*ANOTHER*
NEW
DAILY
Bible Verse Thread ? ? ? ?
What? You couldn't FIND the other "Daily Bible Verse Thread"(s).......? ? ?[/i]
Deuteronomy 32:4
God is good all the time and all the time God is Good.
Philippians 4:13
I don't care how many biblical threads there are.
Wise words of the lord are always welcome for me from whomever starts the thread.
I thank you for adding another verse....it's a great reminder as to why I'm on this earth and to praise him.
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads ...
"Bible-bashing" comments aren't going to poof, and neither are Bible verses. Thank goodness we still have freedoms of speech, expression, and religion (or no religion for those who don't want it.)
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily. "Bible-bashing" comments aren't going to poof, and neither are Bible verses. Thank goodness we still have freedoms of speech, expression, and religion (or no religion for those who don't want it.)
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily.
I like the way they complain about aaaaalllll the Bible threads ...
... and yet they can't leave the "official" Bible thread alone. ::)
... and yet they can't leave the "official" Bible thread alone. ::)
There is no such "official" thread, which is no doubt why you put that word in quotes. Any FC member can post to any FC forum or thread they choose to.
... and yet they can't leave the "official" Bible thread alone. ::)
There is no such "official" thread, which is no doubt why you put that word in quotes. Any FC member can post to any FC forum or thread they choose to.
Ummkay......
so did anyone have those directions for me yet, to the "official" bible bash thread(s)?
:wave: TY!!
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily.
I'm sorry..... (:-[)
Does anyone have directions to those threads.....you know any topics/threads called "Daily Bible Basher Remark" or similar??
:-[ I can't seem to find my way to them...... ??? :dontknow:
Thank you in advance!
YES but back here....When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily.
I'm sorry..... (:-[)
Does anyone have directions to those threads.....you know any topics/threads called "Daily Bible Basher Remark" or similar??
:-[ I can't seem to find my way to them...... ??? :dontknow:
Thank you in advance!
I asked for directions to any topics/threads called "Daily Bible Basher Remark" or similar??
Geez, quit trying to point me in the wrong direction, wouldja?! (I can get there by myself!!)
(http://i46.tinypic.com/30mwmir.gif)
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily. "Bible-bashing" comments aren't going to poof, and neither are Bible verses. Thank goodness we still have freedoms of speech, expression, and religion (or no religion for those who don't want it.)
I like the way they complain about aaaaalllll the Bible threads,and yet they can't leave the "official" Bible thread alone. ::)
At least they are reading them, since they like to respond to them.
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
When you consider many people have to listen to the "bible-bashing" mess going on in a great many threads, not much can be said about Bible verse threads for those who enjoy reading the different and uplifting Bible verses offered daily. "Bible-bashing" comments aren't going to poof, and neither are Bible verses. Thank goodness we still have freedoms of speech, expression, and religion (or no religion for those who don't want it.)
I like the way they complain about aaaaalllll the Bible threads,and yet they can't leave the "official" Bible thread alone. ::)
At least they are reading them, since they like to respond to them.
These guys are like school on Sunday.
No class. ;D
1 Corinthians 10:12 KJV(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
1 Timothy 4:16 KJV
Hebrews 3:12 KJV
2 Peter 1:19KJV
1 Corinthians 10:12
"Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." KJV
1 Timothy 4:16
"Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." KJV
Hebrews 3:12
"Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God." KJV
2 Peter 1:19
"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts." KJV
1 Corinthians 10:12
1 Timothy 4:16
Hebrews 3:12
2 Peter 1:19
WOW!!! How do I feel after reading posts like this?
Here's how.....
(http://i49.tinypic.com/2wd5auu.jpg)
"Critics of Christianity have become more and more vocal recently."
http://www.gotquestions.org/anti-Christian.html
“He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding,
for belief in one false principle is the beginning of all unwisdom.”
-- anonymous
“He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding,
for belief in one false principle is the beginning of all unwisdom.”
-- anonymous
I like that ... I "believe" I'll swipe it for later reuse. Thanks, "duroz".
"Reason is the beginning of understanding, not the end. Understanding is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."
-- falcon9
“He that is slow to believe anything and everything is of great understanding,
for belief in one false principle is the beginning of all unwisdom.”
-- anonymous
I like that ... I "believe" I'll swipe it for later reuse. Thanks, "duroz".
"Reason is the beginning of understanding, not the end. Understanding is the beginning of wisdom, not the end."
-- falcon9
Darn thieving varmintly falcon9.
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
Darn thieving varmintly falcon9.
That one wasn't actuallyt shoplifted since another 'hand-crafted quote' was offered in exchange. Other stuff you've posted, I'm shamelessly 'lifted', (but most, attribute to you).
:angel12:
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered.
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered.
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered......WITHOUT ANY FACTS!!!
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered.
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered......WITHOUT ANY FACTS!!!
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered.
No distortion is required when the "faithful" have that market cornered......WITHOUT ANY FACTS!!!
(http://i911.photobucket.com/albums/ac313/Datenshiz/Yoda_troll_side.jpg)
Dear Falcon,
I beg to differ with you. I respect all people and beliefs. Have a great day!
Dear Falcon,
I beg to differ with you. I respect all people and beliefs. Have a great day!
Well stated. I absolutely agree with you. :)
Dear Falcon,
I beg to differ with you. I respect all people and beliefs. Have a great day!Well stated. I absolutely agree with you. :)
On the contrary, simply stating that you do so while previously and currently proselytizing your religious beliefs is considered by many to be extremely disrespectful of any othat others may have, (including non-religious philosophies). It's presumptuous, sanctimonious and rude for such religious adherents to assume that their particular hypothetical supernatural entity pre-empts anyone else's, (including those who don't believe in such an entity). Therefore, I maintain that neither of you "respect all ... beliefs", due entirely to the evidence of a massive quantity of such disrespectful posts archived here alone, (and despite empty declarations otherwise).
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
-- Robert M. Pirsig
Dear Falcon,
I beg to differ with you. I respect all people and beliefs. Have a great day!Well stated. I absolutely agree with you. :)
On the contrary, simply stating that you do so while previously and currently proselytizing your religious beliefs is considered by many to be extremely disrespectful of any othat others may have, (including non-religious philosophies). It's presumptuous, sanctimonious and rude for such religious adherents to assume that their particular hypothetical supernatural entity pre-empts anyone else's, (including those who don't believe in such an entity). Therefore, I maintain that neither of you "respect all ... beliefs", due entirely to the evidence of a massive quantity of such disrespectful posts archived here alone, (and despite empty declarations otherwise).
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
-- Robert M. Pirsig
Using your words in return to your bashing consistently and constantly of opposing views:
"It's presumptuous, sanctimonious, and rude for such non-religious adherents to assume that their particular athiestic views pre-empts anyone else's."
We can respect other's choices without bashing them. Apparently you are blinded by your apparent dislike of anyone speaking of God. Your way is not the only way either. You have the choice to live your way. That is fine. Christians have the choice to live their way. That should be fine, as well. Our opposite ways of living do not affect each other in the least, yet you seem absolutely stuck on refusing to respect someone else's belief whether it agrees with you or not.
Who cares if you think a Christian's belief is delusional, foolish, insane, empty? You have your own way of living your life, yet seem to be so concerned to chastise anyone who believes in God. So? What does it really get you in the end? Just getting it off your chest like you are the one in control? Feeling like you've told someone off? Thinking you're changing their minds? You think too much of yourself if you think you have accomplished trying to talk foolish-talk down to Christians.
You are not in control of these threads either. You don't like a Bible verse thread? Fine. Don't engage yourself and then expect no one to comment back to you when you speak your foolish babble against the poster's enjoyment of verses. Make your own threads of your views on things, then when others come in, speaking foolish babble against your views, feel free to chastise them for disagreeing. People can disagree without cutting someone's personal beliefs down. You deliberately choose to come into the Bible verse threads to accuse of proselytizing - you are just setting yourself up for rebuttal when you didn't have to choose to come in and make a scene.
You have just as much right to start a thread on your views with like viewers. It doesn't mean I'm going to go in there and accuse you of slamming your views down our throats, because you are entitled to your views and this forum represents and is allowed to represent all kinds of different views, whether Christian, Islam, Buddha, Catholic, just to name a few; and whether non-religious, Atheist, or anything else people choose. People can choose to click in at their own risk, or they can choose to bypass.
FC forums should be fun, enjoyable, and enlightening. The hot debates are going to be sparked, for sure, and entered at risk. But to go in an Off Topic thread where someone posts Bible verses, and choose deliberately to come in and stomp on others for their posting of verses is mean-spirited and rude. They aren't a part of your belief system, so why chew someone up and spit them out for sharing verses with each other for uplifting reasons? You can choose to keep stomping on them or choose to be a bigger person and bypass some of those threads that have nothing to do with the debate thread themselves. You aren't being coerced into those particular threads and the rules don't say that you have to or must enter every single thread in this forum. You choose to do that - which means you also will be called out by others who have had enough of the constant badgering.
You aren't fooling anyone with your foolish words over and over. You aren't changing people's minds. You are only making yourself look like the delusional one who just can't leave Christians or other believers alone. You are technically forcing your views on Christians by trying to belittle them and make them look foolish and delusional for believing in God. In that respect, you are wrong for "proselytizing" your views by calling the believers names. Other than that, you are a humorous person, and know much about many things. It would be interesting to speak with you on some other subjects outside of religion/no religion.
Using your words in return to your bashing consistently and constantly of opposing views:
"It's presumptuous, sanctimonious, and rude for such non-religious adherents to assume that their particular athiestic views pre-empts anyone else's."
Apparently you are blinded by your apparent dislike of anyone speaking of God.
Your way is not the only way either. You have the choice to live your way. That is fine. Christians have the choice to live their way. That should be fine, as well. Our opposite ways of living do not affect each other in the least ...
Who cares if you think a Christian's belief is delusional, foolish, insane, empty?
You are not in control of these threads either. You don't like a Bible verse thread? Fine. Don't engage yourself and then expect no one to comment back to you when you speak your foolish babble against the poster's enjoyment of verses.
Make your own threads of your views on things, then when others come in, speaking foolish babble against your views, feel free to chastise them for disagreeing.
You deliberately choose to come into the Bible verse threads to accuse of proselytizing - you are just setting yourself up for rebuttal when you didn't have to choose to come in and make a scene.
It doesn't mean I'm going to go in there and accuse you of slamming your views down our throats ...
this forum represents and is allowed to represent all kinds of different views, whether Christian, Islam, Buddha, Catholic, just to name a few; and whether non-religious, Atheist, or anything else people choose. People can choose to click in at their own risk, or they can choose to bypass.
FC forums should be fun, enjoyable, and enlightening. The hot debates are going to be sparked, for sure, and entered at risk. But to go in an Off Topic thread where someone posts Bible verses, and choose deliberately to come in and stomp on others for their posting of verses is mean-spirited and rude.
You choose to do that - which means you also will be called out by others who have had enough of the constant badgering.
You aren't fooling anyone with your foolish words over and over. You aren't changing people's minds.
In that respect, you are wrong for "proselytizing" your views by calling the believers names.
Other than that, you are a humorous person, and know much about many things. It would be interesting to speak with you on some other subjects outside of religion/no religion.
Am I bad. You are absolutely right - I did not stop and correctly place punctuation needed for your words. I will do so now:
Using your words in return to your bashing consistently and constantly of opposing views:
"It's presumptuous, sanctimonious, and rude" for such non-religious "adherents to assume that their particular" athiestic views "pre-empts anyone else's."
I am not speaking of "calling out threads."
I am speaking of posters who will defend their beliefs against your foolish words trying to make their beliefs appear delusional, irrational, insane, and/or foolish.
I actually am speaking of disliking the behavior even though it did not come across that way. Yet, when you use such words as you do, you are still aiming it at the person's belief system disrespectfully. And yes, some will take it personal.
You are boxing all Christians and/or believers into one box. That is your assumption of all Christians. All Christians do not believe in murdering as some so-called groups of "Christians" seem to think they can do.
That is where you are very mistaken.
If that's the case, then your foolish babble would need to be left in your "skull."
Being a believer is a believer's choice while your choice is your choice. Dissenting viewpoints are one thing, but totally stomping on their belief system calling them those ridiculous names is disrespectful.
Their beliefs are not "dark environs ..."
You are always on the offense while trying to hush the believers' free speech and expression in here.
The rules do not state whatsoever that there are no Bible verse threads allowed.
They are just as free as you to post in here. Everyone in here is allowed to give opinions, facts, etc. about posts, but within the rules of the forum.
You are telling me to cease and desist? Really?
You certainly don't care about respecting believers' beliefs with your unkind and inflammatory words.
You choose to do that - which means you also will be called out by others who have had enough of the constant badgering.
I am speaking of posters who will defend their beliefs against your foolish words [/u]trying to make their beliefs appear delusional, irrational, insane, and/or foolish.
"Calling out" in this case meant what I explained it to mean - calling you out by challenging your ridiculous name-calling of believers' belief system.
That is where you are very mistaken.
That is just your opinion that I am inaccurate.
You are also picking out one little line from the context of the rest of the remarks. You are still mistaken within the context of what I wrote.
I indicated the name calling of the BELIEVERS' BELIEF SYSTEM.
You are always on the offense while trying to hush the believers' free speech and expression in here.
Quote from: falcon9:
If so, why have I mentioned on several previous occasions, (in different FC threads), the exact opposite of what you contend? Specifically, that those who choose to post on a subject have just as much 'freedom' to do so as those who choose to reply to such posts. That position doesn't inherently preclude any 'freedom of speech' or "expression" here.You have been whining constantly about Christians "proselytizing" in these threads ...
Pointing out such constant xtian proselytizings isn't "whining" about it; it's an objection to it. Nowhere has it been demanded/requested/implied/insinuated that such cease whereas there have certainly been implied/insinuated via
numerous complaints, (mostly from you), that accurately describing proselytizing as such cease.... and calling the belief system of the believers all of those un-lovely words you just seem so much to enjoy to use against them.
Since you just indicated, (in this thread), at least some understanding of the difference between a belief system and a beleiver, why are you now equating descriptors of a belief system with its believers? That type of conflating is the most likely source of any confusion regarding such differences you may be laboring under.
{Thanks, Kohler - this is indeed a d&d topic}You are telling me to cease and desist? Really?
Yes, and since that's been brought up twice, you are certainly misquoting me intentionally. The option to do the same with your posts remains.You certainly don't care about respecting believers' beliefs with your unkind and inflammatory words.
You keep insisting that ... here's a little story:
patrol officer: "License and registration, please."
driver: (hands documents over)
patrol officer: "Thank you, do you know why I pulled you over today?"
driver: "I'm not sure, officer."
patrol officer: "The reason I pulled you over is for a hit-and-run traffic violation when you went through that last intersection."
driver: "Well, I did accellerate when I saw a spawn of hell or, Satan himself crossing that intersection. The bible tells us to
spurn Satan and his minnions so, I thought I'd score one for g-d."
patrol officer: "I see. As it happens, the pedestrian you struck was an elderly, disabled lady instead. Were you aware of your
vehicle striking that pedestrian when you sped-off, ma'am?"
driver: "I hit a demon-spawn, not an old woman and I don't appreciate your putting-down my religious beliefs, officer."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, my duty is to enforce the laws. Under those laws, a driver is not permitted to run people over."
driver: "Well, I abide by g-d's laws and j-sus says 'get thee behind me, Satan!' The only way to do that was to run Satan over."
patrol officer: "Again, that wasn't Satan you ran over, ma'am. You also ran over the elderly woman's seeing-eye dog when you
struck her."
driver: "That was one of Satan's minnions."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, I'll have to ask you to turn off your engine and step out of the vehicle. Now."
driver: "Young man, I resent your talking-down to me because of my faith. What's your badge number, I'm going to report you!"
patrol officer: "I'm not concerned with whatever you may believe, ma'am. You may consider saving that sort of thing for the
hearing. Now, I won't ask you again, please step out of the vehicle now."
driver: "This is outrageous! You're a very rude young man to disrespect someone's personal religious beliefs and I'm gonna
take out a hanky and stomp on it until you stop it!"
patrol officer: "Ma'am, it's almost more unfortunate that you ran over that elderly woman's seeing-eye dog since you apparently
also have a need for one."
driver: "How dare you insinuate that I'm blind ... as in, 'blind-faith'!"
patrol officer: "You either didn't see the elderly woman and her guide-dog crossing that intersection or, want to insist that
they were actually 'Satan and one of his minnions', ma'am. Your own words betray you, not mine. Let's go."
Yet you still cannot or refuse to not see the way you belittle the Christians' or believers' choice to believe in God, and continue to spitefully call the choice the other names. You are only receiving what you are giving out.
That is where you are very mistaken.
Quote from: falcon9:
Your opinion is inaccurate.That is just your opinion that I am inaccurate.
The differences between a factual depiction, (not an "opinion"), and a subjective perception which lacks a factual basis have been previously delineated. Any failure to discern such a difference rests with the one who cannot do so.
You are also picking out one little line from the context of the rest of the remarks. You are still mistaken within the context of what I wrote.
The depiction remains an accurate deduction within the context of the remarks, (which are still available down-thread ... surely you aren't trying to tell me what I can and cannot reply to now?).
"What's all this fuss I hear about endangered feces? That's outrageous. Why is feces endangered? How can you possibly run out of such a thing? Just look around you - you can see it all over the place. And besides, who wants to save that anyway?"
-- Emily Litella/Gilda Radner
... here's a little story (in context):
patrol officer: "License and registration, please."
driver: (hands documents over)
patrol officer: "Thank you, do you know why I pulled you over today?"
driver: "I'm not sure, officer."
patrol officer: "The reason I pulled you over is for a hit-and-run traffic violation when you went through that last intersection."
driver: "Well, I did accellerate when I saw a spawn of hell or, Satan himself crossing that intersection. The bible tells us to
spurn Satan and his minnions so, I thought I'd score one for g-d."
patrol officer: "I see. As it happens, the pedestrian you struck was an elderly, disabled lady instead. Were you aware of your
vehicle striking that pedestrian when you sped-off, ma'am?"
driver: "I hit a demon-spawn, not an old woman and I don't appreciate your putting-down my religious beliefs, officer."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, my duty is to enforce the laws. Under those laws, a driver is not permitted to run people over."
driver: "Well, I abide by g-d's laws and j-sus says 'get thee behind me, Satan!' The only way to do that was to run Satan over."
patrol officer: "Again, that wasn't Satan you ran over, ma'am. You also ran over the elderly woman's seeing-eye dog when you
struck her."
driver: "That was one of Satan's minnions."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, I'll have to ask you to turn off your engine and step out of the vehicle. Now."
driver: "Young man, I resent your talking-down to me because of my faith. What's your badge number, I'm going to report you!"
patrol officer: "I'm not concerned with whatever you may believe, ma'am. You may consider saving that sort of thing for the
hearing. Now, I won't ask you again, please step out of the vehicle now."
driver: "This is outrageous! You're a very rude young man to disrespect someone's personal religious beliefs and I'm gonna
take out a hanky and stomp on it until you stop it!"
patrol officer: "Ma'am, it's almost more unfortunate that you ran over that elderly woman's seeing-eye dog since you apparently
also have a need for one."
driver: "How dare you insinuate that I'm blind ... as in, 'blind-faith'!"
patrol officer: "You either didn't see the elderly woman and her guide-dog crossing that intersection or, want to insist that
they were actually 'Satan and one of his minnions', ma'am. Your own words betray you, not mine. Let's go."
Your role play "joke" is not funny to me, has no relevance to a Christian or believer, other than to once again be inflammatory and make them look foolish and stupid. Surely you can do better and kinder than that?
You choose to do that - which means you also will be called out by others who have had enough of the constant badgering.
I am speaking of posters who will defend their beliefs against your foolish words [/u]trying to make their beliefs appear delusional, irrational, insane, and/or foolish.
"Calling out" in this case meant what I explained it to mean - calling you out by challenging your ridiculous name-calling of believers' belief system.
You keep insisting that and yet ... here's a little story:
patrol officer: "License and registration, please."
driver: (hands documents over)
patrol officer: "Thank you, do you know why I pulled you over today?"
driver: "I'm not sure, officer."
patrol officer: "The reason I pulled you over is for a hit-and-run traffic violation when you went through that last intersection."
driver: "Well, I did accellerate when I saw a spawn of hell or, Satan himself crossing that intersection. The bible tells us to
spurn Satan and his minnions so, I thought I'd score one for g-d."
patrol officer: "I see. As it happens, the pedestrian you struck was an elderly, disabled lady instead. Were you aware of your
vehicle striking that pedestrian when you sped-off, ma'am?"
driver: "I hit a demon-spawn, not an old woman and I don't appreciate your putting-down my religious beliefs, officer."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, my duty is to enforce the laws. Under those laws, a driver is not permitted to run people over."
driver: "Well, I abide by g-d's laws and j-sus says 'get thee behind me, Satan!' The only way to do that was to run Satan over."
patrol officer: "Again, that wasn't Satan you ran over, ma'am. You also ran over the elderly woman's seeing-eye dog when you
struck her."
driver: "That was one of Satan's minnions."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, I'll have to ask you to turn off your engine and step out of the vehicle. Now."
driver: "Young man, I resent your talking-down to me because of my faith. What's your badge number, I'm going to report you!"
patrol officer: "I'm not concerned with whatever you may believe, ma'am. You may consider saving that sort of thing for the
hearing. Now, I won't ask you again, please step out of the vehicle now."
driver: "This is outrageous! You're a very rude young man to disrespect someone's personal religious beliefs and I'm gonna
take out a hanky and stomp on it until you stop it!"
patrol officer: "Ma'am, it's almost more unfortunate that you ran over that elderly woman's seeing-eye dog since you apparently
also have a need for one."
driver: "How dare you insinuate that I'm blind ... as in, 'blind-faith'!"
patrol officer: "You either didn't see the elderly woman and her guide-dog crossing that intersection or, want to insist that
they were actually 'Satan and one of his minnions', ma'am. Your own words betray you, not mine. Let's go."
You are always on the offense while trying to hush the believers' free speech and expression in here.
Quote from: falcon9:
If so, why have I mentioned on several previous occasions, (in different FC threads), the exact opposite of what you contend? Specifically, that those who choose to post on a subject have just as much 'freedom' to do so as those who choose to reply to such posts. That position doesn't inherently preclude any 'freedom of speech' or "expression" here.You have been whining constantly about Christians "proselytizing" in these threads ...
Pointing out such constant xtian proselytizings isn't "whining" about it; it's an objection to it. Nowhere has it been demanded/requested/implied/insinuated that such cease whereas there have certainly been implied/insinuated via
numerous complaints, (mostly from you), that accurately describing proselytizing as such cease.... and calling the belief system of the believers all of those un-lovely words you just seem so much to enjoy to use against them.
Since you just indicated, (in this thread), at least some understanding of the difference between a belief system and a beleiver, why are you now equating descriptors of a belief system with its believers? That type of conflating is the most likely source of any confusion regarding such differences you may be laboring under.
You must know how to do the twist quite well - you are certainly twisting very well here! ;D
That is where you are very mistaken.
Your opinion is inaccurate.
That is just your opinion that I am inaccurate.
The differences between a factual depiction, (not an "opinion"), and a subjective perception which lacks a factual basis have been previously delineated. Any failure to discern such a difference rests with the one who cannot do so.
You are also picking out one little line from the context of the rest of the remarks. You are still mistaken within the context of what I wrote.
The depiction remains an accurate deduction within the context of the remarks, (which are still available down-thread ... surely you aren't trying to tell me what I can and cannot reply to now?).
"What's all this fuss I hear about endangered feces? That's outrageous. Why is feces endangered? How can you possibly run out of such a thing? Just look around you - you can see it all over the place. And besides, who wants to save that anyway?"
-- Emily Litella/Gilda Radner
Wow - even your quotes are getting dirtier. :angry7: You definitely aren't flattering yourself with me, lol. As for the above, I stand by my words, no matter how long you want to twist them to your own meanings.
... here's a little story (in context):
patrol officer: "License and registration, please."
driver: (hands documents over)
patrol officer: "Thank you, do you know why I pulled you over today?"
driver: "I'm not sure, officer."
patrol officer: "The reason I pulled you over is for a hit-and-run traffic violation when you went through that last intersection."
driver: "Well, I did accellerate when I saw a spawn of hell or, Satan himself crossing that intersection. The bible tells us to
spurn Satan and his minnions so, I thought I'd score one for g-d."
patrol officer: "I see. As it happens, the pedestrian you struck was an elderly, disabled lady instead. Were you aware of your
vehicle striking that pedestrian when you sped-off, ma'am?"
driver: "I hit a demon-spawn, not an old woman and I don't appreciate your putting-down my religious beliefs, officer."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, my duty is to enforce the laws. Under those laws, a driver is not permitted to run people over."
driver: "Well, I abide by g-d's laws and j-sus says 'get thee behind me, Satan!' The only way to do that was to run Satan over."
patrol officer: "Again, that wasn't Satan you ran over, ma'am. You also ran over the elderly woman's seeing-eye dog when you
struck her."
driver: "That was one of Satan's minnions."
patrol officer: "Ma'am, I'll have to ask you to turn off your engine and step out of the vehicle. Now."
driver: "Young man, I resent your talking-down to me because of my faith. What's your badge number, I'm going to report you!"
patrol officer: "I'm not concerned with whatever you may believe, ma'am. You may consider saving that sort of thing for the
hearing. Now, I won't ask you again, please step out of the vehicle now."
driver: "This is outrageous! You're a very rude young man to disrespect someone's personal religious beliefs and I'm gonna
take out a hanky and stomp on it until you stop it!"
patrol officer: "Ma'am, it's almost more unfortunate that you ran over that elderly woman's seeing-eye dog since you apparently
also have a need for one."
driver: "How dare you insinuate that I'm blind ... as in, 'blind-faith'!"
patrol officer: "You either didn't see the elderly woman and her guide-dog crossing that intersection or, want to insist that
they were actually 'Satan and one of his minnions', ma'am. Your own words betray you, not mine. Let's go."Your role play "joke" is not funny to me, has no relevance to a Christian or believer, other than to once again be inflammatory and make them look foolish and stupid. Surely you can do better and kinder than that?
No comprende`metaphors, eh? Fair enough.
"Satan hasn't a single salaried helper; the Opposition employ a million."
-- Mark Twain
If that's the case, then your foolish babble would need to be left in your "skull."
That's not a logical conclusion; my responses, (whether inaccurately deemed as "foolish babble" according to an irrational opinion or not), have been in subsequent reply to publically-posted religious beliefs which had initially left the skulls of believers. There are no archived instances of my starting any threads on FC to initiate an opposing viewpoint specifically in opposition to a religious belief. Conversely, there have been an uncounted plethora of threads specifically initiated by religious believers to proselytize their beliefs. Only some of these have had subsequent opposing/dissenting viewpoints posted in response, (by others and myself). Therefore, the situations are not parallel and your conclusion is false.
Once again, that is your opinion that my conclusion is false.
Just because posters are sharing Bible verses with each other for inspiration, encouragement, or for whatever reason, does NOT mean they are necessarily promoting "proselytizing."
When you come into that thread, that is your choice then, and just like with the debate threads, you have entered at your own "risk" ...
... and try and squash a thread that's not even your style in the first place.
I comprende just fine - I gave my reason.
Falcon9:
"Allow me to be perfectly clear when I remark that I'm NOT stating/asserting/claiming/implying/insinuating/accusing/suggesting that you're 'abysmally-stupid' in this regard."Please show me where I said you stated that I'm "abysmally-stupid." 'Cause I ain't seeing that anywhere.
It was a pre-emptive disclaimer presented due to your previous, (archived), tendency to 'loosely reinterpret', (e.g., "twist" or misquote).
Falcon9:
"It may be that you are unable to make the parallel connections between metaphors and context under discussion."Don't make assumptions of what I am able or unable to do. I know exactly what you were meaning - I happen to not care for your slanted paralleling connections to the detriment of believers' belief systems.
That assumption wasn't being made as I clearly posted "It may be ..." in that regard, (which implicitly means that it may not be as well). The secular 'parable' is metaphorical; your perception of it as slanted or biased is simply an unsupported opinion until such time as you present any unbiased reasons, (in lieu of a slanted/biased religious perspective), to support your opinion. Should you choose not to support such an opinion; that's your option. My subsequent conclusion would be that an unsupported opinion carries no weight.
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
“The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational inquiry.”
-- Richard Dawkins
When you come into that thread, that is your choice then, and just like with the debate threads, you have entered at your own "risk" ...
You may not have noticed as yet but, Kohler moved this thread over to d&d a couple a posts ago, 'sunshine'.
Uh, no, I did not realize that. ??? I knew it was in Off Topic and some comment was made by you to Kohler, saying thank you, now I looked and saw "Debate," and to be honest, I thought my mind had finally fallen off the ledge. :confused1:*whoops*
Trickery, I say, trickery!! Y'all got me! :notworthy:
... and try and squash a thread that's not even your style in the first place.
If you mean that it isn't my "style" to "try and squash a thread", you're correct. I reply to such threads in order to contribute to the discussions/remarks in them, not to "squash" them.
In many threads - okay, I'll give you that. However, I respectfully disagree with the idea that in the simple Bible verse threads, that you are contributing and not "squashing." Riling posters up and continually coming back at them like you do, knowing you don't like Bible verses, just speaks the opposite of that.
All they want to do is share verses as inspiration, support, encouragement, uplifting, etc., when instead they are receiving remarks that are hurtful and disrespectful for what they are trying to do with others who enjoy contributing other verses or quotes, etc..
Since this thread has been changed to Debate and Discuss:
Egomania (Falcon9)
Sorry - deleted the "l" in cutting and pasting. Glad that added to the humor!
Sorry I disappeared. I had a surprise phone call tonight from my son's mil. She has set it up for her and our granddaughters to meet with me (out of town.) Sorry, falcon9, but I just have to say this; our prayers have been answered with this. We haven't seen our granddaughters for over a year. I'm so looking forward to spending the day with them tomorrow. To falcon9, again, you could say maybe everything fell into place for this to happen. Anyway, have a good night and thanks for the discussion. :)
Though we don't agree about the first part, thank you for the enjoy part of it. This means the world to me, today, to get to spend the day with them. Have a great Saturday! :)Sorry I disappeared. I had a surprise phone call tonight from my son's mil. She has set it up for her and our granddaughters to meet with me (out of town.) Sorry, falcon9, but I just have to say this; our prayers have been answered with this. We haven't seen our granddaughters for over a year. I'm so looking forward to spending the day with them tomorrow. To falcon9, again, you could say maybe everything fell into place for this to happen. Anyway, have a good night and thanks for the discussion. :)
Though such cannot be irrefutably attributed to 'intercessory magical rituals', enjoy your family time.
Since this thread has been changed to Debate and Discuss:
Egomania (Falcon9)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Egomania is an obsessive preoccupation with one's self and applies to someone who follows their own ungoverned impulses and is possessed by delusions of personal greatness and feels a ack of appreciation. Someone suffering from this extreme egocentric focus is an egomaniac. The condition is psychologically abnormal.
The term egomania is often used by laypersons in a pejorative fashion to describe an individual who is intolerably self-centred. The clinical condition that most resembles the popular conception of egomania is narcissistic personality disorder.
Was Falcon9's picture accompanying the entry by any chance? ;D
At the rate he posts in several threads on a daily basis,how long do you suppose it will be before Falcon9 develops carpal tunnel syndrome? :dontknow:
Why is it that when we do the very same thing as Falcon9, it is trolling, and with him it is not?
In my opinion, I have added meaningful content with my posts.
I mean,I'm genuinely concerned.
How else would Mankind benefit from his constant bashing of religion,belittling of Believers and his obscurantist arguing?
Isn't it great to have so much to offer?
And for the record,I invoke the Right of Elijah to be sarcastic to unbelievers who make fools of themselves. ;D
very inspirational :angel12:
very inspirational :angel12:
What, smacking someone on the head with a book?
:o
very inspirational :angel12:
What, smacking someone on the head with a book?
:o
Perhaps God's trying to get his attention.
very inspirational :angel12:
What, smacking someone on the head with a book?
:o
Perhaps God's trying to get his attention.
very inspirational :angel12:
What, smacking someone on the head with a book?
:o
Perhaps God's trying to get his attention.
There may be no other way into a thick skull! ;D
very inspirational :angel12:What, smacking someone on the head with a book?
:oPerhaps God's trying to get his attention.There may be no other way into a thick skull! ;D
Reminiscing again are you? Regardless of skull-thicknesses, some people find it easier to resist 'drinking the koolaid' than others due to the ability to reason.
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan
I don't drink that kind of koolaid.
I don't drink that kind of koolaid.
No? It comes in the 'flavors' of "blind faith", (no actual substance), "specious beliefs", (over-sweetened by 'faith'), and "proselyting purple", (sour grape).
:o
I don't drink that kind of koolaid.
No? It comes in the 'flavors' of "blind faith", (no actual substance), "specious beliefs", (over-sweetened by 'faith'), and "proselyting purple", (sour grape).
:o
Wrong, it does not. >:(
You are full of sarcastic disrespect. :angry7: Totally not impressive. :P
I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly. That last sentence of yours is getting ugly. I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place. Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as.I don't drink that kind of koolaid.No? It comes in the 'flavors' of "blind faith", (no actual substance), "specious beliefs", (over-sweetened by 'faith'), and "proselyting purple", (sour grape).
:oWrong, it does not. >:(
Wow, another one of your unconvincing rebuttals, eh? What, are you 6.66 years old or something?You are full of sarcastic disrespect. :angry7: Totally not impressive. :P
You're full of something else as well, (normally utilized as fertilzer). Metaphors aren't your forte either, apparently.
I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly. That last sentence of yours is getting ugly. I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place.
Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as.
I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly. That last sentence of yours is getting ugly. I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place.
"I don't drink that kind of koolaid" is a metaphorical remark you just made, a few posts down-thread. Although it could be considered as 'disrespectful' of the "people's temple" xtian cult and their surviving family members, would your remark be "ugly" in that regard as well?Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as.
I don't have to try, it comes naturally.
I don't see why you would be interested about my remark being "ugly" or "disrespectful" since you don't seem to extend respect to Christians regarding their beliefs in God.
I merely mean that I would not ever follow someone who makes such demands of believers to follow through with something like what he did with the koolaid, with him and his "followers" knowing what the end result would be.
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-kool-aid.html
I don't see why you would be interested about my remark being "ugly" or "disrespectful" since you don't seem to extend respect to Christians regarding their beliefs in God.
This is likely because you don't view such initial proselytizing of such beliefs as being "disrespectful" of others as I do, (thus eliciting my subsequent remarks which you view as "disrespectful" ... oddly enough, in contradiction of the "golden rule").I merely mean that I would not ever follow someone who makes such demands of believers to follow through with something like what he did with the koolaid, with him and his "followers" knowing what the end result would be.
Jones was self-declared xtian, you're a self-declared xtian. Self-declared xtians nominally "follow" the xtian belief system, (while some may choose to selectively follow bit and pieces, they all still call it xtianity).
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Saganhttp://www.raptureready.com/rr-kool-aid.html
Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct? If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do. If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'? The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.
Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct? If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do. If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'? The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.
You are twisting words again so you can let yourself believe you are in your "rights" of being disrespectful. It's not working.
You cannot put ALL believers into ONE box. There are many faiths, religious sects, and various differences in some tenets, etc. Committing group "suicide" is not in my beliefs nor tenet ...
Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations. Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others. It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct? If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do. If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'? The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.You are twisting words again so you can let yourself believe you are in your "rights" of being disrespectful. It's not working.
What's not really working is your dodging/twsiting away from the first question, do you believe in the "rapture" notions or not?You cannot put ALL believers into ONE box. There are many faiths, religious sects, and various differences in some tenets, etc. Committing group "suicide" is not in my beliefs nor tenet ...
I'm already aware that there are various sects, cults, denominations of the same religious belief system. Many of these have selective or, conflicting beliefs-within-beliefs which is what separates them from one another. While this may seem a somewhat tangential point, it isn't. All of these various belief systems are subsets of the xtian belief system, (despite denials and attempts to distance themselves from one another). Yes, that means even those Westboro Baptists who claim to be xtians have as much self-declarative 'right' to do so as any random lutheran, protestant, catholic or methodist does.
Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations.
Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others. It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.
Aww... it's amusing? It's not disowning, it's separating from those who are playing God and messing with other people in hateful and/or hurtful ways. And you think it's "amusing..."Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations.
What limits your expounding of specious religious beliefs? Even logical dissent doesn't limit your "right" to proselytize, nor do continued attempts to censor such dissent limit it. As far as the Westboro Baptists go, they are limited by secular laws and not by rationality nor respect.Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others. It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.
One or more religious sects do not need other religious sects to make them "look bad". They can do that all by themselves. It's always amusing when when religious sect, (based upon the same underLying religious beliefs), 'disowns' another.
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
It's always amusing when when religious sect, (based upon the same underLying religious beliefs), 'disowns' another.
Aww... it's amusing? It's not disowning, it's separating from those who are playing God and messing with other people in hateful and/or hurtful ways.
And you think it's "amusing..."
Mark 9:35
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
King James Version (KJV)
To all those who have taken the time to falcon9's replies in the Christian posts have you noticed how he never spells out Christian using instead xstian. I do not know about you but I find that somewhat insulting.
To all those who have taken the time to falcon9's replies in the Christian posts have you noticed how he never spells out Christian using instead xstian. I do not know about you but I find that somewhat insulting.
The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.
Well, hello again! Up to your usual niceties? Hope you have a great secular weekend!The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.
Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive. Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).
If that's 'perceived' "as an insult", so too are the constant specious religious beliefs posts perceived as an insult to intelligence.
The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.
Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive. Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).
If that's 'perceived' "as an insult", so too are the constant specious religious beliefs posts perceived as an insult to intelligence.
Well, hello again! Up to your usual niceties? Hope you have a great secular weekend!
Just trying to be as neighborly and as accepting as you are. Have a nice rest of the evening.The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive. Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).
If that's 'perceived' "as an insult", so too are the constant specious religious beliefs posts perceived as an insult to intelligence.Well, hello again! Up to your usual niceties? Hope you have a great secular weekend!
The reply was contextual, as opposed to your facetious one.
"The fact that a believer is (possibly) happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact than a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
-- George Bernard Shaw
The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.
Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive. Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).
If that's 'perceived' "as an insult", so too are the constant specious religious beliefs posts perceived as an insult to intelligence.
Well, hello again! Up to your usual niceties? Hope you have a great secular weekend!
The reply was contextual, as opposed to your facetious one.
"The fact that a believer is (possibly) happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact than a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
-- George Bernard Shaw
Just trying to be as neighborly and as accepting as you are. Have a nice rest of the evening.
Uh, yeah, right - you keep on believing you aren't being facetious with your special quotes and remarks, and I'll keep being as neighborly and as accepting as you are. :)The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive. Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).
If that's 'perceived' "as an insult", so too are the constant specious religious beliefs posts perceived as an insult to intelligence.Well, hello again! Up to your usual niceties? Hope you have a great secular weekend!The reply was contextual, as opposed to your facetious one.
"The fact that a believer is (possibly) happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact than a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
-- George Bernard ShawJust trying to be as neighborly and as accepting as you are. Have a nice rest of the evening.
No, you were/are being facetious and disingenuous while I've never concealed my opposition to irrational religous delusions.
Uh, yeah, right - you keep on believing you aren't being facetious with your special quotes and remarks, and I'll keep being as neighborly and as accepting as you are. :)
I don't need to, thanks. I have seen with my eyes the example of "facetious" in these threads, lol. Ha ha ha...Uh, yeah, right - you keep on believing you aren't being facetious with your special quotes and remarks, and I'll keep being as neighborly and as accepting as you are. :)
Look up what the word "facetious" actually means, (as opposed to how you might want it to be misapplied).
Uh, yeah, right - you keep on believing you aren't being facetious with your special quotes and remarks, and I'll keep being as neighborly and as accepting as you are. :)
Look up what the word "facetious" actually means, (as opposed to how you might want it to be misapplied).
I don't need to, thanks. I have seen with my eyes the example of "facetious" in these threads, lol. Ha ha ha...
You are blind to your own facetiousness. When you admit to yours, I'll admit to mine. I'm just playing your fun game tonight - just not in the mood to argue. I enjoy (sometimes) waiting to see what you are going to come back with - especially when you think I'm being stupid and not "getting" it, lol. What fun would it be to give you the satisfaction of surrendering to your metaphors and words - when I can just turn them around and give them back to you to chew on? Just because you think they are applicable doesn't mean they are accepted as truth. They are more like assessments toward me or others, which does not mean they are based on truth.Uh, yeah, right - you keep on believing you aren't being facetious with your special quotes and remarks, and I'll keep being as neighborly and as accepting as you are. :)Look up what the word "facetious" actually means, (as opposed to how you might want it to be misapplied).I don't need to, thanks. I have seen with my eyes the example of "facetious" in these threads, lol. Ha ha ha...
Then unless you're reading your own posts to detect those examples, you're misapplying the word's meaning.
... I can just turn them around and give them back to you to chew on?
That's fine. I don't really care if you do or not. Unless they are truth, there is no need to accept them on my end. Your little "subtle" comment is an assessment that is also not accepted since it's not based on truth.... I can just turn them around and give them back to you to chew on?
You haven't managed to do so as yet. Merely claiming to have done so isn't the same as actually accomplishing it. This is perhaps too subtle a difference for someone mind-blinded by "faith" in lieu of reason.
"Religion is the masterpiece of the art of animal training, for it trains people as to how they shall think."
-- Arthur Schopenhauer
... I can just turn them around and give them back to you to chew on?
You haven't managed to do so as yet. Merely claiming to have done so isn't the same as actually accomplishing it. This is perhaps too subtle a difference for someone mind-blinded by "faith" in lieu of reason.
"Religion is the masterpiece of the art of animal training, for it trains people as to how they shall think."
-- Arthur Schopenhauer
Unless they are truth, there is no need to accept them on my end. Your little "subtle" comment is an assessment that is also not accepted since it's not based on truth.
"But ask the animals, and they will teach you, or the birds of the air, and they will tell you; or speak to the earth, and it will teach you ..."
Your "self-delusions" comment is only an assessment, not verifiable by fact. You have the keen desire to always peg some posters who disagree with you, as lower intelligence than you, including being "delusional" and "irrational." Since they are just your opinions and assessments, they do not have to be accepted as truth, won't be accepted as truth, and perhaps you should take some time to really search deep inside your own self for your own "self-delusions" that you are unwilling to admit to.... I can just turn them around and give them back to you to chew on?You haven't managed to do so as yet. Merely claiming to have done so isn't the same as actually accomplishing it. This is perhaps too subtle a difference for someone mind-blinded by "faith" in lieu of reason.
"Religion is the masterpiece of the art of animal training, for it trains people as to how they shall think."
-- Arthur SchopenhauerUnless they are truth, there is no need to accept them on my end. Your little "subtle" comment is an assessment that is also not accepted since it's not based on truth.
How is your failure to provide evidence supporting your claims 'not true'? Your self-delusions run too deep for reason to drill to that depth.
Unless they are truth, there is no need to accept them on my end.
How is your failure to provide evidence supporting your claims 'not true'? Your self-delusions run too deep for reason to drill to that depth.
Your "self-delusions" comment is only an assessment, not verifiable by fact.
You have the keen desire to always peg some posters who disagree with you, as lower intelligence than you, including being "delusional" and "irrational."
It is the tone which you radiate through your words and attitude that give that impression. The fun of debating, sadly, is lost in this very representation of those types of posts.Unless they are truth, there is no need to accept them on my end.How is your failure to provide evidence supporting your claims 'not true'? Your self-delusions run too deep for reason to drill to that depth.Your "self-delusions" comment is only an assessment, not verifiable by fact.
The assessment was made on the basis of reasoning since no substantive evidence to support the specious religious claims you made has been presented. Therefore, such claims/religious beliefs are self-delusional, (not having a factual basis).You have the keen desire to always peg some posters who disagree with you, as lower intelligence than you, including being "delusional" and "irrational."
No, irrational and delusional positions are regarded as such, nothing was stated about the lack of "intelligence" of those holding irrational/self-delusional religious beliefs, (since that seems to be an inherent aspect of religious adherence).
“Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.”
-– Thomas Jefferson
It is the tone which you radiate through your words and attitude that give that impression. The fun of debating, sadly, is lost in this very representation of those types of posts.
Only fools say in their heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt and their actions are evil; no one does good.
Psalm 14:1
Only fools say in their heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt and their actions are evil; no one does good.
Psalm 14:1
That's a self-serving, circular load of nonsense. If religious adherents are clinging to their blind faith, they can either support their claims that
"g-d exists" with evidence or, just with the blind faith, (which is a lack of evidence).
1 Thessalonians 5:11
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
Knowing does not require provable evidence. One can know something and yet remain quite incapable of proving it.
This is even demonstrated and accepted within our court systems and includes, but is not limited to "reasonable doubt".
:thumbsup:1 Thessalonians 5:11
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
Be still and know that I am God
Rev 21: 7-8
He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Rev 21: 7-8
He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
"Sorcerers", as in "not suffering a witch to live"? The intolerant specious beliefs of the xtian religion reveals itself in that 'verse', (especially within the hypocrisy of xtianity being the liars and cultural thieves which historical evidence exposes).
"If you take [a copy of] the xtian Bible and put it out in the wind and the rain, soon the paper on which the words are printed will disintegrate and the words will be gone. Our 'bible' IS the wind and the rain."
-- from Herbalist Carol McGrath as told to her by a Native American woman
It surprises you that the Bible doesn't "paint a picture of witches in Heaven"? :-
There was something about that verse that I didn't realize until after I posted it and was thinking about it (even though I've read that verse so many times before). It doesn't say there are two kinds of people (the believers and the unbelievers) and that only the unbelievers are going to the "burning lake". I know "believers" that are "fearful", "whoring around", I know a few that are pathological liars, some that have placed more importance on "things" rather than on God ("idolatry") and some that "dabble in sorcery" in a variety of ways). They think they're going to heaven. According to that verse, one can be a Believer and still spend eternity with unbelievers...unless I've misinterpreted it wrong...
What do people like you believe in? Let me guess your great great great great grandaddy was an ape, and that's why every one calls you bananas, you believe what you will, but as for me and my house we will follow Almighty God in heaven who created all things. You need proof that God is God? And God is God and needs prove nothing to you!*ANOTHER*
NEW
DAILY
Bible Verse Thread ? ? ? ?
What? You couldn't FIND the other "Daily Bible Verse Thread"(s).......? ? ?[/i]
Apparently not; unless the actual agenda is proselytizing religious propaganda, (despite specious contentions to the contrary). Ostensibly, it's not specifically against FC ToS to 'spam' the off-topic forum with such therefore, it's tacitly alright to post counter-viewpoints to them.
"The Bible as we have it contains elements that are scientifically incorrect or even morally repugnant. No amount of explaining away' can convince us that such passages are the product of Divine Wisdom."
-- Bernard J. Bamberger
*ANOTHER*
NEW
DAILY
Bible Verse Thread ? ? ? ?
What? You couldn't FIND the other "Daily Bible Verse Thread"(s).......? ? ?[/i]
Apparently not; unless the actual agenda is proselytizing religious propaganda, (despite specious contentions to the contrary). Ostensibly, it's not specifically against FC ToS to 'spam' the off-topic forum with such therefore, it's tacitly alright to post counter-viewpoints to them.
"The Bible as we have it contains elements that are scientifically incorrect or even morally repugnant. No amount of explaining away' can convince us that such passages are the product of Divine Wisdom."
-- Bernard J. Bamberger
What do people like you believe in?
Let me guess your great great great great grandaddy was an ape, and that's why every one calls you bananas ...
.. you believe what you will, but as for me and my house we will follow Almighty God in heaven who created all things. You need proof that God is God? And God is God and needs prove nothing to you!
how does one go through a standard public education nowadays and fight the belief of evolution? I can't imagine arguing with a teacher/professor that adamantly considering my own personal beliefs..?
Strong belief comes with having a personal relationship with God over time.
Seeing God work again and again in your own life and the lives of others, equips you to have the stamina required to stand up to and be able to refute those who would try to convince you that there is no God.
Those who are fortunate enough to have grown up in a real Christian home and witnessed God working in the lives of their parents, are not that easily swayed by the various ideologies one is exposed to in college, etc., because they know the truth. Until you have that kind of faith , you may not want to argue religion with a teacher/professor because their ideology is set and would probably be very convincing to someone who is not as strongly set in their own belief.
Such constant remarks constitute hostility towards others of different beliefs. Consistently promoting and provocation of hate-filled remarks toward Christians, show deliberate intent to bash them for their beliefs that they are entitled to believe, whether you accept it or not. If I was a non-christian in many of these posts, and were to read your posts as compared to some of the Christians' posts, I would be turned off from the bashing you do to them. You aren't debating as much as you are bashing.Strong belief comes with having a personal relationship with God over time.
Such "belief" constitutes a baseless religious opinion in that it relies upon "faith" without evidence, (e.g., false attributions to supernatural causes).Seeing God work again and again in your own life and the lives of others, equips you to have the stamina required to stand up to and be able to refute those who would try to convince you that there is no God.
Blind faith does not constitute refutation of rational challenges to irrational superstitious religious beliefs. Such "belief" constitutes a baseless religious opinion in that it relies upon "faith" without evidence, (e.g., false attributions to supernatural causes).Those who are fortunate enough to have grown up in a real Christian home and witnessed God working in the lives of their parents, are not that easily swayed by the various ideologies one is exposed to in college, etc., because they know the truth. Until you have that kind of faith , you may not want to argue religion with a teacher/professor because their ideology is set and would probably be very convincing to someone who is not as strongly set in their own belief.
In other words, those religious adherents who are brain-washed by religious propaganda from an early age, may find it difficult to break free of such instilled/indoctrinated blind faith because of fears and a diminshed ability to reason logically.
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan
Such constant remarks constitute hostility towards others of different beliefs. Consistently promoting and provocation of hate-filled remarks toward Christians, show deliberate intent to bash them for their beliefs that they are entitled to believe, whether you accept it or not.
It isn't a Christian bashing one-way street here, either. If ones keep bashing, like you and some do, you and they, too, will remain unsuccessful in silencing opposition to the bashing mind-blindness you are exhibiting. Such promoting of anti-Christian remarks and hateful comments/quotes/pics, constitutes the hostility and disrespect for Christians, which then provokes dissenting responses of defense for their beliefs, that they are indeed allowed to have, enjoy, and share, in a public forum, where all kinds of topics and themes are allowed.Such constant remarks constitute hostility towards others of different beliefs. Consistently promoting and provocation of hate-filled remarks toward Christians, show deliberate intent to bash them for their beliefs that they are entitled to believe, whether you accept it or not.
Such constant proselytizing by xtian fundamentalists and those holding the same blind faith have been constantly opposed AFTER the fundies post their religious nonsense. If you want to call that "bashing" in yet another attempt to censor dissenting comments, you will remain unsucessful in silencing opposition to religious mind-blindness. Such INITIAL promoting of xtian propaganda constitutes a hostitilty and disrespect for non-xtians which provokes dissenting responses. Religious adherents are as 'free' to attempt such brain-washing as others are to oppose it. It isn't some kind of xtian one-way street here.
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
It isn't a Christian bashing one-way street here, either.
If ones keep bashing, like you and some do, you and they, too, will remain unsuccessful in silencing opposition to the bashing mind-blindness you are exhibiting.
Such promoting of anti-Christian remarks and hateful comments/quotes/pics, constitutes the hostility and disrespect for Christians, which then provokes dissenting responses of defense for their beliefs, that they are indeed allowed to have, enjoy, and share, in a public forum, where all kinds of topics and themes are allowed.
psalm23 the lord is my sheperd i shall not want
My my, now you are calling names? Hypocrite? I am not calling you names - where's the courtesy of respect?It isn't a Christian bashing one-way street here, either.
It never was a one-way street. The xtians have been posted bible-bashing proselytizations since long before I arrived on FC. This does not mean that such must go unopposed. I oppose it after it's posted, (not in advance), therefore such are dissenting responses which you keep calling "bashing", (as if the responses were out-of-the-blue and not replies to Initial bible-bashing proselytizing). Hypocrit.If ones keep bashing, like you and some do, you and they, too, will remain unsuccessful in silencing opposition to the bashing mind-blindness you are exhibiting.
Trying to use my rational arguments against me won't work because you don't demonstrate a comprehension of the underlying logic of those rational arguments, (and are using them irrationally in fabricating false contentions). Logic is not "mind-blindness" because it relies upon rational reasoning, not irrational religious blind-faith which lacks evidence. Secondly, challenges and refutations of religious irrationalities are intended to refute nonsense, not to silence it. Were it silenced, there would be nothing to refute or challenge.Such promoting of anti-Christian remarks and hateful comments/quotes/pics, constitutes the hostility and disrespect for Christians, which then provokes dissenting responses of defense for their beliefs, that they are indeed allowed to have, enjoy, and share, in a public forum, where all kinds of topics and themes are allowed.
Such INITIAL xtian proselytizing of religious blind faith constitutes a hostility towards logic and a hatred of reasoning which invalidates specious superstitious beliefs. There is nothing in the FC TOS about disallowing opposition to religious proselytization. As the FC staff has indicated time and again, if you don't like the dissenting replies, don't read them/use the ignore function. My choice to reply to your irrational xtian propaganda means I've elected not to ignore the insidious mind-poison of blind faith and oppose it here with reasoning. No one demands that xtians post their specious religious beliefs on an offers/surveys site. No member of FC can dictate the replies of another member, just because they don't believe in the same superstitious nonsense.
I support your freedom to hold any irrational, baseless, illogical, faith-based, superstitious religious belief you wish to have rattling around inside of your own skull. Once it escapes those confines and emerges onto a forum as some sort of 'pseudo-fact', I retain a 'freedom' to object/refute/oppose such proselytizations.
My my, now you are calling names? Hypocrite? I am not calling you names - where's the courtesy of respect?
In response to your comment, I'm electing not to ignore the "insidious mind-poison of hateful intolerance" coming from you.
Sure - nothing wrong with a debate. However, nothing can reach to a true debate until you can get past the intolerance part and approach a debate with an open mind, willing to listen, compare, challenge, ask questions, back and forth. You don't give opportunity to get to that point ...
"As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”"
Matthew 7:15-16
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
Watch out for false prophets! They dress up like sheep, but inside they are wolves who have come to attack you.You can tell what they are by what they do.
I don't care how many biblical threads there are. Wise words of the lord are always welcome for me from whomever starts the thread. I thank you for adding another verse. Sometimes I tend to "pause" my relationship with the Lord because I just get so darn busy. So when I see something like this pop up...it's a great reminder as to why I'm on this earth and to praise him.Loving your response.
I don't care how many biblical threads there are.
Ephesians 3:14-19
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
Watch out for false prophets! They dress up like sheep, but inside they are wolves who have come to attack you.You can tell what they are by what they do.
I don't care how many biblical threads there are.
(http://i50.tinypic.com/34p0uvo.gif)
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
Matthew 5:9
I really feel sorry for Falcon 9, Christians know that God loves him despite his beliefs.
I will pray for Falcon9 and ask other Christians to do the same.
John 3:16
(http://i50.tinypic.com/34p0uvo.gif)
“For GOD so loved the world, that HE gave his only SON, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
Romans 14:19
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
Mark 1:14,15 Jesus
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
— Proverbs 10:12
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
psalm23 the lord is my sheperd i shall not wantthis is the prayer i say each night before i go to bed and my sons prayer is the one with now i lay me down to sleep....etc..
this is the prayer i say each night before i go to bed and my sons prayer is the one with now i lay me down to sleep....etc..(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
That's unsolicited superstitious nonsense and is unappreciated. Therefore, according to the 'golden rule', wiccan and satanist associates will endeavor to have other non-xtian egregores evoked to look into why you're so mind-blinded by faith. No extra charge for any "daemons" who happen to take a shine to you.
Thank you for saying that - it's very encouraging to read.QuoteThat's unsolicited superstitious nonsense and is unappreciated. Therefore, according to the 'golden rule', wiccan and satanist associates will endeavor to have other non-xtian egregores evoked to look into why you're so mind-blinded by faith. No extra charge for any "daemons" who happen to take a shine to you.
I love being mind blinded by faith. Thank you for saying that. I anything including " "daemons" " will not stand in the presence of God.
Hate stirs up trouble, but love forgives all offenses. — Proverbs 10:12Your sharing of Bible verses are very fitting - I needed the encouragement from them and they are helping me. Thank you.
I love being mind blinded by faith. Thank you for saying that.
I anything including " "daemons" " will not stand in the presence of God.
"For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them." -- Romans 1:19
'JESUS answered, YOU belong to this world here below, but I come from above. You are from this world, but I am not from this world.'
That is why I told you that you will die in your sins. And you will die in your sins if you do not believe that I Am Who I Am.
Psalm 23:1
The Lord is my Shepard I shall not want.
"Shepard," indeed, very amusing. I note that a lot of people on this forum who believe in gods, magical mystical beings and other apparitions can't seem to spell, capitalize and don't understand punctuation. Am I the only one who sees a connection here, or am I just imagining that?
psalm23 the lord is my sheperd i shall not want
Psalm 23:1 The Lord is my Shepard I shall not want.
Apparently, a spellchecker isn't wanted either when blind faith suffices to shepherd unthinking 'sheeple'.
"Shepard," indeed, very amusing. I note that a lot of people on this forum who believe in gods, magical mystical beings and other apparitions can't seem to spell, capitalize and don't understand punctuation.
Anyway, the lord isn't my shepherd, because since I a human, and not a sheep, I don't have a shepherd.
Anyway, the lord isn't my shepherd, because since I a human, and not a sheep, I don't have a shepherd.
Apparently, the "psalm" was intended to be slightly less obvious than 'the lord is my mole-herder', (which doesn't roll off the tongue or, bounce off of reasoning as well).
Anyway, the lord isn't my shepherd, because since I a human, and not a sheep, I don't have a shepherd.
Apparently, the "psalm" was intended to be slightly less obvious than 'the lord is my mole-herder', (which doesn't roll off the tongue or, bounce off of reasoning as well).
So, what do you call one who "herds" ostrich?
(not to be confused with ostritch, ostretch, ostridge, ostredge)
;D :heart: GGYB! :heart: ;D
"Shepard," indeed, very amusing. I note that a lot of people on this forum who believe in gods, magical mystical beings and other apparitions can't seem to spell, capitalize and don't understand punctuation. Am I the only one who sees a connection here, or am I just imagining that?
It isn't just you; there is a markedly-significant correllation between ignorance and religious beliefs. Conversely, there's a corresponding significant ration of non-believers and an ability to reason. Those are facts, not coincidence.
So, what do you call one who "herds" ostrich?
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
(not to be confused with ostritch, ostretch, ostridge, ostredge)
;D :heart: GGYB! :heart: ;D
For some reason, 'the lord is my post-hole digger' doesn't necessarily convey the whole osterich paradigm as well.
Ouch!! Whadja hafta hit me with that THANG for?? Geez-a-loo!!
.....it's kind of got a ring to it......
the lord is my post-hole digger
(- AND - he's got my back!) :thumbsup:
1 Thessalonians 5:11john 3:16 for god so love the world that he gave his only begotten son
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
john 3:16-Most over-quoted biblical irrationality-
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
when you read a bible you after to prayer and read about thing in life to god bless you.
Matthew 5:3(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
— Jeremiah 29:11 (GNT)(http://i50.tinypic.com/34p0uvo.gif)
when you read a bible you after to prayer and read about thing in life to god bless you.
when you read a bible you after to prayer and read about thing in life to god bless you.
Of course I agree, falcon, this is a completely incoherent statement. This guy is so illiterate that he would be better advised to have his 7 year old son, if he has one, proofread his comments before he posts them. I wonder, who dresses him in the morning, who ties his shoes?
....as we have already discussed before.
....as we have already discussed before.
True; there is an evidential correlation between unreasoned "faith" and unreasoning as well as a strong basis for the ability to reason accurately and a lack of, (baseless, belief without evidence), 'faith'. Evidently, it's easier for many to be mentally-lazy than for some to light-off more synapses as a fire in the darkness.
"... synapses as a fire in the darkness," what a charmingly poetic statement you make. I congratulate you on that, but I expect there will not be very many on this forum that will understand your words, and even fewer that appreciate the philosophical meaning of the idea that you present.
John 14:27
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
“For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you."
2 Corinthians 3:17
"Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty."
Proverbs 3:5-7 Trust in the Lord with all your heart. Never rely on what you think you know. Remember the Lord in everything you do, and he will show you the right way. Never let yourself think that you are wiser than you are; simply obey the Lord and refuse to do wrong.
1 Peter 2:15 For God wants you to silence the ignorant talk of foolish people by the good things you do. (GNT)
1 Peter 2:15 For God wants you to silence the ignorant talk of foolish people by the good things you do. (GNT)~ I just wanted to add it in the KJV, too. ~
1 Peter 2:15 For God wants you to silence the ignorant talk of foolish people by the good things you do. (GNT)
~ I just wanted to add it in the KJV, too. ~
1 Peter 2:15
King James Version (KJV)
15 "For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:"
Ephesians 1:3-6
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
— 2 Peter 1:2-4 (CEV)“Recalling some of the most spectacular horrors of history -- the burning of heretics and witches at the stake, the wholesale massacre of "heathens," and other no less repulsive manifestations of xtian 'civilization' in Europe and elsewhere -- modern man is filled with pride in the "progress" accomplished, in one line at least, since the end of the dark ages of religious fanaticism.”
(http://i50.tinypic.com/34p0uvo.gif)
— Romans 12:2 (CEV)
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
2 Corinthians 10:5 (KJV)
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
Romans 8:6-7 (KJV)
(http://i50.tinypic.com/34p0uvo.gif)
Romans 1:16 (KJV)
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
Luke 9:5 (KJV)
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
James 1:5 (KJV)
2 Timothy 2:15
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
"Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
James 3:16
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
For GOD so love the world that HE gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in HIM shall not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
"Surrender to God!"
"... avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called"
Ephesians 2:8-10, KJV:
Psalm 19:1, KJV:
Romans 1:20, KJV:
I have the answer. Do you?
Ephesians 4:22-24 (CEV)
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
Romans 12:2 (KJV)
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
Romans 5:1 (NIV)
"Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ."
James 1:19-21
"Submit to God and accept the word that he plants in your hearts ..."
Hebrews 11:1
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." (NIV)
Hebrews 4:12
"For the word of God is alive and active."
"... it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart."
Poor, poor Falcon
... just wanted to share my God giving feeling.
Romans 15:13
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
Romans 1:18
John 8:44
Romans 10:17
Titus 2:11
John 5:24
Ephesians 6:10
I Peter 3:15
"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect."
Trust in the lord he will lead you to safe passage into heaven.
I will lift my eyes unto the hill. Where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord, Who made heaven and earth. (My favorite!)
Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not unto your own understanding.
Good people do good things because of the good in their hearts, but bad people do bad things because of the evil in their hearts. Your words show what is in your heart. — Luke 6:45 (CEV)
Psalm 27:4
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
John 3:36
Proselytizing
Acts 3:19
blind faith
Ephesians 2:10
and propagandizing
Colossians 3:12
brain-washing since 300 BCE
The Lord has promised that he will not leave us or desert us. This should make you feel like saying, “The Lord helps me! Why should I be afraid of what people can do to me?”
This is funny no one is listening too falcon... keep the daily verses coming ^^
This is funny no one is listening too falcon... :angel11: keep the daily verses coming ^^
This is funny no one is listening too falcon... :angel11: keep the daily verses coming ^^
And in two threads,no less! ;D
keep the daily verses coming
... no less! ;D
hahhahah you got that right :D this is so entertaining ^^
Proverbs 18:21
(http://i50.tinypic.com/do7885.jpg)
1 Corinthians 16:14
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
2 Timothy 1:7
(http://i48.tinypic.com/fulxkk.jpg)
~unreasoned quotes~Faith is the continuation of unreason.
A. "O Wise One, consider it an esteemed honor to follow through with proof of those wonderful examples of non-sensical non-quotes listed above."~unreasoned quotes~Faith is the continuation of unreason.
Faith is to believe what has no evidence; and the reward of this faith is irrationality.
... the steps of faith fall on the seeming void and find self-delusion.
Faith remains unable to trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.
~unreasoned quotes~
~unreasoned quotes~For the record, please note that Falcon9 quoted me as saying "~unreasoned quotes~ (highlighted in maroon.)" As you notice, he changed the wording to something I did not say, so he should not have quoted me unless quoting correctly. Thank you.Faith is the continuation of unreason.
Faith is to believe what has no evidence; and the reward of this faith is irrationality.
... the steps of faith fall on the seeming void and find self-delusion.
Faith remains unable to trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.
~unreasoned quotes~For the record, please note that Falcon9 quoted me as saying "~unreasoned quotes~ (highlighted in maroon.)" As you notice, he changed the wording to something I did not say, so he should not have quoted me unless quoting correctly. Thank you.
~unreasoned quotes~Faith is the continuation of unreason.
Faith is to believe what has no evidence; and the reward of this faith is irrationality.
... the steps of faith fall on the seeming void and find self-delusion.
Faith remains unable to trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.
Okay, from the beginning: You "quoted" under my name as a "quote:"
~unreasoned quotes~; I did NOT write the words "UNREASONED QUOTES" - YOU DID.
You are saying my quotes are unreasoned ...
but you "quoted" me as if I said those words.
YOU should have "quoted" my quotes and said, YOURSELF, that you considered them "UNREASONED."
COMPRENDE YET?
Okay, from the beginning: You "quoted" under my name as a "quote:"
~unreasoned quotes~; I did NOT write the words "UNREASONED QUOTES" - YOU DID.
No, I remarked that the quotes you quoted were ~unreasoned quotes~, I did not attribute them to you, (since you didn't write them and had attributed them to others).You are saying my quotes are unreasoned ...
Correct.but you "quoted" me as if I said those words.
Incorrect. I remarked that the quotes you quoted were ~unreasoned quotes~, I did not attribute them to you. The unreasoned quotes were mentioned in general by way of my '~unreasoned quotes~' catagorization, (with the "~" delineating that catagorization from quoted material). The catagorization followed your 'nym because you'd requoted the unreasoned quotes, not because you wrote the words "~unreasoned quotes~", or the actual quotes attributed to others.
YOU should have "quoted" my quotes and said, YOURSELF, that you considered them "UNREASONED."
They weren't your quoted words; they were the words of others which you were requoting, (and which I considered to be unreasoned). Had the remarks been attributible to you, they would've been attributed to you.COMPRENDE YET?
Verstehen sie?
You are still not comprehending.
You included my name over the words "Unreasoned quotes" as if you were "quoting" me saying those words.
Galatians 5:22-23
God's Spirit makes us loving, happy, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, and self-controlled.
There is no law against behaving in any of these ways.
1 Thessalonians 5:11Great verse Madeara, i love encouraging my friends, family and even those who don't know me, when i see someone down and not smiling i always say something positive to them and that seem to brighten their expression, because we do not know what someone is dealing with that day, they might had a death in the family, going through financial difficulties, sick in their bodies, contemplating suicide or something, and a smile or a hello or just a kind word can make a world of difference to them, just because it does not have anything to do with our life, does not mean we should not help another in their life, God word says to greet each other with kindness and sincere love and that's all people. I am a christian myself and i still deal with things and it helps me when someone encourage me and it lift my spirits. :angel11: :female:
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
... God word says to greet each other with kindness and sincere love and that's all people.
But now you must stop doing such things. You must quit being angry, hateful, and evil. You must no longer say insulting or cruel things about others. — Colossians 3:8a (CEV)
Prove the attributions are "false," please.Galatians 5:22-23
God's Spirit makes us loving, happy, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, and self-controlled.
There is no law against behaving in any of these ways.
Nor are there any "laws" against making such false attributions, let alone xtian behaviour contrary to the religious admonishments. That just makes xtians hypocrites.
Prove the attributions are "false," please.
Chicken? Prove what you are accusing others of - proof of your false claims rests with you since you choose to name call and are not willing to discuss anything Christians say - so prove your end that these things above are false. I dare you.Prove the attributions are "false," please.
That's not how the burden of proof obligation works since the INITIAL asserted claims, ("G-d's Spirit makes us loving, happy, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, and self-controlled"), constitute attributing effects to a supernatural entity sans evidence of either the posited entity or, the effects attributed to it. The obligation to "prove", (provide substantiating evidence for), such initial claims rests with the initial claimaint, not with challengers to those initial claims. Positive initial assertions fall under the burden of proof obligation. Secondary assertions derived from concluding that, (sans evidence), the initial assertion is false by default, have a secondary obligation after the initial claimant fullfils their primary obligation. Attempts to shift the burden of proof from the primary to a secondary claimaint are disingenuous.
Chicken?
Prove what you are accusing others of - proof of your false claims rests with you since you choose to name call and are not willing to discuss anything Christians say - so prove your end that these things above are false. I dare you.
That's not how the burden of proof obligation works since the INITIAL asserted claims, ("G-d's Spirit makes us loving, happy, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, and self-controlled"), constitute attributing effects to a supernatural entity sans evidence of either the posited entity or, the effects attributed to it. The obligation to "prove", (provide substantiating evidence for), such initial claims rests with the initial claimaint, not with challengers to those initial claims. Positive initial assertions fall under the burden of proof obligation. Secondary assertions derived from concluding that, (sans evidence), the initial assertion is false by default, have a secondary obligation after the initial claimant fullfils their primary obligation. Attempts to shift the burden of proof from the primary to a secondary claimaint are disingenuous.
Chicken? jcribb, you're a goofy guy who keeps me amused with your posts. I couldn't possibly disagree when falcon presents the word "idiot."
You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.
Matthew 5:44
John 3:19
Colossians 2:8
1 Corinthians 1:18
Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life. — Proverbs 22:6
Chicken? jcribb, you're a goofy guy who keeps me amused with your posts. I couldn't possibly disagree when falcon presents the word "idiot."
Actually, "cribb" would technically be a "goofy female" however, still lacking the ability to reason as you delineate below.You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.
Absolutely correct. The inversion of her 'disprove my claims because I'm too intellectually-dishonest to prove them' would be for her to 'disprove contentions that her claims are false'.
I'm also confused as to why women here think they can teach anything considering what they preach is pretty mysogynistic.
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.” –Paul, 1 Timothy 2:11-15
Of course I'm sure I'm forgetting some convenient christian loophole that explains how this verse means the exact opposite despite what it plainly says.
1 Peter 2:1-3 Rid yourselves, then, of all evil; no more lying or hypocrisy or jealousy or insulting language.
Chicken? jcribb, you're a goofy guy who keeps me amused with your posts. I couldn't possibly disagree when falcon presents the word "idiot."You are free to express your opinions as I am. You keep laughing all you wish - one day things will change. Your "opinion" to me doesn't bother me in the least and I will keep posting whenever I want to or feel I need to. You have yourself a wonderful day.
You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.
I knew you wouldn't even try because you cannot. Think what you wish with your little "assessments" - they are just that - opinions of me and what I represent. That's perfectly fine. You have a fantastic day.Chicken? jcribb, you're a goofy guy who keeps me amused with your posts. I couldn't possibly disagree when falcon presents the word "idiot."
Actually, "cribb" would technically be a "goofy female" however, still lacking the ability to reason as you delineate below.You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.
Absolutely correct. The inversion of her 'disprove my claims because I'm too intellectually-dishonest to prove them' would be for her to 'disprove contentions that her claims are false'.
You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.
Absolutely correct. The inversion of her 'disprove my claims because I'm too intellectually-dishonest to prove them' would be for her to 'disprove contentions that her claims are false'.
I knew you wouldn't even try because you cannot.
Think what you wish with your little "assessments" - they are just that - opinions of me and what I represent.
That's perfectly fine. You have a fantastic day.
Feel better now? Good. They aren't true because 'you' say they are - I know you have a difficult time struggling between those assessments and assertions, but hey, it's okay - you are welcome to belittle your reputation by trying to make others appear "dishonest," etc., since we have the freedom to do just that. I know you must have the last word, too, as we all know that from experience in here - and that's perfectly fine, too. So, please, make my day, and have/enjoy the last cutting word. :thumbsup:You must have been at home with the flu while your local school was conducting classes in logic and deductive reasoning. You make a claim about some spiritual being and it's entirely up to you to prove the existence of such a being, that's how real logic works. I could make a claim that the moon Titan is populated by purple cows, prove to me that's not the case, I dare you, you chicken. Do you see how stupid that sounds when you turn it around the other way? Of course you don't, because you're thoroughly brainwashed by your own metaphysical beliefs, it's the beginning and end of your personal space-time continuum, and, in your own deluded mind, others have the responsibility of disproving the fantasies you suffer under. I used the term "space-time continuum" because in another post you made the claim that your god transcended time, so now you've made him or her not only omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, but also omnitemporal, how much more ridiculous can you get? Keep posting and I'll keep laughing.Absolutely correct. The inversion of her 'disprove my claims because I'm too intellectually-dishonest to prove them' would be for her to 'disprove contentions that her claims are false'.I knew you wouldn't even try because you cannot.
Since you haven't proven the religious claims you've made and been challenged to substantiate, it is not incombent upon others to prove various things don't exist. Your attempts to shift the burden of proof responsibility are dishonest.Think what you wish with your little "assessments" - they are just that - opinions of me and what I represent.
No, they aren't merely "opinions"; they are substantiated conclusions based upon evidence you've submitted. This is as opposed to empty religious opinions which lack evidentiary basis.That's perfectly fine. You have a fantastic day.
Such has been your passive-aggressive pattern throughout. It's less than honest.
They aren't true because 'you' say they are -
I know you have a difficult time struggling between those assessments and assertions, but hey, it's okay - you are welcome to belittle your reputation by trying to make others appear "dishonest," etc., since we have the freedom to do just that.
thanks for the Daily Bible Verse response back. I like encouraging others and building them up, but today a friend had some issues with his water bill and i was trying to cheer him up by speaking about the promises of the bible from God, but the more i spoke about them, he seem to have a more of an angry attitude, and this guy was just baptised a month ago and talking about how much he loves God and how much God had done for him. I could not believe this, so i started praying in the car with him, and asked God to deal with his heart string and change his spirit from a negative angry spirit, and not to let that spirit transfer to me and i just prayed and stayed quiet all the way to his house and so did he, his spirit did not change much, but still when he was getting out, i told him to get what he needed and i would take him back up there Monday morning to get his water transfer and most people would have said no way i want deal with that again, but i have a heart for even mean hearted people, because i have been there myself and i have mercy for others and compassion and i am not even going to charge him for gas this time. He thanked me and now this is suppose to be a good friend of mine we been friends for years and he treat me like that after i dropped all i was doing to help him, but i forgive him and still love him and will help him and his lady friend out, because that is what true christians do.
It makes you wonder how Falcon9 spends his Sunday.Does he go from church to church shouting his objections and demanding to be heard in a place where he's not wanted?
Promises from a hypothetical supernatural entity are empty ones. The entire concept is built upon insubstantial "faith", (which is belief without evidence). Such a 'basis' is no basis and perpetuates self-delusions.thanks for the Daily Bible Verse response back. I like encouraging others and building them up, but today a friend had some issues with his water bill and i was trying to cheer him up by speaking about the promises of the bible from God, but the more i spoke about them, he seem to have a more of an angry attitude, and this guy was just baptised a month ago and talking about how much he loves God and how much God had done for him. I could not believe this, so i started praying in the car with him, and asked God to deal with his heart string and change his spirit from a negative angry spirit, and not to let that spirit transfer to me and i just prayed and stayed quiet all the way to his house and so did he, his spirit did not change much, but still when he was getting out, i told him to get what he needed and i would take him back up there Monday morning to get his water transfer and most people would have said no way i want deal with that again, but i have a heart for even mean hearted people, because i have been there myself and i have mercy for others and compassion and i am not even going to charge him for gas this time. He thanked me and now this is suppose to be a good friend of mine we been friends for years and he treat me like that after i dropped all i was doing to help him, but i forgive him and still love him and will help him and his lady friend out, because that is what true christians do.
... no one owes account to anyone else regarding faith or worship. To you, it's empty. To a Christian, it is fulfilling and joyful. You cannot tell what others are feeling - only your own self. Just because you think one way does not mean a Christian has to bow to you and your claims.
As far as sharing in here about it, others who share the same views enjoy discussing their views together. You don't like that and can't seem to handle that concept respectfully nor courteously, as it is that obvious.
You don't want to debate either, because you are not open to that concept with a believer - you would rather be obnoxious, pushy, thinking Christians are wrong, closing any door on any possible evidences -
In the end, it's absolutely none of your business nor concern what a Christian does, thinks, or feels, in regards to their relationship with God.
When it comes down to it, a Christian who believes in ...
"Your words start sounding like Charlie Brown's "adults" speaking of blah, blah, blah."
As previously iterated; xtians remain able to choose to be irrational and self-delusional. That they'd probably prefer not to have it pointed-out that such blind religious faith is irrational and self-delusional would be an effect caused by their posting such religious beliefs. Again, that's their choice, just as it is the choice of others to refute irrationality and reject such religious self-delusions.
... no one owes account to anyone else regarding faith or worship. To you, it's empty. To a Christian, it is fulfilling and joyful. You cannot tell what others are feeling - only your own self. Just because you think one way does not mean a Christian has to bow to you and your claims.
What "claims"? It isn't a 'claim' that "faith" is a belief without evidence. Conversely, you xtians continually make religious claims without supporting evidence which makes such irrational. You're under no particular obligation to be rational however, and are free to delude yourselves.As far as sharing in here about it, others who share the same views enjoy discussing their views together. You don't like that and can't seem to handle that concept respectfully nor courteously, as it is that obvious.
If xtians are able to proselytize their religious propaganda, those who reject it are able to oppose it. You seem to be unable to grasp the concept and appear to desire unopposed religious proselytizing. That's a damned shame.
You don't want to debate either, because you are not open to that concept with a believer - you would rather be obnoxious, pushy, thinking Christians are wrong, closing any door on any possible evidences -
That's just it; xtians have presented no valid evidence to support their specious religious claims so there is little to actually "debate" except for their empty religios opinions, (faith-based claims which lack evidence). It isn't "obnoxious" or "pushy" to require evidence to support the empty claims you xtians keep making, (and dodging the burden of proof requirement for).In the end, it's absolutely none of your business nor concern what a Christian does, thinks, or feels, in regards to their relationship with God.
That's nominally true except when such religious propaganda is posted to a 'publically-open' forum. Then it is open to opposition in a society where religious fundamentalism need not go unopposed.
When it comes down to it, a Christian who believes in ...
"Your words start sounding like Charlie Brown's "adults" speaking of blah, blah, blah."
As previously iterated; xtians remain able to choose to be irrational and self-delusional. That they'd probably prefer not to have it pointed-out that such blind religious faith is irrational and self-delusional would be an effect caused by their posting such religious beliefs. Again, that's their choice, just as it is the choice of others to refute irrationality and reject such religious self-delusions.
They are not irrational and self-delusional just because YOU, falcon9, says so. You are free to express your opinion about what you think about them, but it doesn't make it true. You are making yourself appear unreasonable and unable to accept that people differ in their opinions and choices, and there is no need to call Christians names just because you choose not to accept that there is a God. You act like it's such a big deal and that you must mock and belittle others for believing in God, and you choose to disbelieve. You aren't mocked for your choice, and no one should be mocked for theirs. When they are mocked and criticized, it's deliberate on the part of the person who refuses that a believer has a right to decide what they want to do, just as a disbeliever does.
They are not irrational and self-delusional just because YOU, falcon9, says so.
You are free to express your opinion about what you think about them, but it doesn't make it true.
You are making yourself appear unreasonable and unable to accept that people differ in their opinions and choices ...
It is NOT unreasonable for me to continue holding my "rational" (to you - "irrational") position of faith in God.
There is so much evidence in His creation everywhere - you choose to deny that - and that is your business.
It is NONE of your business what I hold or continue to hold, and it's NONE of your business the reasons I believe as I do. I accept your choice of disbelief and am not belittling you. You, however, seem to think it's your business to name call and ridicule what I or another believer chooses to do. You are NOT unreasonable in what you don't believe, and I would appreciate the same courtesy in what I believe being my business and NOT unreasonable to me.
Do you hunt down the threads that have anything to do with verses, inspiration, Bible, God, etc., just to deliberately go into them to provoke?
Faith is rational. Faith can be applied to much more than faith in God.It is NOT unreasonable for me to continue holding my "rational" (to you - "irrational") position of faith in God.
Faith is not rational, (being an unreasonable belief which lacks evidence). Simply declaring faith to be rational doesn't make it so, especially when no supportive evidence is presented - that just makes it an empty claim, (an earmark of religious adherents).There is so much evidence in His creation everywhere - you choose to deny that - and that is your business.
On the contrary, there is no directly-attributrible evidence of "his creation" anywhere, despite your unsupported assertions stemming from blind faith rather than substantive evidence. Anyone can point to a tree and claim that the 'invisible pink unicorn' created it and that the tree is evidence for the existence of the 'IPU' however, these would be unsupported, (and therefore false), attributions.It is NONE of your business what I hold or continue to hold, and it's NONE of your business the reasons I believe as I do. I accept your choice of disbelief and am not belittling you. You, however, seem to think it's your business to name call and ridicule what I or another believer chooses to do. You are NOT unreasonable in what you don't believe, and I would appreciate the same courtesy in what I believe being my business and NOT unreasonable to me.
By dragging your mindless superstitious religious beliefs onto a forum which is not some xtian domain, you make it the 'business' of others to either agree, ignore or disagree with. You don't get to control which option is exercised, but you remain able to choose what nonsense to believe or not. Again, you don't get to censor dissenting points of view in any way, (which includes imputing 'rudeness', 'belittling' or in any manner whatsoever).
Faith is rational.
Faith can be applied to much more than faith in God.
There is indeed evidence - it's your decision and business to deny it.
You are free to agree and disagree with whomever you wish, but you are the one trying to censor dissenting points of view ...
... in the way you are constantly degrading believers' views - you aren't just disagreeing, you are being very rude, obnoxious ...
Faith is rational.
No; since "faith" is a belief without the rational basis of extant evidence, that makes it irrational. An empty insistance that it is rational, (sans supporting evidence/reasoning), does not constitute substantive evidence.
Faith can be applied to much more than faith in God.
Then it would be 'confidence' or another word which doesn't have a religious context.There is indeed evidence - it's your decision and business to deny it.
No valid evidence has been presented to support the religious superstitions espoused thusfar, (since 'biblical' quotes are unsubstantiated hearsay and do not constitute valid evidence ... neither do blind faith nor false "IPU" attributions constitute valid evidence).You are free to agree and disagree with whomever you wish, but you are the one trying to censor dissenting points of view ...
That's false; opposing your specious religious opinions does not constitute attempts to censor them. In fact, I've repeated insisted that you are free to choose to hold such irrational superstitious beliefs.... in the way you are constantly degrading believers' views - you aren't just disagreeing, you are being very rude, obnoxious ...
Once again, such attempts of yours to censor/restrict a rational viewpoint which opposes your irrational one by characterizing such opposition as "rude, obnoxious, degrading", etc. are disingenuous. These are your subjective opinion; mine is that such religious proselytizing brain-washing propaganda is rude, obnoxious, disrepectful, annoying and specious. That opinion isn't intended to 'censor' your specious opinion.
Faith does not coincide strictly with religious context. You are coinciding it because you choose to.
It's still your choice to be in denial of evidence of creation by God.
I am free to hold beliefs without concern of posters like you who choose to be offensive and make false claims about my beliefs.
You can keep saying those things until you are blue in the face, it gets you nowhere...I have my beliefs, and that's all that matters.
Calling my beliefs irrational is discourteous and you know this. But like I said, your words don't mean a hill of beans to me. I don't call your dis beliefs names but it's obvious you don't respect others enough to extend the same courtesy. I'm totally not surprised since that's all you do towards believers anyway. It helps you to deal better with your anger or loathing of anything about God, so it's pretty much to be expected. Whatever makes you deal and be happy is the key for you - nothing new there.Faith does not coincide strictly with religious context. You are coinciding it because you choose to.
The context here is 'religious faith', (being posted in a thread called "daily bible [in]verse, not in a thread called "having confidence").It's still your choice to be in denial of evidence of creation by God.
No such accurately-attributible evidence has yet been presented so, there's nothing to deny.
I am free to hold beliefs without concern of posters like you who choose to be offensive and make false claims about my beliefs.
Quote exactly which "false claims" were made about your beliefs or, that will be considered a false accusation by default.You can keep saying those things until you are blue in the face, it gets you nowhere...I have my beliefs, and that's all that matters.
As reiterated before, you can choose to hold irrational religious beliefs and spout them, just as I can choose to oppose and refute them as specious superstitions which lack evidence.
Calling my beliefs irrational is discourteous and you know this.
But like I said, your words don't mean a hill of beans to me.
Words you use towards me or other believers, do not bother me in the least. Because when it comes right down to it, as a believer in Christ, 2 Timothy 1:12 (NKJV) says it best for me: "For this reason I also suffer these things; nevertheless I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day."Calling my beliefs irrational is discourteous and you know this.
No, calling something which is not rational, 'irrational' is making a factual statement. You added your own perception of it being "discourteous", which is a subjectively-biased opinion not based on factual evidence. Since "faith" is specifically that which has no evidentiary basis, holding such blind faith is not rational. Proselytizing such blind religious beliefs is beyond "discourteous"; it's insidious propagandizing.
But like I said, your words don't mean a hill of beans to me.
You keep insisting that by repeatedly posting it however, repeatedly posting it belies your insistance. In other words, you protest too much that it doesn't matter by protesting that it doesn't matter to you. I remain dubious for obvious reasons.
Words you use towards me or other believers, do not bother me in the least.
That's fine. Not to mention, it's after 4:30 a.m. here, and I know my brain is starting to mush :sad1: and I'm saying things again and again. ??? Or maybe I'm just emphasizing my point about that. :dontknow: Either way, I really do mean it, as backed by the Timothy verse. 8)Words you use towards me or other believers, do not bother me in the least.
You keep insisting that by repeatedly posting it however, repeatedly posting it belies your insistance. In other words, you protest too much that it doesn't matter by protesting that it doesn't matter to you. I remain dubious for obvious reasons.
Not to mention, it's after 4:30 a.m. here, and I know my brain is starting to mush :sad1: and I'm saying things again and again. ??? Or maybe I'm just emphasizing my point about that. :dontknow: Either way, I really do mean it, as backed by the Timothy verse. 8)
"... let God change the way you think."— Romans 12:2
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
Is there a blog you 2 can get going or is it just here that you think people really care. Starting to not like this site for reasons being they allow this kinda crap to go on. Makes me wonder how many of you actually work for FC and egg things on.
GOD BLESS US ALL! I love it when The Lord can bless us in many ways and we see his blessings. Amen... :peace:
Ephesians 3:14
"For this reason I kneel before the Father." (NIV)
"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear."(http://i46.tinypic.com/24zhhcw.jpg)
"Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.'"
How "near" can it be when that was speciously "predicted" close on to two thousand years ago? Apparently, "near" is an extremely subjective term ranging from not-even-close to never.God's timing is not as ours. Be patient - it's coming."Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.'"
God's timing is not as ours. Be patient - it's coming.
Proverbs 23:17 Don't be envious of sinful people; let reverence for the Lord be the concern of your life. (GNT)
"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."
Science hasn't completely 100 percent proved it. God, the mastermind, used science within His creation. Only someone with a brilliant and perfect mind/brain could have created everything in it's correct time and place, including the working together of everything. There also had to be a cause for something to come into existence. Nothing cannot come from nothing unless there is a someone to achieve just that, with a cause. It's really not such a wild claim, if you really think about it deeper than just the surface of thought and total denial. Good night - my meds have finally kicked in! :)"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."
If there were even a shred of valid evidence to substantiate such a wild claim, it would be apparent. Invalid attributions and blind faith do not constitute substantive evidence.
Science hasn't completely 100 percent proved it.
God, the mastermind, used science within His creation. Only someone with a brilliant and perfect mind/brain could have created everything in it's correct time and place, including the working together of everything.
There also had to be a cause for something to come into existence.
Nothing cannot come from nothing unless there is a someone to achieve just that, with a cause.
Science hasn't completely 100 percent proved it. God, the mastermind, used science within His creation. Only someone with a brilliant and perfect mind/brain could have created everything in it's correct time and place, including the working together of everything. There also had to be a cause for something to come into existence. Nothing cannot come from nothing unless there is a someone to achieve just that, with a cause. It's really not such a wild claim, if you really think about it deeper than just the surface of thought and total denial. Good night - my meds have finally kicked in! :)"By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."
If there were even a shred of valid evidence to substantiate such a wild claim, it would be apparent. Invalid attributions and blind faith do not constitute substantive evidence.
"And God is able to give you more than you need, so that you will always have all you need for yourselves and more than enough for every good cause."
"Religions are all alike - founded upon fables and mythologies."Having faith in God is not a religion. Religion is man-made and I do not worship a religion.
--Thomas Jefferson
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2rxihbn.jpg)
Having faith in God is not a religion. Religion is man-made and I do not worship a religion.
...There once was a time in my life in which I didn't believe in God. I didn't know him properly. I wanted him to be a myth. I'm happy that I decided to develop a relationship with him.....
"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect."
Thanks for posting the daily verses. They are inspiring, and encouraging.....There once was a time in my life in which I didn't believe in God. I didn't know him properly. I wanted him to be a myth. I'm happy that I decided to develop a relationship with him.....KEEP DOING HIS WILL......That's great! I'm happy for you! :)
There once was a time in my life in which I didn't believe in God. I didn't know him properly. I wanted him to be a myth. I'm happy that I decided to develop a relationship with him.....KEEP DOING HIS WILL......
That's great! I'm happy for you! :)
I feel pity for you, however, you also choose to blind yourself with the worldly views and lack of faith.There once was a time in my life in which I didn't believe in God. I didn't know him properly. I wanted him to be a myth. I'm happy that I decided to develop a relationship with him.....KEEP DOING HIS WILL......That's great! I'm happy for you! :)
I'd feel pity for her however, she choose to blind herself with specious faith and unreason.
I feel pity for you, however, you also choose to blind yourself with the worldly views and lack of faith.
I reject your specious "pity" and maintain that such "worldly views" as reason and logic are of more substantive insight than the insubstantial blind faith of religious beliefs.That's your choice. Just as it is theirs.I feel pity for you, however, you also choose to blind yourself with the worldly views and lack of faith.
That's your choice. Just as it is theirs.
That's what I'd already said, ('... she choose to blind herself with specious faith and unreason'). Choosing irrationality is not making a rational choice, by definition.And that, is your biased opinion on the matter (and yes, "biased" is my opinion word about your opinion) even though you do not see it as an opinion. It is an opinion or assessment based on what you choose to believe or dis-believe, in this case.That's your choice. Just as it is theirs.
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan
And that, is your biased opinion on the matter (and yes, "biased" is my opinion word about your opinion) ...
... even though you do not see it as an opinion. It is an opinion or assessment based on what you choose to believe or dis-believe, in this case.
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”So? Carl Sagan's quoted "opinion" is just that - "opinion." Just because he said something about faith/beliefs, does not mean he is the expert and correct, especially about something he never chose to experience for himself. He stayed on the outside of faith/belief in God, and so therefore did not comprehend the "truth" of being a believer in God. So yes, he gave his views and opinions, but they are not set in stone as truth. You accept his views - that's fine; I do not accept his views, nor yours.
-– Carl SaganAnd that, is your biased opinion on the matter (and yes, "biased" is my opinion word about your opinion) ...
Actually, it's Carl Sagan's quoted "opinion", (which is based upon the evidence that religious faith/beliefs are not based upon any validly-attributible evidence). Although I do happen to agree with Carl.... even though you do not see it as an opinion. It is an opinion or assessment based on what you choose to believe or dis-believe, in this case.
The assessment is based upon logical reasoning and not "belief" or 'disbelief', (which has no bearing on the validlity of evidence or reasoning).
The assessment is based upon logical reasoning and not "belief" or 'disbelief', (which has no bearing on the validlity of evidence or reasoning).
So? Carl Sagan's quoted "opinion" is just that - "opinion."
Just because he said something about faith/beliefs, does not mean he is the expert and correct, especially about something he never chose to experience for himself.
Finally, my friends, keep your minds on whatever is true, pure, right, holy, friendly, and proper. Don't ever stop thinking about what is truly worthwhile and worthy of praise. — Philippians 4:8 (CEV)I absolutely agree with this verse. :)
Isaiah 40:8
"The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever." (NIV)
Isaiah 40:8
"The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever." (NIV)
Isaiah 40:8
"The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever." (NIV)
I've read the entire bible, I'll admit, only once. I'm reading all these quotes from the bible and they remind me that none of this is very profound or thought provoking. These are quotes written for a relatively simple minded, and intellectually uneducated and undemanding people living over 3000 years ago.
Some of you people, with that primitive level of education, are still around today. Most of these quotes, childish as they are, would make Dr. Suess look like a candidate for the Nobel prize in literature.
"Now the star-belly sneeches have bellies with stars,
and the plain bellied sneeches have none upon thars."
Very profound and moving, don't you agree? It really makes you ponder our existence in this space-time continuum. Keep reading your childish book, the only book in your library, and keep quoting that primitive nonsense over and over and over again.
Well, I'm going back to the Yahvist origin of the Torah, dating back to about 950 BCE, so that's almost 3000 years ago.
Of course, the entire repeatedly edited and modified text is invented and superstitious.
It's just endlessly amazing that people who proclaim themselves to be even moderately intelligent would believe such nonsense. And, just imagine, almost all of these people have been issued valiid drivers licenses in the states of their legal residence.
Once again I joke at their expense, but I'm sure you get the point. Welcome to Disneyland.
James 3:3-5a By putting a bit into the mouth of a horse, we can turn the horse in different directions. It takes strong winds to move a large sailing ship, but the captain uses only a small rudder to make it go in any direction. Our tongues are small too, and yet they brag about big things. (CEV)
Always let others see you behaving properly, even though they may still accuse you of doing wrong. Then on the day of judgment, they will honor God by telling the good things they saw you do. — 1 Peter 2:12 (CEV)
"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves ... let us be above such transparent egotism."
-- Will Durant
Proverbs 13:15-20
"He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a fool; he that dares not reason is a slave.""What-choo talkin' bout Willis?"
-- William Drummond
This is one of my favorites.
Isaiah 40:31 But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary, and they shall walk , and not faint. (KJV)
If these bible-thumping threads aren't overt proselytizing propaganda, why are there two of them thumping simultaneously?
Such religious propaganda being posted in the d+d subforum and then not debated makes the intention mind-numbing through mind blinding "faith". No religious adherent has sucessfully defended "faith"/religious belief because it has no valid defense, (circular non-reasoning nonsense doesn't consitute validity).
"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people."
-- Gregory House
It's called "saturation bombing," the Air Force charmingly calls it "making parking lots" although they rarely use that method anymore. Meanwhile, we've developed GPS and computer guided precision weaponry that can hit within just a few meters of any intended target.
These bozos are incapable of making any precision comments or arguments, so they're "saturation bombing."
Keep away from worthless and useless talk.
Keep away from worthless and useless talk. It only leads people farther away from God. That sort of talk is like a sore that won't heal. And Hymenaeus and Philetus have been talking this way. — 2 Timothy 2:16-17 (CEV):thumbsup:
If these bible-thumping threads aren't overt proselytizing propaganda, why are there two of them thumping simultaneously?Perhaps different reasons?
Such religious propaganda being posted in the d+d subforum and then not debated makes the intention mind-numbing through mind blinding "faith". No religious adherent has sucessfully defended "faith"/religious belief because it has no valid defense, (circular non-reasoning nonsense doesn't consitute validity).
"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people."
-- Gregory House
Proverbs 3:5-8 Trust in the Lord
2 Timothy 3:12
"In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:25
"Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth,..." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:26
"And that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:10
"Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory." (NIV)
The requotes you've selected to repetitiously propagandize religious faith-blindness with are especially sanctimonious, self-righteous, insulting, deprecating of reason and offensive tonight. Been to church today, huh?Actually, yes I had been to church! I also had to fill in on the piano for morning and evening services. Thanks for asking! Have a nice new week! :)2 Timothy 3:12
"In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:25
"Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth,..." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:26
"And that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will." (NIV)
2 Timothy 2:10
"Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory." (NIV)
"For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?"
God is good all the time ~
Fools have quick tempers, and no one likes you if you can't be trusted. — Proverbs 14:17 (CEV)
"Faith makes us sure of what we hope for and gives us proof of what we cannot see." — Hebrews 11:1 (CEV)
Quote"Faith makes us sure of what we hope for and gives us proof of what we cannot see." — Hebrews 11:1 (CEV)
No, "faith" is a belief which lacks evidence/"proof". As such, an empty "belief" does not constitute evidence, (but does demonstrate a lack of reasoning ability and reliance upon irrationality).
"Faith" is a belief which lacks evidence/"proof". As such, an empty "belief" does not constitute evidence, (but does demonstrate a lack of reasoning ability and reliance upon irrationality).
You have your definition of faith and we have ours. As for me, I choose to accept the one given to us by God.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary:
11:1-3 "Faith always has been the mark of God's servants, from the beginning of the world. Where the principle is planted by the regenerating Spirit of God, it will cause the truth to be received, concerning justification by the sufferings and merits of Christ. And the same things that are the object of our hope, are the object of our faith.
It is a firm persuasion and expectation, that God will perform all he has promised to us in Christ. This persuasion gives the soul to enjoy those things now; it gives them a subsistence or reality in the soul, by the first-fruits and foretastes of them. Faith proves to the mind, the reality of things that cannot be seen by the bodily eye. It is a full approval of all God has revealed, as holy, just, and good.
This view of faith is explained by many examples of persons in former times, who obtained a good report, or an honourable character in the word of God. Faith was the principle of their holy obedience, remarkable services, and patient sufferings.
The Bible gives the most true and exact account of the origin of all things, and we are to believe it, and not to wrest the Scripture account of the creation, because it does not suit with the differing fancies of men. All that we see of the works of creation, were brought into being by the command of God."
— Proverbs 11:25 (CEV)
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
Generosity will be rewarded: Give a cup of water, and you will receive a cup of water in return. — Proverbs 11:25 (CEV)
... the holy bible is a great good book to meditate and learn in our lives ...
it teaches us wisdom,knowledge and understanding....
... its better than gold and what money can buy.. ;D
"Come" when Jesus said come to Peter when He was walking on the water.
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
Peter started to walk on the water, but when he took his eyes off from Jesus, guess what? He became afraid and started to sink!
"Come" when Jesus said come to Peter when He was walking on the water.
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
Peter started to walk on the water, but when he took his eyes off from Jesus, guess what? He became afraid and started to sink!
The 'walking on water' hearsay belief has no basis in substantive evidence.
You may be a master bookbinder, but you are no master of what worth the Bible is, because you do not accept it. You should be very careful speaking of God's Word in such a haughty way - those kinds of attitudes and words will come back around and bite you. I've tried to stay more neutral with you as of late, but no one speaks so dirty of my God's Word, and not expect to hear back about it. You are not and will never be a bookbinder worthy of binding any Bibles of any translations. Nor will I, but I value and treasure His Word, where you are hateful of it. You only "think" you know what you know about God's Word and God, and you have no earthly idea what fire you are flirting with when you cut His Word down like that. I really could care less what you have to say back to me - it will be an honor to take on whatever you say, if it means I'm standing up for my God and His Word.... the holy bible is a great good book to meditate and learn in our lives ...
No, it's a haphazardly translated and retranslated combination of sanctimonious, unsubstantiated religious myth; partly stolen outright from prior pagan belief systems and jumbled together in order to assimulate them.it teaches us wisdom,knowledge and understanding....
Those religious adherents who use it to thump religious propaganda have acquired neither wisdom, knowledge or understanding because blind faith does not lead to such qualities or promote it.... its better than gold and what money can buy.. ;D
On the contrary, I'm trained as a master bookbinder and no 'bible' is worth the paper printed on, nor the binding cover which attempts to conceal the deceit of proselytization from the ones who eschew reason for gullibility.
No valid or substantive evidence has been produced to support such religious claims. Those specious claims remain a matter of blind faith, (belief lacking evidence).What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection. So you believe your way and I'll believe mine. You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something. Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science. Keep fighting it - believe your way, that's fine - but leave people alone who believe what they want.Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary:
11:1-3 "Faith always has been the mark of God's servants, from the beginning of the world. Where the principle is planted by the regenerating Spirit of God, it will cause the truth to be received, concerning justification by the sufferings and merits of Christ. And the same things that are the object of our hope, are the object of our faith.
It is a firm persuasion and expectation, that God will perform all he has promised to us in Christ. This persuasion gives the soul to enjoy those things now; it gives them a subsistence or reality in the soul, by the first-fruits and foretastes of them. Faith proves to the mind, the reality of things that cannot be seen by the bodily eye. It is a full approval of all God has revealed, as holy, just, and good.
This view of faith is explained by many examples of persons in former times, who obtained a good report, or an honourable character in the word of God. Faith was the principle of their holy obedience, remarkable services, and patient sufferings.
The Bible gives the most true and exact account of the origin of all things, and we are to believe it, and not to wrest the Scripture account of the creation, because it does not suit with the differing fancies of men. All that we see of the works of creation, were brought into being by the command of God."
What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection
You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something.
Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science. Keep fighting it - believe your way, that's fine - but leave people alone who believe what they want.
You may be a master bookbinder, but you are no master of what worth the Bible is, because you do not accept it.
You should be very careful speaking of God's Word in such a haughty way - those kinds of attitudes and words will come back around and bite you.
I've tried to stay more neutral with you as of late, but no one speaks so dirty of my God's Word, and not expect to hear back about it.
You are not and will never be a bookbinder worthy of binding any Bibles of any translations.
... you have no earthly idea what fire you are flirting with when you cut His Word down like that. I really could care less what you have to say back to me - it will be an honor to take on whatever you say, if it means I'm standing up for my God and His Word.
Also, if you hate these threads so much, then leave, don't open, or ignore. You have opportunity to make your own atheist thread - why are you not doing that? Afraid no one will come in there? Or you just enjoy picking on Christians?
It's absolutely ridiculous, childish, hateful, and devilish ... That is extremely rude and uncalled for.
Love it! Great word from the Lord
Mark 10:27 Jesus looked at them and said
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2lbat3.gif)
No, it's not illogical, when the responses are hateful and intolerant, such as the one I've responded back to. It matters not what ANYONE writes on here, it will NOT be accepted by that poster. I don't care - it's people's choice to believe or dis-believe. But the hateful, intolerance, spamming, trolling responses coming as of late, are uncalled for and need to chill down.QuoteWhat I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection
That depends. Nihilism vs. creationism would be a boring, depressing, and nonsensical debate reserved for emo and childish reasonings. And the universe and world aren't perfectly designed. I've proven this to you countless times now.QuoteYou have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something.
You're confusing nihilism with atheism. Major difference.QuoteWhereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science. Keep fighting it - believe your way, that's fine - but leave people alone who believe what they want.
I have disproved this countless times in the past as it leads to no other conclusion than your god to be ludicrously malevolent. And yet you still spout the same nonsense. And telling someone to leave people's beliefs alone in a debate and discuss forum is illogical.
No, it doesn't "chap my hide." You want the "golden rule" to apply in a certain way, apparently, so perhaps that is the weird way of applying it now? You are giving your "dissenting" views as hateful and intolerant, and I am giving my "dissenting" views back to you of what I think about them. Censorship goes both ways, including respectfulness to others when disagreeing, not hateful nonsense such as you spew at believers. You can oppose it all you want, just as I am opposing your "spamming" towards believers.You may be a master bookbinder, but you are no master of what worth the Bible is, because you do not accept it.
Following that non-reasoning, you haven't mastered logical reasoning because you do not accept it, (selectively accepting parts of it while not applying it to religious beliefs is not accepting it).You should be very careful speaking of God's Word in such a haughty way - those kinds of attitudes and words will come back around and bite you.
No, they won't - that's merely your superstitious belief, (which I do not share). There is no valid evidence to support the specious religious contention that the 'bible is g-d's word'. Such a claim remains an unsupported one based upon blind faith. Not only do I reject that non-basis, I reject the entire premise of xtianity in totality.
I've tried to stay more neutral with you as of late, but no one speaks so dirty of my God's Word, and not expect to hear back about it.
Oh, now you 'own' your fake 'g-d', do you? If you need to defend the weak concept which could defend 'itself' if it existed, go for it.
You are not and will never be a bookbinder worthy of binding any Bibles of any translations.
Bookbinding is a tradecraft, ranging from apprentice, journeyman to master and as such, I've bound thousands of those tombs of useless superstition. It's likely I've read more variations of the different translations than the average xtian, (or even one who went so far as to study biblical nonsense). It remains the choice of anyone who wants to delude themselves with blind religious fait to do so. Just as it remains anyone's choice to reject specious religious mythology and rely upon their ability to reason, (if they have such an ability).... you have no earthly idea what fire you are flirting with when you cut His Word down like that. I really could care less what you have to say back to me - it will be an honor to take on whatever you say, if it means I'm standing up for my God and His Word.
There's no valid evidence to support a religious claim that such a supernatural 'entity' as the xtian 'g-d' exists. Barring that, your standing up to support an irrational superstition non sequitur is a moot point non sequitur in and of itself.Also, if you hate these threads so much, then leave, don't open, or ignore. You have opportunity to make your own atheist thread - why are you not doing that? Afraid no one will come in there? Or you just enjoy picking on Christians?
There you go again, attempting to censor opposition to specious religious superstitions. As before, you remain unable to do so. Chaps your hide, doesn't it?
It's absolutely ridiculous, childish, hateful, and devilish ... That is extremely rude and uncalled for.
"Devilish" now is it? Your continued attempts to censor dissent by falsely characterizing opposition according to your own religious bias has been tedious for some time. Everytime you promote censorship under religious extremism, I will oppose it just as strongly as before.
No, these are endless repetitions of the religious superstitions other blind faithers hucked-up for those currently blinded by faith.No, they are NOT, to believers. You don't have to read them, now, do you? You are CHOOSING to read them - get over the whining.Love it! Great word from the Lord
You are CHOOSING to read them - get over the whining.
Take your own advice, it doesn't apply to the reasoned objections to unsubstantiated superstitious claptrap. Now, if you had any substantiated claptrap, you'd have presented evidence for it by now.I don't offer advice unless I follow it first. I choose whatever threads I enjoy going into, and do not enjoy some threads, so will not enter them, and some threads I may or may not enter, depending on what's going on and whether or not I wish to join in. You accept nothing from any believer, anyway - you have your own views of things and do not deviate from them. Believers have their views, as well, and will strongly support them. Surely you cannot expect less. Once again, whining gets you nowhere.You are CHOOSING to read them - get over the whining.
I don't offer advice unless I follow it first.
You accept nothing from any believer, anyway - you have your own views of things and do not deviate from them.
What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection. So you believe your way and I'll believe mine. You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something. Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science.
You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design.
What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection. So you believe your way and I'll believe mine. You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something. Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science.
You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design.
(http://i.imgur.com/pXnlF.jpg)
Well I don't think anyone says it better than Spock, when he says:
(http://i.imgur.com/HtCg0.jpg)
2 each of every (he and she) Study the measurements of the ark. Also remember many animals of today are different breeds and mixed breeds - not like so much back then. :)
What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection. So you believe your way and I'll believe mine. You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something. Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science.You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design.
(http://i.imgur.com/pXnlF.jpg)
I also said in response to Falconer that they are archived and can be retrieved from there. That is if you are really motivated and interested enough to do so. You don't accept anything anyway, and I don't have the time to repeat every little thing that has already been posted. Including posters who either do not post as much as they did then, or have since left the site, who also provided great information about this. You are still whining about 'someone' while speaking around that 'someone' instead of to the 'someone.' I'll repeat - it gets you nowhere but in your same circle of your constant repetitive favorite big words.What I believe in the way of Creation by God, is sure more believable than something out of nothing by no one and assembling nothing into perfection. So you believe your way and I'll believe mine. You have nothing to show for nothing creating its nothingness into something. Whereas God creating from His way, with everything in its place, including land, water, air, humans, animals, etc., is more believable, including using both spiritual and science.
You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design.(http://i.imgur.com/pXnlF.jpg)
Curiously, the religious adherent has claimed, (without evidence supporting such a claim), that "intelligent design" is "way more acceptable, provable" and yet, no proof/evidence has been offered to accept. Blind religious faith does not constitute valid evidence since it is based upon 'belief', in lieu of evidentiary proof. Amazingly enough, a religious adherent ha made yet another unsupported, (empty), claim and possibly expects that such an empty assertionis to be taken at face value. Okay, I accept that the religious adherent has made a false claim based upon the lack of proof presented to support it, (at face value, which is to say, having no value other than to provide evidence that the religious adherent prefers to make empty and subsequently false claims).
It shows you how dense Duroz is.....
God just creates the universe in perfect order and HE cant create an ark that will hold animals?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I cant help comment on those that dont have any discernment.But i am wasting my time replying to that cos he cant discern in the first place what the hec i am talking about.
He just enjoys putting up his dumb posters and thinking hes back in kindergarten.
It shows you how dense Duroz is.....
God just creates the universe in perfect order and HE cant create an ark that will hold animals?
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I cant help comment on those that dont have any discernment.
But i am wasting my time replying to that cos he cant discern in the first place what the hec i am talking about.
He just enjoys putting up his dumb posters and thinking hes back in kindergarten.
I also said in response to Falconer that they are archived and can be retrieved from there. That is if you are really motivated and interested enough to do so.
You don't accept anything anyway, and I don't have the time to repeat every little thing that has already been posted.
*ANOTHER*
NEW
DAILY
Bible Verse Thread ? ? ? ?
What? You couldn't FIND the other "Daily Bible Verse Thread"(s).......? ? ?[/i]
Apparently not; unless the actual agenda is proselytizing religious propaganda, (despite specious contentions to the contrary). Ostensibly, it's not specifically against FC ToS to 'spam' the off-topic forum with such therefore, it's tacitly alright to post counter-viewpoints to them.
"The Bible as we have it contains elements that are scientifically incorrect or even morally repugnant. No amount of explaining away' can convince us that such passages are the product of Divine Wisdom."
-- Bernard J. Bamberger
You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design. We will go completely in circles again, and they are in the archives, anyway.
An entire universe can be formed from nothing
life can begin and magically transform from fish to reptile to bird to monkey to man
God just creates the universe in perfect order and HE cant create an ark that will hold animals?
I don't mean this to start an arguement or be negative ...
... but why are you trying so hard to be mean to Christians? If you would rather not see the post do not open them.
You talk so much about rights, but your trying to take ours away.
You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design. We will go completely in circles again, and they are in the archives, anyway.
All of your 'proofs' were thwarted numerous times with earth science 101. Here you admit to favoring magical tales from ancient times and pseudoscience (ID-- like you said, check the archives as it is has been easily debunked and is a clever lie) without acknowledging how the world actually works. You have every right to believe what you believe, but this behavior is 'raw' ignorance of reality.
Psalm 55:22 Leave your troubles with the Lord,
and he will defend you;
he never lets honest people be defeated. (GNT)
... the Fool!!
You should be used to that with me that i speak and let others derive what i meant.
And your constant ...
If you're simply going to quote out of context and not attribute those in your inane replies, you're trolling poorly and foolishly.Oh dear - you are accusing him of quoting out of context, when that is exactly what you do with my responses. Sounds like someone needs to take his own advice, lol.... the Fool!!
If you're simply going to quote out of context and not attribute those in your inane replies, you're trolling poorly and foolishly.
... the Fool!!
Oh dear - you are accusing him of quoting out of context, when that is exactly what you do with my responses.
God did not call us to live in immorality, but in holiness. So then, whoever rejects this teaching is not rejecting a human being, but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. — 1 Thessalonians 4:7-8 (GNT)
I am not making a bad move. I am just standing up to you.
You ignore the rules on Fusian Cash to be respectful.
If someone has a different opinion that is fine with me. Still, people need to stop attacking others and say it in a positive way. You live to try to hurt others, You kind should not be allowed. Theirs been enough hateful actions.
Also, I am Native American so I think I know something about racism they didn't teach your sarcasm.
Your trying to take the weight off of your own actions. I am trying to make you see what you are doing.
Don't try playing the victim card on someone who just posted opposition to the xtian "indian schools" which assimulated so many tribal cultures, (that wan't sarcastic, that was historical fact). In fact, I know tribal members who lived through those days you sanctimonious 'cherokee princess'.
While I thank you for actually looking it up, I figured this would be your reaction, as is typical. You cannot prove your way of creation either, with a total 100% cause. It's a theory, with certain evidences to a point, but not the "crowning proof" that is needed for your view.You have proven nothing to me as far as your views supporting creating the heavens and earth as being more provable than God creating them. There is an Intelligent Design, of which I've spoken with you about, before, that is way more acceptable, provable, and we have agreed to disagree on this subject. I will not accept the Evolution way of creation and you will not accept Intelligent Design. We will go completely in circles again, and they are in the archives, anyway.All of your 'proofs' were thwarted numerous times with earth science 101. Here you admit to favoring magical tales from ancient times and pseudoscience (ID-- like you said, check the archives as it is has been easily debunked and is a clever lie) without acknowledging how the world actually works. You have every right to believe what you believe, but this behavior is 'raw' ignorance of reality.
Since the last exchange concerning this context, I did have an opportunity to puruse the FC archived posts regarding the specious "I.D." concept.
As "Falconer02" mentions above, no valid/substantive evidence/proofs were offered to support the "I.D." contentions. Instead, specious non-reasoning and unsupported attributions were presented and debunked on logical basis. "Belief" is not evidence/proof; it's expressly a lack of evidence or, blind faith. Blind faith is an invalid basis for the "I.D." non-theory, (it's not even a theory because no valid evidence supports suggesting it is one).
Why would anyone accept the "teachings" of any religion which not only actively promoted the crusades, witch hunts, inquisitions, flying planes into buildings, drinking poisoned koolaid, dishonoring military personnel and their families at funerals, brain-washing small children with religious propaganda and promulgating blind faith in superstitions? What's not to reject?Oh good grief - there you go again, lumping Christians of today, of different sects, all into one ugly box because of foolish and murderous things done by people in the past. You are judging genuine Christians/believers who love the Lord, who, with the exception of the "rotten apples" as there always will be, do not approve of those things in the past.God did not call us to live in immorality, but in holiness. So then, whoever rejects this teaching is not rejecting a human being, but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit. — 1 Thessalonians 4:7-8 (GNT)
While I thank you for actually looking it up, I figured this would be your reaction, as is typical. You cannot prove your way of creation either, with a total 100% cause. It's a theory, with certain evidences to a point, but not the "crowning proof" that is needed for your view.
I will stick with God as the Intelligent Designer since there is a cause needed for the creating in the first place ...
... there is more evidence in the way of scrolls, history, Bible, etc., that lend more credibility to God, than the other way.
You are " permitted, (and obligated by honor), to oppose repressive religious beliefs?" Whose honor? That is a big laugh. I'm sorry, but that is the lamest excuse for how you bother and pest believers.I am not making a bad move. I am just standing up to you.
It's a "bad move" to lie to me or, to FC moderators, (which you've done).You ignore the rules on Fusian Cash to be respectful.
No, my posts are under the auspices of the "golden rule" in that those who post INITIALLY rude/disrespectful/offensive posts are giving tacit permission for such to be returned in kind. Initially posted religious proselytization is considered to be rude, offensive and disrespectful, (though permitted by FC). Responses opposing previously posted religious superstition are also permitted by FC.If someone has a different opinion that is fine with me. Still, people need to stop attacking others and say it in a positive way. You live to try to hurt others, You kind should not be allowed. Theirs been enough hateful actions.
I'm permitted, (and obligated by honor), to oppose repressive religious beliefs. You have no authority to repress dissenting viewpoints by characterizing them as "rude", etc. in order to censor dissent. Guess what, 'cherokee princess', there aren't many effective ways to express dissent in some namby-pamby "positive' way". Your own racism is coming through with your "you kind should not be allowed".Also, I am Native American so I think I know something about racism they didn't teach your sarcasm.
Don't try playing the victim card on someone who just posted opposition to the xtian "indian schools" which assimulated so many tribal cultures, (that wan't sarcastic, that was historical fact). In fact, I know tribal members who lived through those days you sanctimonious 'cherokee princess'.Your trying to take the weight off of your own actions. I am trying to make you see what you are doing.
No, I've been straight-forward in my opposition to specious religious superstitions and irrational blind faith. Ask anyone.
It is entirely your "CHOICE" to try and discredit the above. I'm waiting on burden of proof that your view is the correct view. You have not provided it, and until anyone does, I will keep my views. If you know so much, provide the proof for your views, please.While I thank you for actually looking it up, I figured this would be your reaction, as is typical. You cannot prove your way of creation either, with a total 100% cause. It's a theory, with certain evidences to a point, but not the "crowning proof" that is needed for your view.
No "crowning 'disproof'" is required since the burden of proof remains with those who make the I.D. claim in the first place. Challenging such claimants to support their contentious claim that I.D. is valid with substantive evidence does not necessarily require contraverting evidence to disprove that initial claim. I. Kant's tautological arguements invalidate the I.D. notion on logical grounds, for instance.I will stick with God as the Intelligent Designer since there is a cause needed for the creating in the first place ...
No, your a priori premise is not a given and 'what is and came to be' is more probable under emergent theories than it is presuming a supernatural "creator g-d".... there is more evidence in the way of scrolls, history, Bible, etc., that lend more credibility to God, than the other way.
No, those items are NOT evidence; they consist of hearsay, religious faith, dubious 'historical' accounts stemming from specious religious superstitions and more hearsay. None of which are evidence, let alone any that gives the least "credibility" to a hypothetical 'g-d'. Logical reasoning escapes you - stick with the irrational, nonreasoned, illogical twaddle you've been hucking-up in lieu of reason.
- there you go again, lumping Christians of today, of different sects, all into one ...
No "crowning 'disproof'" is required since the burden of proof remains with those who make the I.D. claim in the first place. Challenging such claimants to support their contentious claim that I.D. is valid with substantive evidence does not necessarily require contravening evidence to disprove that initial claim. I. Kant's tautological arguements invalidate the I.D. notion on logical grounds, for instance.
I will stick with God as the Intelligent Designer since there is a cause needed for the creating in the first place ...
No, your a priori premise is not a given and 'what is and came to be' is more probable under emergent theories than it is presuming a supernatural "creator g-d".
... there is more evidence in the way of scrolls, history, Bible, etc., that lend more credibility to God, than the other way.
No, those items are NOT evidence; they consist of hearsay, religious faith, dubious 'historical' accounts stemming from specious religious superstitions and more hearsay. None of which are evidence, let alone any that gives the least "credibility" to a hypothetical 'g-d'. Logical reasoning escapes you - stick with the irrational, nonreasoned, illogical twaddle you've been hucking-up in lieu of reason.
It is entirely your "CHOICE" to try and discredit the above. I'm waiting on burden of proof that your view is the correct view.
You have not provided it, and until anyone does, I will keep my views. If you know so much, provide the proof for your views, please.
That is a totally messed up view you have. Your hate of believers believing in God is so strong that you cannot separate the good from the bad, and think everyone who believes is in the same box as the people who say they believe, yet do murderous things.- there you go again, lumping Christians of today, of different sects, all into one ...
Either those who self-declare as xtians are every bit as xtian as others claim or, none of you are. If you are, they are; the same
essential superstitious religious 'beliefs' underlie the 'faith' of xtians, no matter what particular sect/demonation/cult/flavor. It's understandable that some xtians desire to distance themselves from other xtians who commited attrocities under the same religious blind faith but, that's just a lack of courage in your convictions and basically a cowardly dodge of responsibility. Oh that's right, you're assuming that you get to cherry-pick who's a "real, truly true xtian and who's not". Sheesh.
You are " permitted, (and obligated by honor), to oppose repressive religious beliefs?" Whose honor?
That is a big laugh.
You are indeed disrespectful ...
YOU have an opinion of their beliefs and freedom of speech is INITIALLY spewing hatred, is outlandishly stupid and lying.
That is a totally messed up view you have.
Your "blind" adherence to your view is entitled, since we have our freedom of choice. Yet, you have not provided the MAIN thing that would explain the theory you go by. Both sides of a debate, not only challenge each other, but both sides must also include burden of proof, as well as the opposite. You want to just lay all of the burden on the believers' side, and give yourself a free pass. It's not going to happen - you are just as responsible to provide your burden of proof, or proving my side is wrong.No "crowning 'disproof'" is required since the burden of proof remains with those who make the I.D. claim in the first place. Challenging such claimants to support their contentious claim that I.D. is valid with substantive evidence does not necessarily require contravening evidence to disprove that initial claim. I. Kant's tautological arguements invalidate the I.D. notion on logical grounds, for instance.I will stick with God as the Intelligent Designer since there is a cause needed for the creating in the first place ...No, your a priori premise is not a given and 'what is and came to be' is more probable under emergent theories than it is presuming a supernatural "creator g-d".... there is more evidence in the way of scrolls, history, Bible, etc., that lend more credibility to God, than the other way.No, those items are NOT evidence; they consist of hearsay, religious faith, dubious 'historical' accounts stemming from specious religious superstitions and more hearsay. None of which are evidence, let alone any that gives the least "credibility" to a hypothetical 'g-d'. Logical reasoning escapes you - stick with the irrational, nonreasoned, illogical twaddle you've been hucking-up in lieu of reason.It is entirely your "CHOICE" to try and discredit the above. I'm waiting on burden of proof that your view is the correct view.
You made the initial claim and provided invalid evidence. Now you want me to prove that your evidence is invalid, correct? I've done so before and you failed to pay attention then, if I type more s l o w l y it may still escape you however, that I'm not responding for your benefit also continues to escape you. Nonetheless, being wwritten on a "scroll" or retranslated and printed on a book confers NO validity to the words written because no evidence is provided to give them veracity, (you're attempting to base one unsubstantiated premise on unsubstantiated non-evidence). Lastly, religious faith is not evidence and is not a valid substitute for evidence. Since the foregoing is all that you've tried to present a faux evidence, it is dismissed upon the logical basis outlined herein.You have not provided it, and until anyone does, I will keep my views. If you know so much, provide the proof for your views, please.
Your faux "evidence" is not actual evidence and is based upon blind religious faith, (which is belief without evidence), therefore, your non-evidence has been logically invalidated and the premise it failed to support is deduced to be unsubstantiated speculation. Further, you'll stick with your religious blind faith no matter what logical evidence contradicts it because that's what blind faith does.
Empty, empty, empty. Just as yours is, too. You can't have it both ways, athei.That is a totally messed up view you have.
That's your specious opinion; it has no valid basis in evidence so, it's empty. On the other hand, your religious views are also based on a complet lack of valid evidence and are based upon blind faith. Must be a cosmic coincidence.
Empty, empty, empty. Just as yours is, too. You can't have it both ways, athei.
Your "blind" adherence to your view is entitled, since we have our freedom of choice.
I know that scientists are working diligently on the "God Particle," or Higgs boson, which has yet to be grounded in truth and proof. Even if it is found to be the answer, are you saying you would agree that it just appeared out of nowhere, then everything just burst forth, and evolved into what we are today?
— Psalm 31:19 (GNT)
(http://i46.tinypic.com/zyaxkn.png)
Sending your "specious opinion" right back at you... It's not specious or empty just because you say so - so keep your specious opinion unless you can provide something substantial in rebuttal.That is a totally messed up view you have.
That's your specious opinion; it has no valid basis in evidence so, it's empty. On the other hand, your religious views are also based on a complet lack of valid evidence and are based upon blind faith. Must be a cosmic coincidence.
Even a child's empty repetition of a reasoned rebuttal would be a void as yours. That means you have no rebuttal and have conceded the argument, whether you deny it or not.Your little "same ole, same ole's" are empty, too. You have apparently decided to concede the argument, since you don't have substantial and total 100 percent proof of your view. Like I said already, it's two-sided in here, not one-sided, as much as you would prefer it to be. I've conceded nothing - you just deny any offered forth and that is your choice. You haven't offered any, though...Empty, empty, empty. Just as yours is, too. You can't have it both ways, athei.
I was just including it in my comments, since we have already discussed this before; also making a point that the particle has still not been given 100 percent viability for the total answer. I'm adding to it that if it is proven, it didn't just appear in the first place - it had to have a master of intelligence to have come up with it in the first place.Your "blind" adherence to your view is entitled, since we have our freedom of choice.
Adherence to reason isn't blind, like your religious faith. One, logical reasoning isn't a faaith-based religion. Two, you're attempting, (and failing), to use logic to discount logic. That's illogical and your attempt fails on that basis.I know that scientists are working diligently on the "God Particle," or Higgs boson, which has yet to be grounded in truth and proof. Even if it is found to be the answer, are you saying you would agree that it just appeared out of nowhere, then everything just burst forth, and evolved into what we are today?
I've previously posted regarding Higgs-boson prior to your 'discovery' of the concept and in regards to emergent theories. You can either look up those posts in the archives or, wait around until they're reposted.
That is a totally messed up view you have.
That's your specious opinion; it has no valid basis in evidence so, it's empty. On the other hand, your religious views are also based on a complet lack of valid evidence and are based upon blind faith. Must be a cosmic coincidence.
Sending your "specious opinion" right back at you... It's not specious or empty just because you say so ...
How wonderful are the good things you keep for those who honor you! Everyone knows how good you are, how securely you protect those who trust you. — Psalm 31:19 (GNT)You always post just the right verse - I am enjoying your sharing these verses. :)
I was just including it in my comments, since we have already discussed this before; also making a point that the particle has still not been given 100 percent viability for the total answer. I'm adding to it that if it is proven, it didn't just appear in the first place - it had to have a master of intelligence to have come up with it in the first place.
Your little "same ole, same ole's" are empty, too.
You have apparently decided to concede the argument ...
... since you don't have substantial and total 100 percent proof of your view.
You just think too highly of yourself with your use of your big words - they are getting tediously repetitive and rapidly becoming a cause of ennui or petty annoyance, not to mention being uncongenial. Might you have some more new and better ones stashed away?That is a totally messed up view you have.That's your specious opinion; it has no valid basis in evidence so, it's empty. On the other hand, your religious views are also based on a complet lack of valid evidence and are based upon blind faith. Must be a cosmic coincidence.Sending your "specious opinion" right back at you... It's not specious or empty just because you say so ...
That's correct, (in regards to you sending/posting another specious opinion), and incorrect in that a specious opinion is empty when it is not supported by facts, (as yours was not). The determination that both of your opinions are specious in not, itself, a specious opinion since it is based upon logical reasoning, (something you are manifestly unfamilar with).
Might you have some more new and better ones stashed away?
It's certainly not unacceptable to believers. There may or may not be a specific requirement for a "creator" - you have no evidence to 100 percent back that up. At least you can admit to the fact that "emergent theories" are just that - theories - not 100 percent proven at this point.I was just including it in my comments, since we have already discussed this before; also making a point that the particle has still not been given 100 percent viability for the total answer. I'm adding to it that if it is proven, it didn't just appear in the first place - it had to have a master of intelligence to have come up with it in the first place.
That's an invalid presumption since it not only has no evidence to support it, ("it had to have a master of intelligence to have come up with it in the first place"), but excludes emergent theories with prejudice. If such a Higg-boson particle is detected, that does not constitute evidence that
some "master of intelligence" had to "come up with it in the first place" because emergent theories would also account for Higgs-boson particles.
Now, if you were to wonder where any pre-existent properties "came from" in order for Higgs-boson to emerge, you might be unfamilar with the cyclic universe theories which require no 'first principle'/creator 'g-d'. There's no specific requirement for a 'creator' in such an instance and that's what is unacceptable to one holding religious blind faith in one.
It's nice to see a faith-blinded fundie try to increase her vocabulary and doubtless someone "using big words" inspired such, though she'd be unlikely to admit it.Once again, you still give yourself too much credit. I am a teacher - English is one of my strongest subjects. I have also taught English (including "big words" of spelling and vocabulary) and already have my own stash of words. I figure you just need a little challenge of your words - you really have exhausted your current supply, and we would be a little less tediously bored, to see some new ones introduced into your conversation.Might you have some more new and better ones stashed away?
It's certainly not unacceptable to believers.
There may or may not be a specific requirement for a "creator" - you have no evidence to 100 percent back that up. At least you can admit to the fact that "emergent theories" are just that - theories - not 100 percent proven at this point.
... you really have exhausted your current supply ...
... and we would be a little less tediously bored, to see some new ones introduced into your conversation.
Well, see, that's where you could take your own advice - don't bother reading the verses in here - then you won't be so badly tortured. You don't know my mind, either, so you can stop the ridiculous "assuming" of my responses. Your attempts at "dumbing down" are not as conducive (or contributive) as you think they are.... you really have exhausted your current supply ...
Hardly. It was extrapolated that the previous words were 'beyond you' since you exhibited no depth of understanding them and using others would not be conducive to 'dumbing it down' further.... and we would be a little less tediously bored, to see some new ones introduced into your conversation.
Boredom is a sign of a lack of imagination. If you're bored by the replies received, don't bother reading them, (that's how it appears even when you do technically 'respond').
Well, see, that's where you could take your own advice - don't bother reading the verses in here - then you won't be so badly tortured.
Yours are rejected as well. How nice - we have more opportunities to disagree. You love the attention and the sparking of what you are attempting to do, and so you will most definitely receive some more attention, like you want.Well, see, that's where you could take your own advice - don't bother reading the verses in here - then you won't be so badly tortured.
Your further inept attempts to censor dissenting viewpoints is rejected out of hand, (since the reasons for doing so have been previously iterated and not understood, according to your 'replies').
Yours are rejected as well. How nice - we have more opportunities to disagree.
You love the attention and the sparking of what you are attempting to do, and so you will most definitely receive some more attention, like you want.
You have truly gone overboard with your high regard of self-importance. :notworthy: You are going to have one tough time when your little balloon of too much ego gets popped. Have a nice evening - I'm sleepy. :wave:Yours are rejected as well. How nice - we have more opportunities to disagree.
The difference is that I'm rejecting your irrationality and you're rejecting my rationality. Good luck with that; your method is like shopping for groceries at the tire shop.You love the attention and the sparking of what you are attempting to do, and so you will most definitely receive some more attention, like you want.
If that's intended as some sort of lame 'threat', it's an inane one. Contrary to your assumptions, I'm not trying to censor/limit/restrict/constrain your speciously-baseless religious claims. If you faith-blinded religious adherents didn't post them, there could be no opposing/dissenting responses to them. There are no posts initiated by me which 'dissent in advance' so, that makes your initial posts the offensive instigation of these exchanges, (regardless of whether you see your own proselytizations as instigating or offensive).
You have truly gone overboard with your high regard of self-importance. :notworthy:
You are going to have one tough time when your little balloon of too much ego gets popped. Have a nice evening - I'm sleepy. :wave:
— Romans 8:5-6 (CEV)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)
Let your faith be like a shield, and you will be able to stop all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Let God's saving power be like a helmet, and for a sword use God's message that comes from the Spirit. Never stop praying, especially for others. Always pray by the power of the Spirit. Stay alert and keep praying for God's people. — Ephesians 6:16-18 (CEV)
Blatant religious proselytizing brain-washing attempt. Rejected as mind-blinding hockum.It's fortunate to be able to vocalize your rejections, isn't it? It feels good, too, doesn't it, when you can reject something you don't like. Some don't reject it, and they are just as fortunate to be able to vocalize their acceptance of something they like. Going completely over the edge with rejection begins to sound like something else - fighting against something so much that the bitterness takes over the rational thought processes and affects attitudes and behaviors towards others who accept what they choose. The only one getting hurt, logically, is the bitter one trying to force their rejection onto others who are quite content in their own personal choices. There's no need to come down so hard on yourself - it just makes the bitterness worse.— Romans 8:5-6 (CEV)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)
It's fortunate to be able to vocalize your rejections, isn't it? It feels good, too, doesn't it, when you can reject something you don't like.
Some don't reject it, and they are just as fortunate to be able to vocalize their acceptance of something they like.
Going completely over the edge with rejection begins to sound like something else - fighting against something so much that the bitterness takes over the rational thought processes and affects attitudes and behaviors towards others who accept what they choose.
Always let others see you behaving properly, even though they may still accuse you of doing wrong. Then on the day of judgment, they will honor God by telling the good things they saw you do. — 1 Peter 2:12 (CEV)
All too often people feel the need to complain. :binkybaby: If you don't like the thread,don't read it.That's simple enough.
It makes me so upset because people try to shove me into being a muslim even after 911. Then they try to tell you abortion isn't murder even though science proves he/she is a real human being with a sense of pain from the moment of conception. Along with all that they try to tell us what we can do and say in church and then try to control our speech all together. I am so tired of that. I am so tired of logic being ignored. I have no problem giving evidence for creation as long as someone notifies me too in a personal message because I don't check all thread replies. I did find out their is an ignore button. You can go to that person's reply and hit ignore. Then you can't see any of their comments. I did that to Falcon9 the other day.:)
{a bunch of hypocritical blind-faith based religious proselytization}(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)
-from KJV Bible
I know right? Its obvious Falcon just got a new screenname too.
Its against fusion cash terms of service to have more than one screen name per person and household. Shes so desperate to be a pain that she made to screennames and even used Falcon for both of them.
As I said, I love the ignore button. :) I am always someone that tries to be kind hearted, but she is just wasting her life.
I try not to play her games. If she wants to be an immature waste of space thats up to her. I am just done with it. I suggest others ignore her as well. She will likely get another screen name too. Just continue to ignore her.
You are name calling. Don't open the thread, then you won't have to torture yourself.It makes me so upset because people try to shove me into being a muslim even after 911. Then they try to tell you abortion isn't murder even though science proves he/she is a real human being with a sense of pain from the moment of conception. Along with all that they try to tell us what we can do and say in church and then try to control our speech all together. I am so tired of that. I am so tired of logic being ignored. I have no problem giving evidence for creation as long as someone notifies me too in a personal message because I don't check all thread replies. I did find out their is an ignore button. You can go to that person's reply and hit ignore. Then you can't see any of their comments. I did that to Falcon9 the other day.:)
Having the muslim religion 'shoved' at you upsets your sensibilities but, you 'shoving' your xtian religion at others is alright? You're a faith-blinded hypocritical ostrich with your head buried in blind faith.
You are name calling. Don't open the thread, then you won't have to torture yourself.
Yes, emergent theories may be either proven or disproven at some point. Even your view has not been 100 percent proven as the only final answer. Also, you do not have to believe in the Creator God - no one is forcing you.It's certainly not unacceptable to believers.
Indeed; I'm already aware that blind faith requires no evidence and that such a lack is a presumed requirement of empty beliefs.There may or may not be a specific requirement for a "creator" - you have no evidence to 100 percent back that up. At least you can admit to the fact that "emergent theories" are just that - theories - not 100 percent proven at this point.
Emergent theories may be either proven or, disproven at some point. Your pseudo-'theory' of a "creator g-d" is based entirely upon blind faith and no evidence therefore, it never will be proven. In that case, it isn't necessary to 'disprove' such a pseudo-non-theory because the burden of proof remains with someone who claims that there is a 'creator g-d', (which you and otehrs have implicitly or eplicitly done).
Also, you do not have to believe in the Creator God - no one is forcing you.
I will say, however, that the day you, along with everyone of us, stands before God on the great Judgment Day ...
Blatant religious proselytizing brain-washing attempt. Rejected as mind-blinding hockum.Thanks for your rejection - your choice. I, however, do not reject her verse, yet I reject your immature intolerance towards a believer simply because you hate the idea. You could do yourself a favor, and reject the thread in the first place, by not opening it. However, we know you just cannot resist opening them and putting in your intolerant and hateful remarks. You don't just make your personal choice to not accept God (which is your freedom and right to do so) you go overboard with the attitude towards believers, themselves, including name calling. I am rejecting your belittling and mocking, as well.— Romans 8:5-6 (CEV)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)
Let your faith be like a shield, and you will be able to stop all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Let God's saving power be like a helmet, and for a sword use God's message that comes from the Spirit. Never stop praying, especially for others. Always pray by the power of the Spirit. Stay alert and keep praying for God's people. — Ephesians 6:16-18 (CEV)Great verse about God's armor of protection around us. I feel that the "praying for God's people," also includes praying for Israel and the believers - they need God's armor of protection around them from the evil ones who are wanting to kill them, because of their belief in God. They are definitely a brave nation, and need our support and prayers.
Blatant religious proselytizing brain-washing attempt. Rejected as mind-blinding hockum.
— Romans 8:5-6 (CEV)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)
Thanks for your rejection - your choice.
I am rejecting your belittling and mocking, as well.
Always let others see you behaving properly, even though they may still accuse you of doing wrong. Then on the day of judgment, they will honor God by telling the good things they saw you do. — 1 Peter 2:12 (CEV)You are posting such great related verses to the situation currently happening in here. Thanks for the verses of encouragement. :)
I feel that the "praying for God's people," also includes praying for Israel and the believers - they need God's armor of protection around them from the evil ones who are wanting to kill them, because of their belief in God.
Always let others see you behaving properly, even though they may still accuse you of doing wrong. Then on the day of judgment, they will honor God by telling the good things they saw you do. — 1 Peter 2:12 (CEV)
You are posting such great related verses to the situation currently happening in here. Thanks for the verses of encouragement. :)
Don't open the same thread if you don't want to read dissenting viewpoints, (or use that 'ostrich' button); your choice.Nonsense on your part. I'm already in the thread, posting, and will respond accordingly. You're the one who is bothered and emotional through your words and attitude. You can help yourself by not having to open those threads that you don't have anything to do with in your personal life. Instead, you choose to open them, torture yourself, and torture believers for something they have their right to believe. That's a great example of trolling and being deliberately hateful. I'm just responding back since I'm already a part of a thread that I'm trying to enjoy, along with others who enjoy it.You are name calling. Don't open the thread, then you won't have to torture yourself.
Just as the day you realize that such presumptions on your part are offensive to others who do not hold the same views or beliefs. I'm not the one posting sarcastic atheist pics and quotes aimed at intolerance of your choice - because I already respect your choice to believe or not believe (dis-believe) as you see fit. The problem, is you don't off the same respect and bash believers - that is why your attitude and hate is vehemently opposed (using your words.) You only see things your way and cannot tolerate others' choices to believe how they choose. It needs to be both ways - if both sides are going to be mature adults, that is.Also, you do not have to believe in the Creator God - no one is forcing you.
I will say, however, that the day you, along with everyone of us, stands before God on the great Judgment Day ...
That faith-based presumption, (no extant evidence to support it), is an offensive pretention on your part. Even if no one is "forcing" me to belief such superstitious mythology, I'd still choose not to, based upon reason/rational thought. That being the case, your assumption has no substance or validity and remains an empty and offensive presumption. The day you realize that such presumptions are offensive to others who do not hold similar superstitious beliefs may be the same day it occurs to you why such is vehemently opposed.
Nonsense on your part. I'm already in the thread, posting, and will respond accordingly.
Yet you are still being rude with the wording and sarcasm of what believers are, according to your intolerance.Blatant religious proselytizing brain-washing attempt. Rejected as mind-blinding hockum.— Romans 8:5-6 (CEV)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/yi42p.jpg)Thanks for your rejection - your choice.
You're welcome however, I'm already aware of my choices and they aren't restricted by faith-blinded religious beliefs in contrast to yours.
I am rejecting your belittling and mocking, as well.
That's your choice, (within the restrictions of your closed-minded belief system), however, I'm rejecting your rejection on the basis of the dissenting remarks accurately describing religious proselytization from the perspective of a non-xtian who finds uch propagandizing to be offensive.
Naturally, you cannot substantiate your religious claim that "prayer" is "g-d's armor" and actually 'protects' anyone because that's merely a faith-based belief lacking evidence.Since you do not accept God, and do not have faith, nor understand the inner workings of these things, of course you will say the things you are saying. Once again - that's your choice, yet you have to saturate your remarks with the sarcasm and intolerance.I feel that the "praying for God's people," also includes praying for Israel and the believers - they need God's armor of protection around them from the evil ones who are wanting to kill them, because of their belief in God.
Also, you do not have to believe in the Creator God - no one is forcing you.
I will say, however, that the day you, along with everyone of us, stands before God on the great Judgment Day ...
That faith-based presumption, (no extant evidence to support it), is an offensive pretention on your part. Even if no one is "forcing" me to belief such superstitious mythology, I'd still choose not to, based upon reason/rational thought. That being the case, your assumption has no substance or validity and remains an empty and offensive presumption. The day you realize that such presumptions are offensive to others who do not hold similar superstitious beliefs may be the same day it occurs to you why such is vehemently opposed.
Just as the day you realize that such presumptions on your part are offensive to others who do not hold the same views or beliefs.
I'm not the one posting sarcastic atheist pics and quotes aimed at intolerance of your choice - because I already respect your choice to believe or not believe (dis-believe) as you see fit.
Neither of you fundies comply with these religious strictures/tenets so, that makes you both hypocrites.Poor thing - you are really reaching. You can stop calling us hypocrites - you are showing your own hypocrisy by doing that.Always let others see you behaving properly, even though they may still accuse you of doing wrong. Then on the day of judgment, they will honor God by telling the good things they saw you do. — 1 Peter 2:12 (CEV)You are posting such great related verses to the situation currently happening in here. Thanks for the verses of encouragement. :)
Since you do not accept God, and do not have faith ...
Sorry, the irrational is in your corner - you are "already" posting because you chose to enter a thread you don't like, and the thread was already moving along. You only enter to pick and bash. Oh, and I will continue to respond as I choose to, not because your intolerance of believers' faith in God tries to dictate.Nonsense on your part. I'm already in the thread, posting, and will respond accordingly.
That's irrational nonsense on your part; I'm also "already" posting in this thread and will respond as I choose to; not as your blind faith tries to dictate.
... you are really reaching. You can stop calling us hypocrites - you are showing your own hypocrisy by doing that.
... you are "already" posting because you chose to enter a thread ...
You are so ridiculous. No one is "initially" spreading anything - those who enjoy those threads just want to do that - enjoy them. You are the intolerant one who feels obligated to bash believers. You choose to be offended. No one is deliberately trying to offend anyone. What a laugh - you don't oppose - you name-call, pick, are sarcastic and intolerant - that's way overboard from simple opposing.Also, you do not have to believe in the Creator God - no one is forcing you.
I will say, however, that the day you, along with everyone of us, stands before God on the great Judgment Day ...That faith-based presumption, (no extant evidence to support it), is an offensive pretention on your part. Even if no one is "forcing" me to belief such superstitious mythology, I'd still choose not to, based upon reason/rational thought. That being the case, your assumption has no substance or validity and remains an empty and offensive presumption. The day you realize that such presumptions are offensive to others who do not hold similar superstitious beliefs may be the same day it occurs to you why such is vehemently opposed.Just as the day you realize that such presumptions on your part are offensive to others who do not hold the same views or beliefs.
If you can delineate how logic/rationality constitutes a "belief", (especially a 'religious belief'), you're invited to do so. If not, your contention is unsubstantiated hogwash.I'm not the one posting sarcastic atheist pics and quotes aimed at intolerance of your choice - because I already respect your choice to believe or not believe (dis-believe) as you see fit.
Actually, some of your fellow fundies have done so however, the relevant point is that the religious adherents who feel obliged to INITIALLYspread their offensively faith-blinded beliefs like some mental virus are the ones commiting the initial offense. Any responses to that initial offense are just that; opposing reactions to the presumptive, self-righteous proselytization which they falsely believe should go unopposed.
Personally, as I have repeatedly told you, you are making your choice as all of us do. That's your personal decision and I won't mock and be intolerant of your decision. You, however, do not return the same tolerance of a believer's personal decision, when you use the hateful words you do.Since you do not accept God, and do not have faith ...
Exactly, I do not accept religious superstition on the basis of blind faith. That was obvious some time ago, except to you?
There again, sir, it is none of your business that Christians choose to believe in God. They are not hypocrites just because of that. You may think they are, according to your personal reasoning of the matter, but they are not hypocrites just because you say so. They have made a choice as you have, and neither they, nor you, deserve to be berated for the choices made.... you are really reaching. You can stop calling us hypocrites - you are showing your own hypocrisy by doing that.
I'll stop when you xtians stop being hypocrites. Since I am not a faith-blinded follower of your superstitious beliefs, I'm not the ones envincing the noted hypocrisy. Though such logic demonstrably ecapes you, (as you have previously made abundantly clear and even provided extensive archived evidence to substantiate that contention), your hypocrisy may be revealing to others.
You are so ridiculous.
No one is "initially" spreading anything - those who enjoy those threads just want to do that - enjoy them.
There again, sir, it is none of your business that Christians choose to believe in God. They are not hypocrites just because of that.
We're both already posting in this thread; it's not an exclusive xtian preserve, nor does "F.C." stand for 'fundie xtian'.Wow, you are really trying to reach again! You are right F.C. doesn't stand for "fundie xtian." Sarcasm reason? Because xtian starts with "x." Reality wise? You are the only one who seems to enjoy coming up with telling others that F.C. doesn't stand for Fundie Christian. You are being sarcastic anyway with the "fundie" name calling.... you are "already" posting because you chose to enter a thread ...
We're both already posting in this thread; it's not an exclusive xtian preserve, nor does "F.C." stand for 'fundie xtian'.Wow, you are really trying to reach again! You are right F.C. doesn't stand for "fundie xtian." Sarcasm reason? Because xtian starts with "x."... you are "already" posting because you chose to enter a thread ...
You are right F.C. doesn't stand for "fundie xtian." Sarcasm reason? Because xtian starts with "x." Reality wise? You are the only one who seems to enjoy coming up with telling others that F.C. doesn't stand for Fundie Christian. You are being sarcastic anyway with the "fundie" name calling.
Alternatively, F.C. doesn't stand for on atheist views, either. Both views have a right to be discussed in the forum, whether debating, or by sharing encouragement/inspiration (in an off-topic thread.)
I have no problem with either.
I am not an atheist, but I do not hate atheists and will not go into their thread (if ever made) to just deliberately troll and bash.
You are so wrong about that, sir. No one was starting a Bible verse thread just to spread hate stuff, and there's no need to "make" other Christians have to look up a verse, if they so choose to quote it for other believers for inspiration of verses they enjoy themselves. It's not propaganda to other believers - it's very real and personal.You are so ridiculous.
You are disingenuous.No one is "initially" spreading anything - those who enjoy those threads just want to do that - enjoy them.
False. This thread wa initiated by a religious adherent who was obviously already aware of the "bible verses" she was requoting. There are a limited number of reasons to account for that. Either she was "spreading" hat stuff or, reminding forgetful/unaware xtians of something they could look up themselves. Therefore, she, (and the other fundies adding more requoted regurgitations of religious propaganda), were proselytizing a faith-based belief system. There's no inherent 'right' to unopposed proselytization, just as there's no inherent 'right' to proselytize. FC permite both the proselytizing and dissenting opposition to it. Your continued attempts to restrict the exchange of differing viewpoints by suppressing ones you don't like continue to fail.
You are being judgmental. You don't see them in their real life outside of this forum, so you don't know what they are following or not following. You sure aren't known on here for tolerance and respect to believers; you are known to be able to discuss and joke around with others outside of Bible threads, yet show a whole other side of unkindness and intolerance toward believers. And yet, we do not know how you act in your personal life - and it's not up to you to play "god" and decide what believers follow or don't follow. Everyone, remember, is accountable for their own actions and behavior, whether good or bad - everyone.There again, sir, it is none of your business that Christians choose to believe in God. They are not hypocrites just because of that.
No, they are hypocrites under the definition of that term because they are requoting regurgitated resligious strictures which they do not follow. That's why, not because someone else has logically determined that they have.
You have no room to speak about me going into the wicca thread. I am not in the habit of trolling you specifically in threads like that. I did ask you some questions in there, of which you answered. And you do know that wicca threads are not atheist threads. I will not bash you in an atheist thread just because I don't follow that thinking.You are right F.C. doesn't stand for "fundie xtian." Sarcasm reason? Because xtian starts with "x." Reality wise? You are the only one who seems to enjoy coming up with telling others that F.C. doesn't stand for Fundie Christian. You are being sarcastic anyway with the "fundie" name calling.
It's not name-calling because "fundie", (or fundamentalist), is a descriptive term applied by xtians to other xtians. That term indicates a xtian with a unwavering 'belief' in an "inerrant bible", (among other descriptors). Since this applies to several self-professed xtians on FC, it's accurate and not libelous.Alternatively, F.C. doesn't stand for on atheist views, either. Both views have a right to be discussed in the forum, whether debating, or by sharing encouragement/inspiration (in an off-topic thread.)
That's partially accurate, although such exchanges can and do occur in any forum or thread.I have no problem with either.
That's a manifestly false assertion, given the abundant evidence you've posted to the contrary.I am not an atheist, but I do not hate atheists and will not go into their thread (if ever made) to just deliberately troll and bash.
While there are, (currently), no specifically "atheist" threads, you have gone into a thread concerning "wicca" just to troll me personally.
No one is "initially" spreading anything - those who enjoy those threads just want to do that - enjoy them.
False. This thread was initiated by a religious adherent who was obviously already aware of the "bible verses" she was requoting. There are a limited number of reasons to account for that. Either she was "spreading" hat stuff or, reminding forgetful/unaware xtians of something they could look up themselves. Therefore, she, (and the other fundies adding more requoted regurgitations of religious propaganda), were proselytizing a faith-based belief system. There's no inherent 'right' to unopposed proselytization, just as there's no inherent 'right' to proselytize. FC permite both the proselytizing and dissenting opposition to it. Your continued attempts to restrict the exchange of differing viewpoints by suppressing ones you don't like continue to fail.
You are so wrong about that, sir. No one was starting a Bible verse thread just to spread ...
You are correct in the FC allows what you said. However, you are the one who is attempting to restrict the believers from enjoying what they enjoy, including their viewpoints and their verses, quotes, and inspiration.
I'm not trying to suppress opposition, especially when there are adults challenging, debating, and discussing.
You have no room to speak about me going into the wicca thread.
I am not in the habit of trolling you specifically in threads like that.
I did ask you some questions in there, of which you answered. And you do know that wicca threads are not atheist threads.
I will not bash you in an atheist thread just because I don't follow that thinking.
I will not call you, an atheist, the same hateful words you like to use towards believers. I do call you "athei" as you call believers "fundie." Since you have clarified that "fundie" is okay to use, then I'm assuming "athei" is of the same clarification for an atheist.
— Matthew 5:7-9 (CEV)
1 Thessalonians 5:11Psalm 103:8,10,14,17. God was merciful in tolerating humankind..Isaiah 1:15-17 Unrighteous not heard unless course changed
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened … If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!” (Matthew 7:7-11)
I can think up all this on my own. I don't need a book of fairy tales to dictate my life. :angry7: :BangHead: :angry7: :BangHead:
:thumbsup:I can think up all this on my own. I don't need a book of fairy tales to dictate my life. :angry7: :BangHead: :angry7: :BangHead:
Then,I suggest you put down Grimms book and pick up God's Book.
1 Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' "
Hebrews 12:7,8,11 Be patient when you are being corrected!
1 Timothy 2:12 "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent."
1 Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' "
1 Thessalonians 5:111timothy3:1-5 know this that in the last days critical time hard to deal with will be here...and these times are really upon us
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.
'Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic.'
Witnessing is part of a Christian's life - to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. However, those who choose to not accept Christ can and will move on their way.
If someone were to enter the Bible verse threads and not like what is being offered, then a simple "No" and maybe a reason or rebuttal as to why, is encouraged.
The Bible verse threads, or even threads spreading the Gospel, are there for anyone who are interested. Those not interested do not have to open the thread - therefore, the threads are not offending when those not interested do not subject themselves to what they disagree with or do not like.
They are placed there as an offering to anyone who has a similar interest.
If it's a debate, up for discussion, then I might would go in with questions, thoughts, and rebuttals, etc., to compare and contrast what I believe with what they believe.
They are not insane or mentally off, and they are not irrational because they choose to believe in something, by faith, that you don't choose. It's your choice to dis-believe, as it's their choice to believe.
"Be alert, be on watch! Your enemy, the Devil, roams around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour. Be firm in your faith and resist him, because you know that other believers in all the world are going through the same kind of sufferings." (GNT)
What is sad is your way of debating and discussing and other's ways of doing the same, are at total opposites of the extreme. I'm allowed to give my opinion, as well, which includes dissenting views about how your thoughtless views are presented, and which you attempt to censor, by blaming me of trying to censor.Witnessing is part of a Christian's life - to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. However, those who choose to not accept Christ can and will move on their way.
Opposing religious proselytizing is a small part of the lives of others. Choosing to reject religious blind faith is not a matter of simply 'moving on' if one also chooses to oppose it. Suggesting otherwise is a roundabout way of suggesting such "witnessing" go unopposed. Not going to happen,If someone were to enter the Bible verse threads and not like what is being offered, then a simple "No" and maybe a reason or rebuttal as to why, is encouraged.
Firstly, there are no threads or forums which are exclusive xtian preserves/reservations. That means that any FC member who chooses to "enter" a thread may do so; whether they agree or disagree with the content of a thread/forum. Any 'encouraging' regarding the content of replies by others is attempted censorship. As long as FC's TOS and posting policies are adhered to, such attempts at member-censorship can be disregarded and opposed. That's what's been occurring and why this thread is now in the "Debate & Discuss" forum.The Bible verse threads, or even threads spreading the Gospel, are there for anyone who are interested. Those not interested do not have to open the thread - therefore, the threads are not offending when those not interested do not subject themselves to what they disagree with or do not like.
That non-reasoning is faulty since it's like suggesting that those who are offended by a neo-*bleep* demonstration at a publically-available venue can simply not attend/walk on by, (rather than choose to oppose such an event). Further, those threads are offensive to some non-xtians who have the same option to dissent as bible thumpers have to post their proselytizings. In that regard, those who aren't interested in dissenting viewpoints need not read them and have the same 'ignore' function available to them.They are placed there as an offering to anyone who has a similar interest.
These "verses" are available elsewhere, both on and offline, (as shown by the c&p requoting of reposts of re-verses). Anyone who has similar interests, has access to those verses elsewhere. By reposting them on an non-religious forums, the overt attempt to proselytize a religious belief system is directly evident.If it's a debate, up for discussion, then I might would go in with questions, thoughts, and rebuttals, etc., to compare and contrast what I believe with what they believe.
This thread is in the "Debate & Discuss" subforum of the Off-Topic forum. As such, the subject matter is up for debate and discussion, despite your continued efforts to silence/restrict/censor dissenting viewpoints. Various unsupported religious claims, false contentions and false attributions have been challenged in this and other threads. Thusfar, the xtians making such unsupported religious claims, false contentions and false attributions have failed to effectively rebute those challenges. Instead of debating or discussing, numerous posts which continue to try censoring/limiting/restricting opposing points/refutations are posted.They are not insane or mentally off, and they are not irrational because they choose to believe in something, by faith, that you don't choose. It's your choice to dis-believe, as it's their choice to believe.
The difference being that choosing to be irrational/illogical by "believing" in some concept without any evidentiary basis isn't especially 'sane' or mentally-balanced.
What is sad is your way of debating and discussing and other's ways of doing the same, are at total opposites of the extreme.
I'm allowed to give my opinion, as well, which includes dissenting views about how your thoughtless views are presented ...
... and which you attempt to censor, by blaming me of trying to censor.
It's extremely obvious that you do not wish to discuss and debate topics with points, research, etc.
I have never come across anyone in any forum who outwardly expresses such loathing of believers, faith, God, etc., goes beyond tolerance and respect of their beliefs, and instead is openly hostile towards them, such as your style of so-called "dissenting views."
Oh and no one said anything about opposing views not being allowed.
Opposing views, in a discuss and debate forum, should be opposing views within the guidelines of the rules, and with respect.
What is sad is your way of debating and discussing and other's ways of doing the same, are at total opposites of the extreme.
That's true as far as logical debating, (this does not describe the position of faith blinded religious adherents), and irrational proselytizing/dodging one of the tenets of debating; the burden of proof responsiblity after making religious, (or other), claims. This thread is posted in the Debate & Discuss subforum. It's not the 'baseless religious opinion and irrational dodging' subforum, (because there isn't one).I'm allowed to give my opinion, as well, which includes dissenting views about how your thoughtless views are presented ...
While anyone is "allowed" to give an opinion, (empty or, substantiated - there is a difference) - even one which attempts to censor/restrict/suppress dissenting viewpoints, so too can the characteristics of such an insidious "opinion" be pointed out. Neither your "opinion" nor my substantiated opposition will be censored or restricted unless either violates FC's TOS/posting policies. That said, you continue on the same forlorn mission to suppress dissent because you don't 'like' the content of those dissenting viewpoints, (not just mine).
You have just described yourself in this above paragraph.... and which you attempt to censor, by blaming me of trying to censor.
It's not "blaming"; the word you're grasping for, ("English teacher"), is 'accusing' and that's been done by providing substantiating evidence consisting of your own posted words. Further, I've posted repeatedly that posting opposing points of view is Not an attempt to censor your attempted censorship. That was a poor try at an "I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I" childish illogic, by the way.
I used the word "blaming" as my choice. I was not grasping for the word "accusing" and would really appreciate you not thinking for me, sir. The only childish part of that is you even thinking it is that - it must be what you are trying to do.It's extremely obvious that you do not wish to discuss and debate topics with points, research, etc.
There are numerous archived posts which directly contradict your 'non-obvious' accusation. That makes it false since I, (and others) , have
debated, presented valid evidence and discussed using logical reasoning, (in lieu of teh illogical non-reasoning religious adherents such as yourself have tried to employ). These archived posts aren't buried so deeply that there are obscured by disingenuous religious opinions; they can be produced as evidence.
Ha ha - you make me laugh - you are not producing any kind of debate and logical reasoning when all you do is name-call different names of what believers believe.I have never come across anyone in any forum who outwardly expresses such loathing of believers, faith, God, etc., goes beyond tolerance and respect of their beliefs, and instead is openly hostile towards them, such as your style of so-called "dissenting views."
Then you must not get out much or, come into contact with those who do.Oh and no one said anything about opposing views not being allowed.
The word "allowed" wasn't used until you just used it; the actual words used were "attempted censorship, restricting the content of opposing viewpoints" and "attempts to suppress opposing viewpoints" by you and a few other religious adherents.
You are trying to block me from expressing my views of your name-calling views. Can't be done.Opposing views, in a discuss and debate forum, should be opposing views within the guidelines of the rules, and with respect.
If any opposing viewpoints violates FC's guidelines or TOS, such threads would nominally be locked by Admin/moderators. This thread, (and others), aren't locked, despite numerous false complaints lodged against those who oppose offensive religious proselytization, irrational non-arguments and general faith-blindness. Apparently, at least some of those religious adherents who support blind faith, irrational religious beliefs and offensive religious proselytizing still try to limit/restrict/suppress/censor the opposition with the ineffective passive-agressive methods you continue to use.
Notice the words in red that include your "opinion" toward believers. No tolerance; no respect; no debate/discuss to be accepted by you, because of your words.
The posted replies are available downthread, sans your unsubstantiated and irrational 'interpretations'. In fact, the 'highlighted' terms are descriptive and not merely some 'empty opinion without basis', (because that basis has been presented as a logical premise previously and repeatedly enough that your ignorance of it has to be intentional).
To reiterate a point made often enough that even a faith-blinded fundie should be able to *see* it; this is the Debate & Discuss subforum, not the attempt-to-suppress-opposing-viewpoints-by-calling-them-disrespectful' subforum.Notice the words in red that include your "opinion" toward believers. No tolerance; no respect; no debate/discuss to be accepted by you, because of your words.And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......
And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......
And all can see who is doing the name-calling. Letting your true colors show...And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......
That's what happens when logical reasoning runs over illogical religious irrationality; the faith-blinded go in circles because they cannot *see* rationally.
And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......
That's what happens when logical reasoning runs over illogical religious irrationality; the faith-blinded go in circles because they cannot *see* rationally.
And all can see who is doing the name-calling. Letting your true colors show...
Yes it is, because your remarks are being based on your opinions, your dislike of the subject, and the fact that you are showing intolerance. You are way subjective with your remarks toward believers.And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......That's what happens when logical reasoning runs over illogical religious irrationality; the faith-blinded go in circles because they cannot *see* rationally.And all can see who is doing the name-calling. Letting your true colors show...
It's not "name-calling" if it's factually-accurate and has logical substantiation, (which religious beliefs/blind faith does not).
And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......
That's what happens when logical reasoning runs over illogical religious irrationality; the faith-blinded go in circles because they cannot *see* rationally.
And all can see who is doing the name-calling. Letting your true colors show...
It's not "name-calling" if it's factually-accurate and has logical substantiation, (which religious beliefs/blind faith does not).
Yes it is, because your remarks are being based on your opinions ...
Yours are not based on logical reasoning, as much as they are based on intolerance of any topic of God. If it helps your ego to believe otherwise, have at it. But I'm just saying that your loathing shines through very clear and that is getting a little too personal and mean-spirited toward believers. Have a good night.And the circle keeps going on and on and on and on......That's what happens when logical reasoning runs over illogical religious irrationality; the faith-blinded go in circles because they cannot *see* rationally.And all can see who is doing the name-calling. Letting your true colors show...It's not "name-calling" if it's factually-accurate and has logical substantiation, (which religious beliefs/blind faith does not).Yes it is, because your remarks are being based on your opinions ...
No, they are based upon logical reasoning, as opposed to unsupported specious religious opinions. Your simple and unsubstantiated "yes it is" has no basis other than your biased religious opinion, (which itself, lacks substantive basis and renders such an opinion as devoid of substance).
It's amazing to me that Christians are branded intolerant,when all one has to do is look at people like falcon,who can't simply let Christians alone to practice their beliefs on a public forum.It's indeed sad...
Yours are not based on logical reasoning ...
if they want to bible versus let them there is also a wiccan page i think there should be one for jewish and muslim people as well it helps people connect and thats whats important in the end
Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life. – Proverbs 22:26 (GNT)
Aww... you must be the last one to judge someone's comment. Hope you feel in control and more content in thinking you are "putting me in my place." Still not looking in your own mirror I see...Yours are not based on logical reasoning ...
As there are numerous posts which delineate the logical reasoning used to arrive at rational conclusions, (not irrational, baseless religious opinions), available as evidence, your bland denial is irrelevant. Further, denying the content of archived evidenceto the contrary of your specious 'opinion' is irrational and renders your 'opinion' above as false.
I sure wouldn't want to be taught your views, mainly based on your attitude and intolerance of others who don't think as you do. That's really teaching children how to "hate" believers just because they believe in God. Thank you for finally making it very clear how that works. I feel really sorry for your icy heart.Teach children how they should live, and they will remember it all their life. – Proverbs 22:26 (GNT)
In other words, indoctrinate young minds in a religious superstition at an early age and they may remain unable to tell fact from fiction later in life. What a despicable practice of brain-washing and blinding through "faith".
... you must be the last one to judge someone's comment. Hope you feel in control and more content in thinking you are "putting me in my place." Still not looking in your own mirror I see...
I sure wouldn't want to be taught your views ...
That's really teaching children how to "hate" believers just because they believe in God.
Thank you for finally making it very clear how that works. I feel really sorry for your icy heart.
Only you would try to figure out if I was in a "control-freak" attempt to get the last word in. How dare I even contemplate doing such a thing. Only falcon9 is allowed to have the last judgment on believers, including the last comment, period. Poor thing...... you must be the last one to judge someone's comment. Hope you feel in control and more content in thinking you are "putting me in my place." Still not looking in your own mirror I see...
Either your non-reasoning is faulty or, you just posted that in a 'control-freak' attempt to get in the last word. Based upon prior evidence consisting of your own words, faulty reasoning on your part is extrapolated as an accurate conclusion.
... you must be the last one to judge someone's comment. Hope you feel in control and more content in thinking you are "putting me in my place." Still not looking in your own mirror I see...
Either your non-reasoning is faulty or, you just posted that in a 'control-freak' attempt to get in the last word. Based upon prior evidence consisting of your own words, faulty reasoning on your part is extrapolated as an accurate conclusion.
Only you would try to figure out if I was in a "control-freak" attempt to get the last word in. How dare I even contemplate doing such a thing. Only falcon9 is allowed to have the last judgment on believers, including the last comment, period.
When I say last word, for you, it means "rude remarks" that you must end with, including calling posters' comments "false," "failed," "specious," etc. Like you are the smartest professor ever, and only your grades count. What a laugh...... you must be the last one to judge someone's comment. Hope you feel in control and more content in thinking you are "putting me in my place." Still not looking in your own mirror I see...Either your non-reasoning is faulty or, you just posted that in a 'control-freak' attempt to get in the last word. Based upon prior evidence consisting of your own words, faulty reasoning on your part is extrapolated as an accurate conclusion.Only you would try to figure out if I was in a "control-freak" attempt to get the last word in. How dare I even contemplate doing such a thing. Only falcon9 is allowed to have the last judgment on believers, including the last comment, period.
Evidently, logical reasoning is not your 'friend', nor have you made even a passing aquaintance with rational thought processes. Logically, only the 'last one standing' and choosing to post will have "the last word". As it is, the exchanges are ongoing and it isn't possible to determine the "last word" in advance of that occurance.
When I say last word, for you, it means "rude remarks" that you must end with, including calling posters' comments "false," "failed," "specious," etc..
Psalm 53:1
Only fools say in their hearts,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, and their actions are evil;
not one of them does good!
"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise."
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"
"The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit."
Despicable same words, as usual. You are just being deliberately obstinate and hateful. You must be so bitter inside, since you keep trying to bring others down with you. It's not working. Believe how and what you want. Your opinion is your opinion and whether online or in my own personal life, your opinion does not go with me, affect me, or trouble me. It just makes me feel pity for you and your obvious unhappiness.
"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise."
Sounds like a religious fundamentalist who refuses to heed the counsel of logic and blinds themselves with "faith" instead."Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,"
That one is very descriptive of religious adherents who eschew wisdom in exchange for foolish blind faith."The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit."
That one is most revealing since there is valid evidence of the deceits of xtianity extant, (ranging from empty religious claims, cultural theft of the belief systems of others, the crusades, the inquisitions, the witch hunts ...). The xtian belief system is based upon the deceit of self-delusion via faith-blindness.
Despicable same words, as usual.
Believe how and what you want. Your opinion is your opinion ...
I have no worries about your choices - they are your personal business. So are mine. It's obvious to your chagrin that I am able to share my opinion and share what I believe, when you would rather shut me up. Good luck with that.Despicable same words, as usual.
As regards such repetitious "bible" quotes are proclaimations of blind faith, I concur.Believe how and what you want. Your opinion is your opinion ...
Though stated otherwise, the fact that I don't hold superstitious religious beliefs nor base any opinion on them, should be evident by now - even to a faith-blinded fundie. In lieu of such blind faith, I've based my assessments upon logical reasoning, (which requires no faith/belief, only that it produce functionally-accurate results - which it does, much to your obvious chagrin).
It's obvious to your chagrin that I am able to share my opinion and share what I believe, when you would rather shut me up.
Oh right, you support the option because you have to, according to the forum rules. Okay - I'll give you that one. But trying to make Christians look bad and trying to hush them up - nope - can't give those to you, when they are glaringly obvious. Nice try...It's obvious to your chagrin that I am able to share my opinion and share what I believe, when you would rather shut me up.
On the contrary, I've consistantly supported the option for others to hold and post about their superstitions beliefs, as long as the equal option to oppose such blind faith is a concurrent one. In fact, there is a large volume of evidence, in your own posted words, of your attempting to suppress/repress/oppress viewpoints which oppose such faith blindness.
It's obvious to your chagrin that I am able to share my opinion and share what I believe, when you would rather shut me up.
On the contrary, I've consistantly supported the option for others to hold and post about their superstitions beliefs, as long as the equal option to oppose such blind faith is a concurrent one. In fact, there is a large volume of evidence, in your own posted words, of your attempting to suppress/repress/oppress viewpoints which oppose such faith blindness.
Oh right, you support the option because you have to, according to the forum rules. Okay - I'll give you that one. But trying to make Christians look bad and trying to hush them up - nope - can't give those to you, when they are glaringly obvious.
... with the amount you are ignored.
I do ignore you much of the day...but when i need entertainment i get out my bait and you bite.
I do ignore you much of the day...but when i need entertainment i get out my bait and you bite.
Fish is good brain food Falcon....
you should hunt for a whale
I do ignore you much of the day...but when i need entertainment i get out my bait and you bite.
So you decide when you want when i am speaking to you Falcon?Tsk tsk....so erratic!!!
"Regarding the "baptism" concept remember the katharti, Maioumas, the initiations of Mithras, Isis, Osiris,and the other mystery religions: Remember the words of Tertullian and Justin Martyr. You'll know you're hearing about stuff that predated xtianity by hundreds of years -- in a culture where over and over people built new religions out of old parts."
--anon.
DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I wasnt fortunate enuff to be in the 47% to screw the governement cos i was in the alarmed forces.
The fact that you are on FC 24/7 is enuff proof for me that you are a lazy brat who thinks hes entitled to funds because he served in the armed forces.
No lies. Your false accusations, intolerance, and hateful words are in fact archived evidence, as well as copied in my own personal notes in the event you have tried to go back and change anything from the original comments you made. Is that the best you can come back with? Nice try, however...Oh right, you support the option because you have to, according to the forum rules. Okay - I'll give you that one. But trying to make Christians look bad and trying to hush them up - nope - can't give those to you, when they are glaringly obvious.
What's glaringly-obvious about your false accusations is the fact of archived evidence to the contrarywhich makes them lies.
Oh right, you support the option because you have to, according to the forum rules. Okay - I'll give you that one. But trying to make Christians look bad and trying to hush them up - nope - can't give those to you, when they are glaringly obvious.
What's glaringly-obvious about your false accusations is the fact of archived evidence to the contrary which makes them lies.
No lies. Your false accusations, intolerance, and hateful words are in fact archived evidence, as well as copied in my own personal notes ...
in the event you have tried to go back and change anything from the original comments you made. Is that the best you can come back with?
Cheese....hankies......kleenex
I dont ask you to explain your boring repetitive post...if you dont have discernment and cant keep up with me....TOUGH!!!
On the contrary...your boring repetitive posts...all of them..are quite easy to understand...all you have to know is who wrote them.
On the contrary...your boring repetitive posts...all of them..are quite easy to understand...all you have to know is who wrote them.
Your response contradicts itself because it contains an invalid assumption followed by an irrational conclusion. At the same time, it tacitly demonstrates you inability to comprehend content and a lame attempt to gloss over that incomprehension with troll-nonsense.
Case & point.......CHECKMATE!!
You Lose!!
Something that isnt a superstition was you were in the service and defending us......
Thats like having a plumber doing a strip tease after hes worked in a sewer!!
And the pat on the back dillusion of a full of me cowardice in the service has as much merit as Sandusky proclaiming his innocence at Penn St!!
Lol, trying to twist it around on me. Wow! How pitiful. And the fact that you responded so defensively says either you honestly responded because you haven't done it, or it means you've done it or thought about it. Either way, it doesn't bode well to turn it around and re-write it to me - I wrote it to you and know what I said - you are just repeating to make it look like you are in control. I'll give you credit for trying, though! :star: :star: ;DOh right, you support the option because you have to, according to the forum rules. Okay - I'll give you that one. But trying to make Christians look bad and trying to hush them up - nope - can't give those to you, when they are glaringly obvious.What's glaringly-obvious about your false accusations is the fact of archived evidence to the contrary which makes them lies.No lies. Your false accusations, intolerance, and hateful words are in fact archived evidence, as well as copied in my own personal notes ...
Your speciously-biased opinions interpreting archived evidence aren't evidence. There are unedited, archived posts which contradict your denials and substantiate the contention that you've lied. Your personal opinion that opposition to your religious superstitions are "false accusations, intolerance and hateful words" does not constitute evidence.in the event you have tried to go back and change anything from the original comments you made. Is that the best you can come back with?
Beyond correcting a typo here and there, I haven't "tried to go back and change anything from the original comments ..." Your insinuation is uncalled-for and contemptible. In turn, (and under the auspicess of the "golden rule"), I can speculate that perhaps you're the one planning on trying "to go back and change anything from the original comments" you made. That won't work since FC has records of the original, unedited posts and would be able to determine where and when you lied in your posts in your forlorn attempt to silence opposition.
... you honestly responded because you haven't done it ...
Many of your "snidely-false accusations" aren't worth my time either. I will say something when I choose to, though, when you are going too far. Even then, they aren't worth my time, but supporting other Christians' backs is what we do as brothers and sisters in Christ, and we will stand up for each other and for our Lord.... you honestly responded because you haven't done it ...
That's correct, the remainder of your snidely-false insinuations weren't worth my time.
... supporting other Christians' backs is what we do as brothers and sisters in Christ, and we will stand up for each other and for our Lord.
Think what you want - it's no biggie to me. We support each other - I don't do all of the supporting. If even that kind of thing bothers you, you've got it bad. That's really sad...... supporting other Christians' backs is what we do as brothers and sisters in Christ, and we will stand up for each other and for our Lord.
That's what I was referring to when I accurately characterized your pretense at being some sort of self-appointed defender of weak superstitious beliefs. The self-delusion wrapped up with such a pretense is apparently related to the same religious self-delusions and tacit implication of blind faith being so weak that it needs such 'defense'.
"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding."
Unless you have experienced the "trust" through "faith" in God, of course you would not understand how that works. Once experienced, the truth is seen and known. At least you are asking valid questions. Thank you for that."Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding."
Why would anyone capable of rational thought processes "trust" in some hypothetical entity for which no valid evidence has been presented to substantiate "its" existence? Why would such irrationality be preferred over rationality, and blind faith over evidence?
Unless you have experienced the ...
Well that's nice to know. I'm not drowning either and am quite enjoying my living in the Lord. And for a Christian, God is one of the best things conducive to living. To each their own, right?Unless you have experienced the ...
It is unnecessary to experience drowning to determine in advance that it wouldn't be conducive to living.
Unless you have experienced the ...
It is unnecessary to experience drowning to determine in advance that it wouldn't be conducive to living.
Well that's nice to know. I'm not drowning either and am ...
You are making no sense now. Sounds like you need a time-out to rest your over-active brain. I'll check back tomorrow and see if you are any better.Unless you have experienced the ...It is unnecessary to experience drowning to determine in advance that it wouldn't be conducive to living.Well that's nice to know. I'm not drowning either and am ...
What you're doing is being intentionally obtuse or, forgetting those recent posts concerning metaphorical parallels. What, are you sharing your computer with someone else who posts different things?
Unless you have experienced the ...
It is unnecessary to experience drowning to determine in advance that it wouldn't be conducive to living.
Well that's nice to know. I'm not drowning either and am ...
What you're doing is being intentionally obtuse or, forgetting those recent posts concerning metaphorical parallels. What, are you sharing your computer with someone else who posts different things?
You are making no sense now.
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.:thumbsup:
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
Matthew 11:27-30 King James Version Bible :)
"The fundamentalists, by 'knowing' the answers before they start, and then forcing nature into the straitjacket ofI'm curious - would you transcribe this quote into your own words with what you think about this? Thanks! :)
their discredited preconceptions, lie outside the domain of science --or any honest intellectual inquiry."
-- Stephen J. Gould
"The fundamentalists, by 'knowing' the answers before they start, and then forcing nature into the straitjacket of their discredited preconceptions, lie outside the domain of science --or any honest intellectual inquiry."
-- Stephen J. Gould
I'm curious - would you transcribe this quote into your own words with what you think about this? Thanks! :)
No, not unclear at all. Just wanted to hear it in your words coming from your train of thought. Thanks. I agree it would look or seem that way to you or to others who dis-believe - no argument there."The fundamentalists, by 'knowing' the answers before they start, and then forcing nature into the straitjacket of their discredited preconceptions, lie outside the domain of science --or any honest intellectual inquiry."
-- Stephen J. GouldI'm curious - would you transcribe this quote into your own words with what you think about this? Thanks! :)
Why, is some part of Stephen's observation unclear? The observation being that religious blind faith constitutes holding preconceived superstitious notions which tend to inhibit, ("straitjacket"), rational inquiry and logical reasoning. This is perceived as a 'non-good' stance on several levels.
I'm curious - would you transcribe this quote into your own words with what you think about this? Thanks! :)
Why, is some part of Stephen's observation unclear? The observation being that religious blind faith constitutes holding preconceived superstitious notions which tend to inhibit, ("straitjacket"), rational inquiry and logical reasoning. This is perceived as a 'non-good' stance on several levels.
No, not unclear at all. Just wanted to hear it in your words coming from your train of thought. Thanks. I agree it would look or seem that way to you or to others who dis-believe - no argument there.
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”Actually, it's called faith, and reading "God's Word."
-– Carl Sagan
Actually, it's called faith, and reading "God's Word."
“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”If you want to call it "blind faith," that's your personal choice to do so. :)
-– Carl SaganActually, it's called faith, and reading "God's Word."
Actually, it's called "blind faith" because it isn't based upon *seeing* evidence; it stems directly from belief despite a complete lack of evidence.
If you want to call it "blind faith," that's your personal choice to do so. :)
Yes, an accurate description from your studies and feelings on the matter. Yet, inaccurate for those who choose to be saved, by grace, through faith, and live by the choices they choose. At least you can live your choices freely and others can live their choices freely. :)If you want to call it "blind faith," that's your personal choice to do so. :)
It's much, much more than simply my "choice"; it's an accurate description of religious faith without any substantive basis. It isn't 'sighted-faith' because it relies upon an empty belief to support an empty faith and that's a circular/illogical rationale. If "faith" or "belief" had a basis, it wouldn't be a self-referential circularity of irrationality.
If you want to call it "blind faith," that's your personal choice to do so. :)
It's much, much more than simply my "choice"; it's an accurate description of religious faith without any substantive basis. It isn't 'sighted-faith' because it relies upon an empty belief to support an empty faith and that's a circular/illogical rationale. If "faith" or "belief" had a basis, it wouldn't be a self-referential circularity of irrationality.
Yes, an accurate description from your studies and feelings on the matter.
Yet, inaccurate for those who choose to be saved, by grace, through faith, and live by the choices they choose.
While you are speaking out against believers, you are actually doing the same type of thing, by consistently knocking believers for what they believe and in essence, making them appear as diseased and infectious, when you are infecting others with your intolerance. I want to clarify here, I am not trying to be ugly saying that - I'm honestly trying to show that what you are "spreading" about believers and their freedom to worship, is infecting others with negativism and intolerance; which is what you are accusing believers of doing, spreading irrationality and infection.If you want to call it "blind faith," that's your personal choice to do so. :)It's much, much more than simply my "choice"; it's an accurate description of religious faith without any substantive basis. It isn't 'sighted-faith' because it relies upon an empty belief to support an empty faith and that's a circular/illogical rationale. If "faith" or "belief" had a basis, it wouldn't be a self-referential circularity of irrationality.Yes, an accurate description from your studies and feelings on the matter.
No, it's an accurate description from the standpoint of rational thinking and logical analysis, ("feelings" are irrelevant because they vary from an objective basis).Yet, inaccurate for those who choose to be saved, by grace, through faith, and live by the choices they choose.
No, it's accurate no matter how irrational some religious adherents choose to be by relying upon blind faith and empty religious beliefs, (neither of which have any evidentiary basis). As long as such irrationalities remain inside the skulls of such 'true believers', it wouldn't be noticed much - let alone become a problem, (like the xtian crusades, inquisitions, witch hunts and cultural assimulations of native/pagan peoples became much more than a 'problem' for them). As we can see, such superstitions don't stay inside the heads of 'believers' and instead, leak out to infect the infosphere.
While you are speaking out against believers, you are actually doing the same type of thing, by consistently knocking believers ...
... making them appear as diseased and infectious ...
... when you are infecting others with your intolerance. I'm honestly trying to show that what you are "spreading" about believers and their freedom to worship, is infecting others with negativism and intolerance ...
When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?
I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your last paragraph. Religion or not, people will always enjoy sharing something they enjoy or feel good about. In the Bible, Jesus speaks of sharing with others, as well. Others do not have to accept or take part, and don't, and that's their choice. There are many faiths that either share or at least invite others to attend their churches - that's normal - people who don't want to go just say NO. I don't agree with those who are pushy - I don't like being pushed and I don't agree to being pushy, either. But sharing with others is and will always be there. As far as opposition is concerned, I do agree it will be there - both FOR and AGAINST religion and no religion. It's how far that opposition is taken that makes a difference under the Constitution with regards to a person's safety, whether physical or mental.While you are speaking out against believers, you are actually doing the same type of thing, by consistently knocking believers ...
No, failure to separate a "belief" from a "believer" is yours, not mine. I oppose the superstitious religious beliefs, not any particular religious adherent to such beliefs. I've stated before and I'll state it again; a 'believer' is not their beliefs; they are the one holding such beliefs. Unless this difference is discerned for the separate aspects they are, continued confusion on the part of religious adherents will ensue.
... making them appear as diseased and infectious ...
No, I've been comparing their religious beliefs to a potentially infectious mind virus, (and this parallel has lots of supporting evidence to substaniate it as a valid metaphor). The only remarks I've made regarding those 'infected' by religious blind faith have essentially been that it manifestly causes a significant loss of reasoning ability and has lead to horrendous atrocities in the recent past, (thus providing support for the contention about the root of those atrocities).
... when you are infecting others with your intolerance. I'm honestly trying to show that what you are "spreading" about believers and their freedom to worship, is infecting others with negativism and intolerance ...
That's a completely biased and false analogy since I am not "infecting" anyone with a religious belief and what you call "intolerace" is an intolerance for irrational religious superstitions, (something no one is required to 'tolerate' once it gets hucked-up in public, or on a private forum).When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?
Once again, you're conflating two separate things and hoping no one will notice, (perhaps not even yourself?). The constitution protects the option to believe/disbelieve/not believe in the first place in religious superstitions. It most certainly DOES NOT provide for unopposed religious propagandizing, (because that would be one-sided). In other words, there's no "right" to unopposed religious belief.
Whenever I do something that upsets someone, or I accidentally break a promise, I like to tell them "I work in mysterious ways. It's all part of my plan!" . I think it makes them feel better.:thumbsup:
When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?
Once again, you're conflating two separate things and hoping no one will notice, (perhaps not even yourself?). The constitution protects the option to believe/disbelieve/not believe in the first place in religious superstitions. It most certainly DOES NOT provide for unopposed religious propagandizing, (because that would be one-sided). In other words, there's no "right" to unopposed religious belief.
I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.
You only took my one sentence as a quote - please don't do that, because I then finished the paragraph regarding the opposition and how I agree with you to a point, but added my extra point. It's as if you deliberately disregard some things I do agree with you, but also disagree, with an added point, and only choose a one-liner that opposes your point, and leaves off the extra points. That is very unfair - would you please not do that?When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?Once again, you're conflating two separate things and hoping no one will notice, (perhaps not even yourself?). The constitution protects the option to believe/disbelieve/not believe in the first place in religious superstitions. It most certainly DOES NOT provide for unopposed religious propagandizing, (because that would be one-sided). In other words, there's no "right" to unopposed religious belief.I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.
Whether you agree or disagree, the fact is that there is no such 'constitutional' protection of unopposed religious proselytization. That means, if someone chooses to oppose it, others cannot legally suppress such opposition.
When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?
Once again, you're conflating two separate things and hoping no one will notice, (perhaps not even yourself?). The constitution protects the option to believe/disbelieve/not believe in the first place in religious superstitions. It most certainly DOES NOT provide for unopposed religious propagandizing, (because that would be one-sided). In other words, there's no "right" to unopposed religious belief.
I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.
Whether you agree or disagree, the fact is that there is no such 'constitutional' protection of unopposed religious proselytization. That means, if someone chooses to oppose it, others cannot legally suppress such opposition.
You only took my one sentence as a quote -
First of all, a person should be quoted in their entirety when being responded to - it's less confusion, and a matter of respect. Plus I have asked you to, before.When it comes down to it, your right to dis-believe is just as protected as my right to believe, and though we do not agree with each other's choice, it is our choice and our right, and neither of us should be so intolerant of each other's rightful choice that it causes dissension, arguing, and otherwise. Out of everything discussed in this forum, this is the main issue that I feel strongly passionate about. If we all have our rights protected, then who is anyone else to try and tear down that right of believing or dis-believing of someone else?Once again, you're conflating two separate things and hoping no one will notice, (perhaps not even yourself?). The constitution protects the option to believe/disbelieve/not believe in the first place in religious superstitions. It most certainly DOES NOT provide for unopposed religious propagandizing, (because that would be one-sided). In other words, there's no "right" to unopposed religious belief.I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your last paragraph.Whether you agree or disagree, the fact is that there is no such 'constitutional' protection of unopposed religious proselytization. That means, if someone chooses to oppose it, others cannot legally suppress such opposition.You only took my one sentence as a quote -
Yes, I quoted the part relevant to what I was replying to. Your subsequent reply focussed on that, instead of the content of that reply. With that in mind, that which was not relevant to replies was not quoted. You have a tendency to quote content which your replies do not address and I choose not to quote content to which I'm not responding, (since all content is available in previous posts down-thread and this eleiminates some extraneous repetition of content not being addressed anyway). Should you change your mind and address previous content, context can be restored.
First of all, a person should be quoted in their entirety when being responded to - it's less confusion, and a matter of respect.
Plus I have asked you to, before.
Next, I must be addle-brained in how I'm apparently not answering to your specifications with regards to content. I'm responding to what I perceive and I apologize if I am not touching on the exact part of the content you must be expecting me to. I agreed to a point but also gave my reason for the not agreeing point.
So, please forgive me if I am not seeming to address "previous" context so that my privilege of my context can be restored.
I'm going to ask you again, in the future, to please hit the quote button of my entire response to your comments. I quote anyone in their entirety. I do not like to be only half quoted when my reasons are left out of the quote and are twisted to fit what ever point you are trying to make, which in the end, tries to make me appear stupid or ignorant. This time I am sending a request to Kohler, since I have said I will do that when you do not quote my entire comment in return. Thank you.First of all, a person should be quoted in their entirety when being responded to - it's less confusion, and a matter of respect.
To reiterate two salient points in that regard; text replied to was quoted; text not replied to was not quoted, (rather than quoting material not replied to, as you tend to do). The other point being that the previous posted exchanges are available immediately preceding, down-thread. Requoting text which does not provide relevant context is extraneous.
Plus I have asked you to, before.
I'd considered you request and predicated compliance upon whether or not you replied to content in responses to your posts.Next, I must be addle-brained in how I'm apparently not answering to your specifications with regards to content. I'm responding to what I perceive and I apologize if I am not touching on the exact part of the content you must be expecting me to. I agreed to a point but also gave my reason for the not agreeing point.
While anyone can choose what they want to reply to and what they do not, this point was raised due to an observed tendency on your part to continually gloss-over/avoid/side-step specifically-challenged assertions. That's your choice, as stated and so too is it mine to do the same.
So, please forgive me if I am not seeming to address "previous" context so that my privilege of my context can be restored.
The point most recently not addressed in your replies:
- The "right" to hold a religious belief is not equivalent to a 'non-right' to unopposed religious proselytization and no unopposed religious
propagandizing is 'protected' by the U.S. Constitution.
- The other previous points are too numerous to renumerate.
I'm going to ask you again, in the future, to please hit the quote button of my entire respon
Perhaps not to some, but when serious discussions are going on, it is unfair to only quote a certain phrase or sentence, and then use it to their advantage to make someone appear ignorant, stupid, or making it obvious that certain points given are ignored.
I'm going to ask you again, in the future, to please hit the quote button of my entire respon
Fusioncash Quoting: Super Serious Business. ::)
I'm going to ask you again, in the future, to please hit the quote button of my entire response to your comments.
This time I am sending a request to Kohler, since I have said I will do that when you do not quote my entire comment in return. Thank you.
"A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap."
Where does blind faith come from?Suit yourself, lol.Quote"A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap."
I'll just stand then and not make a lap.
When an adherent is blinded by religious faith, they don't even realize what they're not seeing.False, but suit yourself.
When an adherent is blinded by religious faith, they don't even realize what they're not seeing.
False, but suit yourself.
False, but suit yourself.
hidden
Thanks for the Bible versus. I enjoy reading them.They are the only thing that keeps us going
1 Thessalonians 5:11
New International Version (NIV)
11 Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing.