Australian Politics Forum - spineless apologetics

moses

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6353

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1455 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:09pm

Gandalf wrote:

Quote:

And what are these "Commands of Allah" and "teachings of Muhammad" - oh thats right, rape, slaughter and generally be a dick.

See? Foolproof

You've seen the quote Gandi *many a true word is spoken in jest*

Well we have a classic example with your post, because the innumerable commands, teachings and verses which are the root cause of islamic atrocities do exist, they are followed to the letter by the fundamentalist committing the atrocities.

All faux muslim moderates 100% support the commands, teachings and verses, therefore they support the rape murder and torture engendered by these tenets.

Back to top

IP Logged

moses

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6353

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1456 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:09pm

@ Brian Ross

moses wrote:
Quote:

Quote:

Overwhelming evidence actually.

All muslims fully support the cause and motivation of islamic violence (islam allah muhammad qur'an).

They unequivocally deem this cause and motivation as being immutably perfect and can never be changed.

If you fully support the cause and motivation of unspeakable atrocities, you also fully support the engendered atrocities.

Brian Ross replied:

Quote:

So, is this like how all Christians proclaim their belief in Christ and his teachings and his church(es)?

So, then, why were the teachings of Christ ignored for nearly 2,000+ years and you, a supposedly a Christian continue to ignore them in your hatred of everything that is non-Christian? Mmmm?

The teachings of Christ are there for all people to read if they desire.

These teachings tell of such things as false doctrines and pretend Christians, being rejected by Jesus.

What's that got to do with the fact that islamic tenets cause and motivate human rights atrocities, that all muslims totally support these tenets, therefore they support the depravity engendered?

Quote:

"Falsification"? Yet, the Christian philosophers, theologians and Churchmen all claimed they spoke the true words of Christ when they were proclaiming their wars against the infidel, now didn't they?

They claimed?

Once again For your benefit:

Mathew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mathew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mathew 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The above three verses fully explain that certain people will claim Christianity, but will be rejected by Christ as they are workers of iniquity.

Then we have:

Mathew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Explains that the commandments of men taught as the doctrine which resulted in many wrongdoings, was also rejected by Christ.

Once again the teachings of Christ have bought you down.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49091
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1457 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:52pm

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 3:26pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 6:43am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 10:33pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 5:54pm:

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

FD, perhaps you need to learn that Christianity, like Islam is far more than just the words of their founders? Roll Eyes

True. Actions speak louder than words eh?

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

As I am discussing more than just the words of Christ or Mohammed, FD, your comment is nonsensical. Try again. Roll Eyes

Can you not understand the question Brian, or are you simply unwilling to answer it?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1458 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:29pm

moses wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:09pm:

Gandalf wrote:

Quote:

And what are these "Commands of Allah" and "teachings of Muhammad" - oh thats right, rape, slaughter and generally be a dick.

See? Foolproof

You've seen the quote Gandi *many a true word is spoken in jest*

Well we have a classic example with your post, because the innumerable commands, teachings and verses which are the root cause of islamic atrocities do exist, they are followed to the letter by the fundamentalist committing the atrocities.

All faux muslim moderates 100% support the commands, teachings and verses, therefore they support the rape murder and torture engendered by these tenets.

Do Christians support the Christian exhortations which are the "root causes" of Christian atrocities throughout the ages, Moses?

Do you, with your continued ignoring of Christ's exhortation to "turn the other cheek"?

Just wondering how far you're willing to disobey the 10 Commandments... Oh, thats right, they aren't Christian in origin, are they? Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1459 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:33pm

moses wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:09pm:

@ Brian Ross

moses wrote:
Quote:

Quote:

Overwhelming evidence actually.

All muslims fully support the cause and motivation of islamic violence (islam allah muhammad qur'an).

They unequivocally deem this cause and motivation as being immutably perfect and can never be changed.

If you fully support the cause and motivation of unspeakable atrocities, you also fully support the engendered atrocities.

Brian Ross replied:

Quote:

So, is this like how all Christians proclaim their belief in Christ and his teachings and his church(es)?

So, then, why were the teachings of Christ ignored for nearly 2,000+ years and you, a supposedly a Christian continue to ignore them in your hatred of everything that is non-Christian? Mmmm?

The teachings of Christ are there for all people to read if they desire.

These teachings tell of such things as false doctrines and pretend Christians, being rejected by Jesus.

What's that got to do with the fact that islamic tenets cause and motivate human rights atrocities, that all muslims totally support these tenets, therefore they support the depravity engendered?

Perhaps they point out the hypocrisy of yourself and other Christian fundamentalists who only obey what they want from Christ's teachings, Moses. Ever consider that? Mmm? Roll Eyes

Quote:

"Falsification"? Yet, the Christian philosophers, theologians and Churchmen all claimed they spoke the true words of Christ when they were proclaiming their wars against the infidel, now didn't they?

They claimed?

They claimed, Moses. They claimed that they spoke God's Will. Are you suggesting they lied? Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1460 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:34pm

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 5:52pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 3:26pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 6:43am:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 10:33pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 5:54pm:

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

FD, perhaps you need to learn that Christianity, like Islam is far more than just the words of their founders? Roll Eyes

True. Actions speak louder than words eh?

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

As I am discussing more than just the words of Christ or Mohammed, FD, your comment is nonsensical. Try again. Roll Eyes

Can you not understand the question Brian, or are you simply unwilling to answer it?

As I am discussing more than just the words of Christ or Mohammed, FD, your comment is nonsensical. Try again. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49091 At my desk.	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1461 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:36pm It is a question Brian. Why are you afraid to answer it? Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1462 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:51pm

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 7:36pm:

It is a question Brian. Why are you afraid to answer it?

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

Not interested, FD.

Simple as that. Just as you're never interested in answering the difficult questions about your views... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49091
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1463 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 9:20pm

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 4:23pm:

moses wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 2:24pm:

Quote:

As long as they are not violent, they are members of that "peaceful majority".

I wonder how you classify people who have committed no violence as "violent".

People who support and urge violence, are part and part and parcel of the total violence package.

Fundamentalist muslims who commit the actual atrocities as outlined in the tenets of islam are (spiritually) the highest grade of muslim.

These muslims justify their perversions by quoting the commands of allah, the teachings of muhammad, the verses in the qur'an as their sole cause and motivation.

muslims who sneakily claim to be moderate, also state unequivocally that the islamic commands, teachings and verses which cause and motivate muslims to commit their foul deeds, are absolutely immutable perfect and can never be changed.

If muslims support the cause and motivation of islamic violence and human rights atrocities, they also support the actual inhumane deed

People who support and urge violence, are part and part and parcel of the total violence package.

Fundamentalist Christians who commit the actual atrocities as outlined in the tenets of Christianity are (spiritually) the highest grade of Christian.

These Christians justify their perversions by quoting the commands of Yahweh, the teachings of his Prophets, the verses in the Bible as their sole cause and motivation.

Christians who sneakily claim to be moderate, also state unequivocally that the Christian commands, teachings and verses which cause and motivate Christians to commit their foul deeds, are absolutely immutable perfect and can never be changed.

If Christians support the cause and motivation of Christian violence and human rights atrocities, they also support the actual inhumane deed

Amazing isn't it, just changing the pronouns and names can really prove the definition, now can't it? Roll Eyes

Sounds to me like you are interested in equating the two religions Brian. But you can't just swap in Christianity to make the same criticism can you?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1464 - Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 10:40pm

freediver wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2016 at 9:20pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 4:23pm:

moses wrote on Jun 1^st, 2016 at 2:24pm:

Quote:

As long as they are not violent, they are members of that "peaceful majority".

I wonder how you classify people who have committed no violence as "violent".

People who support and urge violence, are part and part and parcel of the total violence package.

Fundamentalist muslims who commit the actual atrocities as outlined in the tenets of islam are (spiritually) the highest grade of muslim.

These muslims justify their perversions by quoting the commands of allah, the teachings of muhammad, the verses in the qur'an as their sole cause and motivation.

muslims who sneakily claim to be moderate, also state unequivocally that the islamic commands, teachings and verses which cause and motivate muslims to commit their foul deeds, are absolutely immutable perfect and can never be changed.

If muslims support the cause and motivation of islamic violence and human rights atrocities, they also support the actual inhumane deed

People who support and urge violence, are part and part and parcel of the total violence package.

Fundamentalist Christians who commit the actual atrocities as outlined in the tenets of Christianity are (spiritually) the highest grade of Christian.

These Christians justify their perversions by quoting the commands of Yahweh, the teachings of his Prophets, the verses in the Bible as their sole cause and motivation.

Christians who sneakily claim to be moderate, also state unequivocally that the Christian commands, teachings and verses which cause and motivate Christians to commit their foul deeds, are absolutely immutable perfect and can never be changed.

If Christians support the cause and motivation of Christian violence and human rights atrocities, they also support the actual inhumane deed

Amazing isn't it, just changing the pronouns and names can really prove the definition, now can't it? Roll Eyes

Sounds to me like you are interested in equating the two religions Brian. But you can't just swap in Christianity to make the same criticism can you?

Looks to me like I did and that I can, FD. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49091 At my desk.	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #1465 - Jun 4^th, 2016 at 7:45am You tried. But I don't think even you believe it. Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

moses

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6353

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1466 - Jun 4^th, 2016 at 2:38pm

Brian Ross wrote Reply #1458 - Yesterday at 7:29pm
Quote:

Do Christians support the Christian exhortations which are the "root causes" of Christian atrocities throughout the ages, Moses?

Do you, with your continued ignoring of Christ's exhortation to "turn the other cheek"?

exhortation noun: A communication intended to urge or persuade the recipients to take some action.

Falls a long way short of doctrine, so I'd say exhortations are not binding.

Most genuine Christians would only support exhortations that are closely aligned to Christ's doctrine.

As for your turn the other cheek: well that is a favourite way of anti-Christians trying to suppress Christians criticizing and condemning evil.

You desperately try and tell Christians they must embrace anything no matter how wrong and evil it is.

However one of the many examples of how Christians must react to evil is:

Romans 12:9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.

So we see that Christians are told to hate evil.

Reply #1459 - Yesterday at 7:33pm
Quote:

They claimed, Moses. They claimed that they spoke God's Will. Are you suggesting they lied?

Well according to your lies the teachings of men which resulted in the burning of people at the stake, the inquisitions etc. are all genuine Christian doctrine.

SO for the umpteenth time I'll refer you to the Words of Christ which show that evil devised by man under the pretense of Christian doctrine, is totally rejected by Him therefore it is not Christian Doctrine.

Mathew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mathew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Mathew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mathew 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

All of the above clearly state that workers of iniquity and purveyors of evil under the false guise of Christianity are rejected.

Why do you persist in your lies Brian, you will never win, oh that's right you're desperate to disingenuously equate islam / muhammad with Christianity / Jesus. (keep trying you'll never be able to do it)

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 4^th, 2016 at 2:56pm by moses »

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1467 - Jun 4^th, 2016 at 4:33pm

freediver wrote on Jun 4^th, 2016 at 7:45am:

You tried. But I don't think even you believe it. Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

As I have stated, I am discussing the religion and it's teachings, FD. Not the words solely of the founder... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41951

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1468 - Jun 4^th, 2016 at 4:36pm

moses wrote on Jun 4^th, 2016 at 2:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote Reply #1458 - Yesterday at 7:29pm
Quote:

Do Christians support the Christian exhortations which are the "root causes" of Christian atrocities throughout the ages, Moses?

Do you, with your continued ignoring of Christ's exhortation to "turn the other cheek"?

exhortation noun: A communication intended to urge or persuade the recipients to take some action.

Falls a long way short of doctrine, so I'd say exhortations are not binding.

Yet many Christians disagree with your viewpoint, Moses. Does that make them lesser in their faith?

Quote:

Most genuine Christians would only support exhortations that are closely aligned to Christ's doctrine.

Ah, so the Pope is not a "genuine Christian", Moses?

My, how interesting... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49091
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #1469 - Jun 4^th, 2016 at 4:37pm

Quote:

As I have stated, I am discussing the religion and it's teachings, FD. Not the words solely of the founder...

Go ahead then. Here is a very simple question for you to start with:

Do you honestly think that the words and deeds of Jesus are not significantly different from those of Muhammed in terms of support for violence? Or are you just demonstrating you capacity for getting it wrong?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged