Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pat Robertson on natural disasters
bkelly
Inactive Member


Message 29 of 302 (252256)
10-16-2005 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Jazzns
10-13-2005 10:38 AM


Re: Invention of a Christian Consensus
What have you personally done to publically and formally distance yourself from Pat Robertson? I mean you the person writing as Jazzns. Under you own identity.
What have you done to separate Pat Robertson from Christianity? You! Publiclly! Under your name!
When you call yourself Christian and do not publically and vociferously distance yourself, you put yourself in the box along with him.
BTW: I strongly dislike president Bush, but that doesn't matter much. He represents me (a member of the John Q Public club) to other coutries. Because I and others were not able to prevent him from being elected, we do belong in the box with him. I don't like it, but that does not give me a get out of jail free pass. You suffer the same fate with Pat Robertson.
Like it, or lump it, you are there by your own actions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Jazzns, posted 10-13-2005 10:38 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Jazzns, posted 10-18-2005 10:17 AM bkelly has replied

bkelly
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 302 (253186)
10-19-2005 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Jazzns
10-18-2005 10:17 AM


Re: Invention of a Christian Consensus
Jazzns writes:
Its pretty clear that people like you and crash have made up your mind about this issue.
I cannot speak for Crash, but you are right about me. Pat Robertson claims to speak for christians and millions of christians support him. To lump you in with him is human nature. Always has been, always will be. That is just a fact of human behavior. If you do not like that, it is up to you to do something about it.
I made a point you did not reference. When I face people from other nations I cannot deny that president Bush represents me as a United States citizen. When you call yourself christian, you lump yourself in there with Pat.
You might say you did not elect him leader of the Christians. Well, yes you did. I never voted for Bush, but I got him crammed down my throat by those who did. Christians (of which you are one) cast their dollar votes for Pat Robertson. Votes with dollars often carry more weight than those at the ballot box. (Witness Christian PACs)
If you want to be a follower of Jesus Christ and you do not want to be associated (lumped) with Pat Robertson, you must find another name to reference your belief. If not you should expect to be lumped in with him. That is human nature.
BTW: Look at the history of christianity. Do you really want to be a part of that?

Truth fears no question.
bkelly

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Jazzns, posted 10-18-2005 10:17 AM Jazzns has not replied

bkelly
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 302 (253490)
10-20-2005 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Jazzns
10-20-2005 5:33 PM


Re: Invention of a Christian Consensus
Hello Jazzns,
You have made some excellent points and I have decided that what I perceive to be your fundamental position is correct.
But in living our lives, we do have to deal with human nature. Be it right or wrong, and it is frequently wrong. Human nature is that you will be lumped in with all Christians who are in turn lumped in with Pat Robertson. There are some very old and valid reasons why we stereotype. I learned a few of them in a college course on prejudice and racism. (I was going to provide an example, but it is not needed.)
When conversations of this nature begin, there is a strong predisposition to start on an antagonistic path. As someone who has grown more and more to dislike religious belief and behavior, I am subject to an incredible prejudice by almost all Christians. (So to with Muslims and most religious people) If everyone could immediately detect the religious position of other people, I and all who believe as I do would have a very difficult time in life.
This does indeed fit for the general case, but there are individuals that do not fit that case.
Now I would like you to answer a question. Are there any atheists who you seek out to, shall we say, share the experience of life? If you knew (and you may well, this is rhetoric) of atheists that liked many of the things you like and did not actively seek to argue religion, would you seek their friendship? Could you treat them as equals? It is easy for anyone to answer these sorts of questions in the affirmative, but I respectfully ask for some serious introspection.
As for me, I will admit to having a hard time with that.

Truth fears no question.
bkelly

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Jazzns, posted 10-20-2005 5:33 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Chiroptera, posted 10-20-2005 6:29 PM bkelly has not replied
 Message 61 by Jazzns, posted 10-20-2005 7:28 PM bkelly has not replied

bkelly
Inactive Member


Message 172 of 302 (254225)
10-23-2005 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by nwr
10-23-2005 2:08 PM


Re: Invention of a Christian Consensus
Hello nwr
nwr writes:
Or are you asserting that Jazzns should stop calling himself Christian, so as to distance himself from Robertson? By extension, you would presumably require all Christians who disagree with Robertson (and I expect that is the overwhelming majority) to stop calling themselves Christian.
I don't see it that way at all. Jazzns took offence at being lumped in with Pat Robertson because Robertson is a Christian and he (Jazzns) is a Christian. To some degree that is a valid conclusion. However, that is the way people think, have always thought, and in general, will think for a long time. When he rails about that he might as well be pissing in a fan, because he is going to get it all over himself.
It is not my responsibility to publicly denounce a flake mathematician. I would not need to persuade my fellow mathematicians that he was a flake, for that would already be obvious to them. It is my responsibility, as a citizen and as a voter, to work against incompetent politicians who have demonstrated poor judgment.
As I read the point this is responding to, you did not really answer. Here is my clarification: Assume those flake mathematicians had the ear of the government and were getting policy made as they desire. (The president effects a lot of policy without approval of congress) Assume that you voted against the president, but he continues to work with these flakes. Assume the media presents the flake's views to the exclusion of your views. Assume masses of people believe the flake despite the obvious evidence that refutes the flakes.
Would these assumptions / clarifications modify your position any?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by nwr, posted 10-23-2005 2:08 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by nwr, posted 10-23-2005 3:55 PM bkelly has not replied

bkelly
Inactive Member


Message 173 of 302 (254226)
10-23-2005 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Silent H
10-22-2005 11:11 AM


Xians?
Several searches of mine turned up nothing more than a city in China.
Who are the Xians?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Silent H, posted 10-22-2005 11:11 AM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by jar, posted 10-23-2005 3:06 PM bkelly has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024