learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 16, 2024 5:05 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 15, 2024 11:11 pm

learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:48 pm

Of course God has more to offer, even the way of salvation, which leads to the eternal life. However, just the fear of God should make people consider their motives.

Why should I consider my motives in the face of someone whose main motivation is that of fear? How is that any different from a child, who obeys their abusive father to avoid being beaten?

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever. -- Psalm 111:10

The fear of the Lord just makes you do it.

Well screw you and screw him; I won't.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 15, 2024 11:11 pm

learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:48 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 14, 2024 11:27 am

You think God is loving, but you think the only way to make people behave is to have them be terrified of him.

Of course God has more to offer, even the way of salvation, which leads to the eternal life. However, just the fear of God should make people consider their motives.

Why should I consider my motives in the face of someone whose main motivation is that of fear? How is that any different from a child, who obeys their abusive father to avoid being beaten?

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever. -- Psalm 111:10

The fear of the Lord just makes you do it.

If your "God" was real, and was as described in scripture, I would hate him. He is a capricious despot. His demands are self-serving, his works are inconsistent, his lessons are unjust.

Fuck "Him". I feel assurance and satisfaction in my conclusion that there is no such fucking thing.

learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:48 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 14, 2024 11:27 am

You think God is loving, but you think the only way to make people behave is to have them be terrified of him.

Of course God has more to offer, even the way of salvation, which leads to the eternal life. However, just the fear of God should make people consider their motives.

Why?

Why should I consider my motives in the face of someone whose main motivation is that of fear? How is that any different from a child, who obeys their abusive father to avoid being beaten? For me, the right thing to do is to rise up and overthrow such an abuser. Christianity thinks otherwise because it is a centuries-outdated philosophy based on the worship of a violent, paternal, father figure.

The imaginary God you idolise is a violent, abusive parent who rules through fear and pain. It is just as well "he" does not exist.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 14, 2024 11:27 am

You think God is loving, but you think the only way to make people behave is to have them be terrified of him.

Of course God has more to offer, even the way of salvation, which leads to the eternal life. However, just the fear of God should make people consider their motives.

Esquire Bertissimmo wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 14, 2024 3:09 pm

Hamas members are amongst the most God fearing people on earth lol, doesn't seem to be helping.

Source?

I'm not claiming that Christians are perfect, I've never claimed that. I'm not saying that Christian nations are pacifist either. I also find it highly unlikely that those in the Middle East would ever concert to Christianity.

However, I do believe that Christianity tends a nation towards less violence, and indeed less war. I've found a couple of studies on this, when I have more than 30 seconds to write I'll find them and paste them in here. I've done so before, I think in this very thread, but so far back that I'll not make you find them again.

Fritz you must see how dumb Slot's argument is too.

Christian majority nations have never been pacifist. Your contention always seems to be "well they aren't *real* Christians", a cop out that only underscores how poor of a path to peace religiosity is.

Well, one religion is wrong, I guess they all must be!

What a silly argument lol.

Hamas members are amongst the most God fearing people on earth lol, doesn't seem to be helping.

I have to admit that the whole God fearing philosophy is somewhat alien to me. I guess you could fear God in much the same way as you can fear the sea or a storm. It's not out to get you, but it is inherently powerful and not what you can call "safe". But I can't say I ever have.

Still, so far so good. It was a significant attack but, unless Iranian power is considerably less than we've been led to believe, not designed to inflict massive pain. We get a good demonstration of Israeli defensive capability and allied unity, which will hopefully act as a deterrent for future actions. The flag waving lunatic brigade in Iran seem to be satisfied and are celebrating (which I find genuinely mystifying, but gift horses and mouths and all that).

One thing that has become apparent, in both Israel and Ukraine, is that missiles are a lot less effective than public perception would have you believe

learnedSloth wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 14, 2024 7:28 am

CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:51 pm

I want world peace and the end of all wars forever, for what it's worth.

So do I, and I see only one way to it, as there will be wars at least as long as people fear one another more than God.

You think God is loving, but you think the only way to make people behave is to have them be terrified of him. Sounds pretty abusive.

CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:51 pm

I want world peace and the end of all wars forever, for what it's worth.

So do I, and I see only one way to it, as there will be wars at least as long as people fear one another more than God.

I want world peace and the end of all wars forever, for what it's worth.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:29 pm

I was quoting the BBC. Yes, clearly Iran are using the Damascus strike as justification for this. What are find surprising is that you seem to agree with them in that this is a proportionate response to that strike rather than a reckless escalation.

Frankly I would like the disgusting, chauvinistic, militaristic leaders of both countries to fuck off. I would like there to be no war. I would like humans, and in particular, senior political leaders, to emphasise the value of peace over almost all other considerations.

I was quoting the BBC. Yes, clearly Iran are using the Damascus strike as justification for this. What are find surprising is that you seem to agree with them in that this is a proportionate response to that strike rather than a reckless escalation.

Time will tell. Best case scenario is that Iran have deliberately sent forth a few dozen targets for the IDF to shoot down at their leisure, in an attempt to convince their hardliners that they're taking firm action without actually doing anything. But I have to be feeling very optimistic to believe that

For the sake of clarity:

I am not a supporter of the current regime in Iran, which is responsible for the violent repression of peaceful protest in its country, and which displays widespread institutional repression of the rights of women and girls, and other serious human rights violations.

I just think that Israel's decision to bomb the Iranian embassy in Damascus, at this particular time of instability and violence in the region, is the act which has prompted this response.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:00 pm

Iran and Israel have been taking shots at each other for some time. Isolating that particular attack as the reason for tonight's action seems rather bizarre. A direct and large scale attack by Iran against the Israeli homeland is a very significant escalation and calling it reckless is a massive understatement

You called it "a reprisal attack". What did you think it was a reprisal for, when you wrote that?

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:00 pm

Iran and Israel have been taking shots at each other for some time. Isolating that particular attack as the reason for tonight's action seems rather bizarre. A direct and large scale attack by Iran against the Israeli homeland is a very significant escalation and calling it reckless is a massive understatement

I'm not sure how much we accurately know about the scale of the attack yet. I'm watching the live BBC reporting and they don't appear certain. Is it a dozen drones that Israel will easily shoot down? Or is it an enormous barrage of drones and missiles that will cause widespread damage and casualties?

Really hoping this is just tit-for-tat from Iran and/or a superficial show of support for Palestinians.

A hot war between Israel and Iran would immediately involve great powers. Israel has nukes. There's a reason Iran normally takes its shots at Israel through proxies. A direct attack is the definition of reckless when you're the side that would lose in a broader conflict.

The "it's Israel's own fault" narrative is extraordinarily one-sided. Who funded the terror group behind October 7? Who funds Hezbollah? Obviously Israel has gotten spicy too, but how anyone can look at this situation and say definitively that one side started it?

Maybe you think Israel deserves to be attacked by Iran for its war crimes, but upon what moral authority does Iran get to be the nation that dish out this punishment? If that's really the way the world should work then the West should be drone attacking Iran right now for supporting terrorism, suppressing women and gays, etc.

Iran and Israel have been taking shots at each other for some time. Isolating that particular attack as the reason for tonight's action seems rather bizarre. A direct and large scale attack by Iran against the Israeli homeland is a very significant escalation and calling it reckless is a massive understatement