Btw whether you are a christian or not, if you don't accept Jesus' payment for your sins, you will have to pay for them yourself in the lake of fire forever
No offense, but this kind of rhetoric is one of the reasons people become atheists, or at least stop being religious. It sounds like a threat(I know thats not your intention) and trying to convert through fear.
No offense, but this kind of rhetoric is one of the reasons people become atheists, or at least stop being religious. It sounds like a threat(I know thats not your intention) and trying to convert through fear.
And this should be enough reason for him to ignore his beliefs in order to save others?
Yea people have different believes but those believes also says that we should help the others to get into the right way. If you deny this from them you are not respecting them.
As long they are not forcing you into anything there is nothing wrong with them saying this. After all is their belief.
And this should be enough reason for him to ignore his beliefs in order to save others?
Yea people have different believes but those believes also says that we should help the others to get into the right way. If you deny this from them you are not respecting them.
As long they are not forcing you into anything there is nothing wrong with them saying this. After all is their belief.
No offense, but this kind of rhetoric is one of the reasons people become atheists, or at least stop being religious. It sounds like a threat(I know thats not your intention) and trying to convert through fear.
Well better hell-scared than hell-scorched. But salvation is a one time free thing that you can't lose, it's not an invitation to join a religion necesarilly, just to trust in Jesus to save you, and if you do trust him to save you, 1 John 5:13 says God wants you to know that you have eternal life, so there would be no reason to fear, I'm not afraid of going to hell because I trusted Jesus to save me and he did, so I'm saved and that's that.
And I mean I heard that but the Bible says this:
.
John 3:19-21
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
.
I heard Jesus preached the most about hell in the Bible, that nobody preached about it more than him, and this is what he said the condemnation is ^
Well can people from other religions tell you that their book tells them where they're going when they die?
The Bible is the only book that says it, the rest is just trying to get to heaven, with no confirmation, other beliefs don't know where they're going when they die, I know because God wrote it down in his word, and Jesus is the only one that's trust-worthy, because he died and was dead for three days and rose again
2 Timothy 1:12
For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.
1 John 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Suddenly the world remembered that there were Israeli hostages taken by Hamas that was the whole purpose the war began and that Israel removed their troops from Palestine in order to seek peace like they always do and that Hamas was always the problem and never Israel.
But hey no one will call Greta Thunberg a nazi for what she did even after being exposed all that corrupted system by a spy.
If you're talking about preaching, I don't know about preaching with mics on the street, but I think plenty of people received salvation because of that
Btw whether you are a christian or not, if you don't accept Jesus' payment for your sins, you will have to pay for them yourself in the lake of fire forever
pretty sure the ceasefire agreement also has 0 land swaps or guarantees from israel. This is just another step away from a palestinian state so I can see why people would be angry at this particular agreement
but tbf if you were ecstatic about the oct 7th "resistance" you have no grounds to bitch about this.
@Logiko I don't know if you called christianity idealism, but I don't know why some people call it that, I was listening to preaching today and it was debunking the idea that it's all in your mind and "mind over matter"
Post automatically merged: Sunday at 3:26 PM
I'm reading a book about the revolutions of 1848 and this part is pretty interesting to share here:
"Socialist ideals and workers movement
As in Britain, the rise of industry also saw the rise of socialist ideas and a labour movement. This saw the transformed working class increasingly called the “proletariat” by most socialists at the time, but it must be stressed that this was in a pre-Marxist way as industry was not widespread (even if its impact – particularly via competition with Britain – was).
As social conditions changed, so did ideas. Associationism started to grow within the working class alongside strikes and unions, both were illegal and so many “mutual aid” groupings were also “resistance societies.” Yet workers did more than just survive or resist, they hoped for a better future. Faced with the rise of wage-labour, the idea of Associationism – co-operation – was raised by the workers themselves in 1830 as alternative (first by printers, then by other groups of workers). This was reflected in many works, including early feminist Flora Tristan’s The Workers’ Union (1843) as well as in practice, such as the “mutualist” societies of the militant artisans of Lyons.
As in Britain, what was latter termed Utopian Socialism arose during the 1820s and 1830s. This was focused around a few critics of current society (notably Fourier and Saint-Simon) who urged the creation of ideal communities to present an example the rest of society would follow. These thinkers were influential but fundamentally authoritarian in both tactics and aims. The followers of Fourier and Saint-Simon participated in the revolution, along with Cabet and his Icarians – named after his famous utopian novel Voyage to Icaria (1840).
Then there were the Insurrectionists (Blanqui and Barbès) who aimed at the seizure of power by coup de main, followed by the “dictatorship of proletariat” as rule of insurrectionists.
The most influential at the time were the Jacobin-Socialists, which combined French Republicanism with a programme of state-aid to workers associations. As expounded by Louis Blanc in his Organisation of Labour (1839), competition from these workers association – social workshops (ateliers sociaux) – would drive private industry out of business, eventually replacing competition with state planning. However, as a reformist he saw this as benefiting all classes and so all classes – as citizens of the republic – would be involved in the organisation of labour.
Finally, there was Mutualist-Anarchism as advocated by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (he picked up the term mutualist while staying in Lyons in the early 1840s). Unlike the other socialist thinkers, he was working class (forced to leave school to become a printer by trade). Proudhon is essentially a critic of the current system, with alternatives sketched in passing in such works as What is Property? (Three memoirs – 1840, 1841 and 1842) and System of Economic Contradictions (1848). He opposed both capitalism and what he termed “Community,” namely the visions of the utopian socialists. Instead, he advocated “universal association” – a form of market socialism based on workers control of production. Likewise, he opposed Blanc’s ideas as well as what passed at the time for “communism” (rightly so, as Kropotkin later said). In spite of invoking the term “revolution” all the time, he was fundamentally a reformist and saw the organisation of credit as the means to the organisation of labour (i.e., a federated system of workers’ producer, credit and consumer co-operatives)
So by 1848 there were both a workers’ movement and socialist ideas: authoritarian and libertarian, revolutionary and reformist. This meant that any revolution would inevitably bring these aspirations into conflict with existing system. This was expressed during 1848 between the Republic and what radicals called the “Social and Democratic Republic” (la République démocratique et sociale), between a political (bourgeois) revolution and a social revolution. "
@RyoQ what I mentioned about authoritarian and libertarian socialists ^
Also @Logiko Blanqui namedrop in the middle, who Anark and Rosa Luxembourg said inspired Lenin, if you remember his name from a meme I shared before
Post automatically merged: Sunday at 3:45 PM
And seeing what Blanqui wanted, it makes sense Lenin would refuse to be associated with him, if he didn't it would confirm his fraud and the fraud of authoritarian socialists, who want their party to take the role of the capitalists, and rule, not to actually give people ownership of the means of production
I'm sorry, I'm sure you said a lot of very interesting things here, but my mind is not able to focus at the moment on long stuff. Can you make a TLDR for me please ?
@Logiko I don't know if you called christianity idealism, but I don't know why some people call it that, I was listening to preaching today and it was debunking the idea that it's all in your mind and "mind over matter"
As for Religion being idealist.. sadly yeah.. I really do not see how it can be anything else... While I think it can have a few materialistic idea, the way the world is understood through religion is idealist. It's a focus on behavior first and not really systems.
There were people who were actually concerned about Gaza and I take no issue with them. But most people on their "side" were either extreme leftists or anti-semites.
Stop watching far right news. You are confusing leftist with liberals and conservatist and invent nonsensical number to justify a lack of interest that do not exist. There is no celebration because there is no win. There was a genocide and the ceasefire will end no appartheid, no colonization and no oppression. So while we are glad there is a cease fire, we are FAR from happy, we are enraged.
Well better hell-scared than hell-scorched. But salvation is a one time free thing that you can't lose, it's not an invitation to join a religion necesarilly, just to trust in Jesus to save you, and if you do trust him to save you, 1 John 5:13 says God wants you to know that you have eternal life, so there would be no reason to fear, I'm not afraid of going to hell because I trusted Jesus to save me and he did, so I'm saved and that's that.
And I mean I heard that but the Bible says this:
.
John 3:19-21
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
.
I heard Jesus preached the most about hell in the Bible, that nobody preached about it more than him, and this is what he said the condemnation is ^
Post automatically merged:
Well can people from other religions tell you that their book tells them where they're going when they die?
The Bible is the only book that says it, the rest is just trying to get to heaven, with no confirmation, other beliefs don't know where they're going when they die, I know because God wrote it down in his word, and Jesus is the only one that's trust-worthy, because he died and was dead for three days and rose again
2 Timothy 1:12
For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.
1 John 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Because it is a signed agreement. Although I don't understand why instead of giving money they simply don't just give the weapons. Probably some corruption scheme must be going on.
But there are many benefits for US to do so. US is the bigger country. They'd hardly have an agreement that benefits more the other country than it's own by the simple fact that the other country is the most interested part.
Similar to a job. Your boss pay you let's say 100 per hour and you make for them 200. It's a better deal for your boss but you are the most interested in that deal.
US benefits with Israel influence at Middle East plus testing all those newly weapons for US and keeping the weapon industry alive. Plus all the intelligence from Middle East that benefits US to prevents things like 9/11 to really happen (because it was inside job).
Of course as tax payer, and more importantly as a voter, you can be against it but at least know why such thing exist. And also that Obama was the last one to update the contract that exists since 70s. And since it was a 10 year contract I believe Trump will be the next one to update it? So it is basically sure that for another 10 years US will still support Israel.
I will happily take a proselytizing Christian zealot with good intentions every day of the week over the racist/homophobic/otherwise bigoted piece of shit MAGAts who routinely infect this thread, just my two cents
You will talk about the truth when you will be interested learning about reality. That's not what you do. So, reflect when your only reply to love is hate.
You will talk about the truth when you will be interested learning about reality. That's not what you do. So, reflect when your only reply to love is hate.
Proposition : "Anti-white racism doesn't exist but racism against people who are white exists even though it's not based on their skin color"
Examples : Whites and not a western colonizer but from North-Africa or the Middle-East (or really from lots of different places).
Name : Cultural racism ? Xenophobia ? Racism "but no racial profiling" ?
Axiology next to "classical racism" : Is it systemic racism ? Yes it is even though it doesn't work very well for racial profiling.
Far-right is excluded from the debate. Only intellectuals are allowed
I will happily take a proselytizing Christian zealot with good intentions every day of the week over the racist/homophobic/otherwise bigoted piece of shit MAGAts who routinely infect this thread, just my two cents
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.