1) There's a difference between giving precedence to the negative side of Christianity (which I can do just as easily, living in a country whose Christian fundamentalism continues to grow at an alarming rate and gives me a strong desire to move to Denmark in a few years) and speaking reductivistically of the spirit of Christianity as "that of the destructive, annihilating vacuum that consumes all, giving little."
2) The only question you've asked in this thread, thus far, is "So I suppose God allowed false agents of Satan to occupy the See of Rome during the Medieval ages, did He?" I responded by saying that I have a hard time knowing what was going through the heads of professing Christians throughout history who have commit atrocious acts against the Jews. I said that either they were true Christians (and thus not practicing Christianity's love commandments or any of the virtues listed in the New Testament) or they were not (though they claimed to be). Is there an alternative to these you'd prefer I adopt and, if so, on what grounds should I hold it? I don't know what other questions you have in mind, as you haven't been making very much use of the question mark in this thread. I, on the other hand, have been asking repeated questions, in order to better understand your positions, but you—while accusing me of evading questions you've never actually asked—have consistently evaded answering mine. By the way, I'm not a Roman Catholic, I don't hold that God always holds church leaders (Pope or otherwise) accountable in the present life for their actions, I don't believe in the Calvinist God who micromanages everything, and consequently I deny the formal validity of your argument.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
"Clearly, the penguins have finally gone too far. First they take our hearts, now they’re tanking the global economy one smug waddle at a time. Expect fish sanctions by Friday."
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 11/3/12 07:32 (UTC)2) The only question you've asked in this thread, thus far, is "So I suppose God allowed false agents of Satan to occupy the See of Rome during the Medieval ages, did He?" I responded by saying that I have a hard time knowing what was going through the heads of professing Christians throughout history who have commit atrocious acts against the Jews. I said that either they were true Christians (and thus not practicing Christianity's love commandments or any of the virtues listed in the New Testament) or they were not (though they claimed to be). Is there an alternative to these you'd prefer I adopt and, if so, on what grounds should I hold it? I don't know what other questions you have in mind, as you haven't been making very much use of the question mark in this thread. I, on the other hand, have been asking repeated questions, in order to better understand your positions, but you—while accusing me of evading questions you've never actually asked—have consistently evaded answering mine. By the way, I'm not a Roman Catholic, I don't hold that God always holds church leaders (Pope or otherwise) accountable in the present life for their actions, I don't believe in the Calvinist God who micromanages everything, and consequently I deny the formal validity of your argument.