Just because someone thinks they're christian doesn't mean they are.
True enough, but what bar do you set for how to determine if someone is truly Christian? What's the reasoning for your judgments? If someone says they're Christian, and acts in a Christian manner, how can we judge them any other way?
If we were living, say, in the fifties, I would also attack fanservice. But, for now, it does more good than bad - at least it promotes the traditional kind of beauty and relationship between a man and a woman. Now is definitely not the time to attack it and doing so is hardly a priority.
The promotion of beauty is the one positive of "fan service" and older style entertainment that was put out by Hollywood. However, it is always combined with the temptation of lust that's intentionally inserted into that media, to drive men toward sin (lusting after a woman who is not your wife is the same as adultery in the Bible).
Your position is the advocacy of the lesser evil, but that lesser evil also contains sin, and drives your brothers to sin (lust, masturbation, porn). What's happened to Western civilization with people constantly abdicating to the lesser evil? It's only resulted in more evil. At some point, decent men must reject all the compromises that were made before them, and become steadfast in truth. These men are always called zealots in their day, because their fervent adherence to truth appears radical in a world of lies and lesser evils.
Oh, it's easy - most people who say they're christian don't act christian at all.
And your second point is childish. It's not about abdicating to lesser evil, it's choosing which one to combat. And no, you can't fight them all - the modern reality is that hardly anyone can actually do anything about evil, outside of internet shitposting (which doesn't qualify as a christian act as it's no act at all).
Oh, it's easy - most people who say they're christian don't act christian at all.
You dodged the question. What bar, what metrics, do you use to judge if someone is Christian or not.
I somewhat agree, that many Christians do not act like Christians, but most Christians I've seen are better people than those I've seen who aren't, on average. Even considering the corruption of the modern church to espouse anti-Biblical stances, modern Christians are better people on average.
Also, I'm curious. Are you Christian?
And your second point is childish. It's not about abdicating to lesser evil, it's choosing which one to combat. And no, you can't fight them all - the modern reality is that hardly anyone can actually do anything about evil, outside of internet shitposting (which doesn't qualify as a christian act as it's no act at all).
You're putting forth different positions. You're initially arguing that people are incapable of fighting multiple things at once, to which I whole heartedly disagree. Secondly, you argue almost no one can fight evil, at all, to which I also whole heartedly disagree.
Both of your positions are an abdication of a man's responsibility to espouse truth in face of falsehoods and lies, and to violently fight evil in his presence. Your position is understandable, though, given how much demoralization propaganda abounds in Western culture, to keep men weakened, controlled, stupid, demoralized, and inactive. On top of this, civilizations at their peak naturally produce weak constituents who cling to their comforts like a sinking ship, refusing to alter their behavior or lift a finger in the face of the growing tide of corruption in their midst, or the ever accelerating slide toward collapse of their civilization. We see this evidence all over Western civilization.
People are still too comfortable, and will enumerate all manner of excuses for why they can't, won't, or shouldn't act. Your excuse is no different. In your own mind, your reasoning is sound, but it's because you're motivated purely by your comforts, knowing that if you were to take up the sword against the people hurting you, and everyone you love, it would rob you of what little comforts you have left. There will absolutely come a time where your excuses no longer suffice, that people will be forced to fight, or to die.
Can people do more than one thing at once? Yes. Can people fight more than one evil at once? Yes. Can people espouse more than one truth at once? Yes. You're acting like you believe individualism is correct, the false belief that people don't group up or have collective interests, or act collectively to fight back against common enemies. We group up precisely because we understand that we can achieve more together than we can by ourselves, to help us fight all the lies and evil.
Your philosophy is also self serving and self defeating, because you actively denounce any idea, action, or people who would fight back against the lies and evil, even though you admit that the lies and evil exists. Thus, your philosophy allows lies and evil to propagate, to spread, and to become worse, fulfilling your prophecy that it is harder to fight "all" the lies and evil at once. This philosophy would put your children and people in a worse position, essentially kicking the can down the road, because you don't want to act.
You also advocate that we should "pick our battles", and constantly compromise with the lesser evil, which is what's allowed evil to propagate in the first place. You can't correct a problem by acting identically to what caused the problem in the first place. Correct the behavior, and then you can correct the problem. But, in your case, you must correct your mind first.
Bro, arguing with some forum autist is definitely not christian.
Pursuing truth is the pursuit of God, to understand his will. It is the most Christian thing we can do, to learn the truth, to espouse it, defend it, and to live it. Debate is one of the best ways to find truth, to challenge our own ideas, to learn if they're wrong, in part or whole, and to hone them. Weak people hold weak ideas, because neither are challenged. If someone shirks away from debate, challenge, or hardship, they are meritous of nothing.
If you have time to waste on this shit, you're not a christian.
False. Christians are not told to remain silent. Christians are not told to be pacifists to the world and people around them. Tell me where such passages in the Bible espouse these behaviors?
You did not answer my questions, so I must conclude that you're not a Christian, and given how you've reacted, you hold Christians in contempt. You use Biblical passages how Satan used them, and how the Pharisees used them, as a bludgeon against the righteous, to burden people with guilt so they don't come to God, to twist the meanings, to make a law mean its antithesis, or to accuse others of that which you are guilty.
When weak men get in a debate, and they can't refute anything, they try to attack anything of the opponent they can, grabbing at straws, in the hopes to "win" the debate. It's the worst thing they could do to themselves. Debate, when good, is supposed to be logical, civil, and honest, with all parties prioritizing truth above all else, so even if they're proven wrong, they still win, because they come closer to truth. When weak men's ideas are challenged, they see it as a personal attack, and respond with vitriol. It completely escapes them that a Christian, who is commanded to love his neighbor, may tell a man the truth, in an attempt to correct his mistakes, so that he doesn't fall to ruin and sin, in the hopes that his neighbor be saved. But, many who hear the truth, recoil and lash out at the speaker, doubling down on their failings and falsehoods, rather than ever admit wrong. It's probably the most common failing of men that I see, a refusal to budge, hanging onto their beliefs like an anchor, letting it drown them.
Enjoy your day.
I hope God softens your heart and humbles you, like he did with me. I'm hard headed. It took me many years to realize what God was teaching me. Hopefully it won't take you as long.
True enough, but what bar do you set for how to determine if someone is truly Christian? What's the reasoning for your judgments? If someone says they're Christian, and acts in a Christian manner, how can we judge them any other way?
The promotion of beauty is the one positive of "fan service" and older style entertainment that was put out by Hollywood. However, it is always combined with the temptation of lust that's intentionally inserted into that media, to drive men toward sin (lusting after a woman who is not your wife is the same as adultery in the Bible).
Your position is the advocacy of the lesser evil, but that lesser evil also contains sin, and drives your brothers to sin (lust, masturbation, porn). What's happened to Western civilization with people constantly abdicating to the lesser evil? It's only resulted in more evil. At some point, decent men must reject all the compromises that were made before them, and become steadfast in truth. These men are always called zealots in their day, because their fervent adherence to truth appears radical in a world of lies and lesser evils.
Oh, it's easy - most people who say they're christian don't act christian at all.
And your second point is childish. It's not about abdicating to lesser evil, it's choosing which one to combat. And no, you can't fight them all - the modern reality is that hardly anyone can actually do anything about evil, outside of internet shitposting (which doesn't qualify as a christian act as it's no act at all).
You dodged the question. What bar, what metrics, do you use to judge if someone is Christian or not.
I somewhat agree, that many Christians do not act like Christians, but most Christians I've seen are better people than those I've seen who aren't, on average. Even considering the corruption of the modern church to espouse anti-Biblical stances, modern Christians are better people on average.
Also, I'm curious. Are you Christian?
You're putting forth different positions. You're initially arguing that people are incapable of fighting multiple things at once, to which I whole heartedly disagree. Secondly, you argue almost no one can fight evil, at all, to which I also whole heartedly disagree.
Both of your positions are an abdication of a man's responsibility to espouse truth in face of falsehoods and lies, and to violently fight evil in his presence. Your position is understandable, though, given how much demoralization propaganda abounds in Western culture, to keep men weakened, controlled, stupid, demoralized, and inactive. On top of this, civilizations at their peak naturally produce weak constituents who cling to their comforts like a sinking ship, refusing to alter their behavior or lift a finger in the face of the growing tide of corruption in their midst, or the ever accelerating slide toward collapse of their civilization. We see this evidence all over Western civilization.
People are still too comfortable, and will enumerate all manner of excuses for why they can't, won't, or shouldn't act. Your excuse is no different. In your own mind, your reasoning is sound, but it's because you're motivated purely by your comforts, knowing that if you were to take up the sword against the people hurting you, and everyone you love, it would rob you of what little comforts you have left. There will absolutely come a time where your excuses no longer suffice, that people will be forced to fight, or to die.
Can people do more than one thing at once? Yes. Can people fight more than one evil at once? Yes. Can people espouse more than one truth at once? Yes. You're acting like you believe individualism is correct, the false belief that people don't group up or have collective interests, or act collectively to fight back against common enemies. We group up precisely because we understand that we can achieve more together than we can by ourselves, to help us fight all the lies and evil.
Your philosophy is also self serving and self defeating, because you actively denounce any idea, action, or people who would fight back against the lies and evil, even though you admit that the lies and evil exists. Thus, your philosophy allows lies and evil to propagate, to spread, and to become worse, fulfilling your prophecy that it is harder to fight "all" the lies and evil at once. This philosophy would put your children and people in a worse position, essentially kicking the can down the road, because you don't want to act.
You also advocate that we should "pick our battles", and constantly compromise with the lesser evil, which is what's allowed evil to propagate in the first place. You can't correct a problem by acting identically to what caused the problem in the first place. Correct the behavior, and then you can correct the problem. But, in your case, you must correct your mind first.
Bro, arguing with some forum autist is definitely not christian. If you have time to waste on this shit, you're not a christian. Enjoy your day.
Pursuing truth is the pursuit of God, to understand his will. It is the most Christian thing we can do, to learn the truth, to espouse it, defend it, and to live it. Debate is one of the best ways to find truth, to challenge our own ideas, to learn if they're wrong, in part or whole, and to hone them. Weak people hold weak ideas, because neither are challenged. If someone shirks away from debate, challenge, or hardship, they are meritous of nothing.
False. Christians are not told to remain silent. Christians are not told to be pacifists to the world and people around them. Tell me where such passages in the Bible espouse these behaviors?
You did not answer my questions, so I must conclude that you're not a Christian, and given how you've reacted, you hold Christians in contempt. You use Biblical passages how Satan used them, and how the Pharisees used them, as a bludgeon against the righteous, to burden people with guilt so they don't come to God, to twist the meanings, to make a law mean its antithesis, or to accuse others of that which you are guilty.
When weak men get in a debate, and they can't refute anything, they try to attack anything of the opponent they can, grabbing at straws, in the hopes to "win" the debate. It's the worst thing they could do to themselves. Debate, when good, is supposed to be logical, civil, and honest, with all parties prioritizing truth above all else, so even if they're proven wrong, they still win, because they come closer to truth. When weak men's ideas are challenged, they see it as a personal attack, and respond with vitriol. It completely escapes them that a Christian, who is commanded to love his neighbor, may tell a man the truth, in an attempt to correct his mistakes, so that he doesn't fall to ruin and sin, in the hopes that his neighbor be saved. But, many who hear the truth, recoil and lash out at the speaker, doubling down on their failings and falsehoods, rather than ever admit wrong. It's probably the most common failing of men that I see, a refusal to budge, hanging onto their beliefs like an anchor, letting it drown them.
I hope God softens your heart and humbles you, like he did with me. I'm hard headed. It took me many years to realize what God was teaching me. Hopefully it won't take you as long.