LogFAQs > #959621184

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, Database 9 ( 09.28.2021-02-17-2022 ), DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Church is called EVIL for NOT allowing MASKLESS MAN Pray and caused a BRAWL!!!
adjl 11/02/21 12:23:45 PM #57:	SKARDAVNELNATE posted... I believe I've done that. Doing that entails finding the original article (Duckbear gets most of his news from Dailymail, as a starting point, though presumably this has been reported elsewhere) and finding something in there that indicates his prior trespassing offences were not mask-related. You have not done that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... Well if I held them to the standard of serving me cake and ice cream you would still argue that's not very realistic, That would indeed be unrealistic (though in pre-covid times, it was not at all uncommon for churches to serve snacks after services, sometimes including cake and/or ice cream, so perhaps not as unrealistic as you might think). SKARDAVNELNATE posted... The standard I'm holding them to is not the one I want but the one they profess through faith. Nobody actually does that. I'm increasingly convinced you've never actually interacted with a religious person and are instead basing your understanding on some caricature you've come up with based on learning very vaguely about the concept. Absolutely nobody follows every letter of the Bible literally. It's axiomatically impossible to: there are numerous mutually exclusive contradictions in there. Religious practice entails interpreting the teachings of scripture through the lens of modern life for the sake of applying them to become a better person. Interpreting all of it literally with no consideration of how it can be applied in a practical sense is useless. Again, literally nobody holds the standard of "it's better to be shot than to turn somebody away from church." Especially when - as I mentioned earlier - turning somebody away from church whose entry would be genuinely dangerous does not mean denying them compassion and forgiveness. It's just tempering those goals with an understanding of the reality that letting somebody into church isn't worth getting shot over. You can extend that compassion to them much more practically and safely by visiting them in jail to read scripture to them or show them a recording of the service (though, realistically, somebody who was trying to shoot up a church probably doesn't actually care about getting to hear the sermon). --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts. <cite>adjl posted [p:959621184] in Church is ... [t:79731933]...</cite> <quote>SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>I believe I've done that.</quote> Doing that entails finding the original article (Duckbear gets most of his news from Dailymail, as a starting point, though presumably this has been reported elsewhere) and finding something in there that indicates his prior trespassing offences were not mask-related. You have not done that. SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>Well if I held them to the standard of serving me cake and ice cream you would still argue that's not very realistic,</quote> That would indeed be unrealistic (though in pre-covid times, it was not at all uncommon for churches to serve snacks after services, sometimes including cake and/or ice cream, so perhaps not as unrealistic as you might think). SKARDAVNELNATE posted... </cite> <quote>The standard I'm holding them to is not the one I want but the one they profess through faith.</quote> Nobody actually does that. I'm increasingly convinced you've never actually interacted with a religious person and are instead basing your understanding on some caricature you've come up with based on learning very vaguely about the concept. Absolutely nobody follows every letter of the Bible literally. It's axiomatically impossible to: there are numerous mutually exclusive contradictions in there. Religious practice entails interpreting the teachings of scripture through the lens of modern life for the sake of applying them to become a better person. Interpreting all of it literally with no consideration of how it can be applied in a practical sense is useless. Again, literally nobody holds the standard of "it's better to be shot than to turn somebody away from church." Especially when - as I mentioned earlier - turning somebody away from church whose entry would be genuinely dangerous does not mean denying them compassion and forgiveness. It's just tempering those goals with an understanding of the reality that letting somebody into church isn't worth getting shot over. You can extend that compassion to them much more practically and safely by visiting them in jail to read scripture to them or show them a recording of the service (though, realistically, somebody who was trying to shoot up a church probably doesn't actually care about getting to hear the sermon). --- This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1