• Zoolander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Claiming to be a Christian means nothing. I didn’t skip anything. It’s literally the same argument as the “claiming to be a golfer” and “claiming to be a musician” arguments that you can’t wrap your head around.

    Claiming to be a Christian is not a part of what it takes to be a Christian anymore than claiming to be Scotsman makes someone not born in Scotland one.

    Edit: Your edit is even stupider than the body of your post. Satan is not a Christian yet, by your definition, he would have to believe in Jesus’ divinity and would, therefore, be a Christian. This is how stupid your responses are.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Claiming to be a Christian means nothing.

      So words mean nothing again according to you, now only the actions count. Someone’s arguing in circles.

      Claiming to be a Christian has a lot to do with whether or not people consider you a Christian by the common understanding of the word.

      “We are what we pretend to be, so we must careful what we pretend to be.” - Kurt Vonnegut

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Claiming to be a…

        When did I ever claim that words meant anything in terms of whether someone was something?

        It does not. We’ve already covered this. Are you mental? A claim to be something doesn’t make someone that thing. Do I need to keep repeating the “golfer” and “musician” examples? I’m not arguing in circles. You seem to be twisting yourself into knots, though.

        Tell me you don’t understand the Vonnegut quote without telling me you don’t understand it…

        Edit: Just as nonsensical - “Claiming to be a golfer has a lot to do with whether or not people consider you a golfer by the common understanding of the word”. Oh really? I thought it was whether or not you play golf that determined if you were a golfer.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          When did I ever claim that words meant anything in terms of whether someone was something?

          I’ve lost track of the post, but at some point you were saying someone can’t be a Jew if they deny the Commandments or something similar. Now, by your logic maybe a “denial” is some sort of action, but denials by common definition usually take the form of words, not actions.

          Now, if actions are all that count for someone to be considered “a Christian” or “not Christian”, only a complete knowledge of every action a person ever took or will take would suffice for qualifying them or disqualifying them as Christian. So then again, you’d have to basically be God in order to determine which people were Christian. Rendering the definition pointless.

          “Claiming to be a golfer has a lot to do with whether or not people consider you a golfer by the common understanding of the word”. Oh really? I thought it was whether or not you play golf that determined if you were a golfer.

          How do other people know whether or not you play golf?

          You aren’t a thing only when you’re actively doing it.

          • Zoolander@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m going to ignore the first half of this post because you completely missed the point of the Ten Commandments example. I suspect you’re just actually that dense and aren’t being intentionally obtuse or feigning confusion.

            You aren’t a thing only when you’re actively doing it

            Of course not. But you’re definitely not a thing if you don’t do that thing at all.

            • aesthelete@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Of course not. But you’re definitely not a thing if you don’t do that thing at all.

              Who the fuck was arguing that you are?

              • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Again…read up like 2 posts back. That’s the entire point here. Remember? If you don’t play music, you can’t call yourself a musician. If you don’t golf, you can’t claim to be a golfer. Are you really that dense? I genuinely can’t tell if you’re a troll at this point.

                • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You got lost in your own maze of words by saying that “you can’t claim to be a musician if you don’t play an instrument”, and now we’re here.

                  It’s still stupid, your criteria for being considered a musician is still fucking awful.

                  If I were you I would’ve pivoted to say “alright, fair enough, you aren’t a musician unless you play or compose music” and that would be somewhat closer to a common sense definition of the word (oh wait, but those can’t exist, everyone plugs into the dictionary or their nearest holy text in order to decipher meaning), but you like to continue to trip over your own feet for some reason and so you’ve brought us here: to trying to define what a musician isn’t.

                  A topic precisely nobody gives a shit about BTW.

                  You’re a weird little fuck I’ll give you that (if you aren’t just a malfunctioning chatbot).

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Satan is not a Christian yet, by your definition, he would have to believe in Jesus’ divinity and would, therefore, be a Christian. This is how stupid your responses are.

      I like how you keep telling me how stupid I am, but think the common sense definition for “Christian” wouldn’t include having to be a person. 😎

      • Zoolander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I keep telling you how stupid you are because you keep avoiding the actual point and, instead, say stupid things like what you just said as if they’re some sort of gotcha or disprove my point. I literally cannot spell out this argument to you any more simply so, rather than assume you’re intentionally being dishonest or are arguing in bad faith (which I expect is exactly what you’re doing), I have to go with the only logical alternative which is that you are stupid and the point of this is just whizzing above your head while you look at the sky wondering.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I keep telling you how stupid you are because you keep avoiding the actual point and, instead, say stupid things like what you just said as if they’re some sort of gotcha or disprove my point.

          He posts, without a single bit of irony.

          The common sense definition of “a Christian” would certainly contain “a person” or “people” in it.

          • Zoolander@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            …and he doesn’t know what irony is.

            There’s no such thing as a “common sense definition”, you absolutely vacuous moron.

            • aesthelete@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hmm, I wonder what this is then:

              Christians (/ˈkrɪstʃən, -tiən/ ⓘ) are people who follow or adhere to Christianity, a monotheistic Abrahamic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. They form the largest religious community in the world.[10] The words Christ and Christian derive from the Koine Greek title Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach (מָשִׁיחַ) (usually rendered as messiah in English).[11] While there are diverse interpretations of Christianity which sometimes conflict,[12][13] they are united in believing that Jesus has a unique significance.[12]

              Cuz that sure doesn’t seem like the same dumb fucking shit you were spouting, and sure sounds a whole lot more like what I would think of as a definition before looking the fucking thing up.

              • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I have no idea but it’s not a “common sense definition” or whatever bullshit you claimed. Looks like a Wikipedia entry to me.

                All that to say that you have no counter so you moved onto the next bullshit straw man that you pulled out of your empty vessel. I’m done with your inanity.

                • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You sound like ChatGPT, and “common sense definitions” of words definitely exist. Hell, the common sense definitions of words change over time with use constantly…but you know what? You’re right, you absolute “atheist”…all words are neatly defined in divine, ancient tomes, their definition is absolute and unambiguous.

                  • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Good lord. Every time you respond, I cannot believe that someone could be that stupid and then you continue on and not only reinforce it but, somehow, vault over the record you’ve set with your own idiocy.