Stop giving your life to Jesus!
#301
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peace and I have now met, Ditch.
#303
I was talking 2000's, and yes, humanity moved forward to the point by then that it became the other side of the same coin.
#304
Scooby Regular
A small child ought to be fearful of their father's anger when they rebel. A good parent presents their child with boundaries and the child ought to be aware that there are consequences should those boundaries be breached. The perfect parent will surely have this in their toolbox. Love has many faces.
#305
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#307
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a simple question; it's both leading and loaded. Nonetheless, it's fair to say that I want my loved ones to be fearful of that which might bring them harm. Don't you want the same for your family, Hodgy?
#309
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Chewing the fat
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#310
Scooby Regular
it is a very very simple question
obviously you want to widen and conflate is to fear of snakes, fire etc - in essence to muddy the water - but presumably you don't love those things in the same way you love a fellow human being
is it normal to want to instil fear into someone you love
obviously you want to widen and conflate is to fear of snakes, fire etc - in essence to muddy the water - but presumably you don't love those things in the same way you love a fellow human being
is it normal to want to instil fear into someone you love
#311
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#312
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is a very very simple question
obviously you want to widen and conflate is to fear of snakes, fire etc - in essence to muddy the water - but presumably you don't love those things in the same way you love a fellow human being
is it normal to want to instil fear into someone you love
obviously you want to widen and conflate is to fear of snakes, fire etc - in essence to muddy the water - but presumably you don't love those things in the same way you love a fellow human being
is it normal to want to instil fear into someone you love
#314
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So back to this. Nobody wants loved ones to experience fear, but there is a place for it. I'd rather instil a fear of fire or a bite or a fall than gamble that said loved one didn't recover from their first encounter with the danger.
#315
Scooby Regular
it is perfectly natural to fear snakes, fire etc - I suspect that is handled by evolution and science
but we are not talking about that - you suggested it was natural for a father to instil fear into his children
but we are not talking about that - you suggested it was natural for a father to instil fear into his children
#316
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A small child ought to be fearful of their father's anger when they rebel. A good parent presents their child with boundaries and the child ought to be aware that there are consequences should those boundaries be breached. The perfect parent will surely have this in their toolbox. Love has many faces.
#319
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#321
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#322
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
Yes, I find this startling, too. Quite recently I discovered somebody to be a religious nut whom I initially believed to be highly intelligent. I was a little shocked at first, and then felt quite disappointed, because I did respect him and his views on most things. But now I just can't take him seriously. It's a shame.
#323
Yes, I find this startling, too. Quite recently I discovered somebody to be a religious nut whom I initially believed to be highly intelligent. I was a little shocked at first, and then felt quite disappointed, because I did respect him and his views on most things. But now I just can't take him seriously. It's a shame.
#324
FYI #280 again.
#326
Scooby Regular
#328
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, I didn't realise I was obliged to reply to your posts, Mark. I didn't respond for several reasons. First, I thought you made some good, rational, well-constructed points, most of which I didn't particularly feel the urge to contest. I accept that religion has been so ingrained in society for so long that it's impossible to know if humanity today would hold the same morality, or even be recognisable as it is now, had religion never existed. Next, you didn't ask me any direct questions. There was one question but I interpreted it as rhetorical. Finally, the thread moved on to a different sub-topic - specifically, Maz stated that Hitler was Catholic in response to your argument that the *****/WWII was not motivated by religion.
Regarding my "rigid views about people who hold religious beliefs", I firmly believe 'each to their own'; I've stated this twice already earlier on this thread. I would never broach the subject of religion or religious beliefs with anybody, even a friend, as what people want to believe privately is up to them. Unfortunately, however, few religious people do hold their views just to themselves. A considerable number of believers preach, try to convert, and try to force their views on to others, whether overtly or implicitly, which I do not appreciate.
JTaylor is an example of this type. He knows the vast majority of snet members do not share his views, yet he started this thread, and I've read numerous other posts he's made about Christianity/spirituality/his journey/conversion. I've taken particular umbrage to some of his posts on this thread - I can't believe he hasn't faced far more criticism and hostility from others - as, frankly, he's made some outrageous statements. Without going back, reading them all again (once was bad enough!) and quoting them verbatim, in essence he's argued: society would be better if everybody used Christianity as a moral compass, and without it the world is doomed; an evil child killer can be forgiven and go to heaven as long as she accepts God just before she dies; non-believers, however good and moral a life they have lived, will go to hell; good parenting involves instilling fear into one's children; and probably other things I've forgotten. Furthermore, many of his posts contain the general undertone that Christians are superior and better people than those who don't believe in God. And finally, when he's asked a straight-forward question to something provocative that he's posted, more often than not he quotes or references a passage from the Bible, which is a blatant avoidance technique, not to mention a bit weird.
So ultimately, I would argue the views of somebody who uses a 2000-year-old book to determine what their opinion is on a plethora of current moral and social issues show far greater rigidity than those of somebody who thinks for himself and exercises free judgement.
Regarding my "rigid views about people who hold religious beliefs", I firmly believe 'each to their own'; I've stated this twice already earlier on this thread. I would never broach the subject of religion or religious beliefs with anybody, even a friend, as what people want to believe privately is up to them. Unfortunately, however, few religious people do hold their views just to themselves. A considerable number of believers preach, try to convert, and try to force their views on to others, whether overtly or implicitly, which I do not appreciate.
JTaylor is an example of this type. He knows the vast majority of snet members do not share his views, yet he started this thread, and I've read numerous other posts he's made about Christianity/spirituality/his journey/conversion. I've taken particular umbrage to some of his posts on this thread - I can't believe he hasn't faced far more criticism and hostility from others - as, frankly, he's made some outrageous statements. Without going back, reading them all again (once was bad enough!) and quoting them verbatim, in essence he's argued: society would be better if everybody used Christianity as a moral compass, and without it the world is doomed; an evil child killer can be forgiven and go to heaven as long as she accepts God just before she dies; non-believers, however good and moral a life they have lived, will go to hell; good parenting involves instilling fear into one's children; and probably other things I've forgotten. Furthermore, many of his posts contain the general undertone that Christians are superior and better people than those who don't believe in God. And finally, when he's asked a straight-forward question to something provocative that he's posted, more often than not he quotes or references a passage from the Bible, which is a blatant avoidance technique, not to mention a bit weird.
So ultimately, I would argue the views of somebody who uses a 2000-year-old book to determine what their opinion is on a plethora of current moral and social issues show far greater rigidity than those of somebody who thinks for himself and exercises free judgement.
Last edited by JTaylor; 11 July 2015 at 10:42 PM.
#330
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.scoobynet.com/1019401-go...l#post11622643
Probably the toughest challenge is that my partner is unsaved. I pray constantly for her.