Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Muffinstuffer · 05-23-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Starboy
[B]Lets not beat around the bush, proselytizing even occasionally is intolerant. With so many American being Christian, it doesn't have to occur often to become very offensive to the rest of us. The point that many of us have been trying to make but appears to be lost on you is that all of us have heard the good news many times before.

Which is why you do not find me trying to witness to you. If you want me to not even TALK about my beliefs...well, so long as every poster here collaborates with you in ensuring that I am never asked any questions concerning my beliefs, I have no problem with that. I think you misunderstand me. Despite the fact that I'm a Christian, I did NOT come here to actively witness. If my faith is displayed, well, I can't help it sometimes.....it's a part of who I am. And if that is 'passively witnessing' to you, then I'm sorry. But short of never discussing theology with you, I will do my best not to share my beliefs here, especially with you....so long as no one asks me.

Quote:

Your efforts are not needed or appreciated. If the shoe were on the other foot I think you might be able to understand what I am saying.

I do understand what you are saying, to the degree that a Christian can understand the atheist point of view, because I work with 2 atheists and they share their opinions and points of views with me every DAY....it is a two-way conversation, done respectfully, and neither party can help expressing their views and beliefs (or lack thereof), and again, I don't do so unless they ask. And while I don't agree with their beliefs/ideas/opinions some of the time, it IS appreciated because I understand their concern.

Quote:

I am more than happy to accept you as you are. I would hope you could learn to return the same respect to me that I accord you. If you can�t then you should understand that there is no reason for me to respect you or your beliefs.

I have absolutely no problem accepting you as you are. I've listened to and read every comment you have made thus far, and I can honestly say that while I don't agree with some of it, I do appreciate it, whether you believe it or not. But if 'accepting you as you are' means that I must NEVER share ANYTHING about my beliefs EVEN IF I'm asked about them here...well, what am I supposed to do about that? I mean, honestly. It almost sounds as if I'm being made out to be intolerant when someone asks ME about something relating to my faith.

I hope you understand I'm not trying to anger or offend you and if any is taken I truly apologize. I just don't understand why you think that I'm here to 'spread the good news.' I've already said that sure, I like to try to live as I should so that others can see it, but I can refrain from sharing it here, of course. I will ALSO say that I can even do my best to suppress drawing links between my actions and my faith, so that I don't go around saying "See? When I do good things, it's cuz I'm Christian." In that way, I won't be even 'passively' witnessing. But aside from refraining from sharing my beliefs even when asked, and aside from refraining from 'passively' witnessing, what else CAN I do?

Ronin · 05-23-2003, 07:42 AM

It really does come down to the Christian doctrine of Hell for me...all the other Yahweh cruelties should also be enough, I know.

However, that whole 'faith over works' thing is quite an impediment to real human progression, understanding of the universe and compassion for others.

To this very day, even the most kind and liberal theists cannot connect these dots.

Why does real love for humanity fail to impress an omnipotent and all loving deity...in favor of the demand of unfailing belief and submission.

What a petty master to serve.

Starboy · 05-23-2003, 07:51 AM

Muffinstuffer, I don't think you should witness to anybody, here or elsewhere. Just as I don't think that atheists should harass Christians or try to change their beliefs. I am open to discussion and if asked I will state my opinions openly but it is not my hope, desire, goal or directive to turn you into an atheist. That is the crux of it. I don't care if you remain a Christian or not, all I care about is that you do no proselytize anyone. To the extent that you do it, I do not think you can call yourself a freedom loving American. I can't make myself any more clear than that.

Starboy

Rhea · 05-23-2003, 07:51 AM

MffSff: for the record I do appreciate your style here on discussing issues with a fair success at not preaching. It is these kind of discussion which allow me to learn, while not having ANY degree of belief in your system, at least what thought processes make YOU buy into it. I find that interesting.

However I would like to ask if you are aware what this means.

Quote:

Originally posted by Muffinstuffer
I would, however, like to point out that as I've said before, 99.9% of the time, any conversions that happen as a result of talking to me about my faith almost ALWAYS are initiated by the other person, believe it or not.

To say that you have 99.9% occurrence of something, you are saying here that you have personally converted over 1000 people and only one of them was a "first strike evangelization" (FSE).

Did you really personally convert over 1000 people?

Just curious about your use/understanding of scientific expressions.

Anyway, starboy has a point about the one person in 1000 whom you did get with an FSE. Okay, I'm kind of joking because I expect what you really meant is you can't recall ever doing it, but you'd better acknowledge that you might have come across wrong at some point, and that is an admirable realization of self to have. Still, Starboy does have a point because of the 6:1 ratio of theists to atheists in this country, and if each theist is responsible for 1000 conversions and their hit (conversion) rate is (generously) 1 conversion for every 2attempts, then each theist is hitting over 2000 non-christians, so that means each one of us is getting hit (1000x2x6=)

12,000 times!!! So if we are getting hit that many times, can you REALLY claim that a 1-in-1000 FSE rate is tolerant?

Just numbers for thought...

Rhea · 05-23-2003, 07:58 AM

And, more to the point, can you REALLY claim that 12,000 hits per non-christian is really what Jesus intended?

Come on, you guys have to take responsibility for the size of your crowd. Do some FSE math and get back in line with Jesus' intent. I am SURE the bible does not advocate hitting on atheists 12,000 times. Whose responsibility is it to keep count? Those trying to follow Jesus' will?

Perhaps?

Math is a fabulous tool.

Muffinstuffer · 05-23-2003, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhea
MffSff: for the record I do appreciate your style here on discussing issues with a fair success at not preaching. It is these kind of discussion which allow to to learn, while not having ANY degree of belief in your system, at least what thought processes make YOU buy into it. I find that interesting.

Thank you. For the record, I really am doing my best to 'be who I am' while doing my best to not share a darn thing about my beliefs, even when asked - at least from a 'preaching' point of view.

Quote:

However I would like to ask if you are aware what this means.

To say that you have 99.9% occurence of something, you are saying here that ypu have personally converted over 1000 people and only one of them was a "first strike evangelization" (FSE).

Did you really personally convert over 1000 people?

Just curious about your use of scientific expressions.

Anyway, starboy has a point that the one person in 1000 whom you did get with an FSE. Okay, I'm kind of joking because I expect what you really meant is you can't recall ever doing it, but you'd better acknowledge that you might have come across wrong at some point, and that is an admirable realization of self to have. Still, Starboy does have a point because of the 6:1 ration of theists to atheists, and if each theist is responsible for 1000 conversions and their hit rate is (generously) 1 for 2, then each theist is hitting over 2000 non-christians, so that means each one of US is getting hit 12,000 times!!! So if we are getting hit that many times, can you REALLY claim that a 1-in 1000 FSE rate is tolerant?

Just numbers for thought...

I am aware of what you are speaking of, and of course I will admit that once or twice I have definitely come across wrong. That is human nature....to err is human.

For the record, I can honestly say that the number of people I have directly converted is....*drum roll please*.....ZERO. However, obviously the point of the Great Commission is not to MAKE disciples. I can't make anyone do squat. If they accept God/Jesus, that's their decision, not mine. The only thing I've ever done is to share. But even so, I don't keep a running record. I just share when it is appropriate, when people ask, and that's it, and the rest is between them and God.

Again, this being said, no one has really addressed the issue of whether or not I'm being tolerant if someone else WILLINGLY and DELIBERATELY asks me to share my beliefs.

Muffinstuffer · 05-23-2003, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rhea
And, more to the point, can you REALLY claim that 12,000 hits per non-christian is really what Jesus intended?

I'm sorry but I'm getting this picture of a 'Quake' style game where I'm fragging the hell (pun intended

) out of atheists with a BFG. *LOL*

And as far as what he intended as far as witnessing goes, I will honestly have to go look that one up. I know the first and obvious one for me would be the whole passage about talking to others, but not having love, and therefore sounding as a clanging gong. But there, I don't think the Bible is equating 'having not love' with 'leaving non-Christians the heck alone.'

Rhea · 05-23-2003, 08:11 AM

Maybe you will want to substitute "conversation" for "conversion" then.

Oh, and I'll address that. I see nothing intolerant about explaining your religion to someone who asks. Nothing intolerant about telling them that you think it's great for you. When they ask.

I do see intolerance if your delivery includes and discussion of a punishment for not believing or any mention whatsoever about you being a better human than anyone else.

Unfortunately (for you) you have to abandon certain parts of your bible if you wish to avoid that corner. Alas! the bible explicitly states (that means it's spelled out and unambiguous) that not only will I be punished in the afterlife for disagreeing with you, but I am a problem to society in this life.

How to reconcile that? Does the Great Commission involve promoting the bible? Tough situation. The bible is intolerant. You're stuck between a rock and a hard place. You can't claim Jesus' mandate without the OT. You can't excuse the OT. Additionally, the NT has plenty of intolerance in it as well, all by itself.

So unless your Good News can divorce itself from the bible, you are stuck being a tolerant person spreading an intolerant message. Not sure how you can get around that.

Then of course, any bible-toting christian who does not fight against intolerant christian principles in law, is acting intolerant. So if you do not actively fight against the use of your bible in government (e.g. god-off-money, blue laws, anti-homosexual laws, etc) then you are again being intolerant.

Just my 2�

Rhea · 05-23-2003, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Muffinstuffer
I'm sorry but I'm getting this picture of a 'Quake' style game where I'm fragging the hell (pun intended ) out of atheists with a BFG. *LOL*

And as far as what he intended as far as witnessing goes, I will honestly have to go look that one up. I know the first and obvious one for me would be the whole passage about talking to others, but not having love, and therefore sounding as a clanging gong. But there, I don't think the Bible is equating 'having not love' with 'leaving non-Christians the heck alone.'

I'm thinking of the shake the dust off your feet passage. It seems to me that Christians are obligated to jesus to pass on the word of their dust-shaking to other christians so they can quit raising a toxic cloud of dust around us by their duplication.

Muffinstuffer · 05-23-2003, 08:16 AM

So basically I'm just generally screwed then.

And yeah, substitution of the word conversation is a good idea

As far as being intolerant by virtue of what I believe...well, that is something that I see as fairly unavoidable.

It would seem that the best remedy for this is for all of y'all to just ensure you never ask me what the Bible says about people who do not believe, and their final destination. That way, I never have to say it, and you never have to get pissed at me for saying it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-23-2003, 07:42 AM	#262
Ronin Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Mississippi Posts: 5,047	It really does come down to the Christian doctrine of Hell for me...all the other Yahweh cruelties should also be enough, I know. However, that whole 'faith over works' thing is quite an impediment to real human progression, understanding of the universe and compassion for others. To this very day, even the most kind and liberal theists cannot connect these dots. Why does real love for humanity fail to impress an omnipotent and all loving deity...in favor of the demand of unfailing belief and submission. What a petty master to serve.

05-23-2003, 07:51 AM	#263
Starboy Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Tallahassee, FL Reality Adventurer Posts: 5,276	Muffinstuffer, I don't think you should witness to anybody, here or elsewhere. Just as I don't think that atheists should harass Christians or try to change their beliefs. I am open to discussion and if asked I will state my opinions openly but it is not my hope, desire, goal or directive to turn you into an atheist. That is the crux of it. I don't care if you remain a Christian or not, all I care about is that you do no proselytize anyone. To the extent that you do it, I do not think you can call yourself a freedom loving American. I can't make myself any more clear than that. Starboy

05-23-2003, 07:58 AM	#265
Rhea Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Recluse Posts: 9,040	And, more to the point, can you REALLY claim that 12,000 hits per non-christian is really what Jesus intended? Come on, you guys have to take responsibility for the size of your crowd. Do some FSE math and get back in line with Jesus' intent. I am SURE the bible does not advocate hitting on atheists 12,000 times. Whose responsibility is it to keep count? Those trying to follow Jesus' will? Perhaps? Math is a fabulous tool.

05-23-2003, 08:11 AM	#268
Rhea Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Recluse Posts: 9,040	Maybe you will want to substitute "conversation" for "conversion" then. Oh, and I'll address that. I see nothing intolerant about explaining your religion to someone who asks. Nothing intolerant about telling them that you think it's great for you. When they ask. I do see intolerance if your delivery includes and discussion of a punishment for not believing or any mention whatsoever about you being a better human than anyone else. Unfortunately (for you) you have to abandon certain parts of your bible if you wish to avoid that corner. Alas! the bible explicitly states (that means it's spelled out and unambiguous) that not only will I be punished in the afterlife for disagreeing with you, but I am a problem to society in this life. How to reconcile that? Does the Great Commission involve promoting the bible? Tough situation. The bible is intolerant. You're stuck between a rock and a hard place. You can't claim Jesus' mandate without the OT. You can't excuse the OT. Additionally, the NT has plenty of intolerance in it as well, all by itself. So unless your Good News can divorce itself from the bible, you are stuck being a tolerant person spreading an intolerant message. Not sure how you can get around that. Then of course, any bible-toting christian who does not fight against intolerant christian principles in law, is acting intolerant. So if you do not actively fight against the use of your bible in government (e.g. god-off-money, blue laws, anti-homosexual laws, etc) then you are again being intolerant. Just my 2�

05-23-2003, 08:16 AM	#270
Muffinstuffer Regular Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Mountain Home, AR Posts: 199	So basically I'm just generally screwed then. And yeah, substitution of the word conversation is a good idea As far as being intolerant by virtue of what I believe...well, that is something that I see as fairly unavoidable. It would seem that the best remedy for this is for all of y'all to just ensure you never ask me what the Bible says about people who do not believe, and their final destination. That way, I never have to say it, and you never have to get pissed at me for saying it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.