The Challenge of Baiting Anti-Christian and Similar Threads for Believers

reply to post by wildtimes

Sorry to interrupt the back-patting here,
but, are you saying that being confrontational is part of your 'job'?

I haven't got past your post here in the thread yet, so I don't know what more there is to follow --
but this comment inspired me to jump in.

It sounds like you are TRYING to be a divisive, judgmental person, and you welcome being 'persecuted', and intend to behave in a way that keeps it in motion.

Exactly! And more to your point, the first part of the quote.

freedom7:
And while it's discouraging to feel persecuted we can never forget that Jesus promised us this would happen. So we need to dig down deep even when it's hard and thank God because that means we're doing something right.

when we truly should be afraid is when everyone loves us and enjoys every word we say. That's normally a sign that somewhere in our lives we're compromising and becoming friends of the world. Something Christ explicitly warns us against.

So while some Christians are bemoaning that they're being disrespected, baited and attacked, there are some who secretly enjoy the attacks and believe that their behavior, that leads to their victimization, is good and positive. They see the attacks as a validation that they are doing something right, instead of re-evaluating their vulnerability. It's a very convoluted logic of self fulfilling martyrdom and self righteousness.

I prefer to debate the individual points. It's easier that way. Otherwise these arguments get too big, too broad to discuss, especially in a forum like this. I mean this thread has baiting, evolution, death and the afterlife, dinosaurs...too much really.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest

That would be because the mainstream theory of evolution has no scientific basis.

Yes, it does.
It has decades of 'basis' - and I won't even go into the misuse of the term 'theory' when Religionistas use it.

It's ridiculous to think the world is only a few thousand years old, and that 'dinosaur fossils' were 'planted' by "Satan" or whoever.

I'm not an atheist. I can actually accept "Intelligent Design" - but posts like yours are what gets my hackles up.

Stormdancer777
reply to post by Klassified

 

You are right of course, in a perfect world we are supposed to walk away.


However how would you handle being put to death?

I am afraid I am to bullheaded to go willingly.

He who loses his life for my sake...

BO XIAN
reply to post by Gryphon66

 

BAITING, to me . . . in the context of these issues, this thread, and on ATS constitutes:

A thread title and/or OP or post which displays the following:

1. Fairly deliberate
2. Pointed, prickly, fiercely provocative wording in an evidently obnoxious, seemingly mean-spirited way
3. toward triggering a response from those targeted with the baiting
4. which the baitER can then easily and dramatically POUNCE on with great bile, bitterness, resentment, anger, hostility, haughtiness, insult etc.
5. asserting that the responses to the bait are the most ignorant, stupid, clueless, unscientific, baseless, totally false stinking pile to ever pollute the multiverse and particularly ATS.

more or less . . . imho.

mileage may vary.

BO XIAN, I'm going to trim out all the emotionally-charged terms and phrases from your response just for a moment.

In essence, baiting is a title and/or post which is deliberate and intends to trigger a response.

I think this may be a big part of the problem your OP is pointing to ... because if that core construction is right, then essentially, every post on ATS would then be a baiting post.

I say that because:

"prickly, fiercely provocative, evidently obnoxious, mean-spirited" as well as
"bile, bitterness, resentment, anger, hostility, haughtiness, insult" as well as
"ignorant, stupid, clueless, unscientific, baseless, totally false, stinking pile"

are all entirely subjective emotionally-based terms dependant on individual definition (or moderator decision.)

I'm not suggesting that we remove all emotion from our posts by any means. Passionate argument and discussion are part and parcel of what ATS is about in my mind.

I think the answer you seek is very simple: Don't direct comments toward individuals but to ideas.

reply to post by windword

They see the attacks as a validation that they are doing something right, instead of re-evaluating their vulnerability. It's a very convoluted logic of self fulfilling martyrdom and self righteousness.

I guess.

I just don't get it.


It's what is causing all the strife in the world now - not just 'geopolitics', but 'georeligion' seems to be unravelling the very fabric of our solidarity as a 'race.'

It seems a display of weak faith to consider oneself persecuted in the midst of what amounts to mere opinions and rhetoric. If one cannot pit his faith against a few opposing opinions, what else, if anything, could it have the strength to stand against?

BELIEVERpriest
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

That would be because the mainstream theory of evolution has no scientific basis. There is no way for ape to become man. We all change within our own species, but creatures can not become a new species.

Much of what science observes regarding missing links within "human evolution" is evidence of cross genetic manipulation, which is recorded not only in the Bible, but the Sumerian tablets, Greek mythology, and other ancient myths. Why does "science" continue to ignore these factors.

No scientific basis for evolution? You may want to take a look at THIS LINK. While it may not be extensive, it's a good place to start and gets across the basic idea that there are mountains of evidence that supports evolution being a real-world fact.

I also see you have made the common mistake of believing humans evolved from apes which is a pretty amateurish mistake to make. Did a bowtie noodle "evolve" from a spaghetti noodle? Or did both the bowtie and spaghetti noodles come from the same ingredients but "evolved" into different forms?

Humans did not evolve from apes, they share a common ancestor or common "ingredients".

reply to post by windword

So while some Christians are bemoaning that they're being disrespected, baited and attacked, there are some who secretly enjoy the attacks and believe that their behavior, that leads to their victimization, is good and positive. They see the attacks as a validation that they are doing something right, instead of re-evaluating their vulnerability. It's a very convoluted logic of self fulfilling martyrdom and self righteousness.

If I liked it I wouldn't be complaining.

I said i wouldn't make a good martyr, so I don't know exactly where that leaves me.

Waste of time actually trying to find common ground, meet people half way, walk in their shoes, show some compassion.

Looking at the state of the world today I would be ashamed to bash Christians knowing many are being martyred for their beliefs.

whatever.

Aphorism
It seems a display of weak faith to consider oneself persecuted in the midst of what amounts to mere opinions and rhetoric. If one cannot pit his faith against a few opposing opinions, what else, if anything, could it have the strength to stand against?

It is not opposing opinion, an open and honest dialog is all that is asked, minus the snotty remarks.

reply to post by Gryphon66

In essence, baiting is a title and/or post which is deliberate and intends to trigger a response.

NOPE. That does not qualify in my construction on such realities.

Baiting is at least

1. mostly a conscious choice--a deliberate action, strategy--for some, more conscious than for others.

2. DESIGNED to strike to the core, the heart, the emotions, the foundational cosmology, values, heart of . . . in this case . . . Christians

3. in a more or less assaultive, insulting, prickly, bullying, demeaning etc. set of ways

4. and designed to trigger a response which can further and more easily be dogpiled on by one's CO-RELIGIONISTS as absurd, unscientific, irratioinal, unfounded, stupid, ignorant etc.

I don't see how baiting can be much reduced beyond that.

Your definition is not baiting, per se.

Baiting seeks in an ornery way to trigger a response that can be further ganged up on and ridiculed.
.

"prickly, fiercely provocative, evidently obnoxious, mean-spirited" as well as "bile, bitterness, resentment, anger, hostility, haughtiness, insult" as well as "ignorant, stupid, clueless, unscientific, baseless, totally false, stinking pile"

reply to post by Gryphon66


Strangely enough...these are all qualities of the OP projected outwards.

And this of course is a fine example of a 'baiting' thread.

reply to post by midicon


What a massively admirable picture of

--objectivity
--sweetness and light
--thorough going accuracy
--brilliance
--erudition
--magnanimity
--wisdom
--mutually respectful dialogue

. . . yada yada yada

/sarc

reply to post by Stormdancer777

Waste of time actually trying to find common ground, meet people half way, walk in their shoes, show some compassion.

Storm! This breaks my heart!!!

It is NEVER a waste of time trying to find common ground....
to meet people halfway.

How will this world EVER be at peace if this is not practiced by everyone??!!

It's the only real, actionable hope we have. Waiting for "Jesus" to return is the apex of pessimism and resignation (laziness might be another applicable term)!!!

ATS doesn't allow a "call to action".

Closed.