Paige VanZant "I missed violence"

[Mr Wings]

Now, on to Paige. As a fan, I appreciate fighters who are dedicated to the sport. Paige is not. That is her choice.
And my choice is to not be a fan of hers.

 

[Codpiece]

LUL TRIGGERED

LUL, it was an intelligent response, actually. And not overly emotional.

 

[EliteClown]

Actually she doesn't or didn't you notice that she fights in a female weight class? She is a terrible fighter and a pretender.

Being 3-1 in UFc she can't really be terrible, nor a pretender. What's your record?

 

[Talon81]

I don't hate the subject matter, I hate how you use it to excuse your bigoted point of L view. I've seen many Christians use their religion to feel good about themselves while actually supporting all kinds of bad shit. Serve soup at the soup kitchen, give your money on Sunday, tell yourself you are 'good,' then use all that as an excuse for a supremacist point of view. Take all those teachings from the Bible that are meaningful and potentially amazingly helpful to humanity, and twist them around to suit your particular agenda. Discrimination follows.

So, when you say that Christianity teaches 'righteous judgement,' it is inherently bigoted.

But you're not here to fit in, so don't worry about it!

Excuse my bigoted point of view? Ive done nothing but state facts and in fact I was responding to people who took it upon themselves to make this a "bash Christians" thread. However, rather than judge them for being judgemental, you are judging me for defending it, because you are a hypocrite. Meanwhile, you make generalized statements about what I do or dont do, knowing nothing about me. Go ahead and tell me where I stated a supremacist point of view.
Saying Christianity teaches righteous judgement is no more inherently bigoted than saying it teaches to love. We are humans and it is in our nature to have to discriminate in who we do business with, work for, employ, and keep as friends. You are currently judging me hypocritically and unrighteously, so where do you get off?

 

[Codpiece]

People historically love them some violence and hypocrisy, and are happy to claim a belief in a higher power when it suits their greed, pride and selfishness.

Deviake, I really like you. Like, a lot actually - we have similar taste in game characters and you seem like a fantastic bloke all around. But I needed to correct your post, because on this we disagree. Christ tought love and service, especially of one's enemies.

 

[Sleepdancer]

So what you are saying is, people who claim to be Christian have killed others? Shocking. Surely atheists and other religious people have never done this. Since you obviously failed to read, again I say go read up on the motivations behind wars and you will find that far more "religious" people have been killed by people like Stalin than those who have been killed by people professing Christianity. Several times as many, in fact. Wars and killing are unfortunately human nature and nobody gets to choose who does/does not profess a religion.

No what I am saying is that just like most other religions, people have killed in the name of Christianity. There is no denying that fact, and to say the bible is devoid of violence is disingenuous. You are right though that it's peoples fault for sure and its up to your own interpretation, but since I think that the bible is man made to begin with thats simply irrelevant to me. Also to argue that Stalin have killed more people than the Vatican is like excusing a murderer because serial killers exist.

Christianity, just like other religions have a history of violence, thats just fact. I am not arguing that Jesus was a violent person though, but the old testament is filled with some pretty violent shit.

 

[Codpiece]

Excuse my bigoted point of view? Ive done nothing but state facts and in fact I was responding to people who took it upon themselves to make this a "bash Christians" thread. However, rather than judge them for being judgemental, you are judging me for defending it, because you are a hypocrite. Meanwhile, you make generalized statements about what I do or dont do, knowing nothing about me. Go ahead and tell me where I stated a supremacist point of view.
Saying Christianity teaches righteous judgement is no more inherently bigoted than saying it teaches to love. We are humans and it is in our nature to have to discriminate in who we do business with, work for, employ, and keep as friends. You are currently judging me hypocritically and unrighteously, so where do you get off?

Christianity certainly teaches discernment in terms of right and wrong, but my take from reading scripture is that we are meant to apply that to our own lives. We are also instructed to speak the truth in love, which means letting people know if they are doing the wrong thing, but we are expressly commanded to love people regardless of their behaviour.

So we can judge behaviour but not people, if that makes sense - maybe it would be helpful to make that distinction to people you are debating ITT. You are making some solid points, so don't give up!

 

[Talon81]

No what I am saying is that just like most other religions, people have killed in the name of Christianity. There is no denying that fact, and to say the bible is devoid of violence is disingenuous. You are right though that it's peoples fault for sure and its up to your own interpretation, but since I think that the bible is man made to begin with thats simply irrelevant to me. Also to argue that Stalin have killed more people than the Vatican is like excusing a murderer because serial killers exist.

Christianity, just like other religions have a history of violence, thats just fact. I am not arguing that Jesus was a violent person though, but the old testament is filled with some pretty violent shit.

Big time strawman fallacy going on here. I never said people had not killed in the name of Christianity, in fact I immediately acknowledged it in several posts. I never said the Bible is devoid of violence. I never "excused" people who claim Christianity for killing (although I would argue whether they were Christian at all since they were not following the precepts of it), let alone the Vatican which is totally opposed to my beliefs. You are creating false arguments to be "right".

 

[Tormund]

Being 3-1 in UFc she can't really be terrible, nor a pretender. What's your record?

LMAO against who??? If I were in the UFC I'd be fighting killers not highly unskilled women. She probably lost every round 10-8 to Rose, she looked like an amateur and she'll never beat anybody in the top 15, she's dumb for turning down movies and WWE because she'll never be a champion in the UFC.

 

[Talon81]

Christianity certainly teaches discernment in terms of right and wrong, but my take from reading scripture is that we are meant to apply that to our own lives. We are also instructed to speak the truth in love, which means letting people know if they are doing the wrong thing, but we are expressly commanded to love people regardless of their behaviour.

So we can judge behaviour but not people, if that makes sense - maybe it would be helpful to make that distinction to people you are debating ITT. You are making some solid points, so don't give up!

We are meant to apply it to our own lives, and also in letting other people know, as you said, as long as it is done in love. Jesus did make a couple exceptions as you can see by how he talked to the Pharisees (calling them serpents and children of the devil), but those are definitely not things to be taken lightly.
I pretty much totally agree with everything you are saying, except that there is nothing wrong with judging people with respect to making judgement calls for ourselves, not for the sake of judging them. I certainly judge who I choose to keep as friends and who I choose to keep around my children.

 

[Talon81]

Im not sure where Codpiece got this, but...

People historically love them some violence and hypocrisy, and are happy to claim a belief in a higher power when it suits their greed, pride and selfishness.

If this had been what you had said to begin with, I wouldnt have even disagreed with the post itself. In fact I quite agree. However you chose to argue with the one defending rather than the ones starting the name calling, and instead posted this:

Christians historically love them some violence and hypocrisy, not sure what you're on about

Ah fuck, you're probably trolling.

 

[Codpiece]

We are meant to apply it to our own lives, and also in letting other people know, as you said, as long as it is done in love. Jesus did make a couple exceptions as you can see by how he talked to the Pharisees (calling them serpents and children of the devil), but those are definitely not things to be taken lightly.
I pretty much totally agree with everything you are saying, except that there is nothing wrong with judging people with respect to making judgement calls for ourselves, not for the sake of judging them. I certainly judge who I choose to keep as friends and who I choose to keep around my children.

I suppose that is what I would define as being discerning, which is closely related but not identical as judging.

You're right, Jesus was on occasion extraordinarily judgemental. Two things to note on that:

1. Christ was perfect, so he has a right to make any judgements

2. (And this is one all the 'but Christianity and violence/greed' crowd should take note of) Christ saved his most strongly worded judgements for people who misused God's name for personal gain or prestige. He would have certainly been scathing of the Inquisition, Conquistadors and other violent groups who have claimed to do things in His name.

 

[Sleepdancer]

Big time strawman fallacy going on here. I never said people had not killed in the name of Christianity, in fact I immediately acknowledged it in several posts. I never said the Bible is devoid of violence. I never "excused" people who claim Christianity for killing (although I would argue whether they were Christian at all since they were not following the precepts of it), let alone the Vatican which is totally opposed to my beliefs. You are creating false arguments to be "right".

Well I apologize then, but from what I read you came across arguing that Christianity is somehow inherently peaceful in nature, while I think it's neither here nor there when it comes to that, and Christianity actually has a bleak history of violence just like most other religions, because people like to kill (like you did point out), especially when you believe there is only one true god. As for me saying you were excusing certain elements because of Stalin, I'm sorry, but it came across that way from the "Several times as many, in fact." remark. I am not trying to force anything on you that you aren't and I am not trying to be "right" this is simply my point of view and we are talking.

Probably in circles. All I am saying is, that Christianity does not preach violence, no. Has violence been caused and continue to be made in the name of it? Yes.

 

[Codpiece]

Im not sure where Codpiece got this, but...



If this had been what you had said to begin with, I probably wouldnt have even disagreed with the post itself (only the fact that you chose to argue with the one defending rather than the ones starting the name calling). Instead it was this:

I hijacked Deviake's post and changed it. It was a bit naughty, but I felt it needed fixing. In other words it was my post under Dev's name.

 

[Codpiece]

Off to work, good night lads!

 

[F0od]

I seriously get sick of fighter's perusing activities outside of training, and fighting. Meanwhile their opponents spend the entire time getting better. You missed the violence? Then why were you playing touch butt at CBS studios?

 

[sadclown]

Big time strawman fallacy going on here. I never said people had not killed in the name of Christianity, in fact I immediately acknowledged it in several posts. I never said the Bible is devoid of violence. I never "excused" people who claim Christianity for killing (although I would argue whether they were Christian at all since they were not following the precepts of it), let alone the Vatican which is totally opposed to my beliefs. You are creating false arguments to be "right".

I think people are missing your point.

You admit that there has been plenty of Christian violence.

You're only saying that there's more non-Christian violence.

Which of course is true, since humans existed before Christianity and there have always been more non-Christians than there are Christians in this world.

Genocide is never exclusive to any race, creed or breed.

 

[Talon81]

I suppose that is what I would define as being discerning, which is closely related but not identical as judging.

You're right, Jesus was on occasion extraordinarily judgemental. Two things to note on that:

1. Christ was perfect, so he has a right to make any judgements

2. (And this is one all the 'but Christianity and violence/greed' crowd should take note of) Christ saved his most strongly worded judgements for people who misused God's name for personal gain or prestige. He would have certainly been scathing of the Inquisition, Conquistadors and other violent groups who have claimed to do things in His name.

I dont necessarily make the distinction between judgement and discernment, as they are virtually identical in meaning, but I do understand what you mean that they carry different perceptions to people. Your point #2 is very insightful, actually. Goodnight

 

[Talon81]

Well I apologize then, but from what I read you came across arguing that Christianity is somehow inherently peaceful in nature, while I think it's neither here nor there when it comes to that, and Christianity actually has a bleak history of violence just like most other religions, because people like to kill (like you did point out), especially when you believe there is only one true god. As for me saying you were excusing certain elements because of Stalin, I'm sorry, but it came across that way from the "Several times as many, in fact." remark. I am not trying to force anything on you that you aren't and I am not trying to be "right" this is simply my point of view and we are talking.

Probably in circles. All I am saying is, that Christianity does not preach violence, no. Has violence been caused and continue to be made in the name of it? Yes.

Fair enough on all accounts, except for one which I disagree on:
Christianity IS for sure peaceful in nature. The Old Testament was not, but Christianity is based on the New Testament (using the Old Testament as more of a history book to understand the context of our need for Jesus).

BUT, and its a big but, that doesnt mean that all professing Christians will be. You can have a religion with a statement as simple as "love everyone and put their needs above your own" (which the Bible teaches), and people will somehow kill while professing that religion.

It is human nature to use things to our own advantage, and it is human nature that some will kill. Those doing the killing will almost always come up with some excuse why it is "right" or "ok". The question is, would those people have killed anyway? Probably not in all cases, but in most cases, probably. An excuse for violence can always be found, and has been found among the religious and among atheists.

 

[thekartesian]

Cancer patients are missing your hair because of your broken promise.

Hahahahahaha this killed me