skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Akhhorus so, if Hitler liked something then we shouldnt? Bin Laden loves to drink Pepsi, so should we all stop drinking it? Yes, you should stop drinking Pepsi. It has the same affect on Bin Laden that Nietzsche had on Hitler. Let's stay somewhat intelligent here, ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 Wasn't Hitler a lover of Nietzche's writings? Didn't he say, "God is dead"? Seems to me that God is quite alive. As alive as He ever was. If He were dead then He wouldn't still cause such an uproar in the news on almost a daily basis. Why should right be updated? Right is right is right, right? Hitler liked Nietzsche idea of the overman, he interpreted it to mean a race of supermen, which really has nothing to do with Nietzsche. Nietzsche does not even mention race in any of his writings as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 Yes, you should stop drinking Pepsi. It has the same affect on Bin Laden that Nietzsche had on Hitler. Let's stay somewhat intelligent here, ok? Follow your own advice please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty Follow your own advice please. In what way have I put forth anything unintelligent or frivolous? You may not agree with what I say, but I'm not unclear or lacking in substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 In what way have I put forth anything unintelligent or frivolous? You may not agree with what I say, but I'm not unclear or lacking in substance. "Wasn't Hitler a lover of Nietzche's writings?" This was very unfair because it has nothing to do with what we are talkiung about, it doesn't even have anything to do with Nietzsche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty "Wasn't Hitler a lover of Nietzche's writings?" This was very unfair because it has nothing to do with what we are talkiung about, it doesn't even have anything to do with Nietzsche. That's not true. You used Nietzche to try and defend your argument. I used Hitler's love for Neitzche to give everyone an idea of the kind of person who might be influenced by such writings. It's totally relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 That's not true. You used Nietzche to try and defend your argument. I used Hitler's love for Neitzche to give everyone an idea of the kind of person who might be influenced by such writings. It's totally relevant. Akhorrus already explained why this line of thinking should not be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty Akhorrus already explained why this line of thinking should not be used. He was wrong. When we decide to use another person's writings as a source for our own belief system, then we have to be open to that source being scrutinized. It's no different than the thousand attacks I get from guys like you and others for believing and quoting the Bible. I expect it and so should you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Stu I thought long and hard about making this post but I feel compelled to provide a different perspective that needs to be put forth. This scenario that has presented itself in this thread was the topic of conversation today between myself and a friend at work. As the very knowledgable wife of a former fellow officer (He left the Navy and become an ordained Baptist minister) I posed to her the same question. In our ecumenical moment, I was relieved to find that her understanding of Scripture supports the notion that while Christ died for ALL of our sins, God and only God will be the judge of whether an idividual has had ample opportunity to be truly exposed to and accepted the message of Christ as our Savior. So there is at least one (and most likely two) Baptists that disagree with the alternate notion being put forth here. So much for being "black and white" I guess. Now I am not saying that the message of choosing Christ is not in the New Testament. Far from it. And I strongly urge all to honestly read of the Bible and consider the message being put forth as there are serious ramifications. God does love us and wants us to be with Him. He also want us to choose Him of our own free will in the same way that our children run to us for love and affection. His ways are not just arbitrary laws but rather tenets for living a healthy and productive life. For those who don't want to be with God or follow His ways, He will allow that but that will be their fully informed choice. And in the end, He will just go allong with it in allowing them to choose Hell. In fact Hell is also defined as the absence of God and the pain it brings will be from that absence. For those that cannot hear the message or cannot comprehend it, God is a God of mercy and with the love that He has for His children He will treat them justly and fairly. I hardly believe that means being cast into Hell for simply being in the "wrong place" or having bad parents or such. This also doesn't mean purposely living a life of ignorance will work either. For God calls all of us in various different ways on various different levels throughout our life. As we answer those calls or learn more, then more is expected. I fully expect to be judged to higher standard than the hypothetical 16th century man because I should have known better. Just as a priest that does wrong, and we certainly had a rash of them, will be judged even harsher. (God help him.) This question of salvation outside of the Church is not new and it was discussed by the early Church as well. The views of the "Church Fathers", those who learned from the Apostles, is in line with the thought that I presented here as is Scripture if taken as a whole and not piecemeal. Once again I encourage all to seek the Lord and read the Bible. I hope and pray that the message of salvation through Christ will find fertile ground in your heart. I believe Christianity (and more so Catholicism) provides the best answer for God's plan for mankind. Has it been perfect in its application? No. Have corrupt men been involved? Yes but should that come as a surprise given the depravity of man at times. But if you went to a fat doctor because you had a heart problem and he told you to lose weight would he be wrong because he too was fat? I ask that you concentrate on the message, as put correctly, which is one of hope and salvation for mankind and not the misdeed of the Church. (I assure you those involved in those misdeeds too will be judged.) Does that message come with stipulations for the Christian and their behavior? Yes. But these are meant for our own welfare and because they are the truth I firmly believe they will survive any rational, honest survey of their validity. Evangelizing can be a difficult thing and doing it incorrectly does more harm than good as the Good News gets lost in the persona of the messenger. I rarely openly preach like this (which will probably change after I get out of the Navy as I feel a calling for the Diaconate) and rather have my demeanor and calm in life be the example of my devotion. Interestingly it has worked. Without going into great detail, I have had a good share of what could be called tragedy in my life. What has kept me the way that I am is my relationship with God. People around me have noticed this and have questioned where I get my peace and from there I usually do share with them the Good News of the risen Lord. But here is the catch, I can only be an instrument of God. I can use kind, but blunt words when talking to others. I can with charity offer both the benefits of being a Christian and ramifications of rejecting Christ. What I cannot do though is make someone believe. That has to come from inside and in response to God's own Grace working within. I realize that I am not going to fill the Church seats on this one post. But I feel it necessary to provide what I believe is a truer representation of Christianity to you all. There are many names on this board that though I don't agree with them on issues I do like discussing things with them as they usually give me pause to think. There are younger posters who have shown a desire to learn and also come up with some interesting posts as well. Does the fire of youth sometimes show? Sure does. But that is to be expected and not used as an opportunity to dimish their views outright. All of the alternative views make me better in that they make me refine my understanding of God and Christianity. Interestingly enough though, I still have the same set of beliefs but just more well thought out because of the mental exercise that those individuals put me through. I thank those people for their time and camraderie in that sense. Do I truly wish they all become Christians? You bet and I pray for it. But their polite behavior towards me warrants likewise in return. I will tell them what I think the truth is, but I will leave it between them and the Lord to work out the details. I wish God's peace on you all. wow what a post I think it was worth reading through the past 20 something pages the past hour or so (as I'm still doing right now), just to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 He was wrong. When we decide to use another person's writings as a source for our own belief system, then we have to be open to that source being scrutinized. It's no different than the thousand attacks I get from guys like you and others for believing and quoting the Bible. I expect it and so should you. If that is true I could say that about christians who kill in the name of Jesus, that wouldn't make what you believe in any more wrong would it? Even if Hitler liked Nietzsche's philosophy, and even if that mattered, Hitler still misinterpreted Nietzsche. For example Nietzsche was very much against the idea of The State, he was against nationalism and its herd mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty If that is true I could say that about christians who kill in the name of Jesus, that wouldn't make what you believe in any more wrong would it? Even if Hitler liked Nietzsche's philosophy, and even if that mattered, Hitler still misinterpreted Nietzsche. For example Nietzsche was very much against the idea of The State, he was against nationalism and its herd mentality. Do you agree with him about the State and nationalism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 Do you agree with him about the State and nationalism? I don't know yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by Liberty I don't know yet good answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Wasn't Hitler a lover of Nietzche's writings? Wasn't Mao a lover of Thomas Jefferson writings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Originally posted by luckydevil Wasn't Mao a lover of Thomas Jefferson writings? I don't know, but I'm not sure it makes the point you're trying to make. Can you document that, BTW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Originally posted by skinsfan51 Maybe you should take some time to think again about your amazing 16th century man. See how much more extreme you can make the situation so as to avoid the simple truth that God has the final say in matters of faith and practice. He owns everything--he's the Maker--and that gives him the right to make the rules. And he's not too concerned if guys like you or me think it's right or not. No matter what I say or how I explain it, you'll just think of some other attribute to add to this ancient man that would disqualify him for heaven. Here is one fact you left out: There is probably a 100% chance he is religious. So he's worshipping some other god and probably practicing things like animal sacrifices or even worse. The well-known Christian missionary to India, Amy Carmichael, spent most of her life during the late 19th and early 20th centures rescuing young girls who were sold to the temple priests to be used as prostitutes in their religious rights. Just good, down home guys who never hurt anyone, right? Sorry, bud, but your hypothetical man is just that--hyopthetical. No. You are changing the subject again. It doesn't matter if he is good or bad, does it? According to your doctrine, it only matters that he never heard the word of God and accepted Jesus as his saviour. And since no one ever told him about Christ, he has to go to hell. Forever. Without ever having had a chance to do anything about it. You say those are God's rules, but I say that those are YOUR rules, and they are baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted January 10, 2005 Share Posted January 10, 2005 Its like a drunk argument where after an hour you realize youre talking about atom bombs when you started talking about football. Being my first post on this subject I just have one thing to say. What does everyone think about gay bishops? I personally dont think they should be allowed to preach, makes me sick. Its like having a murderer preach not to kill. I know not as bad but youre still going against everything you teach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.