Christianity is Anti-Hatred of People or Groups of People

[Dr.Henry_Killinger]

RadiantDanceMachine said:

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

Did you miss the part where I replied to you and linked you to the fallacy of quoting out of context? Because the verbatim citing you did, does exactly that. If anything, you are ignoring the actual fact that the "facts" you claim I am ignoring are fallacies. 

It astounds me that you have such conginitive dissonance that you recognize that I am purposely using a non-sequitor, but fail to realize that because I am mimicing the form of your claim, I am pointing out that your claim is a non-sequitor as well. 

In other words, if you say that the occurrence of Christ in the NT is a non-sequitor, so to is your claim about the occurences of hate. 

I explicitly told you that based on your reasoning, the occurrence of Christ in the NT refers to how the OT is barely pertinent to modern christianity because its lack of Christ.

So I did not "contrast[ed] "Jesus" and "Christ" with "hate" as you claim, I contrasted the occurrences, ~900 vs 16, which is completely different then the fabricated claim you are alarmed at.

You made no replies in reference to my quotations, you made replies in reference to my occurrences which renders your "out of context" entirely obsolete, which is why I ignored a rebuttal that made no sense. I thought this was very easily understood...by anyone, I suppose I was mistaken.

You seem to not be following this procession of events at all I'm afraid.

Your claim: "Thus, if a so called Christian says "God hates X" they are either not a Christian, or at the very least sinning themselves."

Was refuted by:

1) Quite a few quotations which evidence that several things are hated as per the Bible. 

2) The number of occurences within the Bible that hate is used.

Your efforts at refuting 2) were a complete failure due to the argument itself being a non-sequitur. Namely "IFF Christ/Jesus are mentioned more than hate, then no hate exists".

No effort has been made to address 1) at any point in time until now. These efforts currently stem from nothing at all. Read the passages that contain these quotations in their entirety...nothing is taken out of context here. Feel free to look them up, surely you know where they are?

Oh dear...if you can't see the clear and marked distinction between my argument and yours, you truly are way out of your depth here.

My argument is as follows:

P1) If hate is mentioned in the bible, "god" hates something. 

P2) Hate is mentioned in the bible.

C) Ergo, god hates something.

*P1 could very easily be amended to state: "If the bible mentions that god/lord/Jesus hates X, then god hates X" based upon ample quotations of such.

Your argument:

P1) If Jesus/Christ are mentioned in the bible more than hate, then "god" doesn't hate anything. (clearly inept)

P2) Jesus/Christ are mentioned more in the bible than hate.

C) Ergo, "god" doesn't hate anything.

Hopefully this clears up your confusion since you seem wildly confused about the procession of events.

The only one confused here is you. I will spell it out for you. Quoting the bible verbatim is the same thing as quoting out of context. 

So your "quotations", "references to the occurrencness", and the argument you make in this point are based on fallacies. 

Any reasoning based on fallacies is faulty. For instance, P1) makes no sense because the word count says nothing about even the sentence that the word hate was located in.

Ex. When his brothers saw that their father loved him more than any of them, they hated him and could not speak a kind word to him. -Genesis 37:4

Based on your theorem P1) states " If hate is mentioned in the bible, "god" hates something. ". In the context of the sentence, "His[Joseph] brother's hated him[Joseph]. So here it is the brother's who hates something. P1 implies that Joseph's Brothers is equivalent to God. See how that makes no sense? Furthermore, since P1 makes a statement on ALL occurrence of Hate, in other words For All x, then one example is enough to disprove the entire thing.

The argument you claim I said has nothing to do with the argument I actually purported.

"based on your reasoning, the occurrence of Christ in the NT refers to how the OT is barely pertinent to modern christianity because its lack of Christ." is not the same thing as " If Jesus/Christ are mentioned in the bible more than hate, then "god" doesn't hate anything. (clearly inept)"

In otherwords, the absence of Christ/Jesus in the OT vs is presence in NT, describes how relevant the two books are the Christianity which is not the same as the occurence of Christ/Jesus > occurrence of hate so God doesn't hate anything.

But I prefaced that statement with "based on your reasoning"

And I have just proven that your reasoning DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

Also attempting to apply logic to a book of faith(hence illogical) makes zero sense as well. You can apply logic to how it works in the real world, and its affects like JWeinCom or other posters with valid arguments, but with regards to its contents it's pointless.

FYI: I never said God doesn't hate anything, he does hate sin, just not sinners. A distiction that I will admit I didn't make because I assumed that "God hates X" referred to hate groups using it to justify there hatred of other groups of people.