Continuation of the "Ultimate Gift" Thread

Rrhain responds to me:

quote:

---

Yes, you ARE!

​

My god, how many times do I have to show you your own posts before you remember your own words?

---

I am merely skeptical of fellow christians, observing their actions reveals a lot. I am merely speculating, if that is okay with you.

quote:

---

Incorrect. I understand it all too well.

---

Now if you could only correlate teaching to what christians do, for that is what they do. Accusations of: "they exploiting others" is wrong.

quote:

---

Jews for Jesus

---

Okay, Jews for Jesus, by entitling themselves so when they aren't jewish is wrong. But are they exploiting anyone? By telling others they're jews that are really christian isn't really exploiting, I mean they're lying but exploiting? I beg to differ, they're not forcing others into religion, simply lying to try to persuade others. Deception yes, exploitation no. I am simply correcting your mistake here, not condoning this evil act.

quote:

---

Notice how it's just slipped in there...reading, medicine, food, AIDS...and god.

---

Nothing wrong with that. I don't see how teaching others about necessities and including religion is wrong, they are obviously not forcing anyone to believe anything, unless you can provide any evidence for this assertion...

quote:

---

Hmmm...seems like LIFE is trying to make it appear that the people who have "died because of human rights violations in Sudan" were killed because they were Christian. Why else make a point of the terrible conditions in Sudan right after saying that Christians have been targeted?

​

The reality is quite different. While it is true that Christians have been targeted in the Sudan, the vast majority of those who have died in the Sudan due to human rights violations have not been Christian. By deliberately being vague, they make people think that the human rights violations in the Sudan have to do with freedom of worship rather than the warlords dominating society.

​

And that doesn't even get into the methods used in India to evangelize.

---

Pure opinion.

quote:

---

You won't consider it until I drag you overseas and show you, will you?

---

Absolutely! I'm not going to believe every word you say, especially when these words are highly opinionated and there is no evidence for such statements.

quote:

---

Explain that to the fig tree that dared to be barren out of season. Jesus made it wither.

​

And as others have said, threats of hell are hardly loving and non-forceful.

​

For the umpteenth time, are you saying that unless someone holds a literal gun to your head, there is no coercion?

​

My god, messenjaH, you even used Pascal's Wager, yourself. Message 37, in this thread even, you related how your friend at camp dismayed the counselor by refusing to accept Jesus...and how the counselor "had great reason to be" dismayed.

​

That's coercion, messenjaH: Accept Jesus or something bad will happen.

​

No, it's not a gun, but are you really saying that the only way to coerce somebody is to threaten with a gun?

---

Not a threat, a warning, a display of a glimpse of truth, a caring suggestion. See bias can turn one thing into another, different ways of interpreting passages etc. Dismissing something by calling it evil when it isn't according to another opinion isn't a good procedure.

quote:

---

But the first part isn't beautiful. It's disgusting.

​

Preaching to those who didn't ask to be preached to is perverted and evil.

---

Again, an opinion.PEACE BE WITH YOU------------------
-chris

messenjaH responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Yes, you ARE!

​

My god, how many times do I have to show you your own posts before you remember your own words?

---

​

I am merely skeptical of fellow christians

---

So you admit that you are judging a group (Christians) by the actions of one (yourself). You admit that you are claiming that they are not "true" Christians and that you are final arbiter of what a "true" Christian is.

quote:

---

observing their actions reveals a lot. I am merely speculating, if that is okay with you.

---

But you're doing more than just speculate. You're judging. You're making direct assertions. You didn't say, "That doesn't seem right to me." You said: Message 29Message 26Message 19And in this one, you even added sneer quotes: Message 16It wasn't simply speculation, messenjaH. It was declaration. According to you, these people are not Christians.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Incorrect. I understand it all too well.

---

​

Now if you could only correlate teaching to what christians do, for that is what they do.

---

When did "teaching" come to mean "slip in my personal agenda"? When did "teaching" come to mean "exploit their suffering in order to convert them to my way of thinking"?

quote:

---

Accusations of: "they exploiting others" is wrong.

---

How? Be specific.Is not using a class ostensibly to teach people English as a wedge to proselytize for your god exploitative? Explain to me how if the situation were reversed you wouldn't react the exact same way. Suppose a group of atheists were to go to a Christian community that was suffering massive poverty and disease and were to make a condition of receipt of services a sermon on how god doesn't exist. Do you not think for a second that you and every other Christian organization wouldn't accuse these people of exploitation?So why is it not exploitative when you do it?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Jews for Jesus

---

​

Okay, Jews for Jesus, by entitling themselves so when they aren't jewish is wrong. But are they exploiting anyone?

---

Yes! By going after people who are in crisis and directly lying to them, they are exploiting them!Suppose a person's child has died. Someone then comes to them and says that their child is going to go to hell unless they give $10,000 to a particular religious group. Isn't that exploitative? A person who is in a state of emotional distress comes across somebody who uses that distress in order to finagle something out said person and that isn't exploitation?There are laws against this sort of thing when it comes to senior citizens and financial shenanigans, messenjaH. Telephone solicitors, door-to-door salesmen, and junk mail circular targeted specifically at the elderly that frighten them into thinking that they will not be able to afford things like medicine or their rent in order to get them to sign onto a worthless insurance policy that does nothing but suck their funds dry. Isn't that exploitation?So how is it that when Christians do it, it somehow becomes benevolent? You don't want to go to hell, do you? What is the state of your eternal soul? Are you in a position to meet your maker and not be found wanting? Is that not a threat?

quote:

---

By telling others they're jews that are really christian isn't really exploiting, I mean they're lying but exploiting?

---

[I][B]YES![/i][/b] Lying to somebody in order to get them to go along with your agenda is exploitation! It exploits their trust.

quote:

---

I beg to differ, they're not forcing others into religion, simply lying to try to persuade others.

---

That's forcing! What do you think they're lying about, messenjaH? "If you're Jewish, you're going to go to hell. Believing in Jesus is 'Jewish.' Heck, I'm Jewish and I believe in Jesus."for the umpteenth time: Are you seriously saying that unless a threat of physical violence is made, there is no coercion?How many times do I have to directly ask you that question before you answer it?

quote:

---

Deception yes, exploitation no.

---

Deception is exploitation, messenjaH. It exploits a person's trust. It makes them do things they wouldn't normally do if they had the actual facts.Did you see the movie Minority Report? The main motivation of the main character is that his son was kidnapped right under his nose. Someone then uses his grief and bitterness over the loss of his son to drive him to commit murder. Nobody physically forced him to do so. Nobody told him, "You must kill this person." Instead, they simply knew that this man was in crisis, wanted somebody dead, and set up a series of lies designed to exploit this man's grief so that he would kill the intended target.That isn't exploitative? Lying to someone so that they will do something they wouldn't do if they had the facts isn't exploitation?

quote:

---

I am simply correcting your mistake here, not condoning this evil act.

---

But there is no mistake except on your side, messenjaH. You have heard me put together the words "Christian" and "exploitative" and you have had a tremendous flash of cognitive dissonance. It can't possibly be that Christians are exploitative. You have said so over and over in multiple messages. Even when I show you example after example of Christian group that actively engages in exploitative acts, you continue to deny everything...either the group isn't a "true" Christian group or what they're doing isn't exploitative.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Notice how it's just slipped in there...reading, medicine, food, AIDS...and god.

---

​

Nothing wrong with that.

---

There is everything wrong with that. Exploiting people in need in order to serve an agenda is evil.

quote:

---

I don't see how teaching others about necessities and including religion is wrong, they are obviously not forcing anyone to believe anything, unless you can provide any evidence for this assertion...

---

"You're going to go to hell if you don't believe."How is that not forcing someone?For the umpteenth time: Are you saying that unless somebody threatens physical violence, there is no coercion?How many times do I need to directly ask you that question before you answer it?

quote:

---

quote:

---

You won't consider it until I drag you overseas and show you, will you?

---

​

Absolutely!

---

So your mind is closed.You are so certain that it can't possibly be the case that Christians are exploiting others that the only way you'll ever admit it to be true is to demand something that I cannot actually do.I'm reminded of another creationist I debated with who said she would never, ever believe that evolution could possibly be true unless she died and god told her that it was...and even then she admitted she'd have a hard time accepting that.

quote:

---

I'm not going to believe every word you say

---

I didn't say anything, messenjaH. I provided you with the words of the actual Christian groups talking about what they are doing.I wasn't the one that said that Crossroads Bible College: Division of Christian Ministries uses their English classes to evangelize. They said it themselves: [emphasis added]

quote:

---

especially when these words are highly opinionated and there is no evidence for such statements.

---

If you aren't going to believe the words of the people doing it, messenjaH, who are you going to believe?

quote:

---

quote:

---

That's coercion, messenjaH: Accept Jesus or something bad will happen.

​

No, it's not a gun, but are you really saying that the only way to coerce somebody is to threaten with a gun?

---

​

Not a threat, a warning,

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Since when did a warning become something other than a threat? "If you do this, then this will happen. You don't want to go to hell, so you had better believe in Jesus."How is that not a threat? How is asserting that someone is going to suffer eternal torture not a threat?

quote:

---

a display of a glimpse of truth,

---

BZZZZT!Pascal's Wager. I'm so sorry, messenjaH.Since lying to someone is exploitative, and since Pascal's Wager is a false justification, then using a threat of hell is not a "glimpse of truth."

quote:

---

a caring suggestion.

---

"Believe in Jesus or go to hell."That's a "caring suggestion"?For the umpteenth time: Are you saying that unless somebody threatens physical violence, there is no coercion?How many times do I have to directly ask you that question before you answer it?

quote:

---

quote:

---

But the first part isn't beautiful. It's disgusting.
Preaching to those who didn't ask to be preached to is perverted and evil.

---

​

Again, an opinion.

---

And hypocrites have opinions, too, messenjaH.That doesn't make them valid.If the shoe were on the other foot, I'm sure you'd be howling from the rooftops.So how come it isn't exploitation when Christians do it?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

MessenjaH, I will kill you and eat your remains you better hide!!!!!
Of course that wasn't a threat it was a warning and caring suggestion. You are obviously biased if you think that was a threat.

Rrhain responds to me:

quote:

---

Yes! By going after people who are in crisis and directly lying to them, they are exploiting them!

---

Can you provide examples of how they exploit "weak" Jews under times of crisis? I'm still not sure if they're exploiting. I mean if I told a kid I was part of "G-unit" and 50 cent is on my album and he bought it just because of that lie would I be exploiting him?

quote:

---

But you're doing more than just speculate. You're judging. You're making direct assertions.

---

I'm not going to stand for christians doing evil acts and just let them be. If they are doing evil things I'm going to share my opinion, yes speculate and yes suggest possible realities. I try not to judge others and I'm sorry if I came off that way but I am certainly not writing them off completely as non-christians. How are they able to justify their actions?

quote:

---

Is not using a class ostensibly to teach people English as a wedge to proselytize for your god exploitative? Explain to me how if the situation were reversed you wouldn't react the exact same way. Suppose a group of atheists were to go to a Christian community that was suffering massive poverty and disease and were to make a condition of receipt of services a sermon on how god doesn't exist. Do you not think for a second that you and every other Christian organization wouldn't accuse these people of exploitation?

​

So why is it not exploitative when you do it?

---

It isn't exploiting, again, these atheists aren't forcing the desperate christians to believe by withholding food or anything. A christian would never convert knowing the Lord anyway. I would find the sermon quite amusing by the way.

quote:

---

"You're going to go to hell if you don't believe."

​

How is that not forcing someone?

​

For the umpteenth time: Are you saying that unless somebody threatens physical violence, there is no coercion?

​

How many times do I need to directly ask you that question before you answer it?

---

There is no coercion in this situation without physical violence. Noone has to except it. Anyone could say "you guys are crazy liars" and that is that. The thing is they don't have to believe. They are not forcing anyone to do anything, get that out of your mind please!

quote:

---

So your mind is closed.

​

You are so certain that it can't possibly be the case that Christians are exploiting others that the only way you'll ever admit it to be true is to demand something that I cannot actually do.

​

I'm reminded of another creationist I debated with who said she would never, ever believe that evolution could possibly be true unless she died and god told her that it was...and even then she admitted she'd have a hard time accepting that.

---

It is the only way to actually prove your theory! You are a conspiracy theorist by assuming something evil must be true about what they do because they're christian. I bet that word leaves a bad taste in your mouth. I understand your bias but this is why I will never trust what you say. Oh and the fact that you have NO EVIDENCE. I'm not closed minded I understand your argument and the reason you are alerted to argue on this matter but your trying to change something good into something evil. Your mind is making you do this because you can't accept a christian is doing something good. You must assume things, providing no evidence, besides setting up strawmen of certain groups of supposed christians that commit sins to convert others. Yes, they may be christian but are they doing something glorious and right according to God? No. I don't know what you are thinking Rrhain but by calling ME closed minded when you provide absolutely no evidence for your claims is a blatant falsehood.PEACE BE WITH YOU------------------
-chris

messenjaH responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Yes! By going after people who are in crisis and directly lying to them, they are exploiting them!

---

​

Can you provide examples of how they exploit "weak" Jews under times of crisis?

---

I just did! They lied to them, messenjaH. What more do you want?Are you saying that unless somebody threatens physical violence, there is no coercion?How many times do I have to ask you that question before you answer it?

quote:

---

I'm still not sure if they're exploiting.

---

How is lying to someone not exploitative? How is it not an attempt to use their trust for an ulterior motive?Just what do you think the word "exploit" means?

quote:

---

I mean if I told a kid I was part of "G-unit" and 50 cent is on my album and he bought it just because of that lie would I be exploiting him?

---

YES!You preyed upon his desires and his trust for an ulterior motive and used deception in order to do so.Just what do you think the word "exploit" means?

quote:

---

quote:

---

But you're doing more than just speculate. You're judging. You're making direct assertions.

---

​

I'm not going to stand for christians doing evil acts and just let them be.

---

But you don't get to say they aren't Christians, messenjaH. I agree that they are doing evil things, but I still claim they are Christians.You, on the other hand, fall for the logical fallacy of No "True" Scotsman and claim that somehow these people aren't Christian if they're exploitative.

quote:

---

If they are doing evil things I'm going to share my opinion,

---

That's fine.But we have two separate issues here, messenjaH:1) Are they performing a specific action.
2) Are they Christians.The problem is that you cannot seem to reconcile that both things are happening. If they are performing an evil act, then they cannot be Christians and if they Christians, then they cannot be performing evil acts.I have given you example after example of groups that deliberately go to communities unbidden and force their religious opinions upon others using coercive methods ranging from simple threats to one's immortal soul to requiring people to listen to sermons in order to acquire food and medicine to being truly duplicitous and using something like a class in learning English as a means to proselytize.Your response? None of that is exploitative if they're Christian. Or if it is exploitative, they're not Christian.

quote:

---

I try not to judge others and I'm sorry if I came off that way but I am certainly not writing them off completely as non-christians.

---

Yes, you are! Message 29Message 26Message 19And in this one, you even added sneer quotes: Message 16You most certainly are writing them off as people who aren't Christian.

quote:

---

How are they able to justify their actions?

---

Why don't you read the information I provided to you and find out? I gave you their web sites. Did you look at them?Do I have to do all the work for you?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Is not using a class ostensibly to teach people English as a wedge to proselytize for your god exploitative? Explain to me how if the situation were reversed you wouldn't react the exact same way. Suppose a group of atheists were to go to a Christian community that was suffering massive poverty and disease and were to make a condition of receipt of services a sermon on how god doesn't exist. Do you not think for a second that you and every other Christian organization wouldn't accuse these people of exploitation?

​

So why is it not exploitative when you do it?

---

​

It isn't exploiting, again, these atheists aren't forcing the desperate christians to believe by withholding food or anything.

---

But these Christians ARE.First, I don't know any non-religious group that withholds anything unless somebody submits to preaching. The groups that I did mention to you like Doctors Without Borders and the World Health Organization tend to do everything they can to work within the cultural context of the areas in which they are working. When WHO set out to eradicate smallpox from the face of the earth, nobody had to listen to a sermon about god or the lack thereof. It was simply a question of getting into every region of the world that had ever seen a case of smallpox, finding the people living there, and vaccinating them.When was the last time a religious organization did that? Go into areas of need and focus solely upon the need rather than use it as a pretense to preach?

quote:

---

A christian would never convert knowing the Lord anyway. I would find the sermon quite amusing by the way.

---

What about your kids? You're too busy dealing with the problems of living since there is no such thing as a supermarket to get food not to mention the various warlords (sometimes sponsored by the government) to appease that you welcome the assistance of people to look after your children and give them an education in the hopes that they will be able to have a better life than you do.Do you think your children are going to find an atheistic education "amusing"? Or might they listen to it with rapt attention since there really isn't any other viewpoint being presented?

quote:

---

quote:

---

"You're going to go to hell if you don't believe."

​

How is that not forcing someone?

​

For the umpteenth time: Are you saying that unless somebody threatens physical violence, there is no coercion?

​

How many times do I need to directly ask you that question before you answer it?

---

​

There is no coercion in this situation without physical violence.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?You really are saying that unless somebody puts a gun to your head, there is no such thing as coercion? A person who happens to know your personality and has the means and ability to manipulate the situation so that when you are presented with a certain choice, you will be overwhelmingly likely to take one over the other is not exploiting you by doing so even though he never actually threatens you with physical violence?Is blackmail considered coercion in your book, messenjaH? If I find out that you're having an affair and I demand money from you in exchange for not telling your wife, that is somehow something other than me exploiting you? That is something different than me coercing you into giving me money? I'm not threatening any sort of physical violence against you. I'm simply going to tell your wife about what you're doing.That isn't coercive?

quote:

---

Noone has to except it. Anyone could say "you guys are crazy liars" and that is that.

---

Right...tell the people who are bringing food, medicine, clothing, and education that they're crazy liars. That'll help. That'll save your children from starving.

quote:

---

The thing is they don't have to believe. They are not forcing anyone to do anything, get that out of your mind please!

---

But they are! They're withholding the carrot unless you submit to the stick."Believe in Jesus or go to hell."How is that not forcing?

quote:

---

quote:

---

So your mind is closed.

​

You are so certain that it can't possibly be the case that Christians are exploiting others that the only way you'll ever admit it to be true is to demand something that I cannot actually do.

​

I'm reminded of another creationist I debated with who said she would never, ever believe that evolution could possibly be true unless she died and god told her that it was...and even then she admitted she'd have a hard time accepting that.

---

​

It is the only way to actually prove your theory!

---

You mean listening to the actual words of the people who are carrying it out isn't enough?When I gave you the link to Crossroads Bible College: Division of Christian Ministries and quoted their course description about how their specific intention is to use a class in English as a wedge to preach to people and gain converts, that wasn't good enough?The word of the people who are doing the exploiting isn't good enough? You need to see them do it?

quote:

---

You are a conspiracy theorist

---

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!Oh, that's just precious, messenjaH. That's just the cutest thing in the world.I find someone who says that what they do is use education as a front for conversion and you claim I am engaged in a "conspiracy theory."I suppose it was a "conspiracy theory" that Schwarzenegger was elected governor of California. After all, I don't have access to the physical ballots...I only have the reports from the news agencies and the government and the testimony of a lot of people who claimed to have voted for him. Oh, but that's not good enough...unless I can show you them actually voting for Schwarzenegger, it's just a "conspiracy theory."

quote:

---

by assuming something evil must be true about what they do because they're christian.

---

No, not because they're Christian, messenjaH.Because they admit to doing it.If someone tells you, "I do it," and if they show you how they go about it, by what logic do we claim they don't?

quote:

---

I bet that word leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

---

Not at all.You see, you are arguing a strawman. You seem to think that I am anti-Christian or that I have some bizarre notion that being Christian necessarily requires a person to be evil.Instead, I am simply pointing out that there are Christians, legitimate Christians, who do evil.Not all Christians proselytize where they're not wanted. Not all Christians engage in missionary work exploiting the suffering of others in order to make converts.

quote:

---

I understand your bias but this is why I will never trust what you say. Oh and the fact that you have NO EVIDENCE.

---

(*snort!*)I wasn't the one that said that Crossroads Bible College: Division of Christian Ministries uses their English classes to evangelize. They said it themselves: [emphasis added]I didn't say it. Life Outreach International did: I didn't say it. Andrew Barron, the Canadian director of Jews for Jesus did: Don't take my word for it, messenjaH.But if you aren't going to take the word of the people who actually do this, whose word will you take?By your logic, if you were to ask, "Who killed Mr. Boddy?" and I were to say, "Joe Schmoe did it...you can find his confession on his nightstand along with the weapon that did it," you'd still not accept it because I was the one that brought his confession to your attention.

quote:

---

Your mind is making you do this because you can't accept a christian is doing something good.

---

(*chuckle*)Exploiting the suffering of somebody is not doing something good.We're back to my other question which you didn't really answer:Which is the most altruistic act:1) Providing support for an endeavor where every twelve-and-a-half minutes you interrupt the program to inform all the participants that you are the one supporting the endeavor.2) Providing support for an endeavor where at the beginning and ending of the program, but not during the program, you inform all the participants that you are the one supporting the endeavor.3) Providing support for an endeavor but never telling any of the participants that you are the one supporting the endeavor.

quote:

---

You must assume things,

---

You mean the direct quotes of the people involved is an "assumption"?

quote:

---

providing no evidence,

---

You mean links to the people making the direct quotes is "providing no evidence"? Crossroads Bible College: Division of Christian Ministries
Life Outreach International

quote:

---

besides setting up strawmen of certain groups of supposed christians that commit sins to convert others.

---

"Supposed"?Logical error: No "True" Scotsman.By what evidence do we have that they're not Christians?

quote:

---

Yes, they may be christian but are they doing something glorious and right according to God? No.

---

And that means they're not Christian?Since when?

quote:

---

I don't know what you are thinking Rrhain but by calling ME closed minded when you provide absolutely no evidence for your claims is a blatant falsehood.

---

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!Oh, that is just the most darling thing, messenjaH? I give you three distinct groups, providing you direct quotes of their actions from their own propaganda, and you claim I "provide absolutely no evidence."------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

About coercion, notice I said in this situation... Christians aren't demanding anything, no money. Bad example.Secondly I explained all three groups. The problem is three groups doesn't cut it. Out of billions, three groups are not to be represented by the christian faith. The only group that exploits others is Jews for Jesus. Your definition is wrong.I am sorry the impression you got is that I was judging others, I was not meaning to, only suggesting.PEACE BE WITH YOU------------------
-chris

messenjaH responds to me:

quote:

---

About coercion, notice I said in this situation... Christians aren't demanding anything, no money.

---

They're demanding conversion! They're not doing it because that happens to be the noise their throats make from simple exhalation.Do you really think that the only way an act of coercion can happen is if somebody threatens physical violence in order to physically rob somebody?

quote:

---

Secondly I explained all three groups.

---

No, you didn't. You claimed they either weren't doing what they directly said they did or committed the logical fallacy of No "True" Scotsman.The fact that you wrote something in response does not mean you explained anything.

quote:

---

The problem is three groups doesn't cut it.

---

You're proving my point. You won't believe until I come down and drag you out of your house and show you. And even when I provide you with link after link of direct statements by the people doing the exploitative actions, you still claim that it isn't exploitation, that they aren't really Christians, that it can't be true, la-la-la-LAAAAAA!The single largest group of Christians in the United States, the Southern Baptists, seem to take a special pride in trying to convert Jews. At least twice, now, they have taken out full-page ads in papers like the New York Times during Yom Kippur, claiming that they need to save themselves from the false religion of Judaism. Their goal was: The Home Mission Board of the SBC put together a mission whose mandate was to: In 1987, Rev. Bailey Smith at the SBC convention: And he repeated it again in 1994: It goes on and on and on, messenjaH.But the thing you still don't seem to understand is that even if these are the only people who do this, they are still Christians and they are still doing this.

quote:

---

Your definition is wrong.

---

Oh, this passive-aggressive shit is unbearable.If my definition is wrong, perhaps you would be so kind as to provide the definition you think is correct? I asked you directly what you thought "exploit" meant and you have never answered.If you think "to make use of meanly or unjustly for one's own advantage" (Merriam-Webster) isn't a good definition for "exploit," then tell us what you think it is?Why do I have to pull teeth to get a straight answer out of you?------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Double post again. [This message has been edited by messenjaH, 12-01-2003]

Rhrain responds:

quote:

---

They're demanding conversion! They're not doing it because that happens to be the noise their throats make from simple exhalation.

​

Do you really think that the only way an act of coercion can happen is if somebody threatens physical violence in order to physically rob somebody?

---

They are not demanding anything, I would say prove them DEMANDING others into conversion but it seems you have no evidence to offer so that request would prove futile. I will ask it anyway, any instances of christians demanding anywhere? Please show me.No, an act of coercion can happen without physical violence.

quote:

---

The fact that you wrote something in response does not mean you explained anything.

---

The fact that I explained doesn't mean you can listen or see or use any of your senses to decipher my explanation. Denying it doesn't help the situation.

quote:

---

But the thing you still don't seem to understand is that even if these are the only people who do this, they are still Christians and they are still doing this.

---

The only christians doing an evil act, you could find, it appears, you so gleefully pointed out. Again, one group can't account for the whole community. By the way, nice strawman. The thing you don't understand is that judging one from a billion does not work.

quote:

---

Oh, this passive-aggressive shit is unbearable.

​

If my definition is wrong, perhaps you would be so kind as to provide the definition you think is correct? I asked you directly what you thought "exploit" meant and you have never answered.

​

If you think "to make use of meanly or unjustly for one's own advantage" (Merriam-Webster) isn't a good definition for "exploit," then tell us what you think it is?

---

Oh the definition is fine you are just labeling christian missionaries with the act of exploiting, which points to the only conclusion that you either do not know what the word means, or you are running out of labels to throw at christians.I don't know why you are getting so angry, maybe if this is so "unbearable" for you you should stop discussing with me, you know if you can't take the heat leave the kitchen? Furthermore if you are becoming so distressed over an internet discussion that you are called to swear then maybe you should take a break.PEACE BE WITH YOU------------------
-chris

messenjaH responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

They're demanding conversion! They're not doing it because that happens to be the noise their throats make from simple exhalation.

---

​

They are not demanding anything

---

They are demanding conversion!Do you not read posts before responding?

quote:

---

I would say prove them DEMANDING others into conversion but it seems you have no evidence to offer so that request would prove futile.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?How many more times do I need to provide you the direct quotes of the people engaging in conversion activities under the guise of charity or simple "caring" before you get off your butt and read them?

quote:

---

I will ask it anyway, any instances of christians demanding anywhere? Please show me.

---

I already did. Crossroads Bible College: Division of Christian Ministries
Jews for Jesus
Life Outreach International
Southern Baptist CoalitionYou seem to think that if you ignore it, it doesn't exist.

quote:

---

No, an act of coercion can happen without physical violence.

---

Then how can you say that these people aren't engaging in coercion? If you threaten somebody with hell, you're coercing them.

quote:

---

quote:

---

But the thing you still don't seem to understand is that even if these are the only people who do this, they are still Christians and they are still doing this.

---

​

The only christians doing an evil act, you could find it appears

---

(*chuckle*)Every time you say this, I come up with yet another group. U.S. Center for World MissionThey got written up in the June 30, 2003 issue of Time.

quote:

---

Again, one group can't account for the whole community.

---

But it isn't one group.If we include Mother Theresa, we've got six that I've mentioned here. And every time you say, "But no more than that," I spend another two minutes doing some research and come up with yet another group.And you are committing the logial error that you accuse me of. You are accusing the group (Christians) based upon the actions of one (you).I, on the other hand, readily admit that not all Christians exploit the suffering of others. However, there are a significant number of Christians who do.They exist whether you like it or not and they are Christians whether you like it or not. You are not the arbiter of who is or is not a Christian.

quote:

---

The thing you don't understand is that judging one from a billion does not work.

---

(*chuckle*)I haven't mentioned the Catholic Church because it's just too easy.The Catholic Church's official position is that condoms cannot prevent AIDS because they are "porous" and claim that to use them to prevent HIV infection is a sin.Thus, the Catholic Church is exploiting the suffering of people in order to "save" their souls...by literally killing them.There are over a billion Catholics out there. In fact, they make up half of all Christians.Good enough for you?

quote:

---

Oh the definition is fine you are just labeling christian missionaries with the act of exploiting, which points to the only conclusion that you either do not know what the word means, or you are running out of labels to throw at christians.

---

If "making use of meanly or unjustly for one's own advantage" is an adequate definition of "exploit," and if Christians are unjustly using threats of hell, withholding food and medicine, pretending to be concerned about education when the real purpose is to convert people to their religion for their own advantage, then how is it that these Christians are not exploitative?If a person is there to teach you how to read, how is it not exploitative to use the Bible as your source and to attempt to convert the student in the process?If a person is there to give you food or medicine, how is it not exploitative to require attendance at a sermon in an attempt to convert?If a person is in an environment where he might die, how is it not exploitative to stop him from preventing his own death in an attempt to "save his soul"?

quote:

---

I don't know why you are getting so angry

---

I'm not angry. That would require me caring about you. I don't know you from Adam, so why would I get angry over you?Do not confuse frustration with anger.Basically, you're saying that 1 exists, 2 exists, addition exists and works, equality exists and works, but there's still no evidence that 1 + 1 = 2.It's frustrating, but it isn't something to get angry over.You place too much importance on your own existance.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

I have a bone to pick with catholics, I think it is wrong for you to be using them to represent the christian faith.I see no demanding anywhere, please enlighten me, directly point out the demanding christians. Thank YouI fail to see how the USCWM has done anything wrong. Including the exploitation issue.Show me evidence of christians withholding food. Noone is making threats. Thank you.

quote:

---

You place too much importance on your own existance[sic].

---

Huh? I think I'll be proud of that.------------------
-chris[This message has been edited by messenjaH, 12-01-2003]

messenjaH responds to me:

quote:

---

I have a bone to pick with catholics, I think it is wrong for you to be using them to represent the christian faith.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Catholics make up half the population of those who call themselves "Christian" and they don't deserve to have a say in what it means to be a Christian?Look, if you want to isolate yourself from other sects of Christianity, that's fine, but be honest about it and come right out and say it. You're not talking about "Christians." You're talking about a particular sect. Where you draw the line is completely up to you...whether it be at "Protestant" or "Anglican" or "Seventh Day Adventist" or "those who worship at First Unitarian on 12th street in my home town," that's your perogative.But do not equivocate that this subset of Christianity is the only way to be a Christian.

quote:

---

I see no demanding anywhere, please enlighten me, directly point out the demanding christians. Thank You

---

I did.They demand you convert.How is that not a demand?

quote:

---

I fail to see how the USCWM has done anything wrong. Including the exploitation issue.

---

They seek conversion through ulterior motives. How is that not exploitation?Just what is your definition of "exploitation"? You've already agreed that my definition is fine. So please tell me how using ulterior motives to further one's agenda as the USCWM does isn't exploitative.

quote:

---

Show me evidence of christians withholding food.

---

Already did.Mother Theresa was one of them. Other posters here have related to you their personal experience.

quote:

---

Noone [sic...happy with the dueling spelling flames?] is making threats.

---

"Convert or go to hell."How is that not a threat?Is physical violence the only way to make a threat? You just said above that it isn't, so explain to me how threatening that a person is going to go to hell is not a threat.

quote:

---

quote:

---

You place too much importance on your own existance[sic].

---

​

Huh? I think I'll be proud of that.

---

You are proud of being wrong?No wonder we have issues....------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

You are a broken record.Huh? Where are they demanding?Catholics don't represent what I believe.I don't care what Mother Theresa did, if I did it wouldn't matter you provide no evidence for your claims like usual.I said it all before, christians are providing a warning etc etc.------------------
-chris

I think that the big issue here is perspective. I didn't use to understand why fundies were so aggressive at prosthletizing, until one of my friends described how a fundie put it to her:"It's like seing someone inside a burning house, and shouting 'Get out! You need to get out now!' and the other person just gets annoyed, insisting that there is no fire."They "see a fire" - and they also at the same time are commanded to "save people from the fire". It seems to them like a completely kind act, and there's not going to be persuading them otherwise.On the other hand, Messenjah, you have to understand likewise how this appears to a non-Christian. To put it to you, it's as if one of your friends constantly tried to persuade you not to drink ( insert something you like to drink here ), insisting that tiny aliens inside it are going to make you spontaneously catch on fire some time down the road. You'll get annoyed with that person very fast if they keep it up. From your perspective, that person is completely delusional. Now, picture a worse situation: what if that person had something you needed? What if the person was in charge of food aid and your family was starving, or was the sole provider of an accessable education for your children? The situation becomes all the more a frustrating imposition.It's all about perspective.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

It is all about perspective but your example sucks. A christian isn't delusional by the way. Christians take pride in being radical for Jesus. The things that Rrhain is suggesting is what I am arguing.