This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

What would Jesus's opinion be on MMA?

#71OrangeWizardPosted 3/22/2013 12:05:57 PM
From: JonWood007 | #070
You're missing the point.


You're worming out of conceding that you were wrong.

They were nonviolent when they actually followed the teachings of Jesus.


They weren't often put in situations where violence was ever necessary, so I don't see how you can even say this.
You have no point of reference to base this off of.

It's like observing a guy who lives all alone in the mountains and claiming that he's a pacifist. You can't know whether he is or not, because there's no opportunity for him to defend himself. Bears don't count.

Nothing you won't invade with your pseudologic and flat out denial of the facts.


Well, if you see anything pseudo about my logic, why don't you call me out on it, and destroy me with your real logic?

How someone can be scared of a faulty argument, I'll never know.
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.
#72Burning_WolfXPosted 3/23/2013 10:18:02 PM
bratt100 posted...
LastManStanding posted...
Martial arts, most of them if not all of them, contain occultism which is demonic.


No.


^This.
---
Sometimes I'd like to ask God why He allows poverty, suffering, and injustice when He could do something about it. But Im afraid He'd ask me the same thing.
#73darklaoPosted 3/24/2013 8:29:49 PM
The lesson I always took from the life of Christ is that violence against people is not cool, but if you want to trash the place of business of somebody who is sinning, then you go crazy.
---
[agitprop]
come and play come and play forget about the movement
#74JonWood007Posted 3/24/2013 10:08:32 PM
You're worming out of conceding that you were wrong.


When they actually did what jesus told them, they were not violent. The one violent action you pointed out, Jesus chastised him for it. He wasn't doing what Jesus would've wanted there. How am I wrong?

They weren't often put in situations where violence was ever necessary, so I don't see how you can even say this.
You have no point of reference to base this off of.


Except they went town to town presenting the gospel and facing an incredible amount of hostility in doing so.



Well, if you see anything pseudo about my logic, why don't you call me out on it, and destroy me with your real logic?

How someone can be scared of a faulty argument, I'll never know.


http://www.evolvefish.com/fish/media/G-ToArgueReasonPaineLG.gif

You seem immune to real logic.
---
Desktop: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/K6Pj
Laptop: http://us.gateway.com/gw/en/US/content/model/LX.WY202.001
#75TheRealJiraiyaPosted 3/24/2013 10:19:34 PM
darklao posted...
The lesson I always took from the life of Christ is that violence against people is not cool, but if you want to trash the place of business of somebody who is sinning, then you go crazy.


The idea that the Temple was a place of business was kind of the part that made him angry.

He spent a lot of his ministry ranting and raving about corrupt and pompous religious leaders taking advantage of the people and lifting themselves up above them. This was part of that message, and its a message most atheists would probably love for modern Christians to get, so its weird that its complained about.
---
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato
http://tinyurl.com/JoinThisIRunIt
#76darklaoPosted 3/24/2013 10:55:16 PM
No, I choose to interpret it more generally as license to engage in violence against the property of evil doers.
---
[agitprop]
come and play come and play forget about the movement
#77PatriotwolfPosted 3/24/2013 11:19:15 PM
darklao posted...
No, I choose to interpret it more generally as license to engage in violence against the property of evil doers.


Except that interpretation would contradict other teachings of Jesus
---
"You're just one big headache, and I got a pistol full of aspirin"
"Who cares if you screw others?"-1337toothbrush
#78bratt100Posted 3/25/2013 1:22:26 AM
Patriotwolf posted...
darklao posted...
No, I choose to interpret it more generally as license to engage in violence against the property of evil doers.


Except that interpretation would contradict other teachings of Jesus


That hasn't stopped anybody in the past.
---
"If the victim was a mute, then she shouldn't really be out alone."- OrangeWizard on rape
#79darklaoPosted 3/25/2013 2:25:21 AM
Even if you wanted to interpret it conservatively, it pretty much allows violence against the relevant money-making property of anybody who is profiting off of religion. So not a church itself, but certainly anybody who is merely paying lip service to Christian values in order to gain money or political power or both would be fair game in terms of destruction of their money-making property. Like say the U.S. Republican party.

Either that or Jesus sinned in anger. But since that's impossible, clearly it's not a sin and in fact a good thing to destroy the property of these parasites.
---
[agitprop]
come and play come and play forget about the movement
#80OrangeWizardPosted 3/25/2013 3:40:56 AM
From: JonWood007 | #071
When they actually did what jesus told them, they were not violent.


Because Jesus never told them to do anything violent.
If the opportunity for violence never arose, how can you say for certain that these people were pacifists?
Even if the opportunity for violence did arise and they decided not to take part, how can you say that these people were pacifists?

You can't. It's time you realized this. You have no basis on which to say they were pacifists.

If I am offered milk and don't drink it, it doesn't mean I am lactose intolerant.

Except they went town to town presenting the gospel and facing an incredible amount of hostility in doing so.


Yeah, they did. So?

I could go to a dairy festival and not eat anything, but that still doesn't mean I am lactose intolerant.

http://www.evolvefish.com/fish/media/G-ToArgueReasonPaineLG.gif

You seem immune to real logic.


Ahh, the common death-cry of a horrible debater
"YOU'RE JUST CRAZY, THAT'S WHY MY ABSOLUTE TRUTHS AREN'T GETTING THROUGH TO YOU"
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive things.