One Punk Under God
- Started
- Last post
- 185 Responses
- mrdobolina0
flagellum, what was the major reason why americans left england?
the constitution says that no religion can be established as the american religion. what don't you get about that?
- flagellum0
Who's trying to establish a theocracy, mrdobolina??
- mrdobolina0
I fail to see how the founding fathers personal views of religion have anything to do with the constitution.
- Mimio0
In the mind of the Christian believer all those who oppose their belief system are still subject to it. That's basically where my objection to xtianity starts.
Mimio
(Dec 21 06, 12:21)This comes down to the issue of truth being relative or absolute.
flagellum
(Dec 21 06, 12:24)I don't think so. Condemnation is just pure belief.
- grunttt0
to an outsider this might look like a big ol' fight.
but i know that y'all really fucking love this shit.
have fun!
- skelly0
Mimio, I get what you're saying, I just take issue with the point that the entire faith is intolerant.
In the example you give, when taken to it's extreme would be considered intolerant.
But when you don't impose your belief on others and you don't judge them based on whether or not they agree with you, I don't consider that intolerant.
- flagellum0
Mimio: there's certainly no way to empirically prove condemnation. I think you are trying to say that you have a difficult time with exclusivism. But this is not the same thing as intolerance.
Intolerance - "You Christians are stupid and you suck because you're one."
Exclusivism - "The Bible teaches that we are all dead in our sins - everyone of us. But the good news is that thru Christ alone, we can receive forgiveness and eternal life as an absolutely free gift."
- mrdobolina0
gruntt, the only person I really dislike in this thread is mpfree, but no matter, noone really respects the guys opinions. he just says garbage to get a rise out of people.
- Mimio0
False dilemma. You're saying it's tolerant because it presents a fix to the problem it creates. I'm saying the whole narrative is flawed and intolerant of variation as a belief system.
- mrdobolina0
is tolerance possible really?
I mean the core beliefs are diametrically opposed.
- mpfree0
gruntt, the only person I really dislike in this thread is mpfree, but no matter, noone really respects the guys opinions. he just says garbage to get a rise out of people.
mrdobolina
(Dec 21 06, 12:43)hahhhaa ROFL ohhhhhhhhhhh really? is that right? Or maybe you just say things that would be hurtful to loved ones.
mrdobolina, you just stay wrapped up in that little cocoon of yours up there and keep preaching that same Liberal BS.
np by me.
You can fuck right off chief!
- Mimio0
Mr D.
Do you mean is tolerance between agnosticism and theism possible?If so. I don't think it is either.
- flagellum0
The problem is it can only be truly considered a false dilemma if it can be empirically proved false. You can't demonstrate that a fall into sin didn't happen. However I can point you to the deletirious effects we experience daily (of course you can choose to interpret the cause of said decay, differently).
So, we end at simply a difference of opinions. I believe the narrative explains too much too well to be dismissed. I respect that you see things differently.
- mrdobolina0
nah I mean at what point does tolerance become "humoring" someone?
- flagellum0
Depends again on how we define tolerance. We're being too ambiguous about it. I have great friends who are agnostics. Or am I missing something?
- mrdobolina0
I'm unsure as well.
- Mimio0
The burden of proof lies with the believer, that's why it's a false dilemma. The believer imposes that story.
- Mimio0
It's not a tolerant idea if the result of non-conformity is perpetual torment in hell.
...not very punk-rock either.
- mrdobolina0
haha