Epochalypse

Members
  • Content Count

    3,407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

About Epochalypse

  • Rank
    The Role Player

Profile Information

  • Location
    Gainesville, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm pretty sure my Bible makes no mention of God's inability to overcome public healthcare.
  2. So the solution is to look down your nose at all Christians. Makes sense. Not hypocritical in any way. Edit: this is sarcasm.
  3. In case you didn't have enough to worry about, here's something else to consider... Because the Trumpsters think it's a hoax they're going out and will be among the largest initial groups infected. They'll also be the first treated, which means they may have the best chances of recovering before the medical facilities get overwhelmed and run out of supplies and/or vaccine. *exit stage left*
  4. Unfortunately I have some local news. Received a letter from my son's school that one of the student's parents is self-quarantining after discovering they came into contact with a person infected with the coronavirus. My son's school is in Prince William County. My wife teaches at a school in Fairfax County and she said they are being trained Monday to teach from home.
  5. I agree with you in large part but there are Christians like myself that are calling it out, but they are not getting credit, are getting drowned out, or not getting the coverage they need because it's not a trendy narrative, or frankly because there are always bigger news stories with this current administration. The other issue is that the current political clime doesn't allow for rational discourse. Everything is all one side or the other. If you are a democrat, you want to take everyone's guns. If you are a republican you are a racist. If you are a Christian you are a hypocrite. This binning, or categorization of people is what allows racism and sexism and hate of all types to exist because it places a significant line in the sand that people can use to immediately decide who you are and what you believe. As long as I and like-minded Christians are binned with the "Christians", the ranks of Christians that feel compelled to side with Trump will be larger than they deserve to be, because rational Christians are stuck between the distaste they have for Trump or the abuse and hatred they get from the other side for their most important beliefs. I am literally on here expressing my disgust with Trump and getting attacked anyway. A better tact would be welcoming every Christian that finally sees the light and recognizes that Trump does not equal Christians, by not attacking their religion and faith but rather pointing out the real problem, Trump and his cohorts. As long as Christians are getting attacked, it fuels the accusations corrupt church leaders use to make the argument. Take the ISIS way. ISIS seems to think if they just hate you enough you'll eventually come around to their way of thinking. How many of you are jumping on the ISIS bandwagon? Probably not a lot, because believing that hating and abusing someone enough that at some point they agree with you is a flawed plan. But if you respect their beliefs and focus on where the disconnects are between Trump and Jesus' teachings, your chances of taking that support from the Republican side is significantly damaged. Thank you. I apologize as well and for my part, I will also be more selective in my wording to avoid further negative interactions. I hope you realize my goal here is to improve our chances of making Trump a one-term president.
  6. So to take this further, it would be perfectly appropriate for black people to label all white people racists so long as the ones they know are. I'm glad the vast majority of black people don't hold this same view. Again, please stop binning people.
  7. You do realize people have the ability to read both your and my posts, right? Do you feel that they would agree with this conclusion based on the narrative we've each presented and the way it was presented? That's a rhetorical question, just to clarify.
  8. Perhaps I should have used conservative instead of Republican. And if that is the case, if you were a conservative and then recognized the Republican party was drifting away from conservatism, it made sense to leave the Republican party because they no longer were acting according to what they were saying they believed. But your personal core beliefs are what remained. They weren't tied to the party nomenclature, they were tied to your beliefs. Leaving a party affiliation is one thing, leaving your entire belief system is another. The problem is there is no separation being provided to Christians from "Christians" as there may be forming between conservatives and Republicans. Which goes back to my post that kicked off this latest round of discussion. I still believe and do my best to love my neighbor, heal the sick, help the poor, welcome the foreigner, etc. But outside of starting my own church, I'm left with attending a church that best aligns with my views. It would be the same challenge as conservatives trying to create a new political party. They would face opposition from both sides. I'm guessing John Kasich and Bill Weld would love for all Republicans to stop kowtowing to Trump, but it's not that simple. Doesn't mean they should give up what they believe. Also, you keep pushing this idea that followers dictate what the leader or group are. By definition that is not the case; they are followers. They may branch off and corrupt or reinterpret for their own devices (at which point they cease to be followers and become leaders of their own sect) what Christianity means to them but Christianity as originally intended does not change, even if it reaches to the extreme case that not a single person follows the original teachings. If I tell my followers not to lie, and they go out and lie, you can't make the case that I was wrong to teach people to not lie. You also can't say that I now said that lying is acceptable. Anyway, I'm getting wordy again so I'll stop there.
  9. Then from a gun rights activist view, you don't see at least some parallel with having a very large portion of folks in said "peer" group that you find are doing significant damage to what should be the message of your personal stance? That said situation makes it important to separate the overall message of gun rights from what the recognized figureheads of gun rights may be proposing?
  10. To build on this, I would make the argument that Buttigieg better exemplifies Christian values than Trump. And Pence for that matter.
  11. I looked at your first post. You said: 'Denying that but calling it disappointing is major cop out and wont convince anyone who is not already indoctrinated unfortunately." and in follow up posts you said: "So then you ran in here like a holy white knight..." "you need to get your holy undies out of a bunch" Where would I get the idea that you were attacking me? /sarcasm just to be clear. And I appreciate you not unleashing your full capability to be a dick on me, but good to know you have that in you. Again, /sarcasm. As for your line 'I was expressing my frustration with your religion and the leaders of it, not you" that is a cop out. You're a Republican and a gun rights supporter aren't you?
  12. To your first question, God ultimately. And I would agree with you that there are likely a large majority that would label me a false Christian, and I recognize that they put just as much stock in my view of them as I do in theirs, because again see my first sentence here. Another analogy if it would help, democrats. Republicans will sit there and say democrats hate America, that democrats want to hand out free stuff, that democrats want to destroy capitalism and turn America into Venezuela, turn their children into homosexuals, take away their guns and so on and so on. None of that is true for all democrats. In fact none of that is true for most democrats. But you can't deny there are democrats who espouse all that. There are democrats within the party who call out that section of their party, but it fails to change their view and on the other side falls on the deaf ears of republicans who claim that all democrats think that. Is the problem the democratic party? I'd argue no, every faction has different views within. But does in this analogy the democratic party have a problem? Yes, and one that is just as hard to fix as the one Christianity faces. I'd argue Christianity's is more difficult but that is y own opinion. I agree with you that Trumpian Christians are almost cult-like in their behavior and anyone who has tried to reason with one has probably had just as much success as I have had in making them see the errors I believe exist. But if I can accomplish anything with my occasional posts, it is to separate Christianity from the actions of a very considerable portion of those who call themselves Christians. It is what I imagine any of you would try to do if faced with foreigners who point and say "all Americans are like Trump". You still hold the idea of what America used to stand for in high regard and want to make clear that what is going on right now and being perpetrated by a significant number of Americans does not reflect America as it can be or even each of you as individuals. I get that it is easy to immediately categorize people into groups and they become the de facto representatives for that group. Works very well for Trump, with his all Mexicans are rapists type of narrative. It's designed to compartmentalize everyone in such a way as there is no overlap of ties. You are for or against. I'll stop there since I see some other posts piling up.
  13. As my first post in this recent round of discussion shows, I was specifically responding to the meme Sisko posted that implies that Christians do not practice what they preach. My response was to highlight that is true, but to clarify that what they preach, in the meme provided, are actually good values to adhere to. If anyone was running in here in the manner you describe it was you who immediately followed attacking my clarification with a broad argument that no one was doing the very thing I just showed up to do and was doing in follow on posts. As far as the "holier than thou Christianity rules super sarcasm thing", there was none intended in my last post. If you found some, you had already made that decision yourself that it existed. And for someone who seems to be implying they are turned off by sarcasm, you seem to use it quite liberally. Note, the preceding sentence was indeed sarcasm.
  14. Christianity has a problem. It is not the problem. I hope that alleviates your confusion.
  15. I think I'll just politely disagree. But hey, if false arguments have got you this far in life, you do you.