Christ Centered Gamer

I do remember your rant,
and don't remember it being directed at anyone.
So I am pretty sure you weren't involved.
(Unless I am forgetting something. )

I try not to rant on people, but I thought I had a couple choice words about the idea.

JOJ650s wrote:

ChickenSoup wrote:And... last time we talked about the True Love Waits thing, it got modblocked for heresy. So there's that.

Oh, I remember that thread,
I am pretty sure it was locked due to some flaming at the end.

That was a minor reason. The flaming wasn't that big of a deal, but there started to be an uprising of rethinking against the established ideas of sexual purity and, well.

It's sort of like not working on a Sunday. If you're of a denomination that strongly opposes working on Sundays, wouldn't it be a little hypocritical to go out shopping on Sunday? Isn't that encouraging an act (people being at work) that you yourself believe to be a sin?

It's donating money to a charity, and there's a chance you could win money or a trip to a country of your choice. I think you can only buy one ticket, IIRC. Besides, the professors in question didn't say "but please go ahead and donate money to the organizations directly!", they just went on about how gambling was bad. THAT is Pharisaical.

I don't mean to sound like I remember it perfectly,
but I am certain it was locked due to someone flaming,
As I do remember exactly who flamed and who was flamed, (Which I won't mention the names. )
and the moderator post that ended it with a lock.
(Which also said the reason was due to that someone flaming another user directly.)

JOJ650s wrote:I don't mean to sound like I remember it perfectly,
but I am certain it was locked due to someone flaming,
As I do remember exactly who flamed and who was flamed, (Which I won't mention the names. )
and the moderator post that ended it with a lock.
(Which also said the reason was due to that someone flaming another user directly.)

Much perceived flaming, yes, and the lock-er told the lock-ees what was what in the way of theology to have the last word.

Hmmm... odd, I don't seem to recall that.
Well if you want, you can PM me the details.

ChickenSoup wrote: It's donating money to a charity, and there's a chance you could win money or a trip to a country of your choice. I think you can only buy one ticket, IIRC. Besides, the professors in question didn't say "but please go ahead and donate money to the organizations directly!", they just went on about how gambling was bad. THAT is Pharisaical.

Maybe, but like I said for some people gambling is gambling, period... But I do agree they should have encouraged outright donation, like I said.

The email going around was pharisaical to a T. Obsessing over the legalism in morality, but ignoring actually helping people, and that's where your suggestion, Arctic, does a full dodge of that. It's a super classy way of handling the issue and you've kept what's important in sight.
The people who wrote that email seemed to have completely lost sight of the people the money was meant to help, leading to inadvertently urge people against it. Theology trumped helping people, and if nothing else resembled the Pharisees, it's that.

I find it interesting that you find gambling immoral, and with your permission, I'd like to start another thread about it. I'd like to explore it some more, as I've never seen a good defense on why gambling is wrong. I'm interested in your perspective on it, or anyone else who agrees with you on this.

Certainly don't need my permission, but I'll gladly participate, though I admit it's not one of my stronger issues.

I'd be game for a gambling thread. It could open paths to such discussions as the relative morality of certain actions ("what is son for you isn't sin for me")

I'll post one up. Thought I'd ask instead of just calling you out into a debate.

Thanks, I do appreciate that. I've been making an effort to avoid debates in general lately so thank you.

Been think' 'bout that bloggums I mentioned earlier.


Preview memes deploy