Christian bronies: meet, greet, and mingle!

[LittleMac 3,085]

 

@,

 

Actually, if I might elaborate, does anyone else besides me ever notice how as much as we are accused of being hateful and aggressive, how often it's the anti-theists that are the ones frothing at the mouth and wishing for destruction and pain?

I think both parties can be equally at fault but I have noticed that many anti theists tend to be the ones doing this :/

[starshine wonder 79]

 

'aggressive and hateful is not the Christian way.'

 

True, but so often people misinterpret what scripture says and uses that as an excuse to bible bash because they don't always understand the concept of being loved by Someone who doesn't see their faults any more because He's perfected them. Please note, I am not using this as an excuse to sin, just to clarify.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

True, but so often people misinterpret what scripture says and uses that as an excuse to bible bash because they don't always understand the concept of being loved by Someone who doesn't see their faults any more because He's perfected them. Please note, I am not using this as an excuse to sin, just to clarify.

 

I understand that is the unfortunate reality, one I would swiftly correct if I ever bore witness to it, but it's the fact that I'm usually on the receiving end of aggression merely by association rather than the person being open minded. Again, something they accuse us of being incapable of being.

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

This post has been redacted by the author.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Blue

[Sunwalker 981]

I understand that is the unfortunate reality, one I would swiftly correct if I ever bore witness to it, but it's the fact that I'm usually on the receiving end of aggression merely by association rather than the person being open minded. Again, something they accuse us of being incapable of being.

This doesn't sound that different from how the Pharisees treated Jesus. And remember that he warned us that the world would also hate us.

 

Some people don't approach a discussion being open minded and willing to listen. They are not interested in seeking the thruth, they just want to have fun being mean with you and if you show they are wrong they are going to twist everything and lie.

 

Logic/dialectics don't work to deal with this kind of people. If you are good with rethorical discourse, you might try it in order to break their pride. They react more to emotional than to reason, and only once their pride is broken they are able to logically consider something.

 

But if you aren't comfortable with this sort of tactics (I know I am not...), you can just move away once you realize that someone isn't really willing to debate. More people had been brought to Christ through examples than words.

 

One more thing. Debate sometimes is a spectator sport, if you have kept the composure, while the other side not, the people reading it will notice and you will have won their hearts.

[A Black Circle 1,586]

Flinchel, it's cool I just tend not to go in for titles as such, mainly because how I define my relationship with Daddy and how I define myself in that relationship. I'd rather be a daughter of the living God than a prophetess, if that makes sense.

Daddy is best God nickname. I just call him God, or Mega Senpai.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

This doesn't sound that different from how the Pharisees treated Jesus. And remember that he warned us that the world would also hate us.

 

Some people don't approach a discussion being open minded and willing to listen. They are not interested in seeking the thruth, they just want to have fun being mean with you and if you show they are wrong they are going to twist everything and lie.

 

Logic/dialectics don't work to deal with this kind of people. If you are good with rethorical discourse, you might try it in order to break their pride. They react more to emotional than to reason, and only once their pride is broken they are able to logically consider something.

 

But if you aren't comfortable with this sort of tactics (I know I am not...), you can just move away once you realize that someone isn't really willing to debate. More people had been brought to Christ through examples than words.

 

One more thing. Debate sometimes is a spectator sport, if you have kept the composure, while the other side not, the people reading it will notice and you will have won their hearts.

 

Nor am I comfortable with such. I'm a person of heart first, logic second. Of course, I've always been taught the best Christian is the one that never speaks of his faith, but lives it in his every action.

 

(Part of the reason my Kung Fu training is so compatible with my religious practice. "Kung Fu, isn't just fighting. Kung Fu is in everything we do. In how we treat people." ~Jackie Chan)

Daddy is best God nickname. I just call him God, or Mega Senpai.

 

I've called God many things over the years. God, the Divine, the Lord, Jesus . . . the Force, Primus, Princess Celestia. 

[Lexamena 391]

I've got a question here.

When someone on this site calls God "evil" and a "villain", what are their possible reasons for doing so?

And what would be the best response to them?

I think people forget, or maybe they cant comprehend, to look at sin and the sinner as two separate things. I keep hearing the argument (not just here but everywhere) that God must be evil since he lets people go to the H word. But God does not want that. His design was for us to have free will to do what we please. He doesn't hate anybody. He is not evil. He only hates the sin they commit. Its like they can't separate the two because if they did, it would be indicative of them being responsible for where they end up so it is easier to just say God hates them and they cant figure out why.

@steelaccord, sorry i edited that after your bh.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Lexamena

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I think people forget, or maybe they cant comprehend, to look at sin and the sinner as two separate things. I keep hearing the argument (not just here but everywhere) that God must be evil since he lets people go to the H word. But God does not want that. His design was for us to have free will to do what we please. He doesn't hate anybody. He is not evil. He only hates the sin they commit.

 

Even then, he doesn't hate the sin for He is beyond hate. Hate is a mortal emotion, even Jesus who felt a range of human emotions never hated. (Which isn't to say He didn't get angry.)

 

Besides, God gave us free will. Anyone who wants to be angry at God for the very idea of Hell better take a long look at themselves before they go blaming someone else.

 

Who's the better person, the one that's flawed but takes responsibility for their actions or the person who blames their situation on everything and everyone BUT themselves? (I'm almost certain there's a Bible verse to that effect.)

[Lexamena 391]

Even then, he doesn't hate the sin for He is beyond hate. Hate is a mortal emotion, even Jesus who felt a range of human emotions never hated. (Which isn't to say He didn't get angry.)

 

Besides, God gave us free will. Anyone who wants to be angry at God for the very idea of Hell better take a long look at themselves before they go blaming someone else.

 

Who's the better person, the one that's flawed but takes responsibility for their actions or the person who blames their situation on everything and everyone BUT themselves? (I'm almost certain there's a Bible verse to that effect.)

I agree. The only reason i use the word hate is because i think its hard to understand the more accurate description that God just flat out cannot have sin near Him. I think thats more difficult for a person to wrap their brain around, plus it sort of makes it sound like God has a limitation. So, hate is the simplest term, though definitely not the most accurate.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Buddhism argues that god don't exist.

 

That's not quite true. Buddhism actually has many gods inherited from Hinduism where it began and Chinese deities and Japanese spirits from where it immigrated. What you're thinking of is that Buddhism says that such beings should not be worshipped as such subjugation is yet another attachment that prevents one from attaining Enlightenment. Let it be said though that the Devas are not akin to the Western concept of God, especially in Buddhist tradition.

 

In fact, for all their power, the gods of Buddhist theology are actually lower on the cosmic scheme of Dharma than us. Matching the sentiment of "it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." It's easier for a mere mortal to attain Enlightenment than a Deva of the highest order. (Let it be known though that I don't like that particular verse as it presumes that wealthy people are more prone to sin than poor people.)

 

. . . . What? I'm a syncretist! 

Edited July 14, 2015 by Steel Accord

[Sudo Krenton 243]

Some people don't approach a discussion being open minded and willing to listen. They are not interested in seeking the thruth, they just want to have fun being mean with you and if you show they are wrong they are going to twist everything and lie. Logic/dialectics don't work to deal with this kind of people. If you are good with rethorical discourse, you might try it in order to break their pride. They react more to emotional than to reason, and only once their pride is broken they are able to logically consider something.

 

I for one like to take the logical route, rather than the rhetorical route, as rhetoric can lead to bigger issues if used incorrectly. Also, having taken classes in rhetoric, I personally didn't really like it (maybe it was the class setting?) Sure, breaking down one's pride can help, but that makes no excuse to use faulty logic (not saying that's the intention), and breaking pride in general to prove something isn't necessarily the best of things to do in every case.

 

Don't know if these would be of interest to anyone... but https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/pdf/FallaciesPoster24x36.pdf and http://www.skepdic.com/ re: discerning/learning about logical fallacies and so on.

 

. . . . What? I'm a syncretist! 

 

Curious... so are you saying that Christianity and Buddhism are compatible? If so, how would they be able to work harmoniously? Or was this just a somewhat random comment?

 

 

Completely unrelated to the things I was just talking about...

 

 

In the mood for chant ;P Don't know if anyone appreciates this style, but I thought might as well share what I'm listening to.

 

 

...also this apparently is my first post as a butterfly x'D yay... 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2015 by Sudo Krenton

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Curious... so are you saying that Christianity and Buddhism are compatible? If so, how would they be able to work harmoniously? Or was this just a somewhat random comment?

 

If you look, the Christ and the Buddha both share a similar message and their respective paths both echo each other.

 

"If you do not tend to one another then who is there to tend to you? Whoever would tend me, he should tend the sick."

 

"Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me."

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

 

"Just as a mother would protect her only child at the risk of her own life, even so, cultivate a boundless heart towards all beings. Let your thoughts of boundless love pervade the whole world."

 

"This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one's life for one's friends."

 

Almost eerily close right? In fact if you didn't know your Bible, one could almost mistake one for the other in many places.

 

The two also spoke out against the standing faith of their respective parts of the world while retaining elements of it, and both of their religions spawned similar rituals of prayer, meditation, discipleship, and study, both alone and in groups.

 

Most of all, a Buddhist monk named Thich Nhat Hanh posited in a book called Living Buddha, Living Christ, "When you are a truly happy Christian, you are also a Buddhist. And vice versa."

 

So survey says that the two religions are compatible in practice if not theology, and even then that's only because the two didn't interact with one another originally. As a student of Kung Fu, I've actually grown closer to God through incorporating Buddhist thought into my practice.

 

If God is the true power in existence, how is calling Him "Dharma" any different than calling him Yaweh?

Edited July 14, 2015 by Steel Accord

[A Black Circle 1,586]

I don't believe that Buddhism and Christianity are 100% compatible. They are on the moral and philosophical level (mostly), but not really anything else.

 

Also, pride is what gets you in hell.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I don't believe that Buddhism and Christianity are 100% compatible. They are on the moral and philosophical level (mostly), but not really anything else.

 

Also, pride is what gets you in hell.

 

My research says otherwise on the first part, I agree on the second part. (Along with Sloth, Lust, Envy etc.)

[A Black Circle 1,586]

My research says otherwise on the first part, I agree on the second part. (Along with Sloth, Lust, Envy etc.)

The process of Heaven/Hell is when you die, you get to have a review of your life. If you believe Jesus died for you, you get to go up. If you think that you know better that this is a psychological trick of some sort, have fun burning your skin off 8 times a day.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

The process of Heaven/Hell is when you die, you get to have a review of your life. If you believe Jesus died for you, you get to go up. If you think that you know better that this is a psychological trick of some sort, have fun burning your skin off 8 times a day.

 

I think that's a little presumptuous. For one thing, I do believe that Jesus died for us all if your statement was meant as a direct acusation. (Why else would I be here?) Second the interpretation of purgatory I've always been taught is that it's a place of penance where you atone for your sins and it's only the truly depraved and unrepentant that are in Hell.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Steel Accord

[A Black Circle 1,586]

I think that's a little presumptuous. For one thing, I do believe that Jesus died for us all if your statement was meant as a direct acusation. (Why else would I be here?) Second the interpretation of purgatory I've always been taught is that it's a place of penance where you atone for your sins and it's only the truly depraved and unrepentant that are in Hell.

I meant that he died for our sins. I'm not good with wording things. The rest matches up with what I said.

[Steel Accord 6,660]

I meant that he died for our sins. I'm not good with wording things. The rest matches up with what I said.

 

Right, I agree. To my understanding, that doesn't conflict with the Buddhist idea of reincarnation. One isn't necessarily reincarnated here on Earth after all. One of the ideas of Buddhism is that our lives bring us closer or further to Enlightenment. So if you lived a life that was charitable and loving, you'll be reincarnated in Heaven, if you lived a life that was selfish and destructive, you don't just get Hell but a number of them fitting the Earthly crimes you committed. (Yeah Buddhism actually has many Heavens and Hells.)

 

By my interpretation, Enlightenment is the true Heaven, if defined as Jesus did as being one with God and the lesser "Heavens" (called Sagga) are just what we group together as Purgatory as you are still weighed down by your sins. Better off than Hell certainly, but still not quite there.

[Sudo Krenton 243]

If you look, the Christ and the Buddha both share a similar message and their respective paths both echo each other.

 

Well in the case that you bring up, it would appear that you could say that Islam and Christianity are compatible, as both religious texts share similar passages and ideologie as well. 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my beef with Buddhism. They've got meditation that essentially is to make them "one with everything." If this is not our home, why bother? What I've seen (at least from a lot of other meditations which may/may not be similar to Buddhism meditation)  is that meditation revolves around yourself, and feeling "good" spiritually and bodily. Although I do like the concept of meditation, I do not like the amount of emphasis that is put on the person. Yes the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, and needs be looked after, but something is amiss.... like lack of meditation on God Himself.

 

Again, I do not know if I have everything right, as I never really looked that much into Buddhism itself.... and because of that, I should probably shut up until I've actually read into it.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Sudo Krenton

[Steel Accord 6,660]

Well in the case that you bring up, it would appear that you could say that Islam and Christianity are compatible, as both religious texts share similar passages and ideologie as well. 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my beef with Buddhism. They've got meditation that essentially is to make them "one with everything." If this is not our home, why bother? What I've seen (at least from a lot of other meditations which may/may not be similar to Buddhism meditation)  is that meditation revolves around yourself, and feeling "good" spiritually and bodily. Although I do like the concept of meditation, I do not like the amount of emphasis that is put on the person. Yes the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, and needs be looked after, but something is amiss.... like lack of meditation on God Himself.

 

Again, I do not know if I have everything right, as I never really looked that much into Buddhism itself.... and because of that, I should probably shut up until I've actually read into it.

 

Well yes, you miss the point entirely. Meditation is not a "feel good" drug you take for a high and anyone who spends all day and night on a rock just breathing is not truly balanced. Too much Yin and not enough Yang. In fact, one of Siddhartha's earliest criticisms of his contemporary religious attitude was ignoring the world in favor of the strive for Nirvana. He saw that as the equivalent of closing one's eyes and pretending the evil and suffering of the world didn't exist.

 

Where did you even hear the emphasis put on "the person"? One of the core ideas of Buddhism is the submission of your personal identity to be one with a higher order, that could reasonably be called God. Again, yes, Buddhism is non-deistic in the sense that it doesn't require the worship of a deity, but again again, Siddartha never met Jesus and the gods of his time period were not the modern interpretation of the Divine being a decidedly non-anthropomorphic and ineffable order to the universe. So by meditating to build discipline of the mind, and doing Kung Fu to discipline the body, one steel's themselves against desire, the source of suffering, which could also be called . . . temptation.

 

So by seeking Enlightenment, sloppily I admit, that doesn't stop me from going to church, giving to charity, and praying to Jesus as my Lord and Savior. Seeking Enlightenment and living a Christian life, can and some would say are, synonymous.

[Sudo Krenton 243]

What you've said (or what Buddhism says) seems to clash re: "One of the core ideas of Buddhism is the submission of your personal identity to be one with a higher order, that could reasonably be called God" and "...Buddhism is non-deistic in the sense that it doesn't require the worship of a deity..."

 

The issue with this is the fact that it's non-deist, but makes you obtain a "higher self." This makes it sound either that:

• Buddhism treats the mind as some form of spiritual entity or something(a "god" perhaps, I don't know)
• Buddhism isn't non-deist

The logic I'm going after is the fact that, why would there be a point in "reaching a higher order" if we're human, and there is no God? Something with mediation specifically for spiritual reasons seems off to me in his case.

 

The other thing is that Christianity has never been involved with meditation as part of the practice (as far as I'm aware). Sure we have used the term "mediation" before, but in the sense it is more of a contemplation. Possibly you could consider it as a way to get to a higher form of understanding mysteries and so on, but I am not sure.

 

I'm not sure, there's just a lot of questions about this in the air.

 

Don't get me wrong, I've done some form of meditation before, but not for spiritual reasons.... more like trying to calm down from being nervous.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Sudo Krenton

[Steel Accord 6,660]

@@Sudo Krenton,

 

Perhaps a PM just for the reasons that we don't want to derail this topic? As, at this point it's pretty tangential to the thread's point. 

[Sudo Krenton 243]

Sounds reasonable enough.

 

Don't get me wrong. Syncretism is indeed possible with various religions, I just find it to be clashing if you try to put a non-deist religion with a deist one. 

[I used to be a stranger 7,993]

This post has been redacted by the author.

Edited May 9, 2021 by Blue