The Religion/Spirituality Thread

[EvanG]

Stay strong @Iron MikeyJ

[janrichmond]

Wishing you all the best @Iron MikeyJ 

[Iron MikeyJ]

8 hours ago, Whiskey Rose said:

oh my gosh @Iron MikeyJ, that is pretty serious! 

Just putting this out there, but if you are a snorer, have you ever been checked for sleep apnea? Those cpap machines can help get more oxygen to blood while you are sleeping which may help you a bit, idk. 

Anyway, I wish you all the best. Maybe you can start an online Sunday school so to speak. I know that you made the stories and connections and mysteries of the Bible very interesting and easy to understand. Lots of people would probably enjoy the way you impart your knowledge. 

Thanks

I actually DO have a CPAP machine. Thanks though 😃

[Iron MikeyJ]

7 hours ago, soon said:

Dang @Iron MikeyJ, glad you are taking this so well in stride. Please dont hesitate to ask your Parish for what you need - thats why we gather as Christians, to share in life and give of ourselves to one another in the name of Christ. As I'm sure you've given of yourself many times before. And who knows, that Eucharist blood might just have the same heart healthy properties as say... I dunno, like... red wine 

I bet your Lego game is gonna go through the roof! And I hope that when you're able that your Lego channel will be a relaxing way to keep earning a bit, too. 

I dont usually take the wine (but that's because I dont like sharing a cup with everybody). Besides you dont HAVE to take the blood, you can have just the Eucharist if you want to.

As for my Lego stuff, yes lol. I DO plan on really hitting my Lego channel up quite a bit (it's fun, and to make a little extra money). I also plan on branching it out into retro gaming as well. 

[Iron MikeyJ]

@Lio @EvanG @Kwick1 @Ratam @janrichmond

Thanks everybody, I appreciate it.

yes one day at a time, I'm hopeful and grateful for every moment. 🙏

[Ratam]

16 minutes ago, Iron MikeyJ said:

@Lio @EvanG @Kwick1 @Ratam @janrichmond

Thanks everybody, I appreciate it.

yes one day at a time, I'm hopeful and grateful for every moment. 🙏

take care of you health , we will pray for you  🙏✌

[EvanG]

Two weeks ago the Restored Reformed Church in my country translated the Nashville statement and published it. It's getting obviously a lot of criticism but unbelievably there are crazy christians who are signing it. Back to the Middle Ages!

Edited January 15, 2019 by EvanG

[SoulMonster]

Great news to all the christians here! The catholic pope has finally acknowledged the widespread use of nuns as sex slaves by priests. The pope admitted this during a recent speech in Abu Dhabi, where he referred to it as a "scandal" and blamed it on priests "seeing women as second class". Hmm, I wonder where they got that idea?

Of course the problems is still on-going, but the pope assuredly said they are "working on it" and that it is just confined to "certain congregations" (including congregations in Italy, France, India and African countries...). So perhaps nuns in your city isn't being raped as you read this?

An organization for nuns argued that the catholic church's "culture of silence and secrecy" is making it harder to both be open about the problem and to do something about it. A nun who had been raped by a priest is quoted at describing the priest as having had "a split personality". 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47134033

[janrichmond]

10 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

 

GNR used that before they came on stage,  during the Illusions Tour. 

That's todays fact of the day 

[downzy]

10 minutes ago, soon said:

Im sure glad that Imperialism doesnt make me laugh. Id feel like a right jack ass.

Theres never been a time I was unable to address you.

You avoided many of my points on Christianity only a few days ago. Not saying that you’re not within you’re right to do so, but let’s not pretend you don’t avoid certain arguments brought forward by others that you take issue with.

[soon]

4 minutes ago, downzy said:

You avoided many of my points on Christianity only a few days ago. Not saying that you’re not within you’re right to do so, but let’s not pretend you don’t avoid certain arguments brought forward by others that you take issue with.

No. I didnt. Things that were just bizarre were referred to as being "Interesting conclusions." Apparently you feel that they deserved more time than that, but they didnt. But they were addressed. Also you neglected to demonstrate you accusation of cherry picking. So you didnt address something.

3 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Of course I wasn't laughing at imperialism, but this cutie: "we discuss how to better mobilize our networks to resist the Imperialists from the context of our own lives and setting".

Here's an example of you evading a discussion. And no, there was nothing rude in my question:

 

So your ignorance to the role and importance of social movements is what makes you laugh. Okay. 

You just linked me to entire thread. 

Edited February 26, 2019 by soon

[downzy]

Just now, soon said:

No. I didnt. Things that were just bizarre were referred to as being "Interesting conclusions." Apparently you feel that they deserved more time than that, but they didnt. But they were addressed.

Lol, okay...  I wrote a wall of information supporting my arguments and you decided not to respond, save for suggesting we have different points of view. 

But sure, tell yourself what you want. 

[downzy]

58 minutes ago, soon said:

Bullshit 

I think you have a very inflated sense of your Biblical knowledge.

And lets not forget that you wrote a wall of information unsolicited just because I dared to correct you on how the Bible works in two sections 

Another LOL.

The "discussion" started because you claimed the Bible doesn't claim that Jews are the chosen people (it does, but that's besides the point because I meant Hebrew Bible).

You then stated that the New Testament superseded whatever the old testament stated.  Except, where I pointed out, that Jesus claimed everything in the Hebrew Bible still stood.

You then stated that the only message that mattered was the one of love as professed by Jesus.  I then point out several passages where Jesus professed anything but love for other people (enemies get slaughtered, people born from the wrong parts of the world need to beg and grovel).  

None of my points addressed, you simply excused all of it by saying I didn't know what I was talking about and that it didn't matter since your intention was to correct me (when really, it didn't need it in the first place).  Even @OmarBradley asked more about the passages I quoted or paraphrased and you ignored his requests.  

So please, if you want to accuse others of ignoring the inconvenient, be honest and admit the fact you do the same.  

 

[SoulMonster]

More good news from the realm of the easily impressed: The pope has promised "concrete action" against sexual abuse by Catholic priests. And it goes beyond merely shuffling pedophilic priests to other parishes like they have done in the last decades, now the pope wants them to "listen to the cry of the little ones who are seeking justice" and as if this wasn't enough, the pope also says that victims of systemized abuse within the catholic church he leads deserve "concrete and efficient measures" and not "mere condemnation" (!). 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-child-sex-abuse-summit-priests-bishops-rome-vatican-a8791731.html

[soon]

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

Another LOL.

The "discussion" started because you claimed the Bible doesn't claim that Jews are the chosen people (it does, but that's besides the point because I meant Hebrew Bible).

Fact check: You said the bible "continually" calls the Jews chosen people.

I simply corrected that and you chose to engage me about a whole bunch of other stuff. It does not, again.

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

You then stated that the New Testament superseded whatever the old testament stated.  Except, where I pointed out, that Jesus claimed everything in the Hebrew Bible still stood.

Fact check: thats not where the exchange ended and I went on to indicate who that claim would mean that Christians would be following the laws and holidays. Thats in addition to the most mainstream Christological tenants that also speak to this, that are more advanced.

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

You then stated that the only message that mattered was the one of love as professed by Jesus.  I then point out several passages where Jesus professed anything but love for other people (enemies get slaughtered, people born from the wrong parts of the world need to beg and grovel).  

Yes, you quoted a section of scripture that is widely celebrated in feminist circles as what you put forward as an example of alleged cruelty towards women. 1) Judaism to this day is often studied through "yes but also..." debates on scripture. In that time specifically it was boisterous. He says flat out rude things to the religious leaders and then theyd invite him for dinner like it was no thing. 2) Rabbis are those who would engage in lively debate. Women were not allowed in this world. It is a radical act of womens lib when Jesus, a rabbi debates a women. Treating her as equal and inviting her into religious life. And then celebrating her insight and faith. That is what marks it as a relevant event to the author, who understood the context in a way that your analysis doesnt.

So I called it a interesting conclusion because thats what I thought of your conclusion. Which seems reasonable to me.

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

None of my points addressed, you simply excused all of it by saying I didn't know what I was talking about and that it didn't matter since your intention was to correct me (when really, it didn't need it in the first place).  Even @OmarBradley asked more about the passages I quoted or paraphrased and you ignored his requests.  

He asked any Christian, not me. Im not on here for an inquisition. I can be Christian in public. its like your asking a muslim to apologies for the actions of others, in that its misplaced and othering. Demands cant be made of me simply because Im Christian.

18 minutes ago, downzy said:

So please, if you want to accuse others of ignoring the inconvenient, be honest and admit the fact you do the same.  

Fact check: I commented on the use of an emoji in place of a reply. But here you are reframing that to simply 'ignoring.' And honestly its a bit rich of you all to assume that if I dont give as in depth of a response as you desire that it must mean Im ignoring it because the content is inconvenient.

Edited February 26, 2019 by soon

[downzy]

16 minutes ago, soon said:

Fact check: You said the bible "continually" calls the Jews chosen people.

I simply corrected that and you chose to engage me about a whole bunch of other stuff. It does not, again.

Fact check: thats not where the exchange ended and I went on to indicate who that claim would mean that Christians would be following the laws and holidays. Thats in addition to the most mainstream Christological tenants that also speak to this, that are more advanced.

Yes, you quoted a section of scripture that is widely celebrated in feminist circles as what you put forward as an example of alleged cruelty towards women. 1) Judaism to this day is often studied through "yes but also..." debates on scripture. In that time specifically it was boisterous. He says flat out rude things to the religious leaders and then theyd invite him for dinner like it was no thing. 2) Rabbis are those who would engage in lively debate. Women were not allowed in this world. It is a radical act of womens lib when Jesus, a rabbi debates a women. Treating her as equal and inviting her into religious life. And then celebrating her insight and faith. That is what marks it as a relevant event to the author, who understood the context in a way that your analysis doesnt.

So I called it a interesting conclusion because thats what I thought of your conclusion. Which seems reasonable to me.

He asked any Christian, not me. Im not on here for an inquisition. I can be Christian in public. its like your asking a muslim to apologies for the actions of others, in that its misplaced and othering. Demands cant be made of me simply because Im Christian.

Fact check: I commented on the use of an emoji in place of a reply. But here you are reframing that to simply 'ignoring.' And honestly its a bit rich of you all to assume that if I dont give as in depth of a response as you desire that it must mean Im ignoring it because the content is inconvenient.

Fact check: this is the first time you acknowledged most the points raised in my post above and previously.  

[DieselDaisy]

I tell you one more good thing about Catholicism. Historians have long analysed the voting patterns of Germans between 1929 and 1933, i.e., in order to determine who was more liable to vote NSDAP, vis-à-vis who wasn't. The segment of society most unlikely to vote NSDAP between 1929-33 were Catholics. (Conversely, if there is a typical Nazi voter it would be of lower middle class, e.g., artisans, small shop owners, Lutheran and east Elbian). 

[soon]

2 minutes ago, downzy said:

Fact check: this is the first time you acknowledged most the points raised in my post above and previously.  

Fact check: I literally only replied to one new item, about the womens lib thing.

I just went over the conversation we had for most of my post

In your own words you were posting "walls of text." Leaving two items marked as "interesting" seems completely reasonable when one is faced with "walls of text"

Not sure if its ironic that you just opted not to respond to anything I said? Like none of it. 

[downzy]

Just now, soon said:

Fact check: I literally only replied to one new item, about the womens lib thing.

I just went over the conversation we had for most of my post

In your own words you were posting "walls of text." Leaving two items marked as "interesting" seems completely reasonable when one is faced with "walls of text"

Not sure if its ironic that you just opted not to respond to anything I said? Like none of it. 

Fact check: no one else agrees with you.  

[soon]

Just now, downzy said:

Fact check: no one else agrees with you.  

About what?

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I tell you one more good thing about Catholicism. Historians have long analysed the voting patterns of Germans between 1929 and 1933, i.e., in order to determine who was more liable to vote NSDAP, vis-à-vis who wasn't. The segment of society most unlikely to vote NSDAP between 1929-33 were Catholics. (Conversely, if there is a typical Nazi voter it would be of lower middle class, e.g., artisans, small shop owners, Lutheran and east Elbian). 

Maybe the Nazis were tough on child molestation? 

[DieselDaisy]

19 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Maybe the Nazis were tough on child molestation? 

They did use child molestation in their war against the church actually. 

[downzy]

29 minutes ago, soon said:

About what?

That you don't ignore arguments that are inconvenient or you have no response to.  

Even in your post a few minutes ago you ignored the part about Jesus wanting to slaughter his enemies that betrays your position that he's all about love.  

[soon]

5 minutes ago, downzy said:

That you don't ignore arguments that are inconvenient or you have no response to.  

Even in your post a few minutes ago you ignored the part about Jesus wanting to slaughter his enemies that betrays your position that he's all about love.  

You just ignored all six points in my last point 

And in my replies that you are ignoring, because you find my points inconvenient, speak to why

You are on a tear about me allegedly ignoring things, which has no basis in what I said about emoji proxy responses, and you are openly skipping a bunch of post 

Edited February 26, 2019 by soon

[SoulMonster]

20 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

They did use child molestation in their war against the church actually. 

Interesting. How?