Any serious Christians left?

CR-- If she thinks everyone who doesn't share her beliefs is going to hell--she believes she's superior. And she does believe that.

If she runs about amassing an army to join up here to fight a war with longstanding members of this forum because her religion is not treated the way she thinks it should be, she believes her religion merits special treatment--hence it and she are superior and should prevail.

Lash, I'm getting the feeling you don't much care for Arella Mae. Am I right?
I thought you analyzed that quite well.

Lash wrote:

CR-- If she thinks everyone who doesn't share her beliefs is going to hell--she believes she's superior. And she does believe that.

Guess I gotta join Arella's bandwagon here because as a Christian, I gotta admit that I believe that Lash.

Yes, I know. I think it's a shame that you are satisfied with a belief system that arbitrarily condemns people to burn in hell. I think it says alot about people that they choose to believe some of that ****.

At least that is what I beleive the Bible says. And my guess is that you do not believe that. So is your view or mine superior? Neither one actually.

I reject a belief system that states a few people will be ok and everyone else will scald in agony for all eternity. That's not a religion I respect. The figure in your religion that I loved so much--that I grew up thinking so much of--he wouldn't subscribe to it either.

As to which is correct, guess we won't know that until we die. So, does that make one of us superior over the other? I don't think so. Just means we have different beliefs. I certainly don't think I am superior to you because I am a Christian.
Yes you do. You think you--by virtue of whatever hocus pocus you submit yourself to--will float around in heaven--and that others will burn in hell. There most definitely is an unavoidable superiority in that dynamic. I used to try to tell myself there wasn't because I didn't want to think of myself as superior--but there is.

And I'm pretty sure Arella doesn't think that either.

And I'm sure she does.
Of course, I do believe my belief is superior to yours, but if I didn't I would be crazy to be a Christian, wouldn't I?
You separate yourself from your spiritual belief?

Lash wrote:

If she runs about amassing an army to join up here to fight a war with longstanding members of this forum because her religion is not treated the way she thinks it should be, she believes her religion merits special treatment--hence it and she are superior and should prevail.

So she isn't allowed to suggest to her like-minded friends that they should check out this forum? And doing so constitutes amassing an army?

Ask her, CR. She called them an army. Was concerned about them putting on their ARMOR and such...

And because you or anyone else is a longstanding member means others are somehow of lesser standing and shouldn't discuss opposing views with you? Yeah, that's it. I always refuse to allow people to discuss opposing views. .

That seems to be what you are saying here Lash. Sounds a bit like you are the one feeling superior since you've been a member for so long.
Lame attempt to retreat from the subject.

And did she really say her religion deserves special treatment? If she did, I'm sure nobody here listened. So what's the big deal if she did? I'm getting the feeling you don't much care for her.
Ya think?
Arella Mae does sometimes get defensive, but that is her nature I guess. I tend not to get my dandriff up when people disagree with me and mock my faith, as often happens here (to people of all faiths, not just to Christians, btw). It's why I seldom post on the religion threads anymore. She handles it by sometimes getting defensive. Is that really a big deal? If you don't like it, stay out of discussions that involve her.
If you don't like it, stay out of discussions that involve me.
Given your history with her, I wonder why you even jumped in here on this discussion, other than to goad her.
You were wrong about her in your post, and I responded. You make lame attempts to defend her bullshit--and I don't mind-- You jump in, I jump in, ...same thing.
Lash, I certainly have no bone to pick with you. But since you admittedly addressed these comments to me, I thought I would be kind enough to respond. Hopefully I did so without appearing to believe that I am superior to you. (I am, but that has nothing to do with my being a Christian)
CR. I don't mind that you think you're superior to me. It informs on you, not me.

Gosh Lash, guess I got ya mad at me now too.
Mad wouldn't be the word.

I'd love explaining my beliefs in regards to your comments, but I doubt it would do any good toward giving you a better understanding of my beliefs than what you think you have, so I won't go to the trouble.
Thank you.

As far as her comment about them putting on the Armor, well, either you understand the biblical reference or you don't.
I understand it quite well. Doing battle and putting on armor and her characterization of this place as Satanic left nothing to the imagination.

I will address one comment in order to explain myself a bit better than I may have. You wrote the following. " If she runs about amassing an army to join up here to fight a war with longstanding members of this forum because her religion...

I read this as though you were saying she had no business bringing in people to this forum to argue with longstanding members, as though longstanding members shouldn't be argued with because of some special status.
Your assumption was incorrect.

Sorry if that is not what you intended to convey.
If you are sincere, your apology is accepted.

Finally, I may well have overstepped my bounds by suggesting you stay out of discussions that involve her. Of course you have every right to be in any discussion you wish, regardless of who it involves. My point was simply that it seems whenever the two of you are involved lately, the discussion turns into a cat-fight between you, which does the discussion no good at all.
I have also noticed when third parties insinuate themselves in an exchange such as this, it only gets longer and more colorful. We verging on three colors even now.

Oh, one last thing. Please, please, please understand my comments about being superior at the end of my post was a joke. I thought I made that plain
You wanted to say it and you did. The added disclaimer was so you wouldn't have to answer for it. Been there. Done that.

Now, you have a good day.

Irrelevant, red Herring, and implicational straw man, rl - nothing was said to indicate maporsche claimed to have made a superior choice personally, or a choice of any sort, for that matter. What maporsche may or may not believe, may or may not perceive to be superior, is not at issue

timberlandko wrote:

Irrelevant, red Herring, and implicational straw man, rl - nothing was said to indicate maporsche claimed to have made a superior choice personally, or a choice of any sort, for that matter. What maporsche may or may not believe, may or may not perceive to be superior, is not at issue

Rubbish.

Everyone makes choices to believe and not believe what they wish to believe or not.

maporsche wants to support the idea that a Christian, having made a choice what he believes, thereafter thinks him/herself superior . Why? Because the Christian contends that his conclusion/belief is the best one.

My question is simple, (thus particularly applicable to you as well):

Do non-Christians, since they also think their conclusions are the best one (that is why they hold those conclusions) also think themselves superior for choosing their superior belief?

The answer, if one is given, will doubtless evidence a double standard. This is plain from the one-sided nature of the proposition that maporsche advanced to begin with.

The problem seems to be a vindictiveness against AM by maporsche. maporsche has admitted to what has been said, but still insists that AM has an agenda different that anyone else.

I am not sure whether the word superior should be used, but each would certainly think that they are right. Why can't it just be left at that?

Intrepid wrote:

The problem seems to be a vindictiveness against AM by maporsche. maporsche has admitted to what has been said, but still insists that AM has an agenda different that anyone else.

I am not sure whether the word superior should be used, but each would certainly think that they are right. Why can't it just be left at that?

I've left it at that. I was just responding to RL, who apparently didn't read the entire thread.

maporsche wrote:

Intrepid wrote:

The problem seems to be a vindictiveness against AM by maporsche. maporsche has admitted to what has been said, but still insists that AM has an agenda different that anyone else.

I am not sure whether the word superior should be used, but each would certainly think that they are right. Why can't it just be left at that?

I've left it at that. I was just responding to RL, who apparently didn't read the entire thread.

maporsche, you have not left it. You still insist that I feel other than I do. I accept you feel as you have said you feel. Why can't you accept that I feel as I feel? I am honestly asking you this because I really do not undertand why you don't accept what I am telling you when they are my thoughts and feelings.