Calling out ThinkOfOne

@fmf said
No. "Torturer god ideology" is a description of an ideology. The god figure in this ideology tortures people for eternity for not being Christians after they 'die'. I don't think it's "disparaging" to call a spade a spade. I think it's accurate and honest.

Why do you think Christians who believe in hell simply say they believe in hell, and they do not describe it as a belief in torture?

Why do you feel the need to amend it to a belief in a "toturer-God," language decidedly not used..?

Is "hell" not descriptive enough?

@philokalia said
Saying that a Saint was actually a Roman agent that was meant to subvert the totality of their religion and turn it into a manageable, impotent, and politically expedient social movement isn't disparaging their religion?

I believe Paul was probably a Roman agent. If you think he wasn't, then that's fine. I don't think my point of view is "disparaging". I don't think you are "disparaging" me by calling my belief "ridiculous and inflammatory". You sould say what you feel you must say.

People have been calling the Islamic prophet Muhammad a liar and an agent of "Satan" - along with all his followers - here on this forum for as long as I have been posting. I think it's OK for them to say so, if that's their belief. This forum is for sharing perspectives.

I have been called "a follower of Satan" - for example - by various Christians in this community more times than I can remember. It's OK. They are sharing their beliefs, that's all.

If Paul was not working for the Romans, and that's your belief, so be it. You and your beliefs have not been "disparaged". You've met someone who disagrees with your belief, that's all.

If he was working for the Romans, and that's what someone like me believes, so be it. The perspectives have been shared. That's what a forum like this is for.

If you want to impose some kind of 'political correctness' regime here that curtails how people express themselves to each other, and protects you from hearing beliefs you don't like, you should take it up with the website's owners. You're wasting your time tackling me directly about it.

@philokalia said
It's impossible for you to think that. You are telling boldface lies or you simply do not understand the English language.

I think what I post is fine.

@philokalia said
Why do you think Christians who believe in hell simply say they believe in hell, and they do not describe it as a belief in torture?

Because they believe in a god figure that tortures non-believers for eternity after they have lived their lives.

@philokalia said
Why do you feel the need to amend it to a belief in a "toturer-God," language decidedly not used..?

Because their belief is in a god figure that tortures billions of human beings. This threat/attempted coercion/punishment lies at the very heart of their ideology and is cited as the "perfect morality". I call it the "torturer god ideology".

So FMF's philosophy is simple:

Other people have used angry, inflammatory language about Muslims and about him as an atheist in the past, so he is going to use inflammatory language about Hell and be very willing to accuse the most pivotal Saint in the Church of being an agent of Rome...

It'd be one thing if the latter bit came with an assertion of some kind of proof for it, but it's really just baseless speculation -- something that a materialist would normally say that they oppose.

And, based off of how we know how FMF refers to the doctrine of Hell, it is intended to offend and inflame people.

FMF, isn't the goal to be above people who refer to others rudely as agents of Satan..? Isn't the goal to be high minded in public discourse?

Of course, I do not always meet that goal, but I will try to and will not be so blunt so as to refer to all atheists or Muslims in such ridiculous terms...

So why do you use such a ridiculous term for one of the most common and mainstream Christian beliefs? It's clearly to disrespect people. You don't have this abstract obligation to use shocking, upsetting words to refer to people who believe in a doctrine or else you are a hypocrite -- you can describe exactly what you think the doctrine of hell is (that of a torture by God), but, instead, you use loaded, biased, and upsetting language.

It's simply not right and not conducive to public dialog. But, whatever, I doubt this will have any impact on anyone.

@philokalia said
Is "hell" not descriptive enough?

If I thought "Hell" was appropriate 'enough', I'd use that. But I think the "torturer god ideology' is far better. It shines a bit of light into the heart of darkness that it's describing.

@philokalia said
So FMF's philosophy is simple:

My philosophy is simple: I advocate freedom of speech and freedom of belief on this forum.

@philokalia said
FMF, isn't the goal to be above people who refer to others rudely as agents of Satan..? Isn't the goal to be high minded in public discourse?

I think using the term the "torturer god ideology" is excellent public discourse because it is candid, gets right to the heart of what is being discussed, and it's honest. If it rankles, then it indicates how its proponents don't like taking responsibility for the implications of the ideology they propagate.

I think using euphemisms and dancing around the depraved things some people believe, not talking too directly about them, framing superstitions notions - specifically - as a set of special sacred eggshells that ideologues scatter around themselves and then ask people not to step on is the antithesis of "high minded public discourse".

@philokalia said
So FMF's philosophy is simple:

Other people have used angry, inflammatory language about Muslims and about him as an atheist in the past, so he is going to use inflammatory language about Hell and be very willing to accuse the most pivotal Saint in the Church of being an agent of Rome...

It'd be one thing if the latter bit came with an assertion of some kind of proo ...[text shortened]... ight and not conducive to public dialog. But, whatever, I doubt this will have any impact on anyone.

You sure do talk about FMF a lot.

@fmf said
If I thought "Hell" was appropriate 'enough', I'd use that. But I think the "torturer god ideology' is far better. It shines a bit of light into the heart of darkness that it's describing.

But it doesn't actually makes sense.

Hell is already an illustrative Word. It literally is in everyone's mind a description of the worst possible place. I don't shy away from the fact that I believe specifically in hell. I'm willing to call it the doctrine of hell.

The fact that you want to change it and turn it into something that is a direct assault on God, something that goes beyond the normal language of it, gives it a very political definition.

The default is that people get to name their own ideologies. If I'm in a formal discussion I will refer to Communism as communism. Of course behind closed doors and if I'm feeling angry I can definitely refer to it as other things and be as angry as I like about it, but that's just not something that you should do in public. You shouldn't actually try to deny the name of the doctor. Particularly when it's very common and very neutral.

He'll doesn't sugarcoat anything and it also does not play directly into some negative judgment about it either.

@philokalia said
So why do you use such a ridiculous term for one of the most common and mainstream Christian beliefs?

You've asked me this question maybe half a dozen times. And I have answered it a half a dozen times. My answer hasn't changed.

@philokalia said
It's simply not right and not conducive to public dialog. But, whatever, I doubt this will have any impact on anyone.

You think my posting is "simply not right" and "not conducive". Maybe saying this will have an impact on some people reading it.

@philokalia said
But it doesn't actually makes sense.

Calling the doctrine of eternal torment, the threat of it, the vengeance of it, the wrath of it, and the morality rooted in it, calling it all the "torturer god ideology" makes perfect sense.

@philokalia said
Hell is already an illustrative Word. It literally is in everyone's mind a description of the worst possible place. I don't shy away from the fact that I believe specifically in hell. I'm willing to call it the doctrine of hell.

I suggest you use the word "Hell" then. You should post as you see fit.