Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Bienenhalde]

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

Wait, so you're criticizing liberalism for being allegedly intolerant of Christianity but saying that Christianity should be intolerant of everyone else.

That makes... not a lot of sense.

Well, even if one does not believe in tolerance, one can still claim that liberals are liars and hypocrites for claiming tolerance as a core value while not being tolerant in actual practice.

[North German Realm]

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

Wait, so you're criticizing liberalism for being allegedly intolerant of Christianity but saying that Christianity should be intolerant of everyone else.

That makes... not a lot of sense.

He's criticizing Liberalism specifically because it doesn't allow him to show his intolerance in public as much as he could have before liberalism. You'll notice this is a trend.

[Hanafuridake]

So where's the forcing religion aspect?

We've no intention of sharing the stage.

Joohan made many posts regarding this topic, namely the fact that he doesn't support forcing Christianity on people.

He has said that he doesn't support “Christian death squads,” not that he doesn't support a Christian state.

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

So where's the forcing religion aspect?

We've no intention of sharing the stage.

Joohan made many posts regarding this topic, namely the fact that he doesn't support forcing Christianity on people.

He has said that he doesn't support “Christian death squads,” not that he doesn't support a Christian state.

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

Preaching Christianity still =/= forcing Christianity

[Hanafuridake]

He has said that he doesn't support “Christian death squads,” not that he doesn't support a Christian state.

Preaching Christianity still =/= forcing Christianity

A Christian state which does not share a platform with other religions is forcing Christianity on the public.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Preaching Christianity still =/= forcing Christianity

A Christian state which does not share a platform with other religions is forcing Christianity on the public.

When said Christian state starts forcing people to be Christian you'll be right. Until then, a Christian state appreciating and promoting Christian life is not forcing Christianity on anyone.

[Joohan]

Wait, so you're criticizing liberalism for being allegedly intolerant of Christianity but saying that Christianity should be intolerant of everyone else.

That makes... not a lot of sense.

He's criticizing Liberalism specifically because it doesn't allow him to show his intolerance in public as much as he could have before liberalism. You'll notice this is a trend.

Ive a lot of criticisms for liberalism - but yeah this is what I am currently on about. Liberalism's core concept of tolerance and moral subjectivity has led naturally to the current state of societal norms.

Topical quote given the above poll, " Tolerance is the virtue of the man without conviction " - G.K. Chesterton. Tolerance is not a virtue, nor should it be treated as such. Or, perhaps a more famous quote from Archbishop Charles Chaput,

" Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty; these are Christian virtues. "

[Kowani]

He's criticizing Liberalism specifically because it doesn't allow him to show his intolerance in public as much as he could have before liberalism. You'll notice this is a trend.

Ive a lot of criticisms for liberalism - but yeah this is what I am currently on about. Liberalism's core concept of tolerance and moral subjectivity has led naturally to the current state of societal norms.

Topical quote given the above poll, " Tolerance is the virtue of the man without conviction " - G.K. Chesterton. Tolerance is not a virtue, nor should it be treated as such. Or, perhaps a more famous quote from Archbishop Charles Chaput,

" Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty; these are Christian virtues. "

Tolerance is what allows you to hold your religious beliefs in the first place.

[Joohan]

So where's the forcing religion aspect?

We've no intention of sharing the stage.

Joohan made many posts regarding this topic, namely the fact that he doesn't support forcing Christianity on people.

He has said that he doesn't support “Christian death squads,” not that he doesn't support a Christian state.

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

Christianity has no jurisprudence - thus a Christian state could not exist.

I am for a state which promotes and supports Christianity - but no such state has been laid out by either the Church or the Bible. We can only look here or there for examples.

Such an ideal state would not force people to convert, but it would never humor the idea of agnosticism, Hinduism, or what have you. You may practice your faith as you wish - but the state is geared to accommodate Christianity. It's not a fair game - and it's not supposed to be.

Do what you will - but we are really suggesting you do this.

[Joohan]

Ive a lot of criticisms for liberalism - but yeah this is what I am currently on about. Liberalism's core concept of tolerance and moral subjectivity has led naturally to the current state of societal norms.

Topical quote given the above poll, " Tolerance is the virtue of the man without conviction " - G.K. Chesterton. Tolerance is not a virtue, nor should it be treated as such. Or, perhaps a more famous quote from Archbishop Charles Chaput,

" Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty; these are Christian virtues. "

Tolerance is what allows you to hold your religious beliefs in the first place.

No it's not, and it never has been. Christians have held onto their beliefs while being thrown to the lions in Rome, beheaded in Japan, butchered in Scandinavia, burned in China, lynched in Mexico, guillotined in France, and all other manner of persecution across the world.

Our faith does not need tolerance in order to persevere.

[Kowani]

Tolerance is what allows you to hold your religious beliefs in the first place.

No it's not, and it never has been. Christians have held onto their beliefs while being thrown to the lions in Rome, beheaded in Japan, butchered in Scandinavia, burned in China, lynched in Mexico, guillotined in France, and all other manner of persecution across the world.

Our faithI does not need tolerance in order to persevere.

I would like to point out that it’s much easier to track people’s faith now than it was back than. And than China and Japan really weren’t the greatest examples you could have given. But now? Oh, no. Tolerance is what allows the religion to survive, and not just from governmental or societal persecution.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

No it's not, and it never has been. Christians have held onto their beliefs while being thrown to the lions in Rome, beheaded in Japan, butchered in Scandinavia, burned in China, lynched in Mexico, guillotined in France, and all other manner of persecution across the world.

Our faithI does not need tolerance in order to persevere.

I would like to point out that it’s much easier to track people’s faith now than it was back than. And than China and Japan really weren’t the greatest examples you could have given. But now? Oh, no. Tolerance is what allows the religion to survive, and not just from governmental or societal persecution.

Over 2 billion people adhere to Christianity. It's doing more than surviving.

[Joohan]

No it's not, and it never has been. Christians have held onto their beliefs while being thrown to the lions in Rome, beheaded in Japan, butchered in Scandinavia, burned in China, lynched in Mexico, guillotined in France, and all other manner of persecution across the world.

Our faithI does not need tolerance in order to persevere.

I would like to point out that it’s much easier to track people’s faith now than it was back than. And than China and Japan really weren’t the greatest examples you could have given. But now? Oh, no. Tolerance is what allows the religion to survive, and not just from governmental or societal persecution.

China was infamous for it's persecution of Christian missionaries throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, and Japan straight up banned missionaries for entering into the country ( not before executing a number of the missionaries and their converts ). They were pretty intolerant of Christians.

could you explain why you think it is that our faith is reliant upon tolerance to survive?

[Kowani]

I would like to point out that it’s much easier to track people’s faith now than it was back than. And than China and Japan really weren’t the greatest examples you could have given. But now? Oh, no. Tolerance is what allows the religion to survive, and not just from governmental or societal persecution.

Over 2 billion people adhere to Christianity. It's doing more than surviving.

Cultural inertia, poverty, lack of education-in all the places where these things are on the decline, so too is Christianity.

I would like to point out that it’s much easier to track people’s faith now than it was back than. And than China and Japan really weren’t the greatest examples you could have given. But now? Oh, no. Tolerance is what allows the religion to survive, and not just from governmental or societal persecution.

China was infamous for it's persecution of Christian missionaries throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, and Japan straight up banned missionaries for entering into the country ( not before executing a number of the missionaries and their converts ). They were pretty intolerant of Christians.

Actually, I meant the whole “we will persevere!” thing. ‘Cause that? Nah. Oh, sure, a handful of people. But that’s not so much anyone’s personal spiritual conviction as it was material limits.
[/quote]
And I could you explain why you think it is that our faith is reliant upon tolerance to survive?[/quote]
Let’s begin with the obvious problem of different sects within the religion. The thousands of them that there are. To have these sects coexist in peace would be tolerant, and thus, they must war. If one sect actually wins, it gets to impose its laws on everyone. But that’s a very good recipe for a very angry populace, especially with religious laws, which are a bit prudish, and good at inciting rebellion. The whole “misogyny/homophobia thing” is terrible PR. The prohibition of birth control is fundamentally unworkable, so that’s not good for you either.

[Joohan]

Cultural inertia, poverty, lack of education-in all the places where these things are on the decline, so too is Christianity.

Poverty and lack of education are on the decline practically everywhere - Christianity is only noticeably declining in the west.

China was infamous for it's persecution of Christian missionaries throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, and Japan straight up banned missionaries for entering into the country ( not before executing a number of the missionaries and their converts ). They were pretty intolerant of Christians.

Actually, I meant the whole “we will persevere!” thing. ‘Cause that? Nah. Oh, sure, a handful of people. But that’s not so much anyone’s personal spiritual conviction as it was material limits.

And I could you explain why you think it is that our faith is reliant upon tolerance to survive?[/quote]
Let’s begin with the obvious problem of different sects within the religion. The thousands of them that there are. To have these sects coexist in peace would be tolerant, and thus, they must war. If one sect actually wins, it gets to impose its laws on everyone. But that’s a very good recipe for a very angry populace, especially with religious laws, which are a bit prudish, and good at inciting rebellion. The whole “misogyny/homophobia thing” is terrible PR. The prohibition of birth control is fundamentally unworkable, so that’s not good for you either.[/quote][/quote]

Again, this does nothing to prove your earlier assertion that, " Tolerance is what allows you to hold your religious beliefs in the first place. " Again, not at all. As history has shown over the last 2000 years, we can be actively hunted down by either the state or zealous mobs - we will persevere regardless of if we are tolerated or not.

Tolerance is not something which should be done away with - it is a useful tool to maintain civility between groups which disagree with one another. However, a state which uphold Christianity should not forsake morality in order to appear tolerant. Within the church, the various sects should show a great degree of civility between one another. Our whole, kill the apostate phase, kind of ended back in the 17th century. Heated debate and theological argumentation sure - but your local Lutheran church and Catholic Chapel aren't going to be turning into FOB's.

Again, tolerance is a tool, not a virtue or foundation of governance.

All the blue law stuff you mentioned can be sorted out through a few decades of social engineering. A concerted propaganda campaign by both private and public entities can turn the public opinion with time.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

He's criticizing Liberalism specifically because it doesn't allow him to show his intolerance in public as much as he could have before liberalism. You'll notice this is a trend.

Ive a lot of criticisms for liberalism - but yeah this is what I am currently on about. Liberalism's core concept of tolerance and moral subjectivity has led naturally to the current state of societal norms.

Topical quote given the above poll, " Tolerance is the virtue of the man without conviction " - G.K. Chesterton. Tolerance is not a virtue, nor should it be treated as such. Or, perhaps a more famous quote from Archbishop Charles Chaput,

" Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty; these are Christian virtues. "

Are you saying that someone who believes "live and let live” has no convictions?

Also, you do not want to force non believers to convert, yes? Why is that?

[Joohan]

Ive a lot of criticisms for liberalism - but yeah this is what I am currently on about. Liberalism's core concept of tolerance and moral subjectivity has led naturally to the current state of societal norms.

Topical quote given the above poll, " Tolerance is the virtue of the man without conviction " - G.K. Chesterton. Tolerance is not a virtue, nor should it be treated as such. Or, perhaps a more famous quote from Archbishop Charles Chaput,

" Tolerance is not a Christian virtue. Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty; these are Christian virtues. "

Are you saying that someone who believes "live and let live” has no convictions?

Also, you do not want to force non believers to convert, yes? Why is that?

Apathy isn't a conviction.

A forced convert, isn't really a convert. They haven't accepted Christ or the Spirit; without faith in the trinity, baptism and conversation are just empty and meaningless rituals - completely antithetical to what the point of being a missionary to begin with. We aren't looking to boost numbers on a paper, we are looking to save souls.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Are you saying that someone who believes "live and let live” has no convictions?

Also, you do not want to force non believers to convert, yes? Why is that?

Apathy isn't a conviction.

A forced convert, isn't really a convert. They haven't accepted Christ or the Spirit; without faith in the trinity, baptism and conversation are just empty and meaningless rituals - completely antithetical to what the point of being a missionary to begin with. We aren't looking to boost numbers on a paper, we are looking to save souls.

Who said anything about apathy?

Would you "save souls" by force if you could?

[Hanafuridake]

Japan straight up banned missionaries for entering into the country ( not before executing a number of the missionaries and their converts ). They were pretty intolerant of Christians.

After the missionaries made themselves unwelcome through violating social mores, selling Japanese in the slave trade, burning down temples and shrines, and convincing daimyo to donate feudal land to the Church. Nobunaga paid little attention to the Christians and most of his ire was directed to Buddhist temples and sects which opposed him. Hideyoshi at first simply banned daimyo from handing land away or from forcing farmers of his fief to convert until moving onto harsher measures.

Really, for all of the talk by Christian missionaries about how they face persecution in other countries, they have been their own worst enemies more often than not.

[Napkizemlja]

How about them Yankees.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

How about them Yankees.

What do you mean? The sports team? The slang term for an American? The slang term for a Northerner? The slang term for a New Englander? The guy who made the song Despacito?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Apathy isn't a conviction.

A forced convert, isn't really a convert. They haven't accepted Christ or the Spirit; without faith in the trinity, baptism and conversation are just empty and meaningless rituals - completely antithetical to what the point of being a missionary to begin with. We aren't looking to boost numbers on a paper, we are looking to save souls.

Who said anything about apathy?

Would you "save souls" by force if you could?

You can't save souls by force.

[Joohan]

Apathy isn't a conviction.

A forced convert, isn't really a convert. They haven't accepted Christ or the Spirit; without faith in the trinity, baptism and conversation are just empty and meaningless rituals - completely antithetical to what the point of being a missionary to begin with. We aren't looking to boost numbers on a paper, we are looking to save souls.

Who said anything about apathy?

Would you "save souls" by force if you could?

You did in the first question.

And you can't save a soul by force. No one can force the holy spirit in, you have to let it in.

[Communist Zombie Horde]

Who said anything about apathy?

Would you "save souls" by force if you could?

You can't save souls by force.

False. Communists can be saved by means other than execution.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

You can't save souls by force.

False. Communists can be saved by means other than execution.

Not by force tho. Otherwise they're just putting on a show for you to save their skin. And literally no one was talking about execution, why even bring that up?