The Absolute Best Reason to Vote for Romney

I freely ignore anyone who says that you need to be a Trinitarian to be a Christian, even if billions of people would agree with them and that leaves VRCW and I in a minority of two.

Who's saying you need to be a Trinitarian to be a Christian? What about Arius?
 
Pretty much any Trinitarian really. You know how it goes - many people can't be religious it seems without coming up with ways to point out why others aren't following their religion correctly.
 
Pretty much any Trinitarian really. You know how it goes - many people can't be religious it seems without coming up with ways to point out why others aren't following their religion correctly.

Well they want unity, you can't blame them for that, that's why I never go into exactly what I believe it's just divisive. It's best to present a united front to moral decay, otherwise others just use it too divide us.
I mean look at what Marx wrote about religion he wanted to destroy it completely, what with it being a direct competitor to his own belief system.
 
If you believe in god, believe Jesus is the son of god and was sent to earth to be our savior, that pretty much the whole of what it takes to be a Christian.

Not exactly for even Satan and his minions believe this, and yet it would be hugely incorrect to label them 'Christians' as such.

At least you're not guilty of the self-righteous streak all self-denominated 'good Christians' are guilty of ;)

Good thing I dont claim to be 'good' then.
 
Self-identify?
As if that's the only thing he's done to make him a Christian? He's been baptised, chose the religion over his fathers (and his mom wasn't particularly religious and even remarried another Muslim IIRC) and went/does go to church regularly.

WTH does it take Quackers to convince you he's a Christian? He's got the fundamentals covered.

I really, really, really dislike the line of thinking that if a politician chooses to follow the constitution and tries to keep explicit religion out of his politics that this makes him non-Christian. By this logic, David Cameron and Margaret Thatcher were militant atheists.

I actually don't think you're being honest here, you're just trying to troll Obama fans. And it's working - I'm pissed at you right about now.
/rant

Dude I'm not criticising Obama or anything. Chill out. Where did I ever mention Obama?

I stated that if you want to be considered a Christian you probably have to believe in a few basic fundamentals. Whats so outrageous about that?
 
The sheer thought of her actually going forward on this promise should drive people to vote for Mitt in droves.
Prudish much?

Nope. I aint going to budge to vote for a man who does not give a flying loogie about the lower classes.
 
Not exactly for even Satan and his minions believe this, and yet it would be hugely incorrect to label them 'Christians' as such.
Why's that?

I mean look at what Marx wrote about religion he wanted to destroy it completely, what with it being a direct competitor to his own belief system.
Do you have a citation for this? I'll admit to not having studied Marx's religious commentary in much detail, but I'd be interested to chase this up. I think that you can a lot of the MEW online now, or at least most of the notebooks- if it's from his correspondence it may be a bit more hit-and-miss- so I tracking it down hopefully won't be much trouble. (Maybe you have a link? Or are you working from hard copy?) Some of it might be untranslated, and you can never quite trust online translators when you're dealing with the sort of ambiguous, philosophical language we're talking about, but I should be able to get the jist of it.
 
I stated that if you want to be considered a Christian you probably have to believe in a few basic fundamentals. Whats so outrageous about that?

As an atheist I really can't agree enough.

I'm tired of criticizing X, Y, or Z about Christianity just to have some punk say "Well, I'm an Evolutionist Unitarian Universalist who believes all religions, including 'none,' lead to heaven which is, of course, a state of mind and not an actual place blah blah blah blah."

It's like swinging a sword at mist, I swear :lol:
 
Hey, I get the same thing with Atheists. "Just because I'm an athiest doesn't mean I'm a materialist, or an existentialist, or a monist..."
 
Good thing I dont claim to be 'good' then.
That is indeed a good thing.

I wasn't talking about you there anyway. You have other issues.

What is your take on my definition by the way? It definetly excludes satan.
I stated that if you want to be considered a Christian you probably have to believe in a few basic fundamentals.
And I asked which ones.
 
As an atheist I really can't agree enough.

I'm tired of criticizing X, Y, or Z about Christianity just to have some punk say "Well, I'm an Evolutionist Unitarian Universalist who believes all religions, including 'none,' lead to heaven which is, of course, a state of mind and not an actual place blah blah blah blah."

It's like swinging a sword at mist, I swear :lol:

But wait. That's pretty much what I do think.

Oh dear.
 
And I asked which ones.

Well I don't have a exceptional understanding of christian theology; it was more of a general point to just say we need a definition what constitutes a Christian otherwise it's useless. I will play your game though, I would guess that a belief in God is the best start, followed by a belief that Christ was Divine (son of god, is god along those lines), that he was ressurected after he "died". There are probably a fair few others but your guess is mine.
 
Yeah, to be a Christian, you have to believe that a guy suffering the fate of every human (death) was somehow a great sacrifice and also believe he got a better end of that "sacrifice" (quick ressurection) than every other human.
 
, I would guess that a belief in God is the best start, followed by a belief that Christ was Divine (son of god, is god along those lines), that he was ressurected after he "died". There are probably a fair few others but your guess is mine.

This is close. But I'd go with:
1) Belief in God.
2) Loving thy neighbour as thyself.

Apparently 1) and 2) are much the same. YMMV.

I don't know what either of them means, mind you.
 
Have you heard of an eye for and eye and tooth for a tooth? If you have then you are referring to punishment happening upon those who have caused harm to an unborn child in the Bible. So much so that if the child is stillborn, i.e. dead, then death would be prescribed the individual that caused the harm. There are many other such passages that show that God refers unborn children as valid members of humanity.

Erm, the eye for an eye quote is supposed to be against disproportional punishments not for them.
 
Back
Top Bottom