on my recent ban

[LiveFreeorDie]

im more of a Christian than you, i say with all possible humility

If being a Christian means following the teachings of Jesus Christ as BabyShark was suggesting earlier, then as a Muslim, I have every right to say that I too am more Christian than BabyShark.  And here's my proof:

1) Jesus fell on his face and prayed to God (in the Garden of Gethsemane - Matthew 26:39).  I fall on my face five times a day and pray.  Christians don't.

2) Jesus never ate the pig/pork/ham or whatever you wanna call it.  I don't eat pigs and neither do muslims at large.  Most Christians are pig eaters.

3) Jesus was circumcised and so am I.  The majority of Christians are not.

4) Jesus is portrayed with a beard in most illustrations.  I keep a beard.  Most Christians don't.  Incidentally, almost all illustrations of Jesus's mother (Mary) portray her wearing a head scarf.  Guess who wears a head scarf today - the Muslim woman or the Christian woman?

5) Jesus used to offer the greetings of peace (Luke 10:5, Luke 24:36, John 20:19, John 20:21, John 20:26).  I and all muslims do that today.  Christians don't.

6) Jesus prayed to the father in heaven (God Almighty).  Jesus taught about the unity of God (Mark 12:29).  He submitted his will to God (Luke 22:42).  Jesus was a Muslim by definition.  I submit my will to God.  Christians believe Jesus died for their sins (which is Paul's teachings, not that of Jesus).

@BabyShark
I usually don't post YouTube videos but since you seem to have plenty of time on your hands writing long posts, this video might be of interest to you:

Do Muslims follow Jesus Christ more than Christians? Dr. Laurence Brown on The Deen Show - YouTube

Today I will address this post lining up with your reasoning. I plan to address it another time lining up with the truth.

Your reasoning is that people who do what Jesus did and live like Jesus did and copy His behavior are Christians.

Jesus was born in a stable. Were you born in a stable?

Jesus healed many people from diseases and blindness and cast out demons. Have you done these things?

Jesus turned water into wine. Have you?

Jesus walked on water. Have you?

Jesus kept God's law perfectly and never sinned. Have you? If you've ever lusted after a girl who isn't your wife, or had an angry though against someone, you've broken God's law. None of us can keep God's law perfectly.

Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried, and on the 3rd day rose again from the dead and appeared to His disciples. Have you?

If you don't have to do EVERYTHING Jesus did to be a Christian, surely I and every single human being qualifies, for most of us have breathed, talked, walked, slept, eaten, drank water, and dressed ourselves. Like Jesus did.

If you DO have to do EVERYTHING Jesus did, neither have you.

[Ze_sAiNt]

@BabyShark

Shall I repeat my words?  I said:

If being a Christian means following the teachings of Jesus Christ as BabyShark was suggesting earlier, then as a Muslim, I have every right to say that I too am more Christian than BabyShark.

This is what I said and I meant it exactly the way I said it because I claim to follow Jesus MORE than you and the bulk of Christians do.

Your reasoning is that people who do what Jesus did and live like Jesus did and copy His behavior are Christians.

That is not what I said.  You are putting words in my mouth to be able to put forth other arguments you believe will play in your favor, and in doing so, you have once again cleverly avoided addressing the points I mentioned.  I want you to tell me you follow Jesus's teachings more than I do and prove to me how so.

However, let me quote what YOU said:

Not all people who call themselves Muslims are Muslims and not all people who call themselves Christians are Christians. Actually being the label means believing the teachings of the founder of the religion, Jesus or Muhammad.

We are talking about the teachings of Jesus here, not what he actually did as miracles during his lifetime or the way he was born or his alleged crucifixion.  We are comparing how you and I today, around 2000 years after Jesus walked this Earth, are applying his teachings and behaviors.  I've proven that I follow Jesus in his teachings and behaviors MORE THAN YOU DO.  That doesn't make me perfect or sinless but it certainly makes me more of a Christian than you.  Simple.

If you don't have to do EVERYTHING Jesus did to be a Christian, surely I and every single human being qualifies, for most of us have breathed, talked, walked, slept, eaten, drank water, and dressed ourselves. Like Jesus did.

Agreed, but the minimum you have to do to be called a Christian is to at least follow Jesus's teachings, which I've proven here and in other posts that you don't.  You predominantly follow the teachings of Paul which, if you have to label yourself, makes you a Paulian - see below.

You claim to follow the words of Jesus Christ but in reality, you are only following Paul.  Let's have a look at which of Jesus's or Paul's teachings you follow:

1. Adhering to the laws and commandments

Jesus tells you to keep the laws and the commandments [Matthew 5:17-20]

Paul says that the Law will not bring any justification but a man will only be justified by faith in Christ Jesus. [Galatians 2:16]

You follow Paul.

2. How to attain salvation

Jesus links salvation to the keeping of the commandments. [Matthew 19:16-17]

According to Paul, just professing that Jesus is Lord and that he was raised from the dead will result in the person being saved [Romans 10:9]

You follow Paul.

Paul initiated the whole doctrine of atonement based on the concept of 'original sin' (ROMANS 5:12, 1 CORINTHIANS 15:21-22). Such a concept which states that every human being is born stained with the sin of Adam and Eve, is against the Justice of God.  Major Yeats Brown in his book Life of a Bengal Dancer comments on this absurd concept:

"No heathen tribe has conceived so grotesque an idea, involving as it does the assumption, that man was born with a hereditary stain upon him; and that this stain (for which he is not personably responsible) was to be atoned for; and that the Creator of all things had to sacrifice his only begotten son to neutralize this mysterious curse."

3. Eating the flesh of the swine

Jesus never ate the pig as he followed the Law, which states: "The pig is also unclean; although it has a divided hoof, it does not chew the cud. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses." [Deuteronomy 14:8].

Paul allows everything to be eaten, regardless of what the Law says. [Corinthians 10:25]

You follow Paul.

4. Circumcision

Jesus was circumcised on the 8th day. [Luke 2:21]. And Jesus says, "he is not of me who does not take up his cross and follow me" as I quoted before.

Paul says circumcision is nothing and non-circumcision is nothing. [Corinthians 7:19]

What is good for your "Lord" should be good for you, but the bulk of Christians would rather follow Paul in not circumcising.

You follow Paul.



So, I'm confused.  Which words of Jesus are YOU following?  Can't you see, you're following Paul all the way.

[Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart)]

yeah it's interesting how mnuch influence paul (not an apostle) ended pu having on christianity.  heres a thing
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kamran-pasha/was-jesus-a-vegetarian_b_276141.html

[tora is a simp bitch for billionaires]

jesus was a communist, he told the workers to rise up and got tortured by the romans.

[mousEtopher]

just to clarify, there was some miscommunication when I revised the moderating policy for this section, so bs wasn't actually aware that we stopped using the tiered banning system -- the original plan was to unban everyone & let her try that out with reduced nitpicking over minor crap like cussing, then blid suggested the penitentiary + having an open dialogue with anyone who doesn't follow the section guidelines, and in my mind that was the best & fairest & simplest way that could work long term, i made posts announcing it but i didn't explicitly tell her so she didn't actually know. so all this latest conflict is essentially on me, so sorry everyone for that !

i maintain that her intentions are good and she just needs to find her stride. when this whole forum first started i was the same way, trying to enforce top down morality with ultra specific rules & absolute impartiality, because it made sense to me at the time. i now realize that it just can't work, because everyone is always justified from their own perspective, anyone who forces an external perspective on them for whatever reason will always been seen as oppressive. the only way to reconcile is to focus exclusively on positives & common ground -- when someone feels safe enough to speak their mind without constantly having to defend themselves, then maybe they'll be more willing to hear & understand what you have to say (but definitely not before). which is why i like this new moderation policy -- it doesn't criticize or judge people for acting the way they want to act, it just says "this particular group in this particular place chooses not to act in certain ways, if you want to participate here you have to agree to that, if not you're free to go elsewhere". back then i didn't know what i didn't know, and most of you were gracious enough to be patient with me while i learned.

agree completely with lamby:

Yeah IDK. Lots of reasons I guess. The one constant tends to be each side pointing at the other side and saying "it's their fault beacuse...."

This discussion seems to be made up exclusively of people trying to destroy the other's argument. What can we agree on?

Let's start with something easy: chopping up girl's bits. Absolutely abhorrent. Anybody disagree? No, of course not.

How about burning women alive "at the stake". Anybody like that? No? Ok, we are doing well.

How about racism? Anybody here (apart from Claw, obviously) think that people should be treated differently based solely on their genetic makeup/skin color? No takers? Cool.

Let's try freedom of religion. Does anybody here think that people should be persecuted based on the God they choose to worship? hmmm... well... ... no, I guess - as long as they don't do the bad stuff like chopping/burning/hating etc.



Please feel free to reply with your thoughts on these questions.

Please do not reply with what you think any other person/group's attitude towards these questions is .... that path leads to the dark side!

i can agree that bs does struggle with cognitive biases, like everyone does to some extent or other, and i don't see that as justification to hate or ridicule her or anyone. "If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed." if she doesn't agree with what anyone here is saying, maybe you're not saying it in a way that she can understand based on where she's standing right now. the same goes for what she says too. when someone addresses a person's perceived shortcomings instead of the content of their argument (or if they're misinterpreted to be doing so), the natural response is defensiveness, to push back, equal and opposite reaction. the natural reaction to that is the same. at some point people just need to have the wisdom not to stoop to that base level of name calling and finger pointing and factionalism (in their individual interactions, regardless of what the other person is doing), or nothing ever changes

i skimmed most of the back & forth but what i gather is -- bs is a christian fundamentalist, in her mind being a follower of x religion = literal interpretation & belief in its scripture, word for word, so anyone who does not literally follow the quran (including any bad/outmoded/oppressive things it may say) word for word is not actually a muslim, so it makes sense to trash "muslims" collectively because the term only applies to the ones doing harm. i do not agree with this perspective at all, but viewed in that light the things she says are far less outrageous.

[mousEtopher]

Rolling Stones- Sympathy for the Devil Lyrics - YouTube

[CumSavorer4385]

i can agree that bs does struggle with cognitive biases, like everyone does to some extent or other, and i don't see that as justification to hate or ridicule her or anyone. "If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed." if she doesn't agree with what anyone here is saying, maybe you're not saying it in a way that she can understand based on where she's standing right now. the same goes for what she says too. when someone addresses a person's perceived shortcomings instead of the content of their argument (or if they're misinterpreted to be doing so), the natural response is defensiveness, to push back, equal and opposite reaction. the natural reaction to that is the same. at some point people just need to have the wisdom not to stoop to that base level of name calling and finger pointing and factionalism (in their individual interactions, regardless of what the other person is doing), or nothing ever changes

This is all well and good, but how do you justify a post like this?

http://forum.war2.ru/index.php/topic,3740.msg61475.html#msg61475

This is clearly not the result of just some kind of disagreement, or a reasonable defensive reaction to an attack. She goes out of her way here to lie about my beliefs and falsely attribute many false, absurd, and morally abhorrent views to me, including:

- Support for Nazism
- Support for sectarian eliminationist Wahabbi Islam
- That I think anyone who is not a Muslim or criticizes Islam is a racist
- I believe white people are the master race
- That I support purges and genocide to control population
- Support for killing LGBT people (particularly offensive to me)
- That I think all Christians are bigots who should be killed
- That I support stoning, FGM, and other forms of misogynist violence

And that's just from a brief skim. Not only have I not expressed any of these views on this forum, I have expressed concerted opposition to many of them. Despite all these malicious attacks, I assumed basic good faith and corrected her and asked for her to apologize for the false attribution and debate my actual views. Instead, she doubled down on the false accusations and did not admit fault: http://forum.war2.ru/index.php/topic,3740.msg61559.html#msg61559 And in addition to not admitting fault and not acknowledging my actual beliefs, she put the onus on me to answer to a ridiculous questionnaire full of leading "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions.

And as I pointed out in my reply to the first linked post, she is breaking rule #1 of this forum in both of those posts. Why is a moderator allowed to repeatedly break the forum rules?

And this is just me, I'm sure she's done the same to people like Saint and Tora who have spent more time arguing with her. These are not the actions of someone who has a simple disagreement or misunderstanding, these are the actions of a malicious liar who participates in discussions in bad faith. It is bad enough, IMO, that in a subforum dedicated to productive discussion, such posting is allowed to occur, it's completely absurd and ridiculous that such a liar is allowed to be a moderator and use their moderation powers to bully and intimidate others. There's really no good reason to have someone so dishonest be in a moderation position.

This isn't even getting into her blatant hatred and racism, this is just on the fact that she is a proud, open, and unrepentant liar. I guess if you are dedicated to a complete allowance for views no matter how repugnant being a hateful racist, misogynist, homophobe, transphone, and Islamophobe does not necessarily disqualify someone from being a moderator, but being a repeated and unrepentant liar should.

[~ToRa~]

@mousEtopher

Out of curiosity what was it that made you decide to make BS a mod? Was it because you thought she would make the forums more active? Was it because you thought she would do a good job?

[Ze_sAiNt]

@mousEtopher

Out of curiosity what was it that made you decide to make BS a mod? Was it because you thought she would make the forums more active? Was it because you thought she would do a good job?

Well, I have to admit that BabyShark has made the forum more active primarily because most of her posts are considered controversial by many and would naturally be debated upon - extensively at times since BabyShark IS a hard nut to crack!  Her not posting recently is testimony to what I'm saying.

However, on her doing a good job, maybe we should start a poll on "Do you think BabyShark is doing a good job as Moderator of the "Moderated Section of W2?" where we can all see the results...

[mousEtopher]

@mousEtopher

Out of curiosity what was it that made you decide to make BS a mod? Was it because you thought she would make the forums more active? Was it because you thought she would do a good job?

yes

also she suggested the moderated section in the first place & i like to support as much as possible people who volunteer to make contributions

[tora is a simp bitch for billionaires]

i got banned for owning a retard with facts and logic

[3bdushakur]

i got banned for owning a retard with facts and logic

Delusions are not synonymous with facts or logic.

[tora is a simp bitch for billionaires]

lack of self-awareness is a sign of emotional illogical person

[3bdushakur]

lack of self-awareness is a sign of emotional illogical person

I am glad you are beginning to realize your problem. This is the first step to recovering from delusion. It takes time, don't rush it but it's good that you are becoming self-aware.

[tora is a simp bitch for billionaires]

i' m  not a psychologist but i think your continual projection stems from the fact you likely hate yourself