Anybody up for a random meme dump?

[Zorba]

Your use of the phrase "true believer" belies the fallacy of your argument. Someone calling their own self a "true believer," even an entire movement claiming some adherence to some belief system and calling someone or some group "true believer(s)" does not make them true believers.

Many have come in the name of Jesus Christ claiming to be "true believers," but if one looks at the actions and fruits of many of those, one understands that they follow neither the precepts nor the spirit of biblical Christianity. Jim Jones claimed foundations in the historical Christianity, but any idiot can look at his acts and compare them to the acts of Jesus and of the early church and see that he had no relation to those.

Matthew 7:16-20 quotes Jesus as saying, "You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits."

See, you are trying to judge by words and claims. Jesus says to look beyond claims and words to the actual fruit of the lives. Do they represent the spirit and deeds of the system they claim to follow?

Christ said, "I came to give life, and to give it more abundantly." John 10:7-11 is clear on this account:

So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.

So, that is the question: Do the acts and fruit of those who claim to be true believers lead to life more abundantly, or death, pillage and destruction. That is the test, not what people claim. Words have very little value.

I'm just sick and tired of "True Believers". They fear no consequences as they're right, dontcha know? Obama is a True Believer. So is Gates, and the rest of that crowd. So was Billy Graham, someone who spouted hatred for anything other than his true belief. No thank you.

 

[TJMexico]

I'm just sick and tired of "True Believers". They fear no consequences as they're right, dontcha know? Obama is a True Believer. So is Gates, and the rest of that crowd. So was Billy Graham, someone who spouted hatred for anything other than his true belief. No thank you.

Honestly, I am not a fan of Billy Graham, but I challenge you to give me one example of him "spouting hatred."

 

[Zorba]

Ethics must b e grounded in morality. My morality informs my ethics. Without an established moral code, my ethics can be whatever I want them to be. If there is a transcendent moral code, my ethics must be grounded in that. There is not way around this fact.

You tell me (or better, show me by your actions) what moral foundations your ethics are based on and I will know if I can trust your ethical code.

ETA: Dang, this meme thread has gotten heavily philosophical here!

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I have little use for "morality" because - again - its exactly what the person says it means, nothing more. I only care about ethics, which - as previously stated - seldom intersect with "morality". Lots of people and institutions are full of "morality", but short on ethics. I hear it all the time in politics - from both/all "sides".

 

[TJMexico]

We're going to have to agree to disagree. I have little use for "morality" because - again - its exactly what the person says it means, nothing more. I only care about ethics, which - as previously stated - seldom intersect with "morality". Lots of people and institutions are full of "morality", but short on ethics. I hear it all the time in politics - from both/all "sides".

You are talking in circles and affirming exactly what I have said. I said that if "morality" means what the person says it mean, then there is no morality, only a power dynamic.

 

[Zorba]

Honestly, I am not a fan of Billy Graham, but I challenge you to give me one example of him "spouting hatred."

Its been years, so I no longer recall. His son certainly spouts hateful rhetoric about non-christians - as did the beloved Charlie Kirk for that matter. Nothing has changed in 2,000+ years.

 

[B252]

On a more serious note, Bucees sucks and I can not for the life of me understand the infatuation with it.

Sometimes size matters.

 

[speeding_infraction]

Its been years, so I no longer recall. His son certainly spouts hateful rhetoric about non-christians - as did the beloved Charlie Kirk for that matter. Nothing has changed in 2,000+ years.

Again, like what?

Edit, look what just came up in my YouTube shorts. Warning, it's in portrait format for those who are easily triggered


View: https://m.youtube.com/shorts/L3iZmLthwXw

 

[TJ Jim]

 

[Zorba]

Again, like what?

Edit, look what just came up in my YouTube shorts. Warning, it's in portrait format for those who are easily triggered


View: https://m.youtube.com/shorts/L3iZmLthwXw

"Franklin Graham has characterized modern American culture as being influenced by "pagan altars of personal pleasure and immorality,"

As have many others, including Kirk. I'm tired of my belief system being dragged through the mud by moralists. Yes, there are PLENTY of pagans with whom I disagree, and find that they lack ethics. Same goes for anyone trying to foist their "morality" onto others. Especially when their rhetoric is the exact same bullshit that has murdered millions over the last 2,000 years. Fuck that, and fuck them!

And now we have a confluence of "True Believers" killing each other in the middle east because their "God" promised them something that doesn't belong to them, etc, etc, etc. Its the same shit that's been going on for over 2 millennia now. If you're not "one of us", you're wrong and have no rights whatsoever and can be killed with impunity. Like I say, I've been studying this for over 50 years, the pattern is clear as crystal. I may (probably) not be able to express it particularly well, but I know my history - and its available to anyone who wants to dig a little. Indeed, its more readily available now than it ever has been.

 

[reddvltj]

View attachment 694524

Prove what I said is incorrect.
Even our founding fathers moral beliefs guided their drafting of the constitution. However they wrote it such a way as to draw the line between what they personally believed and equality for different beliefs so long as ones beliefs did NOT harm or interfere with others. So their personal morals shaped the ethics.

 

[Zorba]

Prove what I said is incorrect.
Even our founding fathers moral beliefs guided their drafting of the constitution. However they wrote it such a way as to draw the line between what they personally believed and equality for different beliefs so long as ones beliefs did NOT harm or interfere with others. So their personal morals shaped the ethics.

I'll agree, except I'll say that morals had nothing whatsoever to do with it - rather their ethics did. If their "morals" had played a part, we wouldn't have the constitution we have.

 

[srimes]

Sigh... Check your history man, check your history. Then listen to today's rhetoric. Nothing whatsoever has changed. Morality, ethics, and laws seldom intersect. Morality is meaningless, laws are completely inadequate because they attempt to codify the uncodifiable: Ethics. That leaves raw ethics - who gets hurt? That is my ONLY concern - if the situation violates someone's arbitrary "morality", too bad. I've had enough of moralists to last me two lifetimes.

I don't know what dictionary you're using. Merriam-Webster says this:

Morality, ethics and laws are so deeply intertwined they're inseparable.

Of course they can all be perverted. Evil isn't a lack of morals, it's an inversion.

Monotheism was "successful" for one reason: The sword. I have spent a lifetime studying this crap, it is VERY ugly. Remember, the victors get to write the history - you have to dig to find the buried truth.

Oh, because pagans were just peaceful hobbits dancing in nature, right? Come on dude. Humans have always been violent. Polytheists did LOTS of killing.

Monotheism succeeds because it helps people be more productive and less destructive. This change in behavior produces more resources and wealth, which tends to draw in people who want that. It also provides more resources for winning wars.

 

[reddvltj]

I'll agree, except I'll say that morals had nothing whatsoever to do with it - rather their ethics did. If their "morals" had played a part, we wouldn't have the constitution we have.

The ethics were directly derived from their individual beliefs, the merged moral ideals of the collective.

 

[srimes]

I know you're gay, but are you certified?

 

[srimes]

 

[Wildman]

Vid Linked

 

[RangerTJ]

Let's count our blessings...

 

[Zorba]

Oh, because pagans were just peaceful hobbits dancing in nature, right? Come on dude. Humans have always been violent. Polytheists did LOTS of killing.

Monotheism succeeds because it helps people be more productive and less destructive. This change in behavior produces more resources and wealth, which tends to draw in people who want that. It also provides more resources for winning wars.

Oh please. I've heard all sorts of apologia for monotheism in the last half century, but this is one I've never heard before. I've heard how it invented "everything" (Hospitals are particularly hilarious), how it swept the world converting everybody peacefully, etc, etc. Those who actually study history know better - but you do you.

 

[Zorba]

The ethics were directly derived from their individual beliefs, the merged moral ideals of the collective.

And I say that its pretty darn hard to derive ethics from "morality" as "morality" tends to be arbitrary. My "morals" aren't the same as yours, but my ethics probably are.

 

[RangerTJ]