191 replies to this topic

[Nevermind]

arunma, it doesn't have to do with what you believe or not. You can believe whatever you want. It's the fact that by calling a religion false you are not saying "To me your religion is not the right one.", you are saying "I know all. You're wrong. I'm right. This is fact." You're basically calling other peoples' beliefs out and trying to trample them down.

But if we're not allowed to say anyone else is wrong, there is no Contro. There is no discourse.

My understanding was that the Controversial forum was originally set up to discuss such topics. Not to tell people who is wrong and and who is right.

[Doopliss]

Arunma think he's absolutely right, but he has no proves.

[arunma]

you are saying "I know all. You're wrong. I'm right. This is fact."

No...I'm saying that Jesus knows all, that you're wrong, and that he is right.

My understanding was that the Controversial forum was originally set up to discuss such topics. Not to tell people who is wrong and and who is right.

Actually, the purpose is geared more towards debate than discussion. If it were pleasant discourse, we wouldn't need three mods and special rules.

Arunma think he's absolutely right, but he has no proves.

Now I need proof to think that I'm absolutely right? If religions needed proof to be true, there probably wouldn't be any religions around anymore. Especially since no one can prove that God exists.

[Steel Samurai]

arunma, it doesn't have to do with what you believe or not. You can believe whatever you want. It's the fact that by calling a religion false you are not saying "To me your religion is not the right one.", you are saying "I know all. You're wrong. I'm right. This is fact." You're basically calling other peoples' beliefs out and trying to trample them down.

Again, arunma said only that he believed that all of the nonchristian religions are false.

[Fyxe]

No...I'm saying that Jesus knows all, that you're wrong, and that he is right.

That's no better than what Laz said you were saying. That's still your opinion, which you are stating as fact. You don't KNOW FOR CERTAIN that Jesus knew all, that Jesus is right, and you definitely don't know if anyone else is wrong.

This whole topic is about faith, after all. You said yourself, you can't prove that God exists, etc.
So how can you say you're right? You can't prove that either. You just BELIEVE you're right.

[Oberon Storm]

That's why the bible is almost as dangerous as the Constitution.

The Constitution is dangerous how?

Again, arunma said only that he believed that all of the nonchristian religions are false.

No he didn't.

Many cradle Christians these days are converting to false religions.

He out right called other religions "false". And yes, it would have been better had he added "In my opinion." or just worded it a little differently. But he didn't.

Yes, due to the nature of Contro people will be offended by opposing views and the idea is to respect those views dispite that. But the way arunma said it can come off as disrespectful to those with opposing views to his own. But I also think most of us know arunma meant no disrespect or offense.

[Fyxe]

Well, did he? His very word choice implies he has an inate disrespect towards other religions. Like I said, he could of simply said 'non-Christian religions', but instead he said 'false religions'.

It's just a bad sort of attitude to take.

[Oberon Storm]

I might be largely speaking for myself. I think I have been here long enough to know arunma isn't someone to go out of his way to insult anyone.

That's not to say you don't have a point. What he said could, I guess, be called unreasonably offensive. But still. There was no malice behind it.

[Fyxe]

Well, no, not malice, I didn't mean that.

[Selena]

It's just a bad sort of attitude to take.

It's also, unfortunately, a Christian attitude (at least with the more conservative ones - religious wise, not political wise, before anyone yells at me). I'm not fond of the fact that they're willing to send us non-believers to hell with the rapists and murderers, but sorry, it's what they believe. He didn't pretty it up this time to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy, is all. It's Contro, and not a place to make friends. The rest of the forum is for that. So, I can understand your point, but again, sorry... it's his beliefs and this isn't the section to hide them. It wasn't a really rude statement, just one of hard (Christian) truth.


I prefer people debating with tact, too, but... *shrug* oh well. Said and done, and we all know it wasn't meant with an intention to insult. Let's move along.

[Emiko]

I agree with Selena on the point that this place is not a place to make friends...you have to leave your contro-hat here when you leave or you will end up hating everyone on the forum.

Everyone has their own opinion about what is the "truth" Thats why your beliefs are "personal" Just be glad if you live in the US you can have your personal beliefs...and I do believe [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of countries now are more easy going about people's beliefs than they used to...

i mean, they could tie you to a stake and burn ya alive...

and fryx there are two kinds of regions...the "true" and the "false" there are no in-betweens... it's like light and dark...

[Fyxe]

Emiko, don't speak rubbish. No human can state whether a religion is true or false. For all you know, there's only one type of religion; false. NOBODY knows the truth.

If you have no proof in what YOU believe in, then you have no right to label anything else false.

Also, I should point out, there ARE states inbetween light and dark. Lightish, dim, murky... If everything was either light or dark, there would only be two shades; brilliant white and perfect black.

Again, for the FIVE BILLIONTH TIME, I do not have an issue with his belief, but merely with the unnecessary use of the term 'false religions' when it was uncalled for. He could of said 'non-Christian religions' but instead called them false, essentially saying they're lying.

It's nothing to do with 'prettying' his statement, the problem was that the statement didn't need to be said in the first place.

I'm not going to say any more on the subject. I think my complaint is completely clear, I've repeated it enough.

[Goose]

If you have no proof in what YOU believe in, then you have no right to label anything else false.
.

Its called Faith, I believe you've been discussing it earlier in the thread. He believes he is correct, therefore he can label what he wants. The validity of those labels could be called into question, but you can't deny him the right to say it as he see's it.

Again, for the FIVE BILLIONTH TIME, I do not have an issue with his belief, but merely with the unnecessary use of the term 'false religions' when it was uncalled for. He could of said 'non-Christian religions' but instead called them false, essentially saying they're lying.

If he said differently, he still would've meant that exact thing, the truth is, he didn't lie to you, he was telling the truth from his perspective. He's upfront, To him, anything non-christian is false, and he aint gonna pussy foot around and say differentlly. You think he could've been nicer about it, by just using (IMO) or a different term, but he didn't. Why? Because political correctness is going too far. We are allowed to have disagreements on here. Thats why it was created.

[Alakhriveion]

Surely possible.

Also, I should point out, there ARE states inbetween light and dark. Lightish, dim, murky... If everything was either light or dark, there would only be two shades; brilliant white and perfect black.

Truth and untruth IS black and white, though.

[Fyxe]

He wasn't telling the truth *from his perspective*, that's the point. He made no concessions to it being his opinion. He just said they're false.

I've said this isn't an issue about using a different term. If you look at the post in context, you'll see that the 'false religions' part is completely unnecessary. It was unrelated to the topic (he did not connect it to the faith issue at all), and he did not invite discussion. He just said it in the midst of his actual point.

'Non-Christian religions' isn't an alternate term for 'false religions', anyway. They're both very different terms.

Alak, how about half-truths? Besides, whether something is true or not is often a matter of perspective. If you see a yellow wall, you may say 'that wall is yellow, and that is a truth'. But if you could ask a dog what he saw, he wouldn't agree with you.

[Showsni]

Half truths? Such as?

If anyone says anything, just assume it's thier own opinion they're stating, unless they tell you otherwise.

[Fyxe]

If someone says 'I hurt somebody', that's a half truth. You don't know exactly HOW he hurt this person, or WHO he hurt, etc.

In fact, you could argue that it's impossible to get a 100% truth. Doesn't exist.

[Showsni]

No, if he did hurt somebody then it's the truth. If not, it's a lie. You don't need to know any more than that. How he hurt them, or who he hurt, doesn't stop his statement being true.

[Alakhriveion]

If someone says 'I hurt somebody', that's a half truth. You don't know exactly HOW he hurt this person, or WHO he hurt, etc.

In fact, you could argue that it's impossible to get a 100% truth. Doesn't exist.

Unless you believe it is... which is a very sticky argument.

[Fyxe]

No, if he did hurt somebody then it's the truth. If not, it's a lie. You don't need to know any more than that. How he hurt them, or who he hurt, doesn't stop his statement being true.

Depending on how you define 'hurt', surely.

My point is that there are different levels of truth. It's fairly obvious what a half truth is, but here's a definition anyway.

http://dictionary.re...ch?q=half-truth

Alak, believing in something doesn't necessarily make it possible.

I invite you to give me an example of a truth and a falsity, each of which must have no grey area.

[Nevermind]

It's also, unfortunately, a Christian attitude

Not quite. That kind of attitude lies with the hardcore ones. And they tend to be disrespectful to other denominations, let alone other religions.

[Selena]

Yeah, I know. That's why I said it was mainly a conservative/hardcore Christian thing.

[Nevermind]

/hypocritical Christian thing.

[Alakhriveion]

Alak, believing in something doesn't necessarily make it possible.

This is true. But it IS possible there's an absolute reality. I believe in one myself.

I invite you to give me an example of a truth and a falsity, each of which must have no grey area.

True: 2+2=4
False: 2+2=5

True: Beck rocks
False: Beck does not rock

See those? Irrefutable.

[Doopliss]

Now I need proof to think that I'm absolutely right? If religions needed proof to be true, there probably wouldn't be any religions around anymore. Especially since no one can prove that God exists.

You know, that's why I'm sceptic. You can believe anything you want, even if you have no proves, that's your decision. Anyway, don't expect me to take seriously the "Jesus know everything" or "the Bible is perfect" posts.

The Constitution is dangerous how?

Easy, at least mine says that it can't be abolished nor disobyed under any circumstances.

[Nevermind]

True: 2+2=4
False: 2+2=5

I dunno. One of the final year assessments of our mathematic students is to prove WHY 2+2=4.

[Goose]

I bet its the job of the philosphy students to work out why "2 + 2 = 5"

[arunma]

Shoot, I wrote a rather long post awhile back, but it looks like it never got posted. Everyone act like I made a new post until I really do so.

[Flint]

2 + 2 = 5 for very large quantities of 2.

[spunky-monkey]

Originally Posted by Steel Samurai
God answers every prayer we offer up to him, but the answer isn't always yes. He does all things for His glory, and, although I think sometimes he does make concessions for us, will answer our prayers accordingly.

God doesn't answer our prayers directly because of our sin. If you pray directly to God you will never be answered. However because Jesus made us acceptable to God if you pray to God through Jesus, your prayers will be acknowledged.

Originally Posted by arunma
No...I'm saying that Jesus knows all, that you're wrong, and that he is right.

Careful now, Jesus is truth, but there are things that only the Father knows, not even the Son or the Angels know when the end of the world will happen.


I don't think people should try to challenge another belief or religion as you have to respect other people's choices. I'm a Christian, but I don't force anyone else to be one. Remember you don't choose God, God chooses you. There are many, many religions and they are all based upon people's beliefs, but none of them have any faith behind it. Religion is not a power of any sort - it is more of a means to acquire knowledge or a method to try to understand our purpose in Life and/or After-Life. Religion is mostly man's choice of words, phrases and meanings, there's no true power in them as far as I know.