Does your ideology include a clause that says you should raise hell against evil religions?

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Does your ideology include a clause that says you should raise hell against evil religions?

Seems like a decent overall ideology.

Does your ideology include a clause that says you should raise hell against evil religions?

This, --- for evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing, --- is a part of my ideology/theology, given that I call myself a Gnostic Christian.

Does yours, and how do you exercise that degrading chore?

Regards
DL

 

[Politesse]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

 

[steve_bank]

Not at all. My policy is tolerance., llve, and let live. Even if you do not get tolernce back all the time.

It is better than being angry all the time.

I attack religion on the forum because debate is what we all come here fo, theist and atheist aliker. One of the few things I am certain of is that I am not a god or all knowing moral authority. I am fallible.

How is the evil. as you put it, in religion any different than any other evil?

If you think your versionof Gnostic Christianity has some absolute morality and ability to pass adjustment, which you inferred in the past and in this thread, then you are no different than those which you call evil.

Didn't Jesus say something about the mote in your wn eye and casting the first stone?

If you calm to be a g follower of Jesus than I will view you in the context of how you appear to live the words of Jesus.

 

[Jarhyn]

I have a part in my model that indicates that there is something that ought be protected against: the violation or prevention of mutually compatible self-actualization.

Specifically, the protection and furtherance of mutually compatible self-actualization only authorized the minimal necessary work to ensure the result, as going beyond that violates the core principle itself.

Obviously, we have as a society democratically (or, can as a society democratically) determine where a threshold for "insignificant violation" exists, wherein we accept such interference to a level that we ourselves produce it, and this becomes a commonly accepted threshold. This gives us wiggle room in both extent of measures to protect our "freedom" (because it's a pain to say 'mutually compatible self-actualization' and you all now know what I mean to utter the word 'freedom' here) and to be at least as shitty as everyone else is just going to be because they can't not.

Nowhere does this involve suffering for its own sake, nor violence, nor manipulation via informational leverage (which is, to me, also violence).

It does involve setting up a playbook vs bad faith, to quickly identify it and identify strategies to disarm it: I will not let people be on average any shittier than the minimum we absolutely must tolerate in order to lubricate ethics to smooth function. (It's the same general reason a rocket needs slop to stick the automated platform: reality is sloppy and nobody is perfect all the time, and nobody can or should be!)

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

 

[Politesse]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Not at all. My policy is tolerance., llve, and let live. Even if you do not get tolernce back all the time.

It is better than being angry all the time.

I attack religion on the forum because debate is what we all come here fo, theist and atheist aliker. One of the few things I am certain of is that I am not a god or all knowing moral authority. I am fallible.

How is the evil. as you put it, in religion any different than any other evil?

If you think your versionof Gnostic Christianity has some absolute morality and ability to pass adjustment, which you inferred in the past and in this thread, then you are no different than those which you call evil.

Didn't Jesus say something about the mote in your wn eye and casting the first stone?

If you calm to be a g follower of Jesus than I will view you in the context of how you appear to live the words of Jesus.

Your personal B.S. and poor judgements aside, -----

Your morals do not seem to have a Golden Rule.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

 

[Politesse]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

If you calm to be a g follower of Jesus than I will view you in the context of how you appear to live the words of Jesus.

I follow a Jesus.

Not the Roman one.

You seem to forget that Jesus was chased out of town a couple of times.

They wanted to kill him. I am not surprised that some will not like me.

Ask me if I care?

I like to be moral and right. Not liked.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

 

[Politesse]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

I am not interested in "talking" to a party who is not present in the discussion.

If you are saying that you endorse the Proverbs passage personally, I also do not believe '"correcting" people necessarily requires harming them, nor have I ever seen deliberate harm as a productive means of instruction. As that same chapter admonishes: "Do not envy the violent, nor choose any of their ways... [The Lord] mocks proud mockers, but shows favor to the humble and oppressed."

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

I am not interested in "talking" to a party who is not present in the discussion.

If you are saying that you endorse the Proverbs passage personally, I also do not believe '"correcting" people necessarily requires harming them, nor have I ever seen deliberate harm as a productive means of instruction. As that same chapter admonishes: "Do not envy the violent, nor choose any of their ways... [The Lord] mocks proud mockers, but shows favor to the humble and oppressed."

You show the harm in correcting someone.

Who is not here?

Regards
DL

 

[steve_bank]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

Te problem with religion and all human social groups is the assumption of person or power group that assumes godlike powers of right and wrong.

A worse case example is Trump. He knows all and sees all. What he says is always absolutely true and correct.

You read a scant nmuber of words alleged to have come from a person for whom there is no corroboration, read words in a disjointed set of texts from an ancient people, interpret, and judge. That is what all Christians do.

Same quetion I asked Learner who did not answer.

In the gispels Jesus says marrage is between one man and one woman. That pretty much rules out gay marriage. Do you agree? Do you have gay friends?

Do you have friends gay or straight that have sex outside of a marriage IOW fornicators? If so do you attack what is biblcaly evil?

Do you correct friends who are divorced? Who lie? Who do not honor father and moter?

My guess is yiu are just a routine sort of Christian who picks and chooses what 'evil' to sermonize about.

To me those who appoint themselves judge and jury are the worse 'evil'.

 

[Politesse]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

I am not interested in "talking" to a party who is not present in the discussion.

If you are saying that you endorse the Proverbs passage personally, I also do not believe '"correcting" people necessarily requires harming them, nor have I ever seen deliberate harm as a productive means of instruction. As that same chapter admonishes: "Do not envy the violent, nor choose any of their ways... [The Lord] mocks proud mockers, but shows favor to the humble and oppressed."

You show the harm in correcting someone.

Who is not here?

Regards
DL

Perhaps "raising hell" means something different to you than to me, your reverence.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Does your ideology include a clause that says you should raise hell against evil religions?

Seems like a decent overall ideology.

Does your ideology include a clause that says you should raise hell against evil religions?

Why did you ask the same question twice? Anyway, I really don't have much of an ideology, but I think we should raise hell against any evil, irreligious or religious.

This, --- for evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing, --- is a part of my ideology/theology...

Yes, I think it's very true that evil can and does triumph when good people do nothing. So many people are wimps fearing to offend the sensibilities of those who espouse cruelty and injustice if that cruelty and injustice is socially accepted and is part of the system. We tend to privilege points of view that enjoy popularity.

...given that I call myself a Gnostic Christian.

What is a gnostic Christian?

Does yours, and how do you exercise that degrading chore?

I don't understand this question. Please clarify.

 

[steve_bank]

If you calm to be a g follower of Jesus than I will view you in the context of how you appear to live the words of Jesus.

I follow a Jesus.

Not the Roman one.

You seem to forget that Jesus was chased out of town a couple of times.

They wanted to kill him. I am not surprised tha

t some will not like me.

Ask me if I care?

I like to be moral and right. Not liked.

Regards
DL

Along with Trump, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Have you read Marcus Aurelius and Machiavelli? You would fit right into the Roman Empire.

Just like the routine Christian you are playing the martyr in agony. Do you bleed from your palms?

 

[steve_bank]

Not at all. My policy is tolerance., llve, and let live. Even if you do not get tolernce back all the time.

It is better than being angry all the time.

I attack religion on the forum because debate is what we all come here fo, theist and atheist aliker. One of the few things I am certain of is that I am not a god or all knowing moral authority. I am fallible.

How is the evil. as you put it, in religion any different than any other evil?

If you think your versionof Gnostic Christianity has some absolute morality and ability to pass adjustment, which you inferred in the past and in this thread, then you are no different than those which you call evil.

Didn't Jesus say something about the mote in your wn eye and casting the first stone?

If you calm to be a g follower of Jesus than I will view you in the context of how you appear to live the words of Jesus.

Your personal B.S. and poor judgements aside, -----

Your morals do not seem to have a Golden Rule.

OMG! The power of Christian Agnostic is bending me to his will! The sheer power!

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

Te problem with religion and all human social groups is the assumption of person or power group that assumes godlike powers of right and wrong.

A worse case example is Trump. He knows all and sees all. What he says is always absolutely true and correct.

You read a scant nmuber of words alleged to have come from a person for whom there is no corroboration, read words in a disjointed set of texts from an ancient people, interpret, and judge. That is what all Christians do.

Same quetion I asked Learner who did not answer.

In the gispels Jesus says marrage is between one man and one woman. That pretty much rules out gay marriage. Do you agree? Do you have gay friends?

Do you have friends gay or straight that have sex outside of a marriage IOW fornicators? If so do you attack what is biblcaly evil?

Do you correct friends who are divorced? Who lie? Who do not honor father and moter?

My guess is yiu are just a routine sort of Christian who picks and chooses what 'evil' to sermonize about.

To me those who appoint themselves judge and jury are the worse 'evil'.

Thanks for your judgements.

You have seen me write against homophobia, and I take it that you were being rhetorical or something.

Regards
DL

 

[Gnostic Christian Bishop]

Terrible idea. Visiting pain on others is an invitation for them to do the same, locking people and nations in troubles that never dissipate.

Harm reduction always imposes a penalty on the one whose ethics are shown to be immoral.

If you do not cause pain to the ill, to kill the hurt they will inflict on those we we love, --- the well, --- will get infected.

Regards
DL

I also believe that the sick should be healed, not killed.

Talk to the genocidal god, Yahweh/Jesus.

That Christian god, and his followers, need healing that few seem to care enough to administer.

Regards
DL

Well no, I am talking to you. The person who started the thread. YHWH may interject His opinion himself if he likes, presumably he has access to the internet, at which time I would be happy to talk with him about it.

I meant in the spirit of the O.P.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

Regards
DL

I am not interested in "talking" to a party who is not present in the discussion.

If you are saying that you endorse the Proverbs passage personally, I also do not believe '"correcting" people necessarily requires harming them, nor have I ever seen deliberate harm as a productive means of instruction. As that same chapter admonishes: "Do not envy the violent, nor choose any of their ways... [The Lord] mocks proud mockers, but shows favor to the humble and oppressed."

You show the harm in correcting someone.

Who is not here?

Regards
DL

Perhaps "raising hell" means something different to you than to me, your reverence.

Insert gays and women harmed by homophobic and misogynous religions to this quote. You should get an idea of what hell you should be raising with the homophobic and misogynous mainstream religions, --- if you live by the golden rule.

Please get back to me with your conclusion.

Martin Niemöller
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Regards
DL