100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Should people pray for the misery of others? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
You are funny.. why would i debate sencelessness? Shalom..Miles Well, I guess there is no point in continuing, if you see my argument as senseless. Maybe you are not using bible-college tactics after all. Maybe you just can't see sense where there is one. That sort of blindness to reason is called "stupidity" in the parts where I come from. Salem A'leikum. No.. U ever argue with a 4 yo who just likes to argue? See i have people who do not believe on here who are Athiests ect. who would never say they believe wishing harm on someone makes any sence at all. They are very intelligent people I may add.. They may not believe as I do but jc believers do not either. so we have very common area's thier. I respect them and they I believe they respect me. Shalom..Miles |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wux
on
Thu 07/07/11 11:18 AM
|
|
You are funny.. why would i debate sencelessness? Shalom..Miles Well, I guess there is no point in continuing, if you see my argument as senseless. Maybe you are not using bible-college tactics after all. Maybe you just can't see sense where there is one. That sort of blindness to reason is called "stupidity" in the parts where I come from. Salem A'leikum. No.. U ever argue with a 4 yo who just likes to argue? See i have people who do not believe on here who are Athiests ect. who would never say they believe wishing harm on someone makes any sence at all. They are very intelligent people I may add.. They may not believe as I do but jc believers do not either. so we have very common area's thier. I respect them and they I believe they respect me. Shalom..Miles Jesus Christ, man, you are proving with every word yuo say how deeply you don't have a clue you don't get what I say and mean. I am realizing you are just plain incapable of straight thinking. Why did you make yourself sound so intelligent in the beginning? Now I wasted an hour or so in my life by telling reasons to someone, you, who is farthest from understanding the reasons, and who has a hard time conceptualizing things. Sorry. I apologize to you. I should not call you names, much like i should not call any other unfortunate one names. For the record, I NEVER SAID IT'S OKAY TO WISH HARM. Get that into your head, man, by hook or by crook. I said if it is kosher to wish good for others, then it's kosher to wish harm, based on the fact that wishing is a form of judgement. I did NOT say my personal opinion on this. I don't give out personal opinions, I say things that are based on facts, and the facts are connected by logic. That's all I do. You do not have the right to call my posts senseless ONLY because you don't understand them. You do NOT have the right to treat me as if I were a child, only because you believe in a god and I don't. You do not have the right to put words in my mouth. You have the right to state opinions, or to debate with another's opinion if you feel he or she erred. You are making out with me here as if my erring was based on my logic, whereas that is not the case. I accept when someone points out an erring of mine, and I see that I truly erred. You just called me condescending names, and you kept avoiding the issues I brought up, but at the same time escalating the argument by opposing me -- by saying I was wrong, and not at the same time saying meritfully why I was wrong. I made a mistake by not recognizing that you are only capable of this. I see the religion forum like all others, a forum to give opinions, except a bit more leaning to the science-philosophy forum's criteria, which dictate that the participants be familiar with debating, since there are a lot of opposing opinions on this forum. The organizers made the rule for the participants to not call any others names, which is good; so other than bible quotes or quotes from other religion's scriptures, or quoting religious authorities, the only arguments we can seriously consider here are logical debating arguments. I admit, I hate it when people disagree with my logical arguments, without understanding them first. I don't know why they do that. That is what a child does, a four-year-old: he does not understand the points, he just argues. Now you have the audacity to say I do the four-year-old's job, and you are not. Why do you say that? Because to you my arguments are jibberish, nothing, senseless. You said it several times. Of course you see my arguing and debating like the behaviour of a four-year-old. Spare the rod and spoil the child. Beat independent thinking out of him. If he pits logic against the Bible, he must be punished. There is no other way. Therefore a child who argues in bible school is laughed at, ridiculed, told he is obstreperous and argues too much. Of course he argues too much!! The bible makes no sense to a logical thinker, that's why!! The good sunday school scholar, however, can struggle his intellect under his belt, and accept the complete jibberish any religion teaches. Where was I going with this. Oh yes. I do think there is another forum here on this site where religious people can only post. I think it's a very good idea. This forum, here, is not a relgious forum, it's a forum on religion. Which means that any view that is acceptable can be voiced. To me, a voice that calls another a four-year-old child for nothing, who platitudizes, who is condescending for no real reason but only because the owner of the voice feels superior due to believing in a god, are NOT acceptable reasons. This, again, is an opinion. I am not saying it's the absolute truth and everyone must accept this. I am saying this is how and what I consider acceptable. In this light, I think if people feel superiour due to being religious, or those who express it by condescendence, and by talking around each issue and not meritfully about the points, would have a much better time posting in the religious forum. I mean to say, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Verona, do as the Romeos do. When in a secular world, please don't assume superiority due to being religious, and don't think that your arguments must be accepted if they defy logic; furthermore, it is nice behaviour, if you don't put words into others' mouths, and please don't take what you understand for gibberish or nonsense, and if you realy don't know what the person means with it, then please don't challenge that person with calling his statement jibberish or nonsense. Dos: do state your opinion. Do say what you mean to say. Do defend your position. Do try to stay with a certain point that you are answering, and don't change the subject, or the focus, and continue as if you are still answering the particular point. Do consider others' statements before commenting on them. Do be relevant. Thanks. The above are not rules, not part of the user agreement. i am listing them only as my own preference, and since I am no more than a user, they are not binding. I am just saying that I get angry and express it if someone repeatedly contravenes one or a few of the above, or contravenes at any sinlge time a larger number of them. My anger is not binding to anyone else, I am just saying that my anger will elicit an angry reaction (not the fact that I had an unhappy childhood, Miles). I actually have the right to get angry, I have the right to have emotions, and I also have the right to defend my position, much like anyone and everyone else on the site and on the forums. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You are funny.. why would i debate sencelessness? Shalom..Miles Well, I guess there is no point in continuing, if you see my argument as senseless. Maybe you are not using bible-college tactics after all. Maybe you just can't see sense where there is one. That sort of blindness to reason is called "stupidity" in the parts where I come from. Salem A'leikum. No.. U ever argue with a 4 yo who just likes to argue? See i have people who do not believe on here who are Athiests ect. who would never say they believe wishing harm on someone makes any sence at all. They are very intelligent people I may add.. They may not believe as I do but jc believers do not either. so we have very common area's thier. I respect them and they I believe they respect me. Shalom..Miles Jesus Christ, man, you are proving with every word yuo say how deeply you don't have a clue you don't get what I say and mean. I am realizing you are just plain incapable of straight thinking. Why did you make yourself sound so intelligent in the beginning? Now I wasted an hour or so in my life by telling reasons to someone, you, who is farthest from understanding the reasons, and who has a hard time conceptualizing things. Sorry. I apologize to you. I should not call you names, much like i should not call any other unfortunate one names. For the record, I NEVER SAID IT'S OKAY TO WISH HARM. Get that into your head, man, by hook or by crook. I said if it is kosher to wish good for others, then it's kosher to wish harm, based on the fact that wishing is a form of judgement. I did NOT say my personal opinion on this. I don't give out personal opinions, I say things that are based on facts, and the facts are connected by logic. That's all I do. You do not have the right to call my posts senseless ONLY because you don't understand them. You do NOT have the right to treat me as if I were a child, only because you believe in a god and I don't. You do not have the right to put words in my mouth. You have the right to state opinions, or to debate with another's opinion if you feel he or she erred. You are making out with me here as if my erring was based on my logic, whereas that is not the case. I accept when someone points out an erring of mine, and I see that I truly erred. You just called me condescending names, and you kept avoiding the issues I brought up, but at the same time escalating the argument by opposing me -- by saying I was wrong, and not at the same time saying meritfully why I was wrong. I made a mistake by not recognizing that you are only capable of this. I see the religion forum like all others, a forum to give opinions, except a bit more leaning to the science-philosophy forum's criteria, which dictate that the participants be familiar with debating, since there are a lot of opposing opinions on this forum. The organizers made the rule for the participants to not call any others names, which is good; so other than bible quotes or quotes from other religion's scriptures, or quoting religious authorities, the only arguments we can seriously consider here are logical debating arguments. I admit, I hate it when people disagree with my logical arguments, without understanding them first. I don't know why they do that. That is what a child does, a four-year-old: he does not understand the points, he just argues. Now you have the audacity to say I do the four-year-old's job, and you are not. Why do you say that? Because to you my arguments are jibberish, nothing, senseless. You said it several times. Of course you see my arguing and debating like the behaviour of a four-year-old. Spare the rod and spoil the child. Beat independent thinking out of him. If he pits logic against the Bible, he must be punished. There is no other way. Therefore a child who argues in bible school is laughed at, ridiculed, told he is obstreperous and argues too much. Of course he argues too much!! The bible makes no sense to a logical thinker, that's why!! The good sunday school scholar, however, can struggle his intellect under his belt, and accept the complete jibberish any religion teaches. Where was I going with this. Oh yes. I do think there is another forum here on this site where religious people can only post. I think it's a very good idea. This forum, here, is not a relgious forum, it's a forum on religion. Which means that any view that is acceptable can be voiced. To me, a voice that calls another a four-year-old child for nothing, who platitudizes, who is condescending for no real reason but only because the owner of the voice feels superior due to believing in a god, are NOT acceptable reasons. This, again, is an opinion. I am not saying it's the absolute truth and everyone must accept this. I am saying this is how and what I consider acceptable. In this light, I think if people feel superiour due to being religious, or those who express it by condescendence, and by talking around each issue and not meritfully about the points, would have a much better time posting in the religious forum. I mean to say, when in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Verona, do as the Romeos do. When in a secular world, please don't assume superiority due to being religious, and don't think that your arguments must be accepted if they defy logic; furthermore, it is nice behaviour, if you don't put words into others' mouths, and please don't take what you understand for gibberish or nonsense, and if you realy don't know what the person means with it, then please don't challenge that person with calling his statement jibberish or nonsense. Dos: do state your opinion. Do say what you mean to say. Do defend your position. Do try to stay with a certain point that you are answering, and don't change the subject, or the focus, and continue as if you are still answering the particular point. Do consider others' statements before commenting on them. Do be relevant. Thanks. The above are not rules, not part of the user agreement. i am listing them only as my own preference, and since I am no more than a user, they are not binding. I am just saying that I get angry and express it if someone repeatedly contravenes one or a few of the above, or contravenes at any sinlge time a larger number of them. My anger is not binding to anyone else, I am just saying that my anger will elicit an angry reaction (not the fact that I had an unhappy childhood, Miles). I actually have the right to get angry, I have the right to have emotions, and I also have the right to defend my position, much like anyone and everyone else on the site and on the forums. don't u just love it!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was just scanning my FB page and there was a prayer wishing misery and death on someone they felt deserved it 
First, off no one can determine another's life or death deservance, period.
But to me this shows an unhealthy mind, one that feels justified in determining whether another human deserves this life. Who are they to feel they have this right? One need not ever pray for the misery or death of another person, even a bad person will suffer his or her Karma. I have faith in Karma and the law of vibration. As Evelyn said in the movie "The Mummy" "You know, nasty little fellows such as yourself always get their comeuppance. " ALWAYS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wux ..
Forget about the Hate in your childhood.. Its not your fault and lead a fruitful life.. May Yahweh Bless you with Shalom..Miles Well done. Nice, diminutizing, ad-hominem argument released by the best mind of the Christian arguing group on the site that bites the heathen in the face. Aside from being condescending, which shows an ab-ovo feeling of superiority, it is also avoiding the intellectual part of the debate even more obviously. You are pulling out, fast, and throw a bone behind for the atheist dogs so you hope that will stop them from chasing you, at least temporarily, until you reach the fence of the fortress of intellectual debates and can jump over and run like hell for freedom of being embarrassed by being out-debated by an atheist dog, who hasn't god on his side, but damn if he doesn't come up with irrefutable arguments that make the church shake uncontrollably in its foundation. I guess this is university-level Bible college teaching: when you have to capitulate, or else your very ground is pulled out of under your ideological dogma and from under the suprastructure of your Church by your atheist counterpart in a debate, then in those situations, profess your highly trained theological teachers, you must avoid the subject altogether, you must say a platitude that you don't feel but which allows you to retreat gracefully, but do the retreat fast, because there can be times, when your atheist devil debating opposition will notice your motives with the blessing and your calling him insane and a hater, so don't give him time to recoup and come back with revealing your true colours and the bible college's most important lesson on how to ditch all jetsome and just flee like a scared mouse from the debate.    BRAVO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID:
don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was just scanning my FB page and there was a prayer wishing misery and death on someone they felt deserved it
First, off no one can determine another's life or death deservance, period.
But to me this shows an unhealthy mind, one that feels justified in determining whether another human deserves this life. Who are they to feel they have this right? I wouldn't do that, but each person's relationship with God is their own. I believe in freedom of Religion and I try to only judge a religious behavior as being bad or wrong when it directly effects others. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID: don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
u ever play checkers with a chicken? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID: don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
u ever play checkers with a chicken? If you want to use an analogy, use one that really fits. With Wux, you are out matched. You are the chicken, and he eats chicken for lunch. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID: don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
Thanks... Jeanniebean. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID: don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
u ever play checkers with a chicken? If you want to use an analogy, use one that really fits. With Wux, you are out matched. You are the chicken, and he eats chicken for lunch. Yes, grr, and for that reason I don't play checkers with a chicken, coz my dear ole' Ma always tole me not to play with my food. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Milesoftheusa SAID: don't u just love it!!!!!
Yes I do love his response and I agree with everything he said. It is something I agree with and something that you would be wise to reread and let some of it sink in. Excellent post wux!
u ever play checkers with a chicken? If you want to use an analogy, use one that really fits. With Wux, you are out matched. You are the chicken, and he eats chicken for lunch. Well thiers more to checkers with a chicken than u realize.. look it up. Do you really think I care what a bunch of people think of my intelligence? u should look to the past. Why should i listen or spend time with anyone who just play games.. thats mostly what i c.. I have made challenges about the scriptures and no one cares.. why should I care.. I am very secure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should always pray for justice. And, then leave it at that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should always pray for justice. And, then leave it at that. If God is already just, then wouldn't such a prayer be rather redundant? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should always pray for justice. And, then leave it at that. If God is already just, then wouldn't such a prayer be rather redundant? God's justice is delivered after death, perhaps Ruth is talking about man's justice. In other words, the bad guy gets caught and the innocent aren't hurt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should always pray for justice. And, then leave it at that. If God is already just, then wouldn't such a prayer be rather redundant? God's justice is delivered after death, perhaps Ruth is talking about man's justice. In other words, the bad guy gets caught and the innocent aren't hurt. So in other words, if you pray to God that justice be done on Earth, then he might intervene in human affairs and see to it that the no injustice is done? All because a human requested it? God himself would allow injustices to be done if these things aren't pointed out to him by a mortal human? Do you need to be specific and pray that justice is done for certain people, or can you request that justice be done for everyone? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So in other words, if you pray to God that justice be done on Earth, then he might intervene in human affairs and see to it that the no injustice is done? If all good people prayed for that? Probably. All because a human requested it? He loves us, so yeah. God himself would allow injustices to be done if these things aren't pointed out to him by a mortal human? Once again, you reveal that you haven't read the Bible. We have free will, so God allows us to exercise it. Satan can send his angels out to work evil in the world. God has us give the marching orders to angels. If we don't ask them to intervene in the world on our behalf, they won't. Because WE didn't ask, not because God didn't want them to help us. God believes in liberty and freedom and won't directly interfere in our lives unless we request it. Do you need to be specific and pray that justice is done for certain people, or can you request that justice be done for everyone? I would guess that you should be specific. Jesus said that prayer should be a very personal thing which included contrition for your wrongs against others and asked for forgiveness, as well as asking for material things like enough resources to make it through another day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One should always pray for justice. And, then leave it at that. If God is already just, then wouldn't such a prayer be rather redundant? God's justice is delivered after death, perhaps Ruth is talking about man's justice. In other words, the bad guy gets caught and the innocent aren't hurt. Yes, thank you for clarifying. That is what I meant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spider wrote:
Once again, you reveal that you haven't read the Bible. That's hardly possible. With myriad of disagreeing sects and denominations of Christianity it's crystal clear that no two people who read these collections of fables ever agree on much anything that this superstitious rumors have to say. The appeal to free will doesn't cut it anyway, there are plenty of examples in the Bible where God intervened in the free will of men. I think it starts in Exodus where God hardens the heart of the pharaoh. Not much free will there for the pharaoh there. There are also claims that god blinds certain people to the truth of his scriptures. Again, not much free will there either. And the list goes on. Moreover, the Jews stand firm that Jesus did not meet the requirements of the prophecies of the coming of a messiah. Are you going to suggest that this reveals that they had not read the Torah or Old Testament? Clearly your personal accusations and superficial attacks to attempt to discredit specific individuals for not having "read" the bible is both lame and unrighteous. Most people on these forums have been alert enough to recognize that I have studied the Bible far more than most Christians have. Your lame attempts to wave me off as "not having read the Bible" is truly a cheap shot and basically a dirty underhanded trick to attempt to discredit a person rather than a topic. The arguments that God needs to respect the "Free Will" of people simply cannot be supported in light of biblical stories. Jesus himself supposedly intervened in Saul's free will, appearing before Saul and converting him into the "believer" Paul. Paul would no longer have any choice but to "believe" at that point. His free will to chose whether or not to believe would have been violated. The story of the Canaanites and Israelites is also a story where God intervenes in the free will of the Canaanites by not only siding with the Israelites, but by actually taking part in the war by crumbling the walls of the their city. The Biblical God couldn't give a damn about anyone's free will Spider. That has been made perfectly clear by many examples given right in the scriptures. So perhaps you are the one who is lacking when it comes to knowledge of what's actually in the Bible? 
How can you claim that a God who hardens the heart of a Pharaoh doesn't intervene with the free will of someone? It's right there in the story. Or have you not read these biblical stories? Exodus 11:10 And Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh: and the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land So much for the idea that the Biblical God doesn't intervene in the free will of others. 
Yep, you should try reading some of these biblical stories Spider. You might learn something. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should people pray for the misery of others?
 Should people rape and murder each other?
|
|
|
|
|
