TheCheshireCat
Starter
I'm just going to play Devil's Advocate here. First off, your rebuttals are like wading through mud. Stringing a bunch of big words together doesn't make your point any more valid or make you seem any more intelligent, especially when the writing has no flow whatsoever.Nebula said:1.) That's inherently woven into his belief system, as his missionary work attests to. Proselytizing to "save" by influencing and persuading with an attached message of "or else."BIG ERN said:1. Tim Tebow has never said you were going to hell and suffer if you don't believe what he does.
2. Tebow blew through his $2.5 million signing bonus on various worldwide charity organizations focusing on famine, education and home-building in 24 hours last year.
If you don't like Christianity that's fine you don't have to, but to say he isn't a GREAT kid that helps people and doesn't just talk about it but goes out and walks his talks --your a fool.
2.) That's great. It would be even better if that selfless giving wasn't coupled with an omnipresent pursuit of manipulating the mindset of other human beings. Which brings under scrutiny that idea of "selfless." Was it done simply to help those in need, or to propagate what he himself holds up as his primary objective?
A little advice: If you're going to call someone a fool, you're going to want to make sure you articulate yourself properly. I don't own anything called "a fool." Thanks for your thoughts, though![]()
(Any time anyone wants to move this discussion to the proper forum I'll be happy to take it up there. I'd let it go, but I'm not going to let a derogatory comment about my intelligence go unanswered.)
1. Again, you're making a broad assumption based on your perception of a certain belief system. People don't necessarily believe every single aspect of a philosophy, religion, etc. And if he hasn't come out directly and said so (as you've admitted), you're criticizing him for what exactly... thinking it? So... you essentially dislike a certain individual based on what he thinks/believes. Hm. I'll let you figure out where I'm going with that point, since you're good at reading minds.
2. Awkward phrase aside, this is one point I do not understand. First, I don't get the idea that Tebow is trying to manipulate anyone. He's worn his beliefs on his sleeve, that's for sure, and it gets a lot of media attention, but that means he's being manipulative? Second, if we're going to call that manipulative, show me someone who isn't manipulative? Walk into any lecture hall in any University, any board room in any business or campaign office, etc. and tell me they're not trying to "manipulate" you too. Guess what? No matter what philosophy you subscribe to, people are trying to change your mind about anything and everything, all the time. About the latest science findings, about what to buy, about who to vote for... I could list off for hours. If you were that adamant about not being persuaded or manipulated, you wouldn't be happy with anything or anyone. Everyone pushes their own agenda in one way or another, don't be naive.
And reading your above posts, I find it funny when people bash religion for being corrupt, for being a primary factor in the cause of millions of deaths, etc. Are these things true? Absolutely. But businesses are corrupt, politics are corrupt, and so is just about any other institution you can think of. And all of them have led to many deaths at certain times. Philosophy itself is guilty of everything you're accusing religion of. Hitler had a philosophy too, and look at how many deaths that led to (Yes, Hitler by default was Christian, but let's be honest here, he had his own twisted sense of morality, justice, and idealism and claimed Germany as the only God). So did Stalin, who claimed that religion was a drug that blinded the masses. Again, millions of deaths. Are you then proposing that we condemn philosophy because people can abuse it? Should we abandon business, government, etc. because they can be corrupted?
Like anything else, none of these is inherently corrupt or evil. It's the people who abuse them that are - it comes down to human nature. That same human nature can be used to do incredible acts of good. Philosophy, religion, etc. has been used by people like Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Ghandi, and many others to do incredible and beautiful things. There are two edges to the sword, and it depends on who wields it.
That's my rant. So get real - the kid does his best to better his life and the lives of others and he "sticks to his guns" just like you do. When there are people like Stalin, or people who rape and murder and shoot up schools and office buildings, criticizing someone who isn't hurting anyone - whether you agree with him or not - is f'ing ridiculous. Get off your intellectual, pompous high horse and open your eyes.