Multiple people killed by gunman in an American church

12357

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    jobo wrote: »
    My point was never that religion is completely irrelevant to the subject of either thread, however I believe one tedious discussion lasting 40 + pages is enough. ;)

    Fair enough. That's true.
  • Posts: 14,844
    We don't know yet how faith played a role in the crime. It is part of the ideology of the organization who influenced the killer, so we can safely say that it played an indirect role. I may have gone too far saying the murderer is a Christian taliban, but there is no doubt that some Christian fundies in the US (heck, here in the UK too) are pretty much that.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    ffs, nobody cares what you believe, but your powers of understanding of what's actually being said to you I guess are clouded by your own finely tuned prejudices and conceits.
    First of all, unlike you, I don't claim righteousness.
    Also, I certainly don't claim humility.
    But I am sure you will keep being willfully ingorant of what is actually being said to you, just as you hopped on your righteous crusade-horse with your pithy observations about a major news story, that everyone else took the time to master a basic understandin of before weighing in.
    Problem is in your case, your obsessiveness apparently trumps discipline, civility, rationality...you name it.
    As for humility, at best I'll claim it for others maybe, but not myself, but you keep believing I said otherwise.

    Are you even socialized? Can you go out in public? Can you attend social gatherings without insulting everyone beliefs that don't conform with your own. Or is it just us on this message board that get the benefit of your keyboard crusade.

    The KKK boasts to be a Christian organization. Big F#%ing deal!
    If anything such a boast might underscore how truly Christian the KKK isn't.
    The bigger the lie, the more it's likely to stick etc.
    Orwell's Ministry of Truth.
    Cloak yourself in faux righteousness. Much evil can be accomplished under such camoflauge.
    Greene Planet, comes to mind as well.
    Who cares what people boast. Actions speak, not boasts.

    As you are so well versed in Catholic theology, due to that education of yours, then surely you understand the basic teaching, ie that evil has a source.
    ie we are all vulnerable to its seductions. That it plays to our vanities. That evil's greatest triumph is when it convinces those it has sway over, that they are doing righteous acts.
    Most people that do evil are convinced they are doing good. The guys that steals the chocolate bar, usually has it covered. He's good.
    But if he's conflicted, that's a good thing. Shows he's moving away from the vanity that is his entitlement mentality.

    Back to the matter at hand. Mr Shoot-em-up, who shot up a Bible study meeting, got himself convinced that black folk were a threat to his precious country.
    Thought he was doing some good work.

    Point is he was corrupted by evil, which plays to his vanities, to his fallen nature that we all have.

    As you are so very well versed in the theology, you would know that Christianity asks that we embrace our saved nature as opposed to our fallen nature.
    That we engage spiritual exercises etc that give us greater capacity to embrace our saved nature. That we seek God as manifested in Christ.

    No true Christian is going to embrace the teachings of the KKK. Christianity if you bother to make effort to understand it, teaches salvation via Christ, and via that spiritual nourishment so to speak, via love of God, achieving a greater capacity to do the perfect divine will, which essentially translates to love of neighbor, which is what Christ (God made man) preached.

    We all have the little devil and the little angel perched on our shoulders so to speak.
    The little devil plays to our vanities and strokes them.
    The little angel plays to our better Christ-like nature. By embracing the little angel we are less susceptible to the lies and deceptions of the other that seeks us to turn us from God.

    Fine, if you rejected all that stuff or just didn't find it interesting or whatever. Fine. Who cares. We all have free will. Life is a journey. We are all at different stages on that journey and we interact accordingly. Life is not about lecturing on the superiority of what you may or may not believe ad nauseum.

    I'll stop there. People should do their own seeking. And Christian belief, faith etc does come from personal seeking, not from an education, or being argued in that direction.

    But do understand, the guy on the plough, of humble heart, of no formal education, is as capable of embracing his saved natues as the most pious educated person.
    Mind you the ploughman's humble life is not virtuous of itself
    He could still be a real bastard. Evil knows what lurks within all of us. It knows what buttons to push. We all have them.

    If I may digress, this is what I think makes Stephen Kings books so readable.
    I've recently been indulging. He does have a religious frame of reference. He does understand evil as having a source - a supernatural source.
    He takes dramatic license. He conjures up varied manifestations of evil, being at work in the world, preying on our vanities.
    But his writings are rooted in a Christian based understanding of the nature of evil and it's root source.

    @ludivico I honestly don't give a damn what you believe,or anyone else for that matter. Actions are more important, but you consistenly barge into every thread you can stumble into, to lecture on your, in-your mind, own moral superiority.

    The ill-informed cheap shot you fired in this thread is typical. You do it all the time.
    You have no regard for the fact that many Bond fans, let alone fellow humans don't share your beliefs, yet you blithely toss them around willy nilly like they are ipso facto little nuggets of irrefutable truth.

    eg this gem "The "good book" is not exactly a shining example of peace, love and understanding"
    inspired by your utter disinclination to have any idea of wtf you were talking about regarding the topic at hand.
    The temptation to drag out your tired old tropes is utterly overpowering- like a drug or something.
    You do understand, plenty on this board do not roll with your statement. Is every thread an opportunity for you to Christian bait? Is that why you visit?

    As I said, I know from my interactions with members here, that most just ignore your baiting, because they are here to discuss Bond. Who needs the aggravation.
    But its clearly your obsession.
    Why don't you set up your own thread, if the mods will let you, and call it the Christian bashing thread, instead of having to turn every other thread you can find into one.

    Sorry, unlike you, I don't have the time to be on the keyboard all day. I do work. Just happened to have a day off. Unlike you I can't jump on every post within minutes as you seem able to do, but I am not on a crusade like you are apparently.

    Those priests or nuns or whoever taught you must have done a real number. Maybe you and Madonna went to school together.

    Sorry to disabuse your claims, but I have no claims to righteousness and certainly not humility.
    btw, I don't see the other Christians on this board trolling to lecture on their moral superiority.

    At a guess, I'd say that's because anyone who actually does understand Christianity, knows that you don't argue or lecture people to faith. Those that come seek on their own. Something compels them to seek.

    I know you are not going to change, but maybe you could pretend you are in a room with flesh and blood humanity from time to time, instead of on your keyboard.
    Would you really pull out a megaphone and lecture on your superior beliefs in that setting, or move from conversation to conversation (thread to thread) and lecture everyone on your beliefs.

  • Posts: 315
    It's being reported that South Carolina will remove the Confederate flag from flying over the state capitol building. For those non-USA friends, the American Civil War started in South Carolina in 1861 by an attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished. They fought to keep that system in place and hangings and brutal slayings of African-Americans over the years have been met with acceptance and encouragement.

    The removal of this racist symbol is a small step, as I'm sure it will give rise to flying even more Confederate flags from the brain donor class from their pickup trucks and motorcycles. But it is a small step. Now the right-wingers running for President can end their silence and speak up.

    If you've heard the comments made by victims' families last week confronting the suspect in court, they truly demonstrated a 'Christian belief to forgive' that is wonderful. My heart goes out to them in their grief.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FLeiter wrote: »
    It's being reported that South Carolina will remove the Confederate flag from flying over the state capitol building. For those non-USA friends, the American Civil War started in South Carolina in 1861 by an attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished. They fought to keep that system in place and hangings and brutal slayings of African-Americans over the years have been met with acceptance and encouragement.

    The removal of this racist symbol is a small step, as I'm sure it will give rise to flying even more Confederate flags from the brain donor class from their pickup trucks and motorcycles. But it is a small step. Now the right-wingers running for President can end their silence and speak up.

    If you've heard the comments made by victims' families last week confronting the suspect in court, they truly demonstrated a 'Christian belief to forgive' that is wonderful. My heart goes out to them in their grief.

    That is very reassuring to hear. It's about bloody time.
  • Posts: 14,844
    Who is uncivil now, @Timmer? Who is self righteous? Now you ramble about God, Christian theology, you mention Stephen King and George Orwell (an atheist, by the way, his Big Brother was by the way godly and he uses the Bible to illustrate some principles of Insoc) and you resort to the No True Scotsman Fallacy (because yes, a racist can be Christian, that does not mean all Christians are racist, but that a Christian can be racist). Did I miss anything? Oh yes, wide generalizations and presumptions about me.

    Since I want to remain civil, I won't bother replying to you beyond this post. I won't assume you getting on your high horse has anything to do with your character, but simply that you are upset because I don't find the book you love so good and the believers justified in their belief.
  • Posts: 14,844
    bondjames wrote: »
    FLeiter wrote: »
    It's being reported that South Carolina will remove the Confederate flag from flying over the state capitol building. For those non-USA friends, the American Civil War started in South Carolina in 1861 by an attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished. They fought to keep that system in place and hangings and brutal slayings of African-Americans over the years have been met with acceptance and encouragement.

    The removal of this racist symbol is a small step, as I'm sure it will give rise to flying even more Confederate flags from the brain donor class from their pickup trucks and motorcycles. But it is a small step. Now the right-wingers running for President can end their silence and speak up.

    If you've heard the comments made by victims' families last week confronting the suspect in court, they truly demonstrated a 'Christian belief to forgive' that is wonderful. My heart goes out to them in their grief.

    That is very reassuring to hear. It's about bloody time.

    I am glad they are going to get rid of the Confederate flag.

    I am not so keen on forgiving the murderer. As I said, I am against the death penalty for numerous reasons. But forgiving him? Now? There would need to be sincere repentance first and a punishment accepted as just by the murderer. Of course, it is not up to us to forgive, the family of the victims can do it if they want. I can even see the rationale behind it: not even giving the racists the satisfaction of answering hate by hate. Still, I wouldn't forgive until some punishment has been given and sincere remorse from the murderer.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    FLeiter wrote: »
    It's being reported that South Carolina will remove the Confederate flag from flying over the state capitol building. For those non-USA friends, the American Civil War started in South Carolina in 1861 by an attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished. They fought to keep that system in place and hangings and brutal slayings of African-Americans over the years have been met with acceptance and encouragement.

    The removal of this racist symbol is a small step, as I'm sure it will give rise to flying even more Confederate flags from the brain donor class from their pickup trucks and motorcycles. But it is a small step. Now the right-wingers running for President can end their silence and speak up.

    If you've heard the comments made by victims' families last week confronting the suspect in court, they truly demonstrated a 'Christian belief to forgive' that is wonderful. My heart goes out to them in their grief.

    That is very reassuring to hear. It's about bloody time.

    I am glad they are going to get rid of the Confederate flag.

    I am not so keen on forgiving the murderer. As I said, I am against the death penalty for numerous reasons. But forgiving him? Now? There would need to be sincere repentance first and a punishment accepted as just by the murderer. Of course, it is not up to us to forgive, the family of the victims can do it if they want. I can even see the rationale behind it: not even giving the racists the satisfaction of answering hate by hate. Still, I wouldn't forgive until some punishment has been given and sincere remorse from the murderer.

    While I agree @Ludovico, it's unlikely that he will repent. At least not right away.

    That's why he needs a lifetime in prison without parole and with solitary confinement, to be held as an example to others who may consider this course of action. He should also be made to reflect on his views on black people and do some service maybe to the community (like cleaning their toilets, or getting rid of their garbage or something) before being put away.

    I too am against the death penalty as I mentioned at the start, although the consensus on here is that he should be put down like a dog.

    I can't speak for the victim's families, but since they are from that state, they may possibly have more understanding of how someone can feel this way, particularly if the flag has been flying there for all these years despite our progress as humans.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2015 Posts: 17,691
    Honestly, my country is scaring me these days. 0 dollars for mental health yet trillions for wars abroad & militarizing our police at home. If we gave some of these nuts the preventive care they need, many of these shootings might not happen. But many in my country are not about prevention, just punishment. There's actually an Incarceration Industrial Complex at work here. And I mean, it's not like many important Americans get killed in these massacres, just students, theatre patrons, mall shoppers, marathon runners, church goers and assorted kids. :-L
  • Posts: 14,844
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    FLeiter wrote: »
    It's being reported that South Carolina will remove the Confederate flag from flying over the state capitol building. For those non-USA friends, the American Civil War started in South Carolina in 1861 by an attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished. They fought to keep that system in place and hangings and brutal slayings of African-Americans over the years have been met with acceptance and encouragement.

    The removal of this racist symbol is a small step, as I'm sure it will give rise to flying even more Confederate flags from the brain donor class from their pickup trucks and motorcycles. But it is a small step. Now the right-wingers running for President can end their silence and speak up.

    If you've heard the comments made by victims' families last week confronting the suspect in court, they truly demonstrated a 'Christian belief to forgive' that is wonderful. My heart goes out to them in their grief.

    That is very reassuring to hear. It's about bloody time.

    I am glad they are going to get rid of the Confederate flag.

    I am not so keen on forgiving the murderer. As I said, I am against the death penalty for numerous reasons. But forgiving him? Now? There would need to be sincere repentance first and a punishment accepted as just by the murderer. Of course, it is not up to us to forgive, the family of the victims can do it if they want. I can even see the rationale behind it: not even giving the racists the satisfaction of answering hate by hate. Still, I wouldn't forgive until some punishment has been given and sincere remorse from the murderer.

    While I agree @Ludovico, it's unlikely that he will repent. At least not right away.

    That's why he needs a lifetime in prison without parole and with solitary confinement, to be held as an example to others who may consider this course of action. He should also be made to reflect on his views on black people and do some service maybe to the community (like cleaning their toilets, or getting rid of their garbage or something) before being put away.

    I too am against the death penalty as I mentioned at the start, although the consensus on here is that he should be put down like a dog.

    I can't speak for the victim's families, but since they are from that state, they may possibly have more understanding of how someone can feel this way, particularly if the flag has been flying there for all these years despite our progress as humans.

    Maybe that's why I don't know. But I prefer their forgiveness, however unsatisfying it may be, than the call for blood of many, which would basically sweep the whole issue under the rug. One racist to die so other racists can live... and kill again. With plenty of guns and ammo and suppliers of.
  • Posts: 14,844
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Honestly, my country is scaring me these days. 0 dollars for mental health yet trillions for wars abroad & militarizing our police at home. If we gave some of these nuts the preventive care they need, many of these shootings might not happen. But many in my country are not about prevention, just punishment. There's actually an Incarceration Industrial Complex at work here. And I mean, it's not like many important Americans get killed in these massacres, just students, theatre patrons, mall shoppers, marathon runners, church goers and assorted kids. :-L

    I love what Jon Stewart said about it:

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2015 Posts: 17,691
    @Ludovico, John Stewart speaks here for all sensible and caring Americans IMO.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 2,341
    Israel has no death penalty but make exceptions for Nazi war criminals.
    I feel the same, I think the death penalty is wrong but like Israel. I make exceptions for killers like this. He is no different from a Nazi war criminal so I say he should swing from the gallows.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Who is uncivil now, @Timmer? Who is self righteous? Now you ramble about God, Christian theology, you mention Stephen King and George Orwell (an atheist, by the way, his Big Brother was by the way godly and he uses the Bible to illustrate some principles of Insoc) and you resort to the No True Scotsman Fallacy (because yes, a racist can be Christian, that does not mean all Christians are racist, but that a Christian can be racist). Did I miss anything? Oh yes, wide generalizations and presumptions about me.

    Since I want to remain civil, I won't bother replying to you beyond this post. I won't assume you getting on your high horse has anything to do with your character, but simply that you are upset because I don't find the book you love so good and the believers justified in their belief.
    Nice that you are open to the notion of civility. That's a change.

    George Orwell (an atheist, by the way, his Big Brother was by the way godly and he uses the Bible to illustrate some principles of Insoc) and you resort to the No True Scotsman Fallacy

    What is this is a pissing contest? Orwell was an atheist. Shall I counter with someone who wasn't. Who cares.
    "His big brother was "godly"" What does that even mean. His big brother was Party Leader.
    Quite human, even if his identity was not clear. Cult of personality. No claim to divinity.
    Anyway who cares, I only mentioned Orwell to illustrate Ministry of Truth being anything but, but you missed that apparently.
    btw, any madman can take scripture and derive their own self-serving code from it. Classic case of "evil" playing to their vanity, their hubris. What else is new?
    These supposed points you make are trite.
    Do you even understand what No True Scotsman Fallacy means? Clearly you don't. It doesn't apply to anything I said. But you love to toss the term around like a frisbee. New toy I guess.
    But you see, you have no actual comprehension of what to be Christian means. You think Hitler was a Christian.
    In actual fact, as opposed to Ludovico Self-delusional world, it is categorically un-Christian, to hate someone because of the colour of their skin and thus deny them normal human respect and dignity that you might otherwise extend to others.
    There is nothing Christian about that. Yet you blithely state that a Christian can be a racist. If you beleive it is Christian to be racist and hate someone for the colour of their skin, then again,as usual you have no idea what you are talking about.
    Yet you lecture on something you don't understand, that is, when not making pithy, ill-informed comments aimed at boosting your own finely tuned sense of superiority.
    Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
    Wide generalizations about you? I don't think so. You provide mountains of material.
    If you don't believe me about Christianity and racism, you can consult the chatechism or any priest. Either is competent to articulate church teaching. The chatechism actually is church teaching. Its not ambiguous.
    Or I am sure an Anglican Minister or any other main-stream Protestant denominational authority could enlighten.
    But you are schooled in Catholic teaching, but it seems you missed a few lessons. Yet you lecture, on something you don't actually understand. I doubt Madonna has much understanding either.

    Your definition of a Christian as far as I can tell, is anyone that calls them themselves a Christian and they can define it any way they want.

    I actually don't "love" the good book. I am not a touchy feely type.
    But I respect the good book for what I believe it to be. God's covenant with man.
    If you don't believe that. I don't care. In the real world I do business with all sorts of types. Most, I don't know what their politics or faith beliefs are. Its not germane to our work. Maintaining civil friendly human relationships is.
    We don't beat each over the heads with our politics or religion. Its not civilized. We try to be productive.
    I don't care what people believe. I don't care if closet nazis goosestep in their basements, as long as they don't start killing people again. Thought policing is ego driven. Vanity.

    Don't flatter yourself. I am not upset. You want to see upset. It's when someone doesn't pay me on time.

    Rather, I just think you're kind of dense.
    I generally ignore what you post, on non-Bond matters, but the problem is you are so obsessed with your agenda and sense of moral superiority, that you can't help but post misinformed garbage, like you did on this thread. With you it's knee jerk. No pause. No reflection as you are convinced you are on righteous mission.
    You happened to catch me on day off. I had the time. That's all.

    On Bond I obviously extend full cred. You're credentials are wonderful in that regard, as are those of most of the members on these boards. That's why we are here.

    "I won't bother replying to you beyond this post" This would be quite fine btw. You generally don't grasp what's being said anyway.

    =====As for the actual topic (as opposed to indulging a pointless christian vs atheist pissing contest) I am not offering anything that hasn't been said already.

    I do think this tragic event does require action on the matter of accessibility to guns.
    A clarification of the 2nd amendment if you will... and I do say this as someone who leans conservative. It's a matter of public safety I think
    Where I live, north of the border, I don't think this clown gets a hold of a gun. He'd have to buy it from thugs, who would probably just take his money, and turn around and shoot him with it.
    I don't think legally he would have qualified. Never mind the piles of paperwork he would have to fill out, as the legal gun-owning hobbyists have to do, I don't think he would have passed screening.
    We have plenty of gun violence, gun play etc. We have heavily armed criminals and heavily armed cops, but its kind of tough for regular Jo Schmo loser to obtain a gun legally and go shoot up a school or a movie theatre or a church etc.
    Not impossible but a lot tougher I think.

    As for the family forgiving the killer. I of course defer to their feelings and what they feel they need to do. Who am I to say.
    I would be inclined myself, in such a situation to hold off on any public offerings of foregiveness. I might be inclined to forgive once an apology was offered and even then in time. I would have it in my heart to forgive, but its also to hard to accept an apology if no actual apology or remorse is extended.
    This is tragic stuff. There are other human emotions in play in the short-term, not the least of which is anger, plus sorrow etc
    Christians of course would pray on the matter and ask that God guide their response.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished.

    Actually that's not quite accurate. It was merely the possibility that such a thing might happen after the election of Abraham Lincoln that drove them over the edge. The federal government hadn't actually done anything to abolish slavery at that point.

    I was quite surprised to see Mitt Romney come out so strongly against the confederate flag. He's running for president again, right (not being in the US i don't pay as much attention)? That will cost him some votes in the SC primary (which is important, as it's the third one and the first in the south).
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Sark wrote: »
    South Carolina objected to an intrusive federal government telling them that slavery was evil and should be abolished.

    Actually that's not quite accurate. It was merely the possibility that such a thing might happen after the election of Abraham Lincoln that drove them over the edge. The federal government hadn't actually done anything to abolish slavery at that point.

    I was quite surprised to see Mitt Romney come out so strongly against the confederate flag. He's running for president again, right (not being in the US i don't pay as much attention)? That will cost him some votes in the SC primary (which is important, as it's the third one and the first in the south).

    No @Sark, he pulled out again a few months back. So he can be honest about these things now as politics aren't intruding.....
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Oh that explains it. Mitt Romney always seemed like he was willing to say anything to get elected. Now that he's not trying to get elected he's a lot freer.
  • Posts: 14,844
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    Israel has no death penalty but make exceptions for Nazi war criminals.
    I feel the same, I think the death penalty is wrong but like Israel. I make exceptions for killers like this. He is no different from a Nazi war criminal so I say he should swing from the gallows.

    Then Israel has death penalty de facto. Although now it's unlikely it will be used. Killing him will bring nothing. Lets have proper gun control laws.
  • Posts: 4,602
    Religion seeks to invade so many areas of our lives. It seeks to tell us what he can and cant do in bed (with ourselves or others), it seeks to define justice , it seeks to tell us what we can and cant eat, it seeks to tell us who we can and can't love, it seeks to tell us what we can and can't wear etc etc, so its not very surprising that it becomes a topic within events that, on the surface, are not about religion.
  • Posts: 14,844
    @timmer- By saying someone cannot be Christian if racist, you are doing a no true Scotsman fallacy. To be Christian you need to recognize Jesus as your savior, who died and resurrected for you. Ergo you can be Christian and from the far right, the far left and everything in between. Thus the victims of this massacre were Christians, so was Martin Luther King, so are many gays, but also many racists and far right organizations. Whether or not they are "good" Christians or behave according to the Bible is an entirely different debate. But they are Christians whatever they think of each other.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @jobo, the Bible is not a book of evil? I read the whole damn thing and it is one of the most horrendously evil books ever.
  • edited June 2015 Posts: 4,622
    You don't understand the No True Scottsman fallacy,in the sense that you think it applies here.
    Ergo A person who professes Christian beliefs is also by definition, as are all human beings, a sinner, so of course they are capable of any number of sinful acts, including an act of brazen racist discrimination.
    The distinction being the Christian will acknowledge the sin for what it is. They will have that capacity. They might even do it again, and again, indicating human weakness and struggle with this particular sin, however they will not cross the line into saying the act is OK. Their struggle is to walk the talk and seek spirtual guidance to change their ways.
    Much the way AA members trapped in a losing battle with the bottle, know they need to seek a "higher power" ( in the AA lexicon) Stephen King btw expounds extensively on the spiritual nature of the alchoholics battle with the bottle in a couple of his books, that I have read recently. He speaks from first hand experience
    But if the person commits the racist act, yet also says the act is compatible with their Christian beliefs, then they are practising their own made-up self-serving Christianity of convenience. A priest would dissuade them of this notion. This person is lapsed.
    A Catholic for example must uphold Church teaching to be true and recognize its divine stamp, otherwise they are lapsed, whether they know it or not.
    How able, or even how commited they are, to "walk the talk" is an ongong life journey.

    ====
    But none of these teachings matter in a practical sense if one isn't actually seeking the divine will, divine truth. To understand Christianity, one truly has to be compelled to seek truth.
    Something in one's life need move one to seek. One isn't educated in Christianity. It's not an academic discipline. Rather one seeks.
    To get to a place where one recongnizes that the divine will is at work in the world, and accessible to all, no matter how depraved one's life. Where one achieves a faith in God's saving graces.
    No-one is beyond redemption.

    From my Christian-Catholic frame of reference, fussing over what causes a man to do heinous acts, like shoot up a school or rape and murder etc, at core is not a difficult question.
    The man has been corrupted by evil. Evil has played to his vanities and pushed him along.
    The nature of evil is that it hates mankind. Man is a creation of God. Evil seeks to deceive, corrupt and separate man from God.
    These are biblical truths which I personally do know to be true (and know is the operative word) as would any person of Christian faith. But I wouldn't expect anyone to take my word for it.
    Such revelations only become clear if one seeks for oneself with open and humble heart.
    God will reveal.
    Fleming himself was a seeker.If you read his books carefully, Bond has moments of spiritual reflection, most notably in LALD and DN, where he ponders both the notion of divine intervention and the disposition of souls.
    Where Fleming got to in his journey,, we don't know. We know he had his demons. He battled the bottle, possibly depression. He wrestled with the morality of Bond's trade.
    But there was presumably much joy in his life.
    But by most barometers he was productive and put his talents to work in the world
    In my opinion he led a "good" life. He attempted to make merit, so to speak.
    And like any human, he died, and received his perfect divine judgement, again from my own faith perspective.
    The notion of the perfect divine judgement is a Christian concept.

  • Posts: 12,837
    timmer wrote: »
    A priest would dissuade them of this notion.

    Not all priests would. I think I may as well give my two cents while we're on the subject; to be honest, I begin to think more and more as time goes on that the negatives of religion outweigh the positives, and that we'd be much better off without it altogether. I used to be more liberal on the subject and argue that it's had a great effect on some peoples lives and that we shouldn't let extremists ruin that, but looking at the atrocities that it continues to cause even today (ISIS) I wonder if it's worth it. Religion has been around for so long, thousands of years, and it's still causing death and hatred despite the fact that a lot of it has been proven scientifically wrong. There will always be extremists and there will always be people who refuse to be progressive and accept that a lot of these teachings are outdated and have no place in society. I think now that the only way we're going to get rid of people like that is to get rid of religion altogether but sadly that won't happen. It's a cynical, extreme stance, I know, but I haven't always thought like this. Like I said, I've been convinced into this mindset by the religion motivated atrocities that continue to take place.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    If you believe the Bible, the Quran or the Tora and the Talmud, God is a racist.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    If you believe the Bible, the Quran or the Tora and the Talmud, God is a racist.

    What a stupid comment to make.

    Look, the thread has been derailed enough. Take it to the pms.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    How is that stupid or derailed? Have you read those books?

  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    But if the person commits the racist act, yet also says the act is compatible with their Christian beliefs, then they are practising their own made-up self-serving Christianity of convenience. A priest would dissuade them of this notion. This person is lapsed.

    Would you say that all the Churches in the south that preached the justice of slavery (and later segregation) weren't "real christian churches"?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2015 Posts: 23,883
    What is being missed here imho is not that religion is the 'evil' thing so to speak, but that mankind (and note I say man rather than human because it's more applicable to men) is flawed and capable of 'evil', violence and delusions.

    These a human characteristics that affects men more than the fairer sex sadly.

    So given that men are more capable of this, then if you throw any 'absolute' or something professing (or broadly interpreted) to be a truism, like a constitution for instance, or like a religious text for instance, then you have the possibility.......no, more likely the probability, that it will be interpreted conveniently for self serving purposes and without common sense or conscience. It does not matter how many people believe in it. That is irrelevant. Mankind is known for broadly held misconceptions

    Consequently, we have some idiots wrongly interpreting the constitution to mean they can carry sub-machine guns around and shoot people who they don't agree with, and we have other idiots wrongly thinking that religious texts give them cover to commit atrocities in the name of god.

    At the very end of the day, it is mankind and his unfortunate delusion that's the problem though, imho.

    Which is why I'm all for debate, discussion and intellectual conversation. It's the only way to broaden the mind. Anyone who tries to stop that has something to hide. Anyone who is not tolerant of another's views has an agenda (whether they know it or not). If you can't argue your point properly and coherently, you're the one with the problem imho, and you need to look inside your mind for what that problem is.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Those religions are by and for men, not women. Hence their misogynous nature.

    And they are all in favour of slavery.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    How is that stupid or derailed? Have you read those books?

    You clearly don't know what you're talking about and this thread has been derailed. If you and others want to discuss in thorough detail the degree of ethics and how evil/bad religion is take it elsewhere like I suggested.

Sign In or Register to comment.