# Lifestyles & Discussion > Peace Through Religion >  Never Give Up on Jesus's message of love.  Never.

## Slave Mentality

Love is our only way out.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Love is our only way out.


Partially true. Love for your compatriot, yes. Love for your enemy?

I will pass on that. There is a time for hate, and a time for war.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> Love is our only way out.


For a God-Family-Country priorities model, could be applicable. 
But is that true under 'Country First/America First' flag too, turning the other cheek in the face of 'egregious assault'?
*
Trump: "You'll never take back our country with weakness"*
"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our  democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll be there  with you. We're going to walk down--
We're going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we're going to walk down to the Capitol--
And  we're going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women  and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong."
This is what Trump told supporters before many stormed Capitol Hill

----------


## Anti Globalist

Love is not something I intend to show to any Marxist.

----------


## belian78

> Love is our only way out.


Love for our fellow humans is love for ourselves, we are all from the same creator.  I've no time for anyone preaching division of any sort from here on out.

----------


## belian78

> Partially true. Love for your compatriot, yes. Love for your enemy?
> 
> I will pass on that. There is a time for hate, and a time for war.


I disagree, there is never a time for hate.  Hate comes from ignorance, love comes from understanding.

----------


## Pauls' Revere

This is why the GOP loses.

----------


## Ender

> Love is our only way out.


Absolutely.

The reason we are in this giant dungeon of $#@! is because of hate.  Love is the answer.

----------


## axiomata

> Love for your enemy?
> 
> I will pass on that.


Hmm...

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> I disagree, there is never a time for hate.  Hate comes from ignorance, love comes from understanding.


This is badly flawed logic masquerading as an enlightened platitude. It is fully possible for man to hate what they understand and love what they do not. A hatred for evil is born from understanding what evil is, and loving what is good.




> Love for our fellow humans is love for ourselves, we are all from the same creator. I've no time for anyone preaching division of any sort from here on out.


No, it is not. You are remarkably full of vacuous platitudes. Humans may all be from the same creator, but their actions are what gives them distinction. There will always be division among humans so long as individuality exists.




> Love is not something I intend to show to any Marxist.


Indeed. The only time doing so is not punished with misery or death is when that Marxist has not gotten their hands on the levers of power.




> This is why the GOP loses.


It is certainly one of the reasons. The endless attempt to equivocate oneself with those bent on your destruction is an outstanding flaw among many on the right. They will try to moral high road themselves right into a grave.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Love for our fellow humans is love for ourselves, we are all from the same creator.  I've no time for anyone preaching division of any sort from here on out.


And I, conversely, have no more time for those preaching peace at all costs, even going so far as capitulation to those whose ultimate goal is to render me and my posterity *dead*.

In the end times, scripture says that Anti-christ's most powerful message of deceit will be that he will bring peace and prosperity to troubled world.

Multitudes will be deceived by his greasy promises and saccharine platitudes.

Folks who think like you would be first in line to buy that garbage, based on what you're selling here.

----------


## Danke

I love you guys!


















not really

----------


## Invisible Man

> Love for our fellow humans is love for ourselves, we are all from the same creator.  I've no time for anyone preaching division of any sort from here on out.


"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to belian78 again."

----------


## TheTexan

I love Mac n cheese with bacon

----------


## belian78

> And I, conversely, have no more time for those preaching peace at all costs, even going so far as capitulation to those whose ultimate goal is to render me and my posterity *dead*.
> 
> In the end times, scripture says that Anti-christ's most powerful message of deceit will be that he will bring peace and prosperity to troubled world.
> 
> Multitudes will be deceived by his greasy promises and saccharine platitudes.
> 
> Folks who think like you would be first in line to buy that garbage, based on what you're selling here.


I promise no peace, I know we are in the end times.  That is why it is so much more important to hold love and not hate in our hearts.

----------


## belian78

> This is badly flawed logic masquerading as an enlightened platitude. It is fully possible for man to hate what they understand and love what they do not. A hatred for evil is born from understanding what evil is, and loving what is good.
> 
> 
> 
> No, it is not. You are remarkably full of vacuous platitudes. Humans may all be from the same creator, but their actions are what gives them distinction. There will always be division among humans so long as individuality exists.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed. The only time doing so is not punished with misery or death is when that Marxist has not gotten their hands on the levers of power.
> ...


You could not be more wrong, on all counts.  Whether that's intentional as you're being paid to be here, or unintentional as you've not fallen far enough to realize the truth, either way you are wrong.  That's all I'll say on this subject with you, as you've shown you've no room to discuss this with any neutrality. 

But I will say this again.  I have no time for anyone who speaks any type of division between humanity, from here on out.  Those that consider themselves true Christian would feel the same I would think.

----------


## flightlesskiwi

> Love is our only way out.


Define "love"

Way out of what?

How is this U.S. Political News?

----------


## Pauls' Revere

Are we all going to become Pot smoking Jesus hippies under Biden?

----------


## oyarde

> Are we all going to become Pot smoking Jesus hippies under Biden?


Just Danke . He likes the idea of not doing laundry or bathing every day .

----------


## oyarde

> I love Mac n cheese with bacon


I'm putting on some Beatles All You Need Is Love for you and Happiness Is A Warm Gun for me . Rolling Stones Its All Over Now for AF.

----------


## oyarde

I understand the OP .  While though we are on this earth in this country people need to accept for the vast majority of citizens there is no way out. Never surrender . Be prepared .

----------


## oyarde

> I love you guys!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks man .

----------


## Anti Federalist

> But I will say this again.  I have no time for anyone who speaks any type of division between humanity, from here on out.  *Those that consider themselves true Christian would feel the same I would think*.


If what you say is true, *then I renounce my faith, here and now*, and add you to the ranks of those that would lead good people to slaughter in the face of mortal danger and deadly enemies.

----------


## Pauls' Revere

> Just Danke . He likes the idea of not doing laundry or bathing every day .


Thanks for adding reputation to this user. May you be lucky enough to receive the same Reputation back in turn.

----------


## Invisible Man

> If what you say is true, *then I renounce my faith, here and now*, and add you to the ranks of those that would lead good people to slaughter in the face of mortal danger and deadly enemies.


Good people being slaughtered... You mean like what happened to Jesus?

----------


## phill4paul

Well, I'm not a Christian so.....

  And why isn't this in the Peace Through Religion forum?

----------


## Proph

> Love for our fellow humans is love for ourselves, we are all from the same creator.  I've no time for anyone preaching division of any sort from here on out.


Didn't Jesus himself say that he did not come to unite, but to divide?




> I disagree, there is *never* a time for hate.  Hate comes from ignorance, love comes from understanding.


The time for hate was when you were ignorant.  (Some are beyond that point, some aren't, and some fluctuate; though, just like the seasons, these state-of-minds might change depending on what you learn in the future.  [Unlike seasons, however, we have some control over our mood and outlook.])

Love can come from ignorance, too -- and hate from understanding -- but veracity might depend on the source.  (Anyone who understands the ineptitude of governments should understand the failure of good intentions without results [arguably, faith without works].)

But, yeah, if you dislike the Creator's creations, what makes you think you'll like the Creator?  (If you don't like His creations, you probably don't like yourself!)

You eventually become what you hate.  (So, don't hate!)

----------


## belian78

> If what you say is true, *then I renounce my faith, here and now*, and add you to the ranks of those that would lead good people to slaughter in the face of mortal danger and deadly enemies.


I don't wish to lead anyone anywhere, I'm no one of any importance in that way.  All I'm saying is that you can love your neighbor and realize they are different from you.  It is from this starting point that we must move forward, as a species.

----------


## donnay

> I disagree, there is never a time for hate.  Hate comes from ignorance, love comes from understanding.


Do you love Satan?

----------


## TheTexan

> I don't wish to lead anyone anywhere, I'm no one of any importance in that way.  All I'm saying is that you can love your neighbor and realize they are different from you.  It is from this starting point that we must move forward, as a species.


This x1000.

Loving your neighbor, and shooting him in the face after he's kicked in your door,

are not mutually exclusive

----------


## donnay

> You could not be more wrong, on all counts.  Whether that's intentional as you're being paid to be here, or unintentional as you've not fallen far enough to realize the truth, either way you are wrong.  That's all I'll say on this subject with you, as you've shown you've no room to discuss this with any neutrality. 
> 
> But I will say this again.  I have no time for anyone who speaks any type of division between humanity, from here on out.  Those that consider themselves true Christian would feel the same I would think.


Denominational religion in of itself is 'division.'  There is two choices-- Good or Evil.  I certainly will not love Evil of any kind.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I don't wish to lead anyone anywhere, I'm no one of any importance in that way.  All I'm saying is that you can love your neighbor and realize they are different from you.  It is from this starting point that we must move forward, as a species.


My neighbor is an atheist who believes no such sky pilot fairy tales, and will be quick to tell you so.

My neighbor has become convinced that everything I have worked for to provide for myself and family, are ill gotten gains that are in fact rightfully his, and have only ended in my hands because of a rotten system designed to do nothing more than that.

My neighbor also believes that human beings are not individuals, but rather just a collective mob of competing interest groups. He's convinced that the real problem is that there are just too many of us and not enough of him. Therefore he has committed himself genocide for the greater good, including my and my family.

And you wish me to embrace and make peace with these demons?

People who can legitimately think and act that way are as different from me as a race of space aliens.

Separate or Die.

----------


## Occam's Banana

> I love Mac n cheese with bacon


But does Mac n cheese with bacon love you?

----------


## Sammy

The evil left hates God & Christianity.
God is going to punish them one day.

----------


## donnay

> The evil left hates God & Christianity.
> God is going to punish them one day.


God HATES Evil...

Proverbs 8:13 (KJV)

“*The fear of the LORD is to hate evil*: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.”


Psalm 97:10-12  King James Version

10 Ye that love the Lord, *hate evil*: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.

11 Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart.

12 Rejoice in the Lord, ye righteous; and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness.

----------


## Danke

> Define "love"
> 
> Way out of what?
> 
> How is this U.S. Political News?


It is like that thrill you feel up your leg when you read my posts.

----------


## TheTexan

> But does Mac n cheese with bacon love you?


It reciprocates my affection, in ways you wouldn't understand

----------


## Jenard Butler

A slave religion for a Slave Mentality.

----------


## Invisible Man

> A slave religion for a Slave Mentality.


Accurate.

----------


## oyarde

> This x1000.
> 
> Loving your neighbor, and shooting him in the face after he's kicked in your door,
> 
> are not mutually exclusive


Pretty sure I can do both . I am just talented like that .

----------


## nobody's_hero

Eh, I think we're in Old Testament times.

----------


## donnay

> A slave religion for a Slave Mentality.


Religion and the denominations are all man-made what do you expect?

----------


## donnay

> Eh, I think we're in Old Testament times.


Ezekiel has more about the end of days than all of the New Testament.

----------


## Ender

*Matthew 5:44* 

*But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;*


*
Matthew 22:39*

* And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.*

----------


## oyarde

Well I do think its OK to pray for your enemies after you've won  . I think thats what Matthew would want .

----------


## Invisible Man

> *Matthew 5:44* 
> 
> *But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;*
> 
> 
> *
> Matthew 22:39*
> 
> * And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.*


"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ender again."

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> You could not be more wrong, on all counts.  Whether that's intentional as you're being paid to be here, or unintentional as you've not fallen far enough to realize the truth, either way you are wrong.  That's all I'll say on this subject with you, as you've shown you've no room to discuss this with any neutrality.


Bleating about truth while employing _awful_ logic in defense of your cause is pathetic.




> But I will say this again.  I have no time for anyone who speaks any type of division between humanity, from here on out.  Those that consider themselves true Christian would feel the same I would think.


The only purpose a "true Christian" of your ilk serves is to end up persecuted and in an early grave at the hands of malicious men. Your kind of "true Christian" will also get your loved ones persecuted and killed at the hands of those same men due to your sheer ineffectiveness. Your tepid existence is sustained entirely by hard men not content to allow malicious men to do as they please due to some misbegotten and thoroughly dangerous interpretation of love.

Finally, those that are unwilling or incapable of dividing humanity based on their actions can lay claim to neither knowledge or wisdom. They are psychological eunuchs.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> If what you say is true, *then I renounce my faith, here and now*, and add you to the ranks of those that would lead good people to slaughter in the face of mortal danger and deadly enemies.


The martyr complex they possess compels them to get themselves and everyone around them killed. Their reward is not of this world, so it does not matter to them whether everyone is slaughtered as a result of their actions. If their type was dominant around the time of the Revolutionary War, then this country would have never been founded as they would have sat on their asses doing nothing at all about the British.




> A slave religion for a Slave Mentality.


Ouch.

----------


## oyarde

> But does Mac n cheese with bacon love you?


Bacon loves me , Mac and cheese cant be good for you so I leave it alone .

----------


## Proph

> Bleating about truth while employing _awful_ logic in defense of your cause is pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> *The only purpose a "true Christian" of your ilk serves is to end up persecuted and in an early grave at the hands of malicious men.* Your kind of "true Christian" will also get your loved ones persecuted and killed at the hands of those same men due to your sheer ineffectiveness. Your tepid existence is sustained entirely by hard men not content to allow malicious men to do as they please due to some misbegotten and thoroughly dangerous interpretation of love.
> 
> Finally, those that are unwilling or incapable of dividing humanity based on their actions can lay claim to neither knowledge or wisdom. They are psychological eunuchs.


If they don't cause you to rein in your tough-guy talk, someone else bigger and badder will.  (Ultimately, you will become one of the malicious men you fear and hate if you continue down that road.)

How appropriate this quote is, on MLK Day of all days:  "Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love."

Most folks are afraid of stuff that will never happen.  (Governments will eventually collapse under their own weight;  no outside intervention is necessary; merely withdraw your support!)


* *




Speaking of withdrawing support and martyr complexes...  (There's no point in even opening that can of worms, with all of the double-thought entailed.)

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> If they don't cause you to rein in your tough-guy talk, someone else bigger and badder will.  (Ultimately, you will become one of the malicious men you fear and hate if you continue down that road.)


It is time to dispense of this sophistry. Firstly, malicious men are not "feared". They exist, and this observation is an acceptance of the nature of man comprising a duality. Also, nobody was speaking of fear until you mentioned it. At best, it is a nice strawman you concocted. At worst, you are being willfully disingenuous.

Secondly, the idea that one becomes what one hates is pseudointellectual garbage. As an example, one does not become a Marxist by hating Marxism. The fact there are people still running around laboring under this delusion is an indictment of the intellectual state of mankind.

Finally, if you thought _any_ of what I wrote amounted to "tough guy talk", then I suggest you locate your spine and verify it is still intact.

----------


## Invisible Man

> Their reward is not of this world,


It really does come down to this.

----------


## flightlesskiwi

> It really does come down to this.


comes in handy for sending them on suicide missions.

----------


## Invisible Man

> comes in handy for sending them on suicide missions.


That cuts both ways.

In the materialistic world view that excludes factors that are not of this world, human life is meaningless and without value anyway. So in that case it still matters not if anyone gets slaughtered.

The hypothesis that it is people with such a world view, and not those who seek rewards that are not of this world, who are really more liable to be suicidal is born out by statistics.

----------


## belian78

> Do you love Satan?


wtf??

----------


## belian78

> Denominational religion in of itself is 'division.'  There is two choices-- Good or Evil.  I certainly will not love Evil of any kind.


What you must realize is that true evil makes up a very small percentage of people on this planet, and folks like you and me will probably never meet one of em if we're lucky.  Most people out there that everyone here is salivating at the mouth to go full jihadi on, are mislead folks just like there are here.  They've just been mislead in a different direction, and for just as long.  Humans on a basic level want to live a life that makes them feel content, and that's the extent of it.  We all can find common ground with our neighbors in that regard, and then build from there.

----------


## belian78

> If they don't cause you to rein in your tough-guy talk, someone else bigger and badder will.  (Ultimately, you will become one of the malicious men you fear and hate if you continue down that road.)
> 
> How appropriate this quote is, on MLK Day of all days:  "Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love."
> 
> Most folks are afraid of stuff that will never happen.  (Governments will eventually collapse under their own weight;  no outside intervention is necessary; merely withdraw your support!)
> 
> 
> * *
> 
> ...


I absolutely agree.  I see posters here today that for years I've seen wish each other and all mankind peace on numerous occasions, now practically salivating to spill the blood of those they say can't wait to get a rope around their necks!

----------


## Proph

> It is time to dispense of this sophistry. Firstly, malicious men are not "feared". They exist, and this observation is an acceptance of the nature of man comprising a duality. Also, nobody was speaking of fear until you mentioned it. At best, it is a nice strawman you concocted. At worst, you are being willfully disingenuous.


How do you propose to stop these "malicious men," BSWPaulsen?  (Pre-emptive violence puts your ideology in the same realm as governments.)




> *Secondly, the idea that one becomes what one hates is pseudointellectual garbage. As an example, one does not become a Marxist by hating Marxism.* The fact there are people still running around laboring under this delusion is an indictment of the intellectual state of mankind.


You do when you forego your principles to stop it.




> Finally, if you thought _any_ of what I wrote amounted to "tough guy talk", then I suggest you locate your spine and verify it is still intact.


"Tough guys" like to appear tough by disregarding simple -- yet important -- concepts like love.

"There is a time for hate, and there is a time for war."

 Tell me how hate and strife will help you accomplish your goals.  (Or help anyone, for that matter!)

----------


## Anti Federalist

> It is time to dispense of this sophistry. Firstly, malicious men are not "feared". They exist, and this observation is an acceptance of the nature of man comprising a duality. Also, nobody was speaking of fear until you mentioned it. At best, it is a nice strawman you concocted. At worst, you are being willfully disingenuous.
> 
> Secondly, the idea that one becomes what one hates is pseudointellectual garbage. As an example, one does not become a Marxist by hating Marxism. The fact there are people still running around laboring under this delusion is an indictment of the intellectual state of mankind.
> 
> Finally, if you thought _any_ of what I wrote amounted to "tough guy talk", then I suggest you locate your spine and verify it is still intact.


_You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to BSWPaulsen again._

----------


## belian78

The only time I see actual extremist thought or actions it's by people that consume online garbage every day, that includes quite a few posters here these days unfortunately.  Whenever I'm out face to face with people, they just want to live the way that makes them content and they dont want to be getting screwed by corps or government.  That's something we of all walks of life can come to agree on.  Absolutely.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> How do you propose to stop these "malicious men," BSWPaulsen?  (Pre-emptive violence puts your ideology in the same realm as governments.)


It does not.

The clear message of political violence across the board is simple: "Do what we want, or we will hurt you".

The only person that has a pass on that concept, that can use it with moral authority, is the person who only wants one thing to be done:

*Leave me alone.*

To engage in violence to stop exterior forces from harming you, your loved ones or molesting your property is justified.




> "There is a time for hate, and there is a time for war."
> 
> Tell me how hate and strife will help you accomplish your goals. (Or help anyone, for that matter!)


Hate is brought to us by our enemies.

Strife is caused by that conflict.

War decides who will rule, politics by other means.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I absolutely agree.  I see posters here today that for years I've seen wish each other and all mankind peace on numerous occasions, now practically salivating to spill the blood of those they say can't wait to get a rope around their necks!


Such as?

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> How do you propose to stop these "malicious men," BSWPaulsen?  (Pre-emptive violence puts your ideology in the same realm as governments.)


Hanging them for their crimes works wonders.




> You do when you forego your principles to stop it.


That does not even rise to the level of sophistry and is just flatly stupid. You do not become a Marxist by stopping Marxism. 




> "Tough guys" like to appear tough by disregarding simple -- yet important -- concepts like love.
> 
> "There is a time for hate, and there is a time for war."


Men, or what you are disparaging as "tough guys", love their families and hate those that would destroy them.




> Tell me how hate and strife will help you accomplish your goals.  (Or help anyone, for that matter!)


Hate helps motivate one toward the destruction of their enemies and enables perseverance in the presence of strife. Humanity would not be capable of hatred if it did not have a useful purpose to serve.

----------


## Proph

> It does not.
> 
> The clear message of political violence across the board is simple: "Do what we want, or we will hurt you".
> 
> The only person that has a pass on that concept, that can use it with moral authority, is the person who only wants one thing to be done:
> 
> *Leave me alone.*
> 
> To engage in violence to stop exterior forces from harming you, your loved ones or molesting your property is justified.
> ...


About the only thing you can control in this life is how you respond to whatever is thrown at you.  (But, violence begets violence and exacerbates strife.)

God rules!  (Quit waiting for some final apocalyptic war, and live your life.)




> The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.





> Will a day come when the race will detect the funniness of these juvenilities and laugh at them--and by laughing at them destroy them? For your race, in its poverty, has unquestionably one really effective weapon--laughter. Power, Money, Persuasion, Supplication, Persecution--these can lift at a colossal humbug,--push it a little-- crowd it a little--weaken it a little, century by century: but only Laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of Laughter nothing can stand.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> About the only thing you can control in this life is how you respond to whatever is thrown at you.  (But, violence begets violence and exacerbates strife.)


Humans are fully capable of directly influencing exactly what gets "thrown at you". There is no requirement they lead a purely reactive life.

No, violence does not necessarily beget more violence. As human history demonstrates, war will exist among a people at one time and peace at another, and this renders your statement an objective falsehood.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

Taken from the reputation comment:




> You talk about hanging people, and claim I'm the sophist? (How much disregard for human life do you have?)


You are a sophist due to your poor usage of logic. The fact you equate hanging people with sophistry indicates your grasp of logic is tenuous at best and nonexistent at worst.

I will not apologize for thinking hanging those that would harm my family is a good thing. Similarly, I would shoot home invaders. Deal with it.

----------


## Proph

> Humans are fully capable of directly influencing exactly what gets "thrown at you". There is no requirement they lead a purely reactive life.
> 
> No, violence does not necessarily beget more violence. As human history demonstrates, war will exist among a people at one time and peace at another, and this renders your statement an objective falsehood.


At all times there is peace in some places and war in others.  (I'd conjecture that those who seek peace are more peaceful!)

You're determined to continue in your conceit, unfortunately.

----------


## belian78

> Bleating about truth while employing _awful_ logic in defense of your cause is pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> The only purpose a "true Christian" of your ilk serves is to end up persecuted and in an early grave at the hands of malicious men. Your kind of "true Christian" will also get your loved ones persecuted and killed at the hands of those same men due to your sheer ineffectiveness. Your tepid existence is sustained entirely by hard men not content to allow malicious men to do as they please due to some misbegotten and thoroughly dangerous interpretation of love.
> 
> Finally, those that are unwilling or incapable of dividing humanity based on their actions can lay claim to neither knowledge or wisdom. They are psychological eunuchs.


Firstly, you know nothing of me or my ilk so you can shut your trap on that front.  Secondly, I don't consider myself a Christian I merely brought that into the conversation because many here consider themselves to be.  And finally, do not mistake my call for love for passivity.  Anyone that threatens my life or of one I love, they will not have a good day.  That doesn't mean I won't regret it and hurt for the rest of my days for taking a light from this world, but in nature the way is to live.

----------


## belian78

> About the only thing you can control in this life is how you respond to whatever is thrown at you.  (But, violence begets violence and exacerbates strife.)
> 
> God rules!  (Quit waiting for some final apocalyptic war, and live your life.)


This is just about the exact conclusions I have came to as well.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> At all times there is peace in some places and war in others.  (I'd conjecture that those who seek peace are more peaceful!)


Your first statement does nothing at all to support your awful argument that violence begets violence.

Your conjecture is ignorant. Those who seek peace fight to defend it or die by the sword of those that are not peaceful.

----------


## Proph

> Taken from the reputation comment:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a sophist due to your poor usage of logic. The fact you equate hanging people with sophistry indicates your grasp of logic is tenuous at best and nonexistent at worst.
> 
> I will not apologize for thinking hanging those that would harm my family is a good thing. Similarly, I would shoot home invaders. Deal with it.


I equate it with sophistry, because of the ease with which you say -- type -- it.  (A lot of steps happen between now and your desired, stated goal; and I doubt you've thought much of it through at all, starting with messages like this.)

The people harming you believe they are helping.  Hurting them won't help anyone, and will only cause more fear and hatred.  

*But, you don't care.*  (You're no better than they are!  [No worse, either, but certainly no better!])

----------


## Anti Federalist

> About the only thing you can control in this life is how you respond to whatever is thrown at you. (But, violence begets violence and exacerbates strife.)
> 
> God rules!  (Quit waiting for some final apocalyptic war, and live your life.)


So, do nothing to those who oppress me, or wish me dead, and have the power and authority to do so, but offer them kind words and forgiveness.

Make no effort to confront tyranny but leave it all in God's hands to deal with.

That's why Christianity is losing followers and it's churches closing down daily and the only worldly battle it wishes to engage in is how to embrace and empower homosexuals and pedophiles.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> I equate it with sophistry, because of the ease with which you say -- type -- it.  (A lot of steps happen between now and your desired, stated goal; and I doubt you've thought much of it through at all, starting with messages like this.)
> 
> *The people harming you believe they are helping.*  Hurting them won't help anyone, and will only cause more fear and hatred.  
> 
> *But, you don't care.*  (You're no better than they are!  [No worse, either, but certainly no better!])


No, they do not believe that.

We are a cancer, a virus, a malignancy to be exterminated...that is them in their own words.

Even Christ whipped the money changers.

----------


## Proph

> *So, do nothing to those who oppress me, or wish me dead, and have the power and authority to do so, but offer them kind words and forgiveness.*
> 
> Make no effort to confront tyranny but leave it all in God's hands to deal with.
> 
> That's why Christianity is losing followers and it's churches closing down daily and the only worldly battle it wishes to engage in is how to embrace and empower homosexuals and pedophiles.


Who said that?  Don't use violence.  (Except in [immediate] defense?]

Technology has granted more means than ever to peacefully retaliate -- if not outright avoid -- oppressors, yet there are still Luddites on forums like this legitimizing the very oppression they claim to want to stop with their calls for the gallows.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Firstly, you know nothing of me or my ilk so you can shut your trap on that front.


You have revealed more than enough about your ilk with your statements. I am not going to be quiet when people like you are attempting to pass off categorical nonsense as truth.




> Secondly, I don't consider myself a Christian I merely brought that into the conversation because many here consider themselves to be.  And finally, do not mistake my call for love for passivity.  Anyone that threatens my life or of one I love, they will not have a good day.  That doesn't mean I won't regret it and hurt for the rest of my days for taking a light from this world, but in nature the way is to live.


Virtue signaling about the hurt and regret you would have over defending your own is disgusting.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> I equate it with sophistry, because of the ease with which you say -- type -- it.  (A lot of steps happen between now and your desired, stated goal; and I doubt you've thought much of it through at all, starting with messages like this.)


That is not what sophistry is, and at this point it is clear you are either ignorant of what it constitutes or being willfully disingenuous.




> The people harming you believe they are helping.  Hurting them won't help anyone, and will only cause more fear and hatred.


You should _never_ make the mistake of claiming to speak for others. You do not _know_ what any of those individuals _believe_. The only thing there is to go by is their words and actions. If what they are doing is a problem for me, then it is a problem that must be dealt with regardless of their intentions.

Destroying the enemy does not cause more "fear and hatred". War is followed by peace.




> *But, you don't care.*  (You're no better than they are!  [No worse, either, but certainly no better!])


I have no interest in equivocating myself with them. That is a pointless endeavor best left to impotent charlatans slated for destruction.

----------


## Proph

> No, they do not believe that.
> 
> We are a cancer, a virus, a malignancy to be exterminated...that is them in their own words.
> 
> Even Christ whipped the money changers.


The heart of the problem is collectivism.  (And here, I always thought it was taxation!)

You're worried about the identity politics about go to into full swing with Biden's presidency.  (Don't use Theire currency!  [And don't make prose-persecution easy by posting inflammatory rhetoric about hanging politicians!])

Threats don't benefit anyone, and if you're guilty of the same actions, then you won't have the high-ground when they do it to you again.

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Threats don't benefit anyone, and if you're guilty of the same actions, then you won't have the high-ground when they do it to you again.


Oh hell. This is too rich.

Hey, *Anti Federalist*, how's that moral superiority been working out for us to this point?

----------


## Proph

> That is not what sophistry is, and at this point it is clear you are either ignorant of what it constitutes or being willfully disingenuous.
> 
> 
> 
> You should _never_ make the mistake of claiming to speak for others. You do not _know_ what any of those individuals _believe_. The only thing there is to go by is their words and actions. If what they are doing is a problem for me, then it is a problem that must be dealt with regardless of their intentions.
> 
> Destroying the enemy does not cause more "fear and hatred". War is followed by peace.
> 
> 
> ...


Sophists are less dangerous than you, if you really believe what you write.

There will always be war, only the enemy changes.

Glad you found a friend, though!  (Keep each other out of trouble.)

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Sophists are less dangerous than you, if you really believe what you write.


Sophists are not dangerous on account of the falsehoods they perpetuate, and the truth is often dangerous, so I will take that as a compliment.




> There will always be war, only the enemy changes.


Irrelevant. Those individuals experiencing war change over time and invalidates your earlier falsehood about violence begetting more violence.

----------


## tfurrh

I wish Sola Fide could've seen this thread....then derailed it.

----------


## tfurrh

Right after Jesus tells us to love enemies he also says not to cast pearls before swine. And all that was after first saying repent.

----------


## phill4paul

> I wish Sola Fide could've seen this thread....then derailed it.


 Bwahahaha!

----------


## oyarde

> I wish Sola Fide could've seen this thread....then derailed it.


Ya , I'm taking Kiwi for my foxhole . Danke gets Sola .

----------


## oyarde

> Right after Jesus tells us to love enemies he also says not to cast pearls before swine. And all that was after first saying repent.


I just take that as to repent a little after I get rid of my enemies . Seems reasonable enough .

----------


## phill4paul

Onward to Valhalla!

----------


## pcosmar

> Onward to Valhalla!


I already live with two women that keep me like a pet..

Bring it.

----------


## phill4paul

> I already live with two women that keep me like a pet..
> 
> Bring it.


  A much needed LMAO!

 You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to pcosmar again.

----------


## Proph

> *Hanging them for their crimes works wonders.*





> You should _never_ make the mistake of claiming to speak for others. You do not _know_ what any of those individuals _believe_. The only thing there is to go by is their words and actions. If what they are doing is a problem for me, then it is a problem that must be dealt with regardless of their intentions.


Presumably, you live alone?  I mean, otherwise, you're essentially speaking for them.  If you encourage the gallows -- threatening people -- are you responsible for any retaliation suffered by those around you for your words?  ("Of course not!  They started it!" says the sophist.)




> That does not even rise to the level of sophistry and is just flatly stupid. You do not become a Marxist by stopping Marxism.


You become a Marxist when you use Marxist means to achieve your goal.  (In this case, offensive, retaliatory -- preemptive -- violence.)




> Men, or what you are disparaging as "tough guys", love their families and hate those that would destroy them.
> 
> Hate helps motivate one toward the destruction of their enemies and enables perseverance in the presence of strife. Humanity would not be capable of hatred if it did not have a useful purpose to serve.


"Tough guys" encourage violence.  (Because they can handle it, everyone else can too!)

How does threatening anyone help, rather than exacerbate?  (It's easy to denigrate ignorant opposition as "enemies," but if they believe their cause is righteous, your hatred serves as fuel.)




> That is not what sophistry is, and at this point it is clear you are either ignorant of what it constitutes or being willfully disingenuous.


Sophists often end up exchanging positions by the end of the discussion.  (You, BSWPaulsen, seem intent on violence!)





> Destroying the enemy does not cause more "fear and hatred". War is followed by peace.


You become "the enemy."  (And, the peace is only temporary!)




> I have no interest in equivocating myself with them. That is a pointless endeavor best left to impotent charlatans slated for destruction.


That's the great hypocrisy though, isn't it?  *(You become what you hate.)*




> Sophists are not dangerous on account of the falsehoods they perpetuate, and the truth is often dangerous, so I will take that as a compliment.


Lies are often more dangerous, and I don't trust anyone trumpeting themselves as such.




> Irrelevant. Those individuals experiencing war change over time and invalidates your earlier falsehood about violence begetting more violence.


Has war changed you?  (Then, what's your excuse?)

Those experiencing war probably just want peace, regardless of which tyrant wins.  (But, no!  It has to be your sandbox for justice!)

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Presumably, you live alone?  I mean, otherwise, you're essentially speaking for them.  If you encourage the gallows -- threatening people -- are you responsible for any retaliation suffered by those around you for your words?  ("Of course not!  They started it!" says the sophist.)


Threatening the gallows in response to crimes committed and equivocating it with random violence against the people I live with is the domain of the intellectually bankrupt.




> You become a Marxist when you use Marxist means to achieve your goal.  (In this case, offensive, retaliatory -- preemptive -- violence.)


In one line you have managed to be wrong twice. Firstly, you become a Marxist when you adopt it as your personal philosophy, so you are wrong on that front. Secondly, retaliatory violence does not belong in the same category as offensive or preemptive violence. 




> "Tough guys" encourage violence.  (Because they can handle it, everyone else can too!)


"Tough guys" use violence when it is appropriate to the occasion at hand.




> How does threatening anyone help, rather than exacerbate?  (It's easy to denigrate ignorant opposition as "enemies," but if they believe their cause is righteous, your hatred serves as fuel.)


Diametrically opposed ideologies typically come to violence. It does not matter whether rhetoric fuels their side or not.




> Sophists often end up exchanging positions by the end of the discussion.  (You, BSWPaulsen, seem intent on violence!)


No position of mine has changed, and you still appear to be wholly ignorant of what sophistry is and is not.




> You become "the enemy."  (And, the peace is only temporary!)


No, you do not become "the enemy" when the war is over. That is categorically false and wholly ignorant of human history.




> That's the great hypocrisy though, isn't it?  *(You become what you hate.)*


As has been discussed previously, the idea that you become what you hate is completely and demonstrably false. 




> Lies are often more dangerous, and I don't trust anyone trumpeting themselves as such.


Good for you.




> Has war changed you?  (Then, what's your excuse?)
> 
> Those experiencing war probably just want peace, regardless of which tyrant wins.  (But, no!  It has to be your sandbox for justice!)


If peace if the most important thing to a person, then they deserve every form of tyranny they encounter.

----------


## Proph

Continue in your conceit, then, I suppose.  (I tried!)

"An eye for an eye makes the world go blind."

I hate the pain and suffering you're going to cause others with your words and actions.  (But, I won't become you by suggesting you be hanged for your threats!)

*Remember the title of the thread.*

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> "An eye for an eye makes the world go blind."


The world would have long since been blinded (or dead) if that were actually true. The wisdom contained in the quote is useful for informing human action, but reality does not neatly coincide with it. As human history amply demonstrates, there are a great many times when it is flatly false.




> I hate the pain and suffering you're going to cause others with your words and actions. (But, I won't become you by suggesting you be hanged for your threats!)


Talking about feeling a certain way regarding something but doing nothing about it is empty virtue signaling. Aside from that, while my actions could potentially achieve a negative outcome, others are responsible for their own outcomes.

----------


## Proph

> *The world would have long since been blinded (or dead) if that were actually true.* The wisdom contained in the quote is useful for informing human action, but reality does not neatly coincide with it. As human history amply demonstrates, there are a great many times when it is flatly false.


That's why I believe in the general goodness of people, and that ultimately government -- coercion -- is not necessary.  (We're not extinct, yet!)

Storming the Capitol worked wonders for freedom, didn't it?  ("They should have done more!  Grrr...  *grumble grumble*")




> Talking about feeling a certain way regarding something *but doing nothing about it* is empty virtue signaling. Aside from that, while my actions could potentially achieve a negative outcome, others are responsible for their own outcomes.





> *Who said that?  Don't use violence.  (Except in [immediate] defense?)
> *
> Technology has granted more means than ever to peacefully retaliate [against] -- if not outright avoid -- oppressors, yet there are still Luddites on forums like this legitimizing the very oppression they claim to want to stop with their calls for the gallows.


*When you start stringing up politicians -- or even threaten such -- "somebody has to do something!"*  (But, if you're a shill, then you probably don't care -- and might even desire this outcome!)

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> That's why I believe in the general goodness of people, and that ultimately government -- coercion -- is not necessary.


The general goodness of people has nothing to do with why the species did not end up blind or dead. Human history, including biblical history, is rife with accounts of one side being destroyed and the conflict ending without the winner "going blind".




> *When you start stringing up politicians -- or even threaten such -- "somebody has to do something!"*  (But, if you're a shill, then you probably don't care -- and might even desire this outcome!)


I was referencing your purported "hate" for what my actions would cause being little more than you virtue signaling. Aside from that, violence _only_ in immediate defense is the same thing as allowing one's enemy to choose the time and place of battle. Basically, moralized stupidity and a blank check for any form of tyranny that does not amount to a "direct threat".

----------


## Proph

> The general goodness of people has nothing to do with why the species did not end up blind or dead. Human history, including biblical history, is rife with accounts of one side being destroyed and the conflict ending without the winner "going blind".
> 
> 
> 
> I was referencing your purported "hate" for what my actions would cause being little more than you virtue signaling. Aside from that, violence _only_ in immediate defense is the same thing as allowing one's enemy to choose the time and place of battle. Basically, moralized stupidity and a blank check for any form of tyranny that does not amount to a "direct threat".


Obsessing over enemies and attacks, *still!*

You'd rather nitpick than address the meat of any of these arguments.

The only "successful" defense that I can recall in recent memory was the BLM/Bundy standoff in 2014.  (But even then, many of the participants were black-bagged later.)  [Offensive retaliation won't fix any of that.]

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> You'd rather nitpick than address the meat of any of these arguments.


Logical progression follows a sequence. The "meat" of an argument is only as good as that sequence, so if the sequence is fallacious, then there is no substance to the argument.




> The only "successful" defense that I can recall in recent memory was the BLM/Bundy standoff in 2014.  (But even then, many of the participants were black-bagged later.)  [Offensive retaliation won't fix any of that.]


That standoff served a valuable lesson in why informational security matters and why any future participants in similar events should carefully guard their identity. Similarly, it reinforced the concept that when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

----------


## Proph

> Logical progression follows a sequence. The "meat" of an argument is only as good as that sequence, so if the sequence is fallacious, then there is no substance to the argument.


Your premise is that pre-emptive violence is sometimes acceptable.  (That's our main disagreement!)

Your "sequence" depends on a similar faulty chain, because you refuse to delve into your faulty premise.

The ease with which you encourage violence truly is astonishing.  (I hope you don't end up creating your own Hell because of it!  [The rest of us might have to live there.])

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Your premise is that pre-emptive violence is sometimes acceptable.  (That's our main disagreement!)


My position is that the applicability of violence is best left to the discernment of the individuals potentially affected by the actions of others. Tolerating tyranny or subversion because it is not immediately violent is not wise. Also lacking in wisdom is allowing malicious actors to engineer your destruction at a time of their choosing because you are hamstrung by a set of rules they do not abide by.




> Your "sequence" depends on a similar faulty chain, because you refuse to delve into your faulty premise.


I have clearly stated what my premise is above.




> The ease with which you encourage violence truly is astonishing.  (I hope you don't end up creating your own Hell because of it!  [The rest of us might have to live there.])


I advocate for individuals to exercise discretion when it comes to violence and regard anyone that reduces its usefulness to a mere reactionary function to be fools that will be exploited by Machiavellians. Basically, those who dismiss the initiation of violence as immoral are doomed to suffer at the hands of those who do not. Conversely, the possibility of aggressive violence can and does serve as a deterrent to tyrants.

----------


## Proph

> My position is that the applicability of violence is best left to the discernment of the individuals potentially affected by the actions of others. *Tolerating tyranny or subversion because it is not immediately violent is not wise.* Also lacking in wisdom is allowing malicious actors to engineer your destruction at a time of their choosing because you are hamstrung by a set of rules they do not abide by.
> 
> 
> 
> I have clearly stated what my premise is above.
> 
> 
> 
> I advocate for individuals to exercise discretion when it comes to violence and regard anyone that reduces its usefulness to a mere reactionary function to be fools that will be exploited by Machiavellians. Basically, those who dismiss the initiation of violence as immoral are doomed to suffer at the hands of those who do not. Conversely, the possibility of aggressive violence can and does serve as a deterrent to tyrants.


Using violence when they are not immediately violent is even more unwise!  (Violence is the health of the State!)

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Using violence when they are not immediately violent is even more unwise!  (Violence is the health of the State!)


I fundamentally disagree with the idea that it is better to tolerate ostensibly peaceful manifestations of tyranny or subversion than to be violent against either.

Violence is the health of any human hierarchy. The State is merely one form of a human hierarchy.

----------


## Proph

> I fundamentally disagree with the idea that it is better to tolerate ostensibly peaceful manifestations of tyranny or subversion than to be violent against either.
> 
> Violence is the health of any human hierarchy. The State is merely one form of a human hierarchy.


Things can always be better, but they can always be much, much worse.

Violence achieves dereliction.  If you would initiate violence -- become an aggressor -- towards those that discomfort you, then we have nothing left to talk about.

"If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."

----------


## BSWPaulsen

> Things can always be better, but they can always be much, much worse.


Indeed.




> Violence achieves dereliction.  If you would initiate violence -- become an aggressor -- towards those that discomfort you, then we have nothing left to talk about.


Like I stated previously, I will stand by exercising discretion as to when violence is and is not both necessary and proper based on the circumstances before me. Neither of us will be changing our positions, so the discussion has reached its natural conclusion.




> "If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet."


You are free to do as you please, and may you encounter good fortune in your endeavors.

----------

