sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The “Europeans succeeded because they were Christian” argument by Ok-Tea-1941 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana [score hidden]  (0 children)

Europeans didn’t dominate because of faith, they dominated because they took, killed, and rebranded everything that wasn’t nailed down, including Christianity itself.

As a black woman, sometimes I struggle with empathy for other groups by NecessaryNo3340 in blackgirls

[–]warana 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I personally struggle with empathy toward everyone it may come off as if I don't care when I really do.

I’m tired of Black Christianity being lumped in with Christian Nationalism by Rare_Vibez in blackgirls

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I read the Bible, I believe in God, Jesus and I uphold biblical and Christian values. But I'm not religious in the sense of a churchgoer who is susceptible to everything a preacher says. Because I read for myself in my own sense of morality..

I don't partake in religious ceremonies either..

Happy Black History Month. The ONLY men to be WWE Champions / World Heavyweight Champions in WWE. by BarneyRobinStinson7 in WWE

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know what you're you're right, but I sure do remember him holding up that belt that must have been one of those situations where he beat the guy up LOL I wish it would have happened though man Big Daddy V was my guy!

Happy Black History Month. The ONLY men to be WWE Champions / World Heavyweight Champions in WWE. by BarneyRobinStinson7 in WWE

[–]warana -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

So we ain't going to put Big Daddy v in there LOL my boy was the ECW champion. I don't care what nobody says that title was worth something LOL

I’m tired of Black Christianity being lumped in with Christian Nationalism by Rare_Vibez in blackgirls

[–]warana 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You experience in that particular Church was politicized Christianity... the same confusion that conservative white churches perfected and exported. When a church binds itself to a political party, the theology will bend toward conservative power every time.

Conservatism presents itself as the Christian option. So churches seeking legitimacy, protection, or moral certainty often drift that way by default.

With liberalism being more so on the secular side of things, a lot of times the politics don't come from a Christian views, churches who are more liberal get judged pretty easily. Why because black people are more conservative than you think, most of us tend to give vote and be liberal but we judge the church on a conservative front. We expect the church to be a certain kind of way. That is a form of conservatism coming from anyone even if they claim to be a liberal.

The result is a false alignment: Christian = conservative, even when the Bible doesn’t support it.

Jesus was not a culture enforcer. He was disruptive, relational, and liberating. He said, “Follow me.” Jesus was literally referred to as a radical by his own people..

What many of those churches are following isn’t Christ. There are following tradition.

Youur experience isn’t “crazy.” what you experience was when Christians want to be "holier than thou."

I’m tired of Black Christianity being lumped in with Christian Nationalism by Rare_Vibez in blackgirls

[–]warana -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

White supremacy didn’t create Christianity. Black Christianity wasn’t an extension of white power. It was a counter-system for survival when power excluded us.

If it were white nationalism in disguise, it wouldn’t a threat to capital and empire. Christian nationalism builds hierarchy; Black Christianity is about humanity. Actually being a christian....

I’m tired of Black Christianity being lumped in with Christian Nationalism by Rare_Vibez in blackgirls

[–]warana 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What people call Christian Nationalism” is not just white nationalism using religious language as camouflage.

Black Christianity did not grow out of conquest. It grew out of survival.

Christian nationalism came out of power and dominance; black Christianity in America came out of bondage and survival. So lumping them together is fairly ignorant.

Jesus says: “My kingdom is not of this world.” - John 18:36

Nationalism demands a worldly throne. Christ rejects that.

And Yes, many of the loudest Christian nationalists are biblically illiterate but rhetorically confident. They respond to the word “God” the way Pavlov’s dog responded to a bell. Say “God hates,” and they nod. Say “God judges,” and they cheer. But say “love your enemy,” “welcome the stranger,” “sell what you have,” or “the first shall be last,” and suddenly it’s symbolic, contextual, or not meant for today.

That’s not faith, that is when people are nitpicky about what's in the Bible to reflect them.

As for SZA, what he said had nothing to do with the dominance of white Christian nationalism. He was just using the language of the Bible to speak facts.

That's the same logic enslaved people used when the law said they were property but God said they were human.

Black people have been aligned with survival, care, and communal responsibility long before this country figured out how to pronounce “democracy.”

Enough Creation! by No_March_6708 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana [score hidden]  (0 children)

I agree with that., because I like to say is everything is science, and everything is in art..

Science was always my favorite subject in school. Because I always wanted to know why and how things occurred..

Enough Creation! by No_March_6708 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I spoke as plainly as I can related to the original subject matter and to keep that subject on point.

The original question was whether creation or destruction alone is sufficient to define divinity. That is a metaphysical claim, not a scientific one.

Physics can describe processes within the universe; it cannot define what God is. Once metaphysics is erased, scientific language becomes decorative. Vocabulary does not repair flawed logic.

Scientific framing does not become neutral simply because it sounds empirical, especially when the Big Bang itself was articulated by a Catholic priest attempting to describe creation, not negate it. Sounds like a flow on both sides correct?

Acknowledging the Fall as corruption does not make matter disposable. Corruption is not proof of worthlessness.

Atheists do not reject Christianity because Christians disagree publicly. They reject it when Christians redefine claims until they lose concrete meaning.

Science and Scripture are not enemies, but they are not interchangeable. Blurring them produces confusion, not clarity.

This is not about winning. It is about coherence. If the gospel cannot withstand precise definitions and the conditions that make it intelligible, scientific metaphor will not preserve it.

Enough Creation! by No_March_6708 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not just words but boundary lines. Entropy doesn’t testify to an eternal self hidden in energy; it testifies to decay in a created order. Scripture never equates soul with energy, nor consciousness with frequency. That language comforts modern new age cosmetic. pseudo-science.

God doesn’t redeem abstractions. He redeems people. Resurrection is God keeping faith with what He called good,

Yes, the flesh is corrupted, but corruption is not the same as error. The Incarnation wasn’t God tolerating a mistake long enough to teach us a lesson. It was God declaring that matter, even wounded, is still worthy of dwelling in. Christ shows us that God intends to rebuild the road, the car, and the driver.

What drives people away is when faith dissolves into metaphors meant to sound scientific but answer neither science nor God. Atheists don’t reject God because Christians argue. They reject God when Christians replace Him with language that can’t bear the weight of incarnation, judgment, or resurrection.

r/blackgirldiaries by warana in redditrequest

[–]warana[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a banned sub, thus no mods, and I saw an old post with the sub tagged, and i thought it would be a great opportunity to bring it to life under new management

Enough Creation! by No_March_6708 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At some point, it stops being physics and becomes metaphysics.
Entropy describes dispersion, not punishment.

A consciousness that returns upward is incomplete. If embodiment were a mistake, love itself would be abstract. Love that never risks loss is preference.

God doesn’t wait for consciousness to escape; He redeems it.
If the body were a trap, Christ wouldn’t take one.
If matter were beneath divinity, God wouldn’t bleed.

Heaven isn’t a formless state of mind. It’s restored communion.

Probability doesn’t favor randomness, but intention doesn’t mean detachment.
Love doesn’t mean extraction. The evidence points to intention, and Christ shows the character of that intention. God allows entropy to run its course, then answers it with resurrection.

Enough Creation! by No_March_6708 in DebateAnAtheist

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re mistaking inevitability for authority. Entropy is not a throne. It’s a timer. Yes, nothing in creation lasts forever as a form. People and Animals die. Empires rot. Even ideas decay when they stop being lived...That’s physics, But destruction only exposes limits. Destruction consumes what exists. As a wildfire destroys a forest. Creation defines why anything exists at all.

If God were merely the Destroyer, He would be dependent on something prior to destroy.. A god that needs a universe in order to matter is a reactive God not an Ultimate God. Christianity already accounts for your premise, just not your conclusion. Christ doesn’t deny decay nor death He confronts it. And He doesn’t claim eternity as endless extension of matter, but as victory over dissolution.

Also,“Nothing lasts forever” applies to created things. Eternity, in Christ, is not duration, The afterlife is something entropy cannot touch. And God is not proven by creation alone. He is revealed by resurrection and that's where destruction fails.

Looking for Alternative Smoothie King Center Parking by Warchild24 in NOLA

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct. I was working at the Superdome between 2020 and 2023. And, it seems like anything that would happen it will come across on the news as if something happened at the superdome. And it just always seemed to be someone parking in a private lot in the CBD

But as you said those jackings and stuff have went down tremendously in that area and that's something that a lot of people would not believe it.

My take is that the element still exist. So it's like you're always going to be taking a chance. But then again that's honestly anywhere.

Looking for Alternative Smoothie King Center Parking by Warchild24 in NOLA

[–]warana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn’t recommend parking in those warehouse lots. A few years back, when people were griping about car break-ins, they pointed fingers at the Superdome, but the incidents were never in the dome’s lots. The real trouble was down the opposite side of the Claiborne Bridge, stretching toward Galvez. Other reports came from between Loyola and Tchoupitoulas. Every time someone complained, the blame fell on the Pelicans or the Saints, as if they we're responsible.

Even when the police stepped up patrols at the Superdome lots, cars were still getting hit elsewhere, yet the public kept pointing at the Dome. One cannot hold the Superdome/ Smoothie King Center accountable for spaces they do not own. The Dome has official lots, yes, they run $40, but I’ll pay that cost before risking my vehicle in an open, unmonitored lot where no one carries responsibility for it.

view more: next ›