Christians vs SJWs

Author: TheUnderdog 3 years ago

Posts

Total: 40

Topic's author

TheUnderdog

Debates: 5

Posts: 4,340

TheUnderdog

07.29.2021 09:13PM

SJWs: We believe in tolerance and being open minded, but if you disagree with BLM, Femenism, or Bernie Sanders, we will hate you for being priviliged. But remember we are the tolerant ones.

Christians: God loves you and we love you. If you don't like God or us, we will think you deserve to burn in hell forever. But remember we love you.

Me: smh.

Fruit_Inspector

Debates: 20

Posts: 855

Fruit_Inspector

07.30.2021 01:19AM

-->

@TheUnderdog

I have a brother who was an alcoholic for a number of his young adult years. I remember the night we had to call an ambulance after we found him passed out in a pool of his own vomit at the bottom of the stairs. That was the same night I realized I could no longer ignore that he was going down a path of self-destruction. He was experiencing the consequences of his actions. It was love that caused me to confront him about his alcoholism. Letting him continue down that path unhindered would have been the most unloving thing for me to do.

My family's love is part of the reason my brother is now sober and getting his life together. It quite literally saved his life.

That is the same love that drives the Christian message. There is a God who will judge the world. Everyone who has broken God's law, everyone who has chosen to sin against Him, will experience the consequences of their choices.

But let me be clear. Every Christian is just as deserving of hell as every non-Christian. The difference is that God has promised to save those who will turn away from their sin and trust in the Lord Jesus for salvation.

If this is true and I failed to tell others about this message of salvation - if I allow them to continue down their path of self-destruction unhindered - I would be the most unloving person in the world.

Theweakeredge

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

Theweakeredge

07.30.2021 03:55AM

-->

@TheUnderdog

Again, if you are someone who denies someone human or civil rights, you no longer have the right to be tolerated. Get the fuck off your high horse.

zedvictor4

Debates: 22

Posts: 12,083

zedvictor4

07.30.2021 07:37AM

-->

@TheUnderdog

@Theweakeredge.

You have just contradicted yourselves.

If you think that it's OK to promote one human or civil rights issue, whilst simultaneously denying another.

And if you separate two things with a "vs" you are clearly promoting an idea of discrimination.

And tolerance is an individual trait, and not always a two way thing.

Interestingly the Bible is similarly contradictory.

You're both jousting from high horses.

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

07.30.2021 09:47AM

-->

@Fruit_Inspector

Your quote;

But let me be clear. Every Christian is just as deserving of hell as every non-Christian. The difference is that God has promised to save those who will turn away from their sin and trust in the Lord Jesus for salvation.

You really need to read that before someone comes along and debunks it.

And didn't Jesus die as blood "ransom" for our sins? If not, what was the point of going to the extremes of god impregnating an unwilling maiden ? And promising her that her son would inherit the throne and kingdom of David when he didn't even get to sniff the seat? And what was the point of sending Jesus to suffer a wild and vicious bloody scourging ending in the torturous execution by Crucifixion?

fauxlaw

Debates: 77

Posts: 3,565

fauxlaw

07.30.2021 01:56PM

-->

@Theweakeredge

Since when is thought, alone, a denial of rights? Anyone's thoughts can do no harm if they remain thoughts. Actions may have rights-limiting consequences, but thought, alone? That's an overreach. That's thought police, and entirely SJW tactic. Reel it in, yeah? As in "get off your [own] high horse."

Fruit_Inspector

Debates: 20

Posts: 855

Fruit_Inspector

07.30.2021 02:21PM

-->

@Stephen

I meant exactly what I said. But perhaps you should read this section again:

There is a God who will judge the world. Everyone who has broken God's law, everyone who has chosen to sin against Him, will experience the consequences of their choices.

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

07.30.2021 02:28PM

-->

@Fruit_Inspector

But perhaps you should read this section again:

I don't need to re-read it , I just simply do not believe it.

I meant exactly what I said.

Yes I understand that, I just wanted you to read what you have wrote; so there can be no misunderstanding.

And you missed these few questions; was there a reason for that?

Didn't Jesus die as blood "ransom" for our sins? If not, what was the point of going to the extremes of god impregnating an unwilling maiden ? And promising her that her son would inherit the throne and kingdom of David when he didn't even get to sniff the seat? And what was the point of sending Jesus to suffer a wild and vicious bloody scourging ending in the torturous execution by Crucifixion?

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

07.30.2021 02:41PM

-->

@fauxlaw

Since when is thought, alone, a denial of rights? Anyone's thoughts can do no harm if they remain thoughts. Actions may have rights-limiting consequences, but thought, alone? That's an overreach. That's thought police, and entirely SJW tactic. Reel it in, yeah? As in "get off your [own] high horse."

And you should climb down from your own "high and mighty" self-righteous horse yourself "High Priest".

You certainly do not understand or haven't read your bible that you preach from to others, then do you High Priest"? How quickly you put aside your bible when it suites you to do so.

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant,

his ox or donkey,

or anything that belongs to your neighbor.” Exodus 2017

This is thought crime at its roots.

You lot simply cannot help your self righteous, holier than thou, selves', can you.

#10

Fruit_Inspector

Debates: 20

Posts: 855

Fruit_Inspector

07.30.2021 02:50PM

-->

@Stephen

I don't need to re-read it , I just simply do not believe it.

I know you don't. That's the problem. You are an angry individual who has an obsession with attacking Christianity. There is no reason to answer your questions because you don't care what the answers are. You will just keep hating God, no matter what I say. And I suspect you also harbor some resentment for Christians, including myself. That's no way to live your life.

#11

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

07.30.2021 03:01PM

-->

@Fruit_Inspector

I don't need to re-read it , I just simply do not believe it.
I know you don't. That's the problem.

Well that is only your own opinion that you believe it is a problem to me. I don't find it a problem whatsoever.

attacking Christianity.

Not really. I read the scriptures with a critical eye and then ask the likes of you questions.

There is no reason to answer your questions because you don't care what the answers are.

You will never know though will you how or if I care? Until you dare answer my questions.

You will just keep hating God, no matter what I say.

Again, you have no way ever of knowing that unless I say so, and not you.

And I suspect you also harbor some resentment for Christians, including myself.

NOPE!!! I have many Christian friends and they seem to believe that I always make and raise good biblical talking points. And I only ever recall "hating" one single individual in the whole of my life. And it is not YOU. You are just words on a screen to me, my friend.

That's no way to live your life.

You leave that to me how I live my life and concern your self with yours .

So you do not want to take on those simple questions then. You are just like my Christian friends, they fall at the first fence too but I have great discussions with them and they don't start crying just because they cannot answer my questions, either.

Go on, have go;

Either answer the questions or simply do not respond at all. Your ad hominem simply ruins another's thread .

#12

Fruit_Inspector

Debates: 20

Posts: 855

Fruit_Inspector

07.30.2021 03:20PM

-->

@Stephen

I have many Christian friends and they seem to believe that I always make and raise good biblical talking points.

For some reason, I have a hard time believing this one!

#13

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

07.30.2021 03:36PM

-->

@Fruit_Inspector

I have many Christian friends and they seem to believe that I always make and raise good biblical talking points.
For some reason, I have a hard time believing this one!

Irrelevant. Now stop replying, You are wasting both our times on someone else's thread.

You have totally ignored my questions that are relevant to your own comments and instead, chose the ad hominem route.

YOU FAILED!!!

HERE>>>

Fruit_Inspector, wrote: The difference is that God has promised to save those who will turn away from their sin and trust in the Lord Jesus for salvation.#2

But didn't Jesus die as blood "ransom" for our sins? If not, what was the point of going to the extremes of god impregnating an unwilling maiden ? And promising her that her son would inherit the throne and kingdom of David when he didn't even get to sniff the seat? And what was the point of sending Jesus to suffer a wild and vicious bloody scourging ending in the torturous execution by Crucifixion?

Do not bother answering. You simply don't have any. Leave it to the big boys, to make themselves look totally stupid.

#14

Fruit_Inspector

Debates: 20

Posts: 855

Fruit_Inspector

07.30.2021 03:52PM

-->

@Stephen

But didn't Jesus die as blood "ransom" for our sins? If not, what was the point of going to the extremes of god impregnating an unwilling maiden ? And promising her that her son would inherit the throne and kingdom of David when he didn't even get to sniff the seat? And what was the point of sending Jesus to suffer a wild and vicious bloody scourging ending in the torturous execution by Crucifixion?

Do not bother answering.

But also:

You are wasting both our times on someone else's thread.

Irony.

#15

Nyxified

Debates: 21

Posts: 224

Nyxified

07.30.2021 09:34PM

-->

@TheUnderdog

I recommend reading this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

#16

Theweakeredge

Debates: 33

Posts: 3,457

Theweakeredge

07.30.2021 10:33PM

-->

@fauxlaw

Nope, whenever you "think" that you hate gay people, black people, etc - we don't have to tolerate them. Again, get the fuck off your high horse

#17

RationalMadman

Debates: 574

Posts: 19,931

RationalMadman

07.31.2021 12:14AM

-->

@TheUnderdog

SJWs believe in equality and protecting the vulnerable, tolerance comes along with the protection aspect.

They do not ever need to tolerate intolerance because the very basis of their tolerance is protecting the outcasted and vulnerable from being intolerantly bullied and neglected.

#18

RationalMadman

Debates: 574

Posts: 19,931

RationalMadman

07.31.2021 12:15AM

-->

@Theweakeredge

Almost every thread by this Underdog guy makes me cringe at his ignorance of the very topic he's made the thread about.

#19

Polytheist-Witch

Debates: 1

Posts: 4,188

Polytheist-Witch

07.31.2021 05:44PM

-->

@Fruit_Inspector

LOL

Topic's author

#20

TheUnderdog

Debates: 5

Posts: 4,340

TheUnderdog

07.31.2021 09:08PM

-->

@RationalMadman

The problem with SJWs isn’t that they are ignorant of the world; it’s that they know so much that isn’t so.

I’m sure if someone disapproved of polygamy, the SJWs wouldn’t care. But if someone disapproves of homosexuality, the pink and purple haired SJWs act like grown babies about it.

Topic's author

#21

TheUnderdog

Debates: 5

Posts: 4,340

TheUnderdog

07.31.2021 09:20PM

-->

@Nyxified

SJWs are more then intolerant of intolerance.

They are intolerant of:

-Political disagreement

-Maskless people if unvaccinated

-The 1% since SJWs think they are too rich

-Unvaccinated people.

-People who open carry AK47S

-And any group backed by the right

The main justification for being intolerant of the intolerant is the fear they will take over. However is this a reasonable fear? Do we really have to worry about Nazis taking over the government? Do we really have to worry about another Halocaust? Do we really have to worry about bringing back slavery when the KKK denounced slavery? If a white supremest ran for office he would lose miserably.

Some people would argue that Trump is a white supremest. However virtually all of his supporters deny this. If they believed he hated blacks, they wouldn’t support him; there have been many former republicans that denounce Trump. But most like Trump because of his immigration stance not out of a hatred for non whites, but out of a hatred for being unemployed and jobless. The democrats never addressed this fear, so this is why white working class voters are willing to vote for Trump.

If you want the right to support undocumented immigrants, you have to explain to them why they don’t have to worry about an undocumented immigrant taking their job because Hilliard Clinton never did. Instead she played the women card and expected to win when in reality she never addressed the fear that immigrants were taking jobs and the Trump base voted for the guy they thought protected their jobs.

Now I support open borders and I don’t think the unemployment rate will go up because of it. However Trump supporters are often afraid of being unemployed so they are willing to deport undocumented immigrants in order to stay employed.

#22

RationalMadman

Debates: 574

Posts: 19,931

RationalMadman

07.31.2021 09:59PM

-->

@TheUnderdog

What you're saying is crying about is worth crying about you fucking ignoramus. Homophobia isn't a joke.

#23

BrotherDThomas

Debates: 2

Posts: 2,140

BrotherDThomas

07.31.2021 10:54PM

-->

@TheUnderdog

RationalMadman,

YOUR UN TAOIST QUOTE: "What you're saying is crying about is worth crying about you fucking ignoramus. Homophobia isn't a joke."

We were under the impression that a part of your Taoist faith was to show kindness, therefore, where do you get the authority to take the day off relative to your Taoism by calling the Underdog a"fu*king ignoramus?"

Yeah, just like pseudo-christians, they too trample over their faith ad infinitum in making themselves hypocrites as well.

Topic's author

#24

TheUnderdog

Debates: 5

Posts: 4,340

TheUnderdog

08.01.2021 02:59PM

-->

@BrotherDThomas

For once, I actually agree with you.

11 days later

Topic's author

#25

TheUnderdog

Debates: 5

Posts: 4,340

TheUnderdog

08.13.2021 01:33AM

@RM

I'm LGBT and homophobia at this point is a joke. People don't hate gay people and I recommend gay people quit acting like speech police and quit spreading HIV for the health system to inevitably treat due to their sickening promiscuity.

#26

RationalMadman

Debates: 574

Posts: 19,931

RationalMadman

08.14.2021 02:57AM

-->

@TheUnderdog

you really need help

#27

RationalMadman

Debates: 574

Posts: 19,931

RationalMadman

08.14.2021 02:58AM

-->

@BrotherDThomas

We were under the impression that a part of your Taoist faith was to show kindness, therefore, where do you get the authority to take the day off relative to your Taoism by calling the Underdog a"fu*king ignoramus?"

Actually unlike Buddhism a core tenet of Taoism is that too much passivity is unhealthy for the soul.

Good day, Brother D, goodnight Troll Tom.

#28

Stephen

Debates: 0

Posts: 8,624

Stephen

08.14.2021 06:45AM

-->

@BrotherDThomas

& RationalMadman,

🤣

RationalMadman, wrote:Homophobia isn't a joke."

Of course its a Joke. You just don't understand the word phobia.

I'll tell you what the joke is here.

A phobia is and extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something. And I find it irrational that homosexuals believe everyone fears them because they prefer to hang out of the back of someone of the same sex. Well I don't fear you irrationally or otherwise, you clown. And where you decide to put your penis is of no interest to me.

And I have found that the only way that you, the minority of homosexuals, can get the attention you crave is for jokers like you to redefine words to make them offensive in order to criminalise people that YOU fear irrationally. Do you see the Joke?

Islam of course takes a different view to me . You would be tossed off a high place or hung from the gibb of a tower crane if you were in an Islamic country. I don't hear you taking on Islam for its barbaric punishment for your homosexual brothers, why is that? No, you would rather complain and protest and irrationally fear in a nice tolerant country in the west where you are protected from such barbarity.

That is the fkn Joke.

#29

zedvictor4

Debates: 22

Posts: 12,083

zedvictor4

08.14.2021 06:56AM

-->

@Stephen

Actually, well stated.

Though with rhetorical decadence.

You will be blocked.

Oops...You already are.

#30

BrotherDThomas

Debates: 2

Posts: 2,140

BrotherDThomas

08.14.2021 03:51PM

-->

@TheUnderdog

.
RationalMadman, the outright HYPOCRITE to his assumed faith,

YOUR HYPOCRITICAL QUOTE IN POST 27: "Actually unlike Buddhism a core tenet of Taoism is that too much passivity is unhealthy for the soul."

Your WEAK and comical refutation above is duly noted at your expense. FACT: One of your Taoist faith's tenants include in being "KIND," therefore when you call Underdog a "fu*king ignoramus, then once again, you directly go against your Taoist faith, plain and simple that maybe even you can understand, Yes? get it?

In essence, where do you get the authority to be a hypocrite to your Taoist faith and still want to be called a Taoist? Well?

NEXT DUMBFOUNDED TAOIST HYPOCRITE OF THEIR FAITH WILL BE … ?