knapplc Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Every time I've ever said I want to "kill that guy" or "punch that guy," I've meant it absolutely implicitly, and not metaphorically at all. Because using hyperbole in conversation is so rare I'm sure it would be misunderstood. Link to comment
ADS Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 I say that kind of stuff all the time, does that mean I'm going to hell? Link to comment
ShawnWatson Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 I'm a Christian; that doesn't mean I'm good. I'm just as wicked as anyone else and saved by grace alone. Yeah, I want to punch him in the face, and yeah, that's not alright and that needs to result in confession and repentance. I'm sure all that confession and repentance will make that guy's face not hurt after you punch him. How about instead not punching somebody in the face because they have a different viewpoint than you. Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 I'm a Christian; that doesn't mean I'm good. I'm just as wicked as anyone else and saved by grace alone. Yeah, I want to punch him in the face, and yeah, that's not alright and that needs to result in confession and repentance. I'm sure all that confession and repentance will make that guy's face not hurt after you punch him. How about instead not punching somebody in the face because they have a different viewpoint than you. I mean, I haven't punched anyone as of 1:30pm this afternoon so ...... Link to comment
GSG Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 I say that kind of stuff all the time, does that mean I'm going to hell? You were going to hell anyway, Mr. French Tickler Link to comment
ADS Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 I say that kind of stuff all the time, does that mean I'm going to hell? You were going to hell anyway, Mr. French Tickler Link to comment
huskerjack23 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 If I met that guy in person I'd have a hard time not punching him in the face. It's been well documented that the current concept of hell was originated in Dante's Inferno. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dante%27s_Inferno Do all differing christian denominations and sects cause you anger? Frustration? Like they're wrong? About a book that's supposedly the true word of the Lord? Maybe not all of them do, but clearly some of them do...as this is a case of that. Do you understand why this is so hard for some of us, in this infinitely vast universe, to grasp this when your own people can't seem to get your stories straight? 1 Link to comment
walksalone Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 If I met that guy in person I'd have a hard time not punching him in the face. 1 Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 If I met that guy in person I'd have a hard time not punching him in the face. It's been well documented that the current concept of hell was originated in Dante's Inferno. http://en.wikipedia....nte%27s_Inferno Do all differing christian denominations and sects cause you anger? Frustration? Like they're wrong? About a book that's supposedly the true word of the Lord? Maybe not all of them do, but clearly some of them do...as this is a case of that. Do you understand why this is so hard for some of us, in this infinitely vast universe, to grasp this when your own people can't seem to get your stories straight? To answer your question, no. Not many do cause me anger, in fact. In fact, I don't know of a single denomination or sect that does; I'm looking at this guy as an individual. The reason I'm angry is because he is a leader in the Christian church. Yet in a 3 minute video, he has (by example and not exhaustion): 1. speaking as if factually and with authority and not just with a humble opinion, ascribed multiple blanket statements to the church that might be true of some but are certainly not true across the board 2. generated several counters to strawman arguments that the church does not even make 3. decided himself what the motives and intentions and heart of the church are 4. denied several traditions and key doctrines of the faith held in orthodoxy since the beginning of the church 5. spoke in literal contrast to Jesus' words himself This guy can say what he wants, believe what he wants, and preach what he wants. Just call it what it is. I'm not angry because I think he's wrong, I'm angry because he is using Christ as a label for something that isn't founded in Christ. That's offensive to me. Link to comment
walksalone Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 So if you speak your mind, but doesn't agree with your religions doctrine then you're wrong? If you choose to believe in christianity, thats cool, what ever gets you through your day. But, if you start forcing your beliefs down other folks throats, that makes you an a$$hole... 4 Link to comment
huskerjack23 Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 You're not saying he's wrong yet you go on to say he's using a word incorrectly? So your interpretation of church doctrine is more correct than his? The person who's studied in seminary for many years and provided service to congregations for many more? The point: His opinion is different than doctrine His opinion doesn't fit your opinion either, which I'm assuming fits with "doctrine" Church doctrine varies over thousands of denominations Why does more than one opinion exist over such an important matter? Over something that is supposedly the true word of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god? Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Landlord- just my two cents but I'm not sure I get your being upset with this jackass. He is no more a priest than I am. He is not a Christian and his "church" bears no resemblance to any viable Christian denomination. He is simply some self enlightened blow hard that likes to wear a collar. He bothers me no more than any other atheist attacking Christianity. About the worst thing you can say about him is that he might be leading some people astray and away from Christ and God. That's not good but it differs little from about half the people who regularly comment in this forum. I think you're giving him way more authority and relevance than he deserves. My dog has a better understanding of Christianity than this douche. Link to comment
Junior Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Sorry JJ, I'd venture to say that many of the atheists who comment in this forum have a very strong grasp of the Christian religion. Perhaps stronger than a good many self-proclaimed Christians. Link to comment
Landlord Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Landlord- just my two cents but I'm not sure I get your being upset with this jackass. He is no more a priest than I am. He is not a Christian and his "church" bears no resemblance to any viable Christian denomination. He is simply some self enlightened blow hard that likes to wear a collar. He bothers me no more than any other atheist attacking Christianity. About the worst thing you can say about him is that he might be leading some people astray and away from Christ and God. That's not good but it differs little from about half the people who regularly comment in this forum. I think you're giving him way more authority and relevance than he deserves. My dog has a better understanding of Christianity than this douche. You might be right. I haven't actually looked into who he is, I just was under the assumption that he serves under the Catholic church. So if you speak your mind, but doesn't agree with your religions doctrine then you're wrong? If you choose to believe in christianity, thats cool, what ever gets you through your day. But, if you start forcing your beliefs down other folks throats, that makes you an a$$hole... Let me analogize this for you because I really don't it's that hard to make sense of. It's like if some other school's fans came posting on our board when we joined the B1G, and one of our mods started explaining the Nebraska culture to them. They explain how Tom Osborne was a win-at-all-costs coach that kept criminals on the team just to have on-the-field success, how Bo Pelini is a raging mindless maniac that doesn't have control of his team, how they can't wait for everyone to leave crying when we beat them all by three touchdowns and dominate our new pathetic conference, etc. First, you probably wouldn't want to claim him for our side. I've actually seen this happen dozens of times where Husker fans feel the need to apologize on behalf of others saying "that's not what we're actually about." Further, you'd probably be pissed at how he's representing you and everyone else. The house makes the rules. You're free to live in the house, but if you do you live by the rules. If you don't want to live by them, fine, you're allowed to do that, but not inside the house. This "force your beliefs down people's throats" argument is really absurd. Who here has ever been forced to listen to or read anything that I say? Anyone? I don't know of a single person who has ever cornered somebody in an alleyway not letting them go until they heard the good news of the gospel so I really have no idea where you're getting that idea from. I'll defend my beliefs, I'll support my beliefs I'll even be eager to share them. Because I live in a free country and even if I didn't, because Jesus has commanded me to. I won't force them on anyone, nor have I ever. This isn't the middle ages. You're not saying he's wrong yet you go on to say he's using a word incorrectly? So your interpretation of church doctrine is more correct than his? The person who's studied in seminary for many years and provided service to congregations for many more? The point: His opinion is different than doctrine His opinion doesn't fit your opinion either, which I'm assuming fits with "doctrine" Church doctrine varies over thousands of denominations Why does more than one opinion exist over such an important matter? Over something that is supposedly the true word of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god? The answer to your question of why more than one opinion exists is because the guy in the video denies that the word of God (Scripture) actually is the word of God. My interpretation of church doctrine isn't perfect; but it's also not my own interpretation. It's an acceptance of a collaborative and evolving interpretation over millenia of church history and tradition and reform. It changes and it allows for disagreements and it webs and it flows off track from time to time, but the pillars of the faith have always remained the same and been held to: * Scripture being the inspired word of God * Sinful condition of humanity, which necessitates: * Jesus' sinless life, death and resurrection in our place * Salvation by faith in the work and person of Jesus Link to comment
Recommended Posts