Christians talk geek?

[vertigo]

Well, I have been saying for a while now that one shouldn't keep giving atheistic arguments over and over again, it is really pointless. So in lieu of that let me relate my experience of joining an innocent sounding channel called #geekspeak on IRC, which I found to be a geeky Christian enclave. I will share some interesting moments.

Here I raised a pertinent issue, with regards to freedom of speech:

[23:41] <Jung-> hellbring, there really isn't anything you can't talk about. Just try to keep it rated PG, G would be better
[23:41] <hellbring> ah
[23:41] <verty> what is G?
[23:41] <hellbring> I change my name
[23:41] * hellbring is now known as spangleso
[23:41] <Jung-> General Audiances
[23:41] <spangleso>
[23:41] <verty> surely the word 'hell' is allowed
[23:42] * spangleso is now known as spangles
[23:42] <verty> free speech and all that

... to which I received no answer. I gather the word 'hell' is not liked.

Here is an interesting part. See how N777win (the eldest) comes to the rescue when I throw a curveball (that the Bible supports religious zeal):

[00:20] <spangles> i respect my own life and others that are friends with me
[00:20] <spangles> I protect and look after my own
[00:20] <spangles> anyone who breaks that group of friends
[00:20] <spangles> I'll go take them out in a matter of words.
[00:20] <verty> huh?
[00:20] <verty> how will you take them out?
[00:21] <spangles> erm well for instance if they killed my friend - then you get the picture
[00:21] <verty> if they killed an unborn baby?
[00:21] <verty> if they were a doctor who did that?
[00:22] <N777win> we teach it is better to forgive others rather then take revenge
[00:22] <N777win> let God get the revenge at judgement
[00:22] <spangles> no only my friendship with another person
[00:22] <Snu> oh please lets not get into a debate about abortion...
[00:22] <verty> I'm quite willing to avoid it
[00:23] <copper> myself included.
[00:23] <verty> if someone were to kill such a doctor, would you regard that as a perversion of Christianity?

-- ignored this question for more than a minute

[00:25] <Snu> verty: yes, even if abortion is wrong, repaying a wrong with a wrong is not good
[00:26] <verty> snu, how do you account for the story of Phinehas in the Bible? Do you contend that story does not support religious zeal, in such a way as would support killing that doctor?
[00:26] <verty> this is the last question I have
[00:26] <Snu> verty: i dont know the story
[00:26] <verty> snu, read it sometime
[00:27] <Snu> i probably have, i just dont remember it, heh
[00:27] <copper> I'll tell you what I think.
[00:27] <copper> There is the bible. And then there are retarded people who never know how to interpret it. Then there are retarded people who never know how to interpret it but are on the other side of the debate. And I resent peoples' tendency to flare up a debate every time the bible is mentioned.
[00:28] <Snu> heh
[00:28] <copper> No sense hashing out the same bullcrap over and over again.
[00:29] <verty> well for reference, it is Numbers 25
[00:29] <Snu> there's also the issue of context, which is so often forgotten
[00:29] <verty> I'd love you to tell me about the context

-- silence

[00:30] <verty> it needn't be now of course
[00:31] <Snu> also, the old testament is quite different from the new, in short it was a much harsher time, and God was very strict with israel in an attempt to keep them from being corrupted
[00:31] <N777win> very true
[00:31] <spangles> Oops didn't mean all these bewildered people to start chatting on about the bible
[00:31] <N777win> and the NT fulfils the "law" of the ot
[00:31] <N777win> so we don't live under the "The Law"
[00:32] <N777win> only by love
[00:32] <N777win> if you love you won't steal, etc
[00:32] <N777win> if you love you kill, etc

-- and so it continued...

[Superhappyjen]

At least these people were willing to talk to you. I've been booted from a Christian chatroom for asking similar questions.

I have to say it's difficult to interpret pauses in a chatroom. These could be explained by lag times in connections, or other computer problems, and don't necessarily mean people are avoiding your questions. (though that is also likely)

[vertigo]

I have to say it's difficult to interpret pauses in a chatroom.

I believe I fairly reflected the attitude that was present. Although I agree about gaps it did seem to me not to be about lag. For instance, before my 'it needn't be now' comment the gap was quite large. Also, there was other talk going on which I removed.

That last line reads 'if you love you kill'. It was a mistake by N777win, he meant to say 'if you love you won't kill'. I replied 'only if you are a jilted lover', however they only understood the joke when I explained it later. They were stuck in preach mode at the time.

And just so you know, even though they did answer these questions, they didn't seem entirely happy about them. One commented that they dislike when people abuse their favours (?). Another told me I mustn't challenge people all the time, it's adversarial. I told them that's what chatting is about, sharing differing opinions.

One commented on how he disliked PETA's propaganda. When I asked how it was different from Christians spreading the word, I was in the dog box for sure.

[Superhappyjen]

Ever seen the This Hour has 22 Minutes segment called "Talking to Americans"? Sometimes I think they should do a segment called "Talking to Bible-thumpers"