of Christ than almost anything else in this world. I don't enjoy people using prophanities, however, if they're not in my house, there's not a blessed thing I can do about it. It's their choice, and I'm only accountable for me. However, if their on my terf, and they want to use words, and talk about things I disapprove of, I'm well within my right to force my preference. After all, if a person doesn' like it, they have the option to leave.
On the other hand, if you don't want to hear about Christ, I won't talk about Him with you...I'll respect your opinion, but if you ask, I'll tell you how I feel.
If I start talking about Him, and you tell me to shut up, I will respect your wishes. I think that's the way it should be.
Hear hear.
I never said that the Christians were definitely wrong. I realise that nobody knows how life began, whether god exists, what happens when we die etc. No unboubtable theories on these matters have ever been put forward, and I will only believe things which are prooven. This means that if Christianity was ever prooved to be absolutely undoubtabley correct then I would believe it. However the many different demoninations of it, and the controdictive nature of the bible both undermine the religion really. As for laws, there are consequences for the breaking of every law if the culprit is court by the authorities and action is taken against them. This doesn't apply to religion, people just believe there are consequences if they're found guilty of disobeying the religion and if their religion was to be prooved to be definite3ly incorrect, they and all the other followers of that religion would be as well.
Okay Wainderful wangel, what are the consequences of section 78 of the Law of Property act 1925? This provides that the benefit of a restrictive covenant inures not only as between covenantor and covenantee, but also for the benefit of the covenantee's successors in title, his assigns and his heirs? therein one finds a law truly without a sanction, because if the covenantee never claims the benefit, then the fact that the covenantor doesn't provide the benefit is of no consequence and yet the law says that the benefit should be available. Answer that one old lad!
Lol Lawlord, you made an interesting point about the title hear and the unclarified pronoun, I didn't notice that. Interesting play on words, that.
It's only wrong if you get caught.
I don't know enough about property acts to be able to answer that question Lawlord, but within laws are recommendations and proposals and these have to be treated as such.
I don't believe in god, because earlier I got forced to gog to church and to pray and I never felt like I was doing that voluntarily and i never felt like the prayers were of any use. I know this might sound hard, but I just can't believe in god anymore. I once had an African pen friend who claimed god would make me sighted again - I'm sorry, I respect anyone who believes in god, but this is ridiculous, at least this is my opinion. If god is there and if he could make people sighted again, he could have done that earlier. I hope I did not make myself unpopular on here now.
Ines, I read in the Bible that when Jesus healed a blind man, He told him that he was blind, so that the works of the Father may be seen through him. And they were, for he was healed, and he believed, and the Father's name was glorified. That is why we are this way. We may not all be healed now, but God will use us in some way to glorify His name. I know because I've experienced it first hand; my sighty friends ask me how I do things with all the extra school work, being rejected for being blind, losing sight, and being made fun of, and I say because Jesus helps me through it and is always by my side. Maybe blindies may not be healed at this time, but if they believe in Him and accept Him as their Lord and Savior, and they go to Heaven, they will, in fact, see better than ever before; that is promised in the Bible.
And you wonder why people can't stand Christianity. It's because some Sighted Christians use a persons lack of sight to tempt them to Christianity and corrupt the mind of the blind person with the belief that if they accept Jesus as their lord, they'll be able to see eventually. This belief has not been prooven beyond doubt and I don't think therefore, that there should be any tollerence for the spreading of that of similar beliefs.
Oh I have no problem with their holding such beliefs personally, it makes perfect sense for them to do so if they find inspiration therefrom, and we can't argue with that. Getting back to the Law of Property Act Wainderful wangel, I don't expect you to know about property statutes, but you jolly well know that a statutory provision is neither a recommendation, nor a proposal. It's a law! It must be followed! And yet, there's no sanction for its breach. So, explain that one. How does it fit into your concept of law?
Do you really believe everything they wrote in the bible? I honestly don't. How do they know that it was that way? Maybe it was all invented!! I'm sorry that this all sounds a bit rude, but it's just my opinion. We can not know if anything written in the bible is true.
Oh my goodness! I didn't mean to make anyone mad; I'm sooo sorry! Just like you guys, I was expressing my opinion, and I am terribly sorry if I came across as preachy or anything, for that is the LAST thing I want to do; trust me. Again, I apologize...
No no, you didn't make me mad or something, I just questioned the truth of the bible. It's all good!!
What we can be sure of is that Jesus definitely existed during the reign of the emperor Tiberius.
So you think he existed? I'm sorry, but I'm still not sure, I still doubt it.
Ok, in answer to the question about really believing the Bible, I still hold to my argument...if there were no heaven, no God, no hell, and no Jesus Christ, I still don't lose by believing in them. My life is still enriched by these beliefs, and besides that, the Bible is not an immoral book, so practicing its teaching is not going to get me in trouble.
Secondly, Jesus Christ did exist, and there are plenty of historical records which proved His existence. You don't even have to take the Bible's word for it. He existed, just as much as the Egyptian Pharaohs existed, as well as dead kings, queens and princes. The fact of His existence is not up for debate, unless you want to debate the existance of King George of England, Louis of France, or any oof the other dead people of history of whom we have no other documented evidence of, except writing. i guess, just like everything else, we have to take somebody's word for it. For that matter, how do I know some of you really exist? I mean, it could just be one person with several login names, posting these responses for all I know.
Jesus definitely existed and was crucified in the year 27 AD, when Pontius Pilot was governor of the Jews. at that time, Tiberius was emperor and Lucius Elius Sajanus was the commander of the guard.
But, I suppose some bright spark on here is going to tell me that Tiberius and sajanus, and Pontius Pilot, didn't exist either.
Well, if he really existed, I really can't imagine how he healed so many people. I'm sorry, I mean I am starting to believe he existed, but this even gives me more unanswered questions.
Well probably in the same way that he came out of a virgin. I don't doubt he existed. I did watch once a documentary which said that he was born naturally and that the real bible was distroyed by the romans who then wrote their own version of it because they didn't like the way the original bible portrayed them. This followed a battle which the Romans won. The entire bible hasn't been provved beyond doubt to be true or false. However, it controdicts itself, and their are many versions of Christianity and these factors do undermine its accuracy. I believe that when something hasn't been prooved to be definitely right or definitely wrong, people should be strong enough to admit that nobody knows either way for definite.
Well maybe I'll find my own way in believing in god one day, without getting forced by anyone.
well in actual fact, it is possible for a virgin to become pregnant, but .. let's not explore that here ... and what ll was saying was, the man jesus christ did actually exist, and was crucified, whether he healed the sick and performed miracles .. etc, is the matter for debate.
Yes I didn't dispute that SugarBaby. Inesle you don't need to believe in God. It isn't essential. You have survived without believing in God so far so there's no need to change. Think about all the problems religion has caused. Then you will realise that there are better things to do than pursue a religion which hasn't been provved beyond doubt to be entirely true. Especially don't join one which controdicts itself and has many different versions therefore undermining its accuracy.
When you say proved beyond doubt, Wainderful Wangel, that's all stuff of nonsense because we can't prove very many things beyond doubt. In a court of law, for instance, a conviction doesn't have to be proven beyond doubt, but beyond reasonable doubt. Once that's done, your laboratory can freeze or otherwise experiment on the recalcitrant. Also, it's quite plain to me that you haven't really been paying attention on the history course you purport to be doing, because you'd know then that contradiction doesn't doom a document to failure, especially if it's written by several people. The bible is made up of stories that comprise the old testament, and various writings that comprise the new testament, the originals of some of which we still have to date. So, it's bound to contradict itself! Just like the accounts of the trial of Penn and Meed, of the Popish Plot, of the battle of actium, contradict each other! You fall into the same foolery that you have done in times of yore. One cannot prove a religion beyond doubt, but that doesn't preclude one's believing in it being the truth. One cannot prove that asbestos fibres caused a particular person's mesathelioma, but nonetheless one can still believe that this is what happened even though there is an area of doubt. So the idea that a school of thought or belief is worthless for want of proof beyond doubt is, you guessed it, a non sequitur.
Kragiel wrote: "Jesus Christ did exist, and there are plenty of historical records which proved His existence.
You don't even have to take the Bible's word for it." Really? I'd like to see them. Kragiel wrote: "He existed, just as much as the Egyptian Pharaohs existed, as well as dead kings, queens and princes.
The fact of His existence is not up for debate, unless you want to debate the existance of King George of England, Louis of France, or any oof the other
dead people of history of whom we have no other documented evidence of, except writing. i guess, just like everything else, we have to take somebody's
word for it. For that matter, how do I know some of you really exist? I mean, it could just be one person with several login names, posting these responses
for all I know." I reply: Well, you don't know we all exist as separate entities for sure, and you don't know the existence of many persons of history for usre either. Did Homer exist? Did Socrates? I don't know for sure. I certainly don't believe in someone's existence just because a few people in history wrote about them, although it's also useful to look at motive. Sometimes there is a motive for lying or twisting, sometimes there's legitimate misperception (as in someone believing in a story that was presented as a fiction in the first place), but other times, the person seems to be telling the truth and perceiving things correctly. Of course, the more independent observers we have, the more likely they are to be correct, and we can believe them easier.
I'm really just trying to help a friend, I really don't mean to shove anything down anyone's throat thanks for your views all of you. Mel, Hannah, you will always be my sisters in Christ thanks, and you Lordlover thanks for your input please PM me if you want to talk that goes for all of you. Thanks And God Bless all of you, and even if you don't believe you are all my brothers and sisters in Christ.
What's the difference between being healed and being cured? Plus, do these people who wish for a deity to give us our eyesight back think about how we willl ahve to relearn how to live life and do stuff with our newly-found eyesight?
i doubt that even crosses their minds.
I'd take the eyesight in a second. buddy
hmmm I dunnow, if you've seen before then of course, but if you've never seen before, suddenly being able to see would be scary as hell ..
Religion often causes people to get a clouded view of reality. Just because I have two legs doesn't mean that I should pray for some amputee to have two legs also. Our uniqueness is one of the greatest qualities in life, and prayer sohuldn't get in the way of this. That being said, the sight vs. no sight argument would totally take this thread off course, so I'll reserve my comments on that one for later.
And I think this is something a lot of people would not even think of concerning those of us who have never seen a thing. They're not thinking ahead of time, they are only thinking of the immediate result of us getting our eyesight, which would mean we would have what they have and therefore aren't the miserable and depressed wretches we are in their minds. Plus, they've just roped themselves another subject for conversion which will most likely in their minds give them heavenly brownie points. This is immediately shot down when we very politely refuse their offer and they tell us angrily that they hope we burn in Hell for being so ungrateful. LOL!
Isn't that slightly harsh though? After all, although most of us might not choose to see, as we have never seen before, I don't think any of us would choose to have been born blind? or to lose our sight? So while the thought of suddenly being able to see is a scary one ... looking in the mirror ... scary! .. if we could turn back the clock, are there any of us who really would choose to not be able to see? I don't think so.
First of all, Sugarbaby, reality can be seen as a harsh thing. Second, I personally don't even speculate about whether I could turn back time and do things over or what I could choose. You can't turn back time and you can't choose. What you can choose is to pine away over the fact you can't see and others can and wish you could, else you can try and accept it and find some good in it and be relaxed about it. Nobody has it easier in life, they just have a different set of problems than yours, and to me, that's OK. I've been blind all my 40 years and despite its annoyances, I accept it and am pretty happy with it and relaxed about it. So I personally will not seek out any faith healers and will tell any street preacher or healer that I'm pretty happy with my life, thank you very much.
Oh, here's another thought, and it's a brief excursion into the land of what-if. If we were the type who sought to educate the sighted about what it is to be blind and how to treat us and what our abilities are and such,and if we became sighted and it was some kind of simple process, people could say that they shouldn't have to change their attitudes towards blind people if we could just become sighted like they are.
Your all right but I still pray that my vision will come back completely, cause we wouldn't have it so hard on us if we could, and because I know that God preforms miracles, and I know if you really want your vision back that if you pray you'll get it back when the time is right. God bless all of you my brothers and sisters in Christ.
ah no no laberynth I wasn't implying that we'd harp back to turning back the clock ... all i meant was, if someone gave you the choice, most would choose to have been able to see ... I'm perfectly happy with my life as it is right now ..
and um, if you prey hard enough then your sight will come back when the time is right? so does that mean that if you die and go to heaven, assuming you have lived a virtuous life that is, that you will be blind in heaven as well? because if that is the case then heaven ain't perfect either is it ... or does it mean that if you prety then your sight will come back while you're still alive, because if all you need to do to get what you really want is prey for it ... then ... i'll have next week's lotto number please?
In a sense what you pray for will come true. "There's power in the tongue."
tony, thats so not true that praying for your site will make it happen. prayers dont work for everything, nor everyone. everyone has their own beliefs, and you have to respect that. not everyone sees christianity as you do either, so just chill with the talk ok? you believe what you want, and let others believe what they want. im not being rude, thats just reality, and sometimes the truth hurts.
Well, Sugarbaby, you don't ask easy questions, do you? LOL! Now, I'm no Christian, but the way I understand it, just because you pray for something doesn't mean you'll get it. I suppose people believe the deity has its reasons and sometimes it says no. I think this idea that if we pray hard enough for eyesight, we'll get it is wishful thinking on the part of those who want us to pray for it. I suppose they want us to be transformed into something that is easier for them to cope with or understand.
absolutely, or wishful thinking on the part of those who find it difficult to come to terms with the fact they cannot see...
or who are not content with any particular part of their life for that matter ... after all, if you believe that it "shouldn't be like this" and that all you have to do is believe in god and he will basically give you what you want, then turning to god maybe doesn't seem like such a bad prospect if all else has failed.
I totally agree with everything Labyrinth has said in the last few days. Tony What you say you know you don't, you just believe it and it is a very stupid person who can't distinguish betweeen knowing and believing. It doesn't bother me that I am blind enough to make me want to turn the clock back and be born sighted or want to see. I'm blind, that's just the way it is and I just get on with my life like sighted people do. Labyrinth Tony and other evangelical jesus freaks will use everything they can to convert people. When they see a depressed person they'll tell them "gods love will make you happy". When they see someone who's ill in anyway thgey'll tel them "Giods love will make them better". They'll do what ever it takes to increase the amount of Evangelical Jesus Freaks and have no boundaries or limits.
ww I am equally opposed to people preaching to me and trying to convert me into this faith, or that faith .. I make my own decisions on what I believe is the right way to go. however, I think calling extreme religious people "freaks" is somewhat harsh. Whether you believe in god or not, deeply religious people believe that god will give them strength, and courage, they do not deliberately set out to brainwash people, they honestly believe that the way they have chosen is the right way, and they feel so passionately about that, that they feel the need to tell the world about it. no, I do not think it is right, and I do not think people should be allowed to go knocking on peoples' doors, handing out leaflets, standing on street corners, spouting the word of god, and telling me that if I do not convert I will burn in hell for all eternity, however, I do respect that some people believe strongly in their faith, and that in times of trouble, that faith gives them strength and courage to carry on.
ww, great way of putting it, i guess it is a little harsh to call people like that "freaks", but what else can you call them? wierdos? that doesnt seem like a term suitable enough to describe them. i dont know, maybe its just me, all ill say is that people like that really urk me.
I think in this case, "freak" means "fanatic." You can be a Star Trek freak or a heavy metal freak or a religious freak. And I think Sugarbaby's got it right as to the fanatical mindset. These people honestly believe what they do to the core with no reservations. Unfortunately, part of what they're taught is that anyone who doesn't follow their particular way will be punished for it, and the honestly believe that one, too. I'm not going to put anyone down for the path they follow, but extremists are not my favorite kinds of people, and that means any type of extremist.
Yeah, I pray about my sight, but I pray that His will be done over mine, so if that means He wills for me to be blind, may it be done. If He wills for me to be sighted, great! He might say yes, no, or wait, but He always has a will and plan for things. I'm not trying to convert anyone; I'm just expressing what I believe, as you all have. I'm sorry if I ever come across as preachy because that is most definitely not what I aim to do so yeah... have a good day, all.
For all we know, we might be blind as a lesson to those who stubbornly are not accepting of differences in people. Just a slightly idealistic musing.
well, a former manager of the England football team, Glen Hoddle, had the view that the disabled were being punished for sins they had committed in a previous life, and he actually did believe in god I think, but also in reincarnation, and he made those views public and was promptly relieved of his position of football manager ..
That's the way I see things to be honest: That people are disabled or go thru things to either teach others to accept differences and to teach them to help others. (Not help as in feeling sorry for, but help as in knowing that there are people who can't all just literally look at something, communicate in speech, learn certain things, or care for themselves.) So it teaches people not to take anything for granted, and to consider doing things to make peoples' lives easier or at least to support them thru hard times. I mean, if noone was different in anyway (including race, ethnicity, abilities, etc.), or if we never had any problems/issues to deal with or help others thru, it would be boring in that we all wouldn't have anything to appreciate or learn from.
Leilani
That's the way I see things to be honest: That people are disabled or go thru things to either teach others to accept differences and to teach them to help others. (Not help as in feeling sorry for, but help as in knowing that there are people who can't all just literally look at something, communicate in speech, learn certain things, or care for themselves.) So it teaches people not to take anything for granted, and to consider doing things to make peoples' lives easier or at least to support them thru hard times. I mean, if noone was different in anyway (including race, ethnicity, abilities, etc.), or if we never had any problems/issues to deal with or help others thru, it would be boring in that we all wouldn't have anything to appreciate or learn from.
Leilani
I think I recall hearing about that, probably in another topic in these boards. That particular notion just seems way too harsh for my own taste, and a bit outdated.
Yeah I remember Glen Hoddle saying that and he was sacked. I was opposed to him been sacked. He hasn't been prooved to be wrong on his views or right and he is entitled to have them. His views on disabled people been disabled as a punnishment for bad things they did in previous lives should not have determined whether he remained an England manager or not.
well no but that's a topic for another day ... the brittish media have this habbit of calling for people to be sacked for their views/behaviors ... i seem to recall there being calls for paul Gascoigne to be sacked when it emerged he beat up his wife..
Well I wouldn't employ a criminal.
Respect someone for thier beliefs, i believe in God but i never force others to believe what i believe, just give sthat person time maybe he/she will listen
ah but ww they're only a criminal if they've been convicted. He wasn't convicted, she never took action against him, therefore, he's not a criminal. Whilst morally I might disapprove of someone who beats up their wife, in fact morally I definitely disapprove of it and there's no way I'd stick around and stand for that if it was my husband, I still couldn't fire someone because of the way they treat their wife unless she took him to court and took legal proceedings against him.
Yeah well if I had reason to believe my employee did what he did they'd be sacked!
and you'd be up in front of an employers tribunal for unfair dismissal faster than you could say "here's your p45"
Well they should be limited since who a person highers and fires is their decision if they're in charge.
sadly employment law doesn't work like that though. otherwise the DDA wouldn't be worth the paper it was written on either ..
Well I guess I have to take bacdk all the anti-god posts in this topic now that I found my faith again.
I doubt you found it again, I think you probably stopped resisting the pressure. I'm glad I'm not so week!
No no no, you can doubt as much as you want to but I found it again. OLr, well, call it whatever you want.
I am happy being a Wiccan, and for those of you who would pray for me to 'see the light' please, don't waste your time. I have found my path and it is I and only I who must walk it. Goddess, deliver me from these insane, narrow-minded religious fanatics.
I am religious and i believe in god. Never will I push my beleifs on other people. My boyfriend is Hindu and never would I think to make him convert. I believe that we are all entitled to our belief systems. by pushing your beliefs you are pushing people away. Just be supportive. If she doesn't believe in Christianity, find other ways to be supportive besides religion.