How We Got To Here: Christianity Version

#376
#376
VolsSportsFan said:
1) Assuming I've never studied the Bible....tsk tsk tsk, bad assumption there junior.

2) I don't even know what in the hell you're trying to argue now; I said it would be a "complete non issue" in 50 years, and you jump on me claiming it isn't now and accuse me of not knowing the facts. I prove you wrong with said facts and you then say "meh but you said in 50 years" and accuse me of playing semantics. WTF? And the cherry on top, in you getting overly defensive you project onto me and Septic that WE are the ones getting defensive and that WE are the ones that can't handle someone not agreeing with us?

Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Click to expand...

Wow. You guys are hilarious... and not coming across at all as being defensive. :)

As to point 1 above, feel free to go back and read my post. It was a generic statement and never referenced you or anyone else. But if you took as being directed at you, again... that doesn't come across as being defensive at all. :)

And as to your point 2 above, here's your direct post...

VolsSportsFan said:
For example, in 50 years the gay marriage/homosexuality issue will be a compelte non-issue for the majority of the Christian denominations and .
Click to expand...

... so let's break it up into 2 parts. Your first statement is that "in 50 years the gay marriage/homosexuality issue will be a complete non-issue for the majority of the Christian denominations". I simply pointed out that it is a non-issue for the majority of Christians today, which you then supported yourself in another post. So the ONLY thing that differs in our positions is your reference of "complete non-issue". I would offer that if someone doesn't have an issue with it (which is what the surveys state) then it must in fact be a complete non-issue. You're suggesting that even though the majority (and yes... I do realize that 54% is a small majority but thanks for explaining percentages to me) states it's a non-issue, you still want to hang your hat on the point that you said "a complete non-issue". As I said, that would be semantics so it's not really worth discussing.

Then you use the word "and" which references your second point which was that "those who still oppose will be the minority". From what I posted, and from what you then confirmed yourself, those who oppose it are a minority today even though your claim was that this would be the case in 50 years, which is what "those who still" refers to.

So there you go VSF. I can't believe I actually had to take the time to point this out to you, but it's all there in black and white. No name calling, no being defensive, just simply pointing out what is likely obvious to most.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#377
#377
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Wow. You guys are hilarious... and not coming across at all as being defensive. :)

As to point 1 above, feel free to go back and read my post. It was a generic statement and never referenced you or anyone else. But if you took as being directed at you, again... that doesn't come across as being defensive at all. :)

And as to your point 2 above, here's your direct post...



... so let's break it up into 2 parts. Your first statement is that "in 50 years the gay marriage/homosexuality issue will be a complete non-issue for the majority of the Christian denominations". I simply pointed out that it is a non-issue for the majority of Christians today, which you then supported yourself in another post. So the ONLY thing that differs in our positions is your reference of "complete non-issue". I would offer that if someone doesn't have an issue with it (which is what the surveys state) then it must in fact be a complete non-issue. You're suggesting that even though the majority (and yes... I do realize that 54% is a small majority but thanks for explaining percentages to me) states it's a non-issue, you still want to hang your hat on the point that you said "a complete non-issue". As I said, that would be semantics so it's not really worth discussing.

Then you use the word "and" which references your second point which was that "those who still oppose will be the minority". From what I posted, and from what you then confirmed yourself, those who oppose it are a minority today even though your claim was that this would be the case in 50 years, which is what "those who still" refers to.

So there you go VSF. I can't believe I actually had to take the time to point this out to you, but it's all there in black and white. No name calling, no being defensive, just simply pointing out what is likely obvious to most.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#378
#378
VolsSportsFan said:
Good God dude, get a grip.
Click to expand...

I guess a response like this is all one can expect when you can't refute anything in my post. I will say though, I was wrong in a prior post.

Upon seeing this well thought out response of yours... the detail, the logic, the intricate choice of words... its now obvious that when I stated you must have been the star of your debate team I was clearly selling you short. That's right... you know what it means... you are without question a master debater. :)
 
#379
#379
IBlvNTmWrk said:
I guess a response like this is all one can expect when you can't refute anything in my post. I will say though, I was wrong in a prior post.

Upon seeing this well thought out response of yours... the detail, the logic, the intricate choice of words... its now obvious that when I stated you must have been the star of your debate team I was clearly selling you short. That's right... you know what it means... you are without question a master debater. :)
Click to expand...

65644230.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#380
#380
marcusluvsvols said:
Oh yeah, i like roust too. I like everybody here really except 8188, and he hasnt been around in a while
He always shows up and quits lurking when you say his name tho. Hes like bloody mary, or charlie, or whatever they call the boogey man this week. I may not agree with peoples views, but i dont dislike them personally.

You and i see politics quite a bit differently, and we are down like 4 flat tires...so its no surprise. Ill holla soon. Headed to knoxville this weekend to see my folks.
Click to expand...

It is widely accepted as fact that 8188 is a bad person. Atheists, agnostics, and the faithful all have come to an agreement on this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#382
#382
VolsSportsFan said:
I always love when a non-atheist explains what atheism is; it means you don't believe in a higher power and that's it. If you replace it with something else, then you probably aren't really an atheist.
Click to expand...

It's a worthy debate and one I'm willing to have. You obviously think I haven't studied this and am just commenting off the cuff.
I'm not talking about individuals per se, although we can discuss that. I'm talking about a collective society.

And yes, I disage that the majority of those who identify as atheist simply lack belief in God.
 
#383
#383
VolsSportsFan said:
The latest data from Dec 2015 states 54% of all Christians are ok with gay marriage. A majority but only barely, and I said it would be a "complete non issue"; if almost half still have an issue with it, then you cannot declare it a "complete non issue".

So you can get your panties in a wad about my opinions about Christians' view of gay marriage, but it is most certainly supported by "actual facts".
Click to expand...
Do you think people are entitled to hold and promote a position that is pro traditional marriage?
 
#386
#386
Roustabout said:
It's a worthy debate and one I'm willing to have. You obviously think I haven't studied this and am just commenting off the cuff.
I'm not talking about individuals per se, although we can discuss that. I'm talking about a collective society.

And yes, I disage that the majority of those who identify as atheist simply lack belief in God.
Click to expand...

Orange_Crush said:
Are you assuming Roust hasn't "studied" atheism? :p
Click to expand...

Oh, snap...
 
#387
#387
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Wow. You guys are hilarious... and not coming across at all as being defensive. :)

As to point 1 above, feel free to go back and read my post. It was a generic statement and never referenced you or anyone else. But if you took as being directed at you, again... that doesn't come across as being defensive at all. :)

And as to your point 2 above, here's your direct post...



... so let's break it up into 2 parts. Your first statement is that "in 50 years the gay marriage/homosexuality issue will be a complete non-issue for the majority of the Christian denominations". I simply pointed out that it is a non-issue for the majority of Christians today, which you then supported yourself in another post. So the ONLY thing that differs in our positions is your reference of "complete non-issue". I would offer that if someone doesn't have an issue with it (which is what the surveys state) then it must in fact be a complete non-issue. You're suggesting that even though the majority (and yes... I do realize that 54% is a small majority but thanks for explaining percentages to me) states it's a non-issue, you still want to hang your hat on the point that you said "a complete non-issue". As I said, that would be semantics so it's not really worth discussing.

Then you use the word "and" which references your second point which was that "those who still oppose will be the minority". From what I posted, and from what you then confirmed yourself, those who oppose it are a minority today even though your claim was that this would be the case in 50 years, which is what "those who still" refers to.

So there you go VSF. I can't believe I actually had to take the time to point this out to you, but it's all there in black and white. No name calling, no being defensive, just simply pointing out what is likely obvious to most.
Click to expand...

that is completely not true. the majority of true Christian absolutely oppose homosexual marriage. now there may be people who claim to be Christians that support it, but no true Christian will ever supported that immoral lifestyle.
 
#392
#392
VolsSportsFan said:
I'm not assuming anything, I was pretty much saying the same thing ape did.
Click to expand...

I was pointing out that you applied two different standards--one for yourself and one for Roust. You inferred that Roust should be quite based on what he believes or doesn't believe...

I always love when a non-atheist explains what atheism is
Click to expand...

And then inferred you could speak on Christianity based on what you've studied:

1) Assuming I've never studied the Bible....tsk tsk tsk, bad assumption there junior.
Click to expand...

Tsk tsk tsk...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#394
#394
joevol320 said:
that is completely not true. the majority of true Christian absolutely oppose homosexual marriage. now there may be people who claim to be Christians that support it, but no true Christian will ever supported that immoral lifestyle.
Click to expand...

Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage

Roughly six-in-ten Catholics (58%) now support same-sex marriage, as do nearly two-thirds of white mainline Protestants (64%).
Click to expand...

So two things: (1) this is just one poll and there are many out there that have similar results, and (2) you would have to define what a "true Christian" is. I certainly consider myself a true Christian as I believe in Christ and that His death on the cross was a sacrifice for my sins.

Marriage today is, for the most part, nothing more than a legal, binding contract recognized by government which can at some point be terminated through divorce proceedings. I seriously doubt the majority of the LGBT community are having their ceremonies in churches, with a pastor quoting scripture, and asking for God to bless their union. So why should I care if two people want to get "married"? Marriage to a "true Christian" likely has a different meaning and nothing has changed to prevent them/us for taking our vows any differently than before gay marriage became legal. Obviously this is just my opinion and others may certainly disagree.

VolsSportsFan said:
Hmmm....
Click to expand...

I see you're still polishing up those debate skills. :p
 
#395
#395
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage



So two things: (1) this is just one poll and there are many out there that have similar results, and (2) you would have to define what a "true Christian" is. I certainly consider myself a true Christian as I believe in Christ and that His death on the cross was a sacrifice for my sins.

Marriage today is, for the most part, nothing more than a legal, binding contract recognized by government which can at some point be terminated through divorce proceedings. I seriously doubt the majority of the LGBT community are having their ceremonies in churches, with a pastor quoting scripture, and asking for God to bless their union. So why should I care if two people want to get "married"? Marriage to a "true Christian" likely has a different meaning and nothing has changed to prevent them/us for taking our vows any differently than before gay marriage became legal. Obviously this is just my opinion and others may certainly disagree.



I see you're still polishing up those debate skills. :p
Click to expand...

And you're still trying too hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#396
#396
joevol320 said:
what is there to hmmmm about? Christians would not support the homosexual lifestyle as they wouldn't support a thief's or liar's or a cheater's lifestyle. there is no difference from a Biblical perspective.
Click to expand...

Don't talk to me about all that, talk to the guy that disagrees with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#397
#397
Orange_Crush said:
I was pointing out that you applied two different standards--one for yourself and one for Roust. You inferred that Roust should be quite based on what he believes or doesn't believe...



And then inferred you could speak on Christianity based on what you've studied:



Tsk tsk tsk...
Click to expand...

Actually I'm starting to see what's going on here. You and Roust are like Jedi Masters and IBlvNTmWrk is your Padawan, which explains why he's so much worse at this than you two are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top