Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“I.Spirit.Son.God”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#588326 Sep 11, 2013
LuciFerr wrote:
<quoted text>
How?
I think church family for the Christian is healthy. Fellowship, is important. And although a Christian can find other Christians to fellowship with outside the church, the church is where the fellowship is the strongest.

Also corporate worship. You support a church with your time and money, that church then can do missionary work to spread the gospel. open homeless shelters. even offer jobs. etc.

Also having someone a pastor, that has went to seminary college..or just devoted their whole life to studying the bible, is a potent leader to have as a resource for preaching and also for counseling.

Plus I think a institution like the church is important for many other reasons functions and abilities.

But I real. With Buddhism I see many people that from other religions like hinduism or islam...that dare not go to no church or even own no bible because they or they family will get killed. So they praise and worship Jesus...and they saved and sanctified.

So a church is not needed to save or keep anybody saved. That why I say it "somewhat" important. But a church is not a necessity for the believers, especially believers overseas.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#588327 Sep 11, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> No one mocks education, just the arrogant educated. Damns oneself, to who, insignifigant people who don't really matter? Leave the ivory tower and try real life. Ians couldn't take the gaff he hightailed it. Not that theres to much wrong with that. Stop hating people who are different, you haven't contributed much to the world yet. Youre quite inexperienced in many things. Your motto is a clear indication of your high mindedness. You do sit naked on your throne, powerless. I have near illiterate latinos managing property and tenants that have much more influence and power than you.
You are the one who openly stated that blacks were hurting America. You called them all kinds of horrible names and you dare to tell me that I hate difference?

The only thing I hate is willful ignorance, lies and stupidity - and you have that in spades. You're lying now with your childish attack on my person.

You might be correct about my powerless, but I'll never be as naive, uninformed and unintelligent as you. I'll always be your intellectual better. You claim I live in an Ivory Tower - you don't even know what "Ivory Tower" means. What, you don't think people are academics? You don't think there's human interaction?

You and people like you are either stupid or liars. For you, we have to go with both. You're the racist who hates blacks - and I'm the one arguing against racism, yet here you go claiming I hate others. I don't care how much money you pretend to have, you're a childish, insecure cowardly and stupid man.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#588328 Sep 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Well, this is actually a long-standing debate
And while U.S. government anyway has discretionary spending when it comes to taxes and it has always been left up to the individual bodies of Congress to decide how to spend that money, the closest anyone can get to justifying social programs when it comes to taxes is the use of the word 'welfare' in the U.S. Constitution
"“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and General Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/what-co...
It is not explicitly laid out and comes down to personal interpretation whether it is in the best interest of the country to financially aid those who are not self-sufficient
It really is more of a moral issue than a legal one
While most people might argue that there deserves to be some safety net for people that through no fault of their own can not contribute to society or people that have and no longer can, there is always an ongoing debate whether this should include people who can contribute and choose not to
My personal feeling is there is no way to help the former without helping the latter. Some people will always scam the system but the solution isn't screw the people that deserve help and that is unavoidable when aid is cut
But in fairness I don't think anybody can say as a fact a government has a duty to provide social programs through taxes
Although I would argue it has a moral obligation and is a reflection of its people
- where did taxes originate from, Skom?

- what is their purpose?

- how did that purpose change throughout history and especially with the Industrial Revolution?

- how did the French Revolution transform how taxes were thought of?

- how did the British moral system, developing away from aristocracy and toward people, fundamentally change how taxes are used?

- what does "for the people, by the people" etc., mean?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#588329 Sep 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
There is no point any longer in even trying to address the absurdity of your claim that you made an overture of peace any more than your denial you were the start of hostilities.
Liar.
Skombolis wrote:
I responded to you in the beginning at least half a dozen times, questioning why you would reply with insults and condescension when I had been nothing but respectful.
Liar.
Skombolis wrote:
I am talking about your non-stop trolling. About the fact that even with the nicest Christians on this site, day in and day out they have to endure your constant abuse and whining and criticizing of their faith.
Liar.

I am entitled to criticize your church. That's what Topix is for, and what happens in the marketplace of ideas. You call that trolling or whining.

Just look at the difference in our terms for rapprochement: I need you to cease your abusive language, and you need me to stop criticizing Christianity.

Consider my recent exchanges with Quin, who claimed that Jesus teaches love, or regarding his definition of a Christian. I disagreed in both cases - respectful of him, but not of his religion. He may not agree with me, but he is able to tell the difference between a rebuttal to a claim and a personal attack. You are unable to tell the difference - or unwilling.

And I get along just fine with the nicest Christians - those that don't take my opinions about the church personally, nor feel that they have to make personal comments about me in return.
Skombolis wrote:
you do this for your own ego.
Liar.

This is typical for you. You haven't got a clue what motivates me, and have no moral right to assume derogatory motives.
Skombolis wrote:
Day after day after day for over a year now, you are in here post after post just looking to be a pain in the ass.
Liar again. See above.

Make an offer that doesn't require that I censor my sincere opinions about your church.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#588330 Sep 11, 2013
Bongo wrote:
<quoted text> You've taken or still take anti depressants. You've relied on assistance to get into your ivory tower. You drink to much. You don't "earn" money or pay taxes. Youre a r r o g a n t, a much higher sin than all the things your ilk complain about
Cowardly racist, are you claiming that having depression - a biological disorder - is morally wrong?

And, no, I both earn money and pay taxes.

If I'm arrogant with regards to you, it's because you are beneath me. You're a racist. You despise education, yet covet it. And you're stupid. Haven't seen you make a cogent argument or state a critically thought out position yet.

Your attacks on my person don't bother me, Bongo. I know who you are, and I am laughing at how impotent and pathetic you are, as a person.

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#588331 Sep 11, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
This kind of drivel is waht Catcher calls "intriguing conversation"
M'kay....
Hey Redneck.

I never said anything about intriguing conversation.

If you claim I did, show me.

You could at least be truthful, don't you think?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#588332 Sep 11, 2013
Here For Now wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree.
I’m not a bible scholar either Annie. I mostly read the New Testament but I don’t know of anything that says not to mix races. Maybe someone will (NICLEY people), let us know if there is. Maybe BA or Skombolis will know.
No it does not forbid interracial marriage. Or more specifically inter-ethnic marriage. At least not on the basis of race or ethnicity. People mistakenly point to Leviticus 19:19 where it talks about not letting your cattle breed with other cattle. But the distinction was not the race but rather the religious beliefs other races held during that time.

A verse that makes this clearer is:

Deuteronomy 7:3-4
3 kYou shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, 4 for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods. lThen the anger of the Lord would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#588333 Sep 11, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Good. Then you are also a bigot, self proclaimed.
why are you worried yo are not a christian

“I.Spirit.Son.God”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#588334 Sep 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
You got it dead on. His delusions are as much about denial as anything else
Ians just wrote:
"Isn't that important? Isn't what we do here doing our small part to promote a worthwhile change in Western culture? I'm proud to do my part."
If that was true (it isn't)
If his crusade by his own admission didn't only start once he got online (it did)
And if it wasn't delusions of grandeur to think he is changing anything from posts on Topix (it is)
He would be going to as many rooms as possible trying to spread his 'message'. Instead he goes to the same few rooms, day in and day out, posting variations of the exact same thing to the exact same people month after month, year after year
He does it for the ego-stroke as he needs the validation. He desperately wants to feel important. If change was his goal, he wouldn't hammer the same points over and over again to people who already agree with him. He would be trying to reach as many new people as possible to get them to see his way of thinking
He is an internet troll. And an insecure one. And a dishonest one. But he can't admit that. So he conjures up these fantasies of himself and what he is doing. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
Well...it is still a little funny!
LOL
Cosign! You is on a roll Skombolis. What you say makes perfect sense.

If it was true that he or any other of these fake atheists on here that want to do their part to promote "change in western culture" or do they part to "bring down Christianity" how come they come here everyday?, not only arguing with the same people with the same old arguments, but then they write to each other the same things they write to each other thousands of other times! oy!LOL!..hilarious!

He is pathetic and funny!

he uses this fantasy reality to stroke his ego. They all travel like a pack. And when he comes here, he like the validation these fake atheists give him.

He is a insecure inferior Clown that uses a pseudo-reality forum for an excuse to prop up why he exist. Makes you wonder what kind of depressed hellish existence he lives offline and behind the billboard when the only times he thinks he is worth existing is when he comes "Under the Dome" in a movie like video game fantastical adventure existence to get validation from invented internet personas spewing the same worthless garbage to them daily and deluded into thinking anyone else is buying it.

He is an Idiot.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#588335 Sep 11, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I never claimed that God "has been talking to me".
Stop calling yourself an intellectual, you're an idiot.
an educated intellectual, every thing you are not.

So It shall remain, unless I loose my mind as I become aged and become damaged enough for religion.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#588336 Sep 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
Annie said:
"Straight person 1 says they are not homophobic...Straight person 1 gets angry at Straight person 2...person 1 calls person 2 a faggot...accuses them of being gay...using "gay" as an insult.
Is person 1 non-homophobic as they claim?"

1) They are angry
2) They know logically is makes no sense to call a straight person gay as an insult as it doesn't apply. It isn't a reflection of their attitude towards someone gay but is done for 1 of 3 reasons
A) Growing up being called fagot was meant as insult. And it didn't even necessarily have to do with being gay. It meant a man was weak, a wuss, etc. Granted being more socially correct says, well look why it would mean that and it derived from this and this is why it shouldn't be said and etc. And thats probably right. But point is to the person saying it being gay may be the furthest thing from their mind. When angry people tend to go to default mode. Perhaps bad habits they had broken from the past come out
2) It is being said as fag in terms of gay. However they know the person is not gay. It is the same as calling someone white a "N-word". Logically it makes no sense. But when angry people look to hurt. And they generally don't spend a lot of time planning out what words they may use. It is again, probably just an old habit they broke once becoming more sensitive to how it may effect others that surfaced simply because on some level they know it doesn't apply. Now if someone got mad and called someone gay a fagot someone black an N-word, that is different. But again, not always that much. The main intent again may simply be to get to the quick. To inflict injury. It mat have nothing to do with their actual beliefs
C) They know the person they are saying it to will take it as an insult. You know what I do when people say I sleep with other guys as an insult? I laugh. To me its simply an attempt that won't work to bother me. I in return have used it as an insult. Generally with people older than me or around the same age as people aren't always so forthcoming. Lots of people claim they aren't homophobic. Then you may see them posting as an insult about guys taking it up the rear like a woman. Or who knows, maybe that is just an extreme version of what I have been talking about?
The point is, you may not necessarily learn anything from something said out of anger. And sometimes it is a reflection of people's true feelings. There is no clear cut way to know. But usually when between two straight guys, it rarely reflects their actual attitude towards someone gay
That's my opinion anyway
Bigot. Your facilitating bigotry by justifying it.

People like me don't really care if you never understand. We're going to give you something that you can understand: a hard way to go until you closet your hateful stupidity.

Can you understand that?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#588337 Sep 11, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
- where did taxes originate from, Skom?
- what is their purpose?
- how did that purpose change throughout history and especially with the Industrial Revolution?
- how did the French Revolution transform how taxes were thought of?
- how did the British moral system, developing away from aristocracy and toward people, fundamentally change how taxes are used?
- what does "for the people, by the people" etc., mean?
"of the people by the people" is a quote from Jefferson during the Gettyburg address talking about how our way of life will maintain

"..It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

It really has nothing to do with social programs

Taxes for the U.S. are based on the 16th ammendment are are meant for the safety and general welfare of the nation. Some taxes have been around a long time. Others have been added over the years

But again, how they are used (such as social programs) has always been left up to the states and the individual bodies of congress based on their interpretation. There is no set standard

I would have to look up how the French Revolution impacted how the U.S. looks at taxes, if it did. But I do know our tax system is based on the 16th ammendment

“BE BRAVE ENOUGH ”

Since: Oct 09

TO STEP IN MUD PUDDLES

#588338 Sep 11, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I've been calling it "cold bigotry." From http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
Grace Walker wrote: "I could have gotten angry over [a Topix poster] saying that women are only saved through child bearing, but I overlooked it.
IANS: "That's what I call cold bigotry. It's not necessarily delivered with hatred, and might even be sincere. But it's demeaning anyway. Somebody who disesteemed women came up with it, and the priests have been repeating it to one another and their congregations ever since. Even if not delivered with hatred by the most recent vector of the meme, it was conceived in hatred."
It occurs when you say something like, "He speaks well for a black man" or "She's a credit to her race" - things that we don't hear about white people. It sounds like a compliment, and often no malice is intended, but lowered expectations are disabling just the same.
That is a part of what I was saying. Maybe people don't intend it to be derogatory...but I wonder if it reveals some unrecognized feelings...feelings that maybe even the speaker is unaware of.

Maybe not in every case but I can't help but wonder...why would we think to say those things if there wasn't an element (maybe even very small) of underlying feelings.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#588339 Sep 11, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>Cosign! You is on a roll Skombolis. What you say makes perfect sense.
If it was true that he or any other of these fake atheists on here that want to do their part to promote "change in western culture" or do they part to "bring down Christianity" how come they come here everyday?, not only arguing with the same people with the same old arguments, but then they write to each other the same things they write to each other thousands of other times! oy!LOL!..hilarious!
He is pathetic and funny!
he uses this fantasy reality to stroke his ego. They all travel like a pack. And when he comes here, he like the validation these fake atheists give him.
He is a insecure inferior Clown that uses a pseudo-reality forum for an excuse to prop up why he exist. Makes you wonder what kind of depressed hellish existence he lives offline and behind the billboard when the only times he thinks he is worth existing is when he comes "Under the Dome" in a movie like video game fantastical adventure existence to get validation from invented internet personas spewing the same worthless garbage to them daily and deluded into thinking anyone else is buying it.
He is an Idiot.
Yep Yep!

Sorry this is short, walking out the door to run some errands. Will catch up soon
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#588340 Sep 11, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly, racist. I constantly fight against racists like you who denigrate people not like you.
I love how you pretend that my house somehow detracts from my words.
The reality is, Bongo, you lack education. You have a simple view of reality - moreover, you're impressed by education. You're constantly begging women of learning to go on dates with you, thinking we'll be impressed by your money.
I can't imagine a more boring time, talking with someone who's knowledge of history is beaten by most 16 year olds.
Youre bobbing and weaving to avoid explaining your arrogance. Your house, the one you don't own, is ramshackle, is it not? Not fitting for such a highminded elitist. You really don't fight racism, you use it for an excuse as you feel like a lesser person, fitting since a cow is worth more than a young female in your part of the world. You only know what you rotely learned, you haven't got any skin in the game yet. You just denigrated Nano , you trash, you take meds! My last year of education was 15 years old honey, and you will never come near to my achievments. Impressed by education, I just sent my fourth child off to an ivy league college and I support a relative at NYU. Yes im impressed. You say that like its a dirty word, you filth. Money, youre impressed for sure. The only one doing the talking (yammering) at dinner would be highminded you, afterwards (sex) the man always says to you, uuuggghh get out.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#588341 Sep 11, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
Skombolis wrote:
1) They are ...

2) They know ...

A) Growing up ...

2) It is being ...

C) They know ...
Incidentally, what would have been next ... iv)?
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#588342 Sep 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
I am so grateful that I have so many paid sick days to take.
The working welfare , a great goal to aspire to ehh ol yeller? What should a person who cant do anything do? teach! lol
Here For Now

Lenoir City, TN

#588343 Sep 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible belt is famous for segregation. It only was outlawed a few decades ago and still persists in the culture.
"I haven't seen it." is a poor argument.
I’m not saying there are no racist BA because there are. I’m saying that no one I know would put people away and gas them. There probably are those that would do that to others, Christians and Atheists both. I’m not arguing with you but trying to see it as it is.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#588344 Sep 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
I have never said anything negative towards Mexican people
Liar.
Skombolis wrote:
My comments do not focus on the people
Of course they do.
Skombolis wrote:
They simply focus on how you came to be there
Liar. When you do that, you talk about running from lawsuits, or being too poor.
Skombolis wrote:
You will never be able to produce a post where I say anything bad about Mexican people.
I'll likely never try to produce any of your posts again. I don't respect you enough. My full rebuttal to your claims will be "Liar."
Skombolis wrote:
the economic conditions such a 'success' as yourself finds himself in after telling of priests who misappropriate funds and laughs at the idea they wouldn't because "after all, it's a church".
Liar.
Skombolis wrote:
You are in Mexico buddy. How is your fate something you are rubbing in anybody's face
Bigot.
Bongo

Bronx, NY

#588345 Sep 11, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>

You might be correct about my powerless, but I'll never be as naive, uninformed and unintelligent as you. I'll always be your intellectual better. You claim I live in an Ivory Tower - You're the racist who hates blacks - and I'm the one arguing against racism, yet here you go claiming I hate others. I don't care how much money you pretend to have, yes you do, you keep talking about it..
Im very corect about your powerlessness! Youre better at what, enculturation lol? You do live In an ivory tower, figuratively, in reality , a hovel. I don't hate blacks, I commented on my observances of typical ones in a certain area. Incidentally, My best man and his wife in my wedding were black, your embellished assertions are arrogant as usual.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The 'Fake News' Con: A Case Study 2 min TRUMP WINNERS 23
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 9 min Buck Crick 583
Secular Humanism VS Christianity 18 min Elerby 162
The Future of Politics in America 18 min Buck Crick 251
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 29 min Gods r Delusions ... 665,376
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 33 min RiversideRedneck 88,225
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 35 min RiversideRedneck 977,371
More from around the web