@eb52megafortress Need proof that there is no God? Jump off a cliff. If "God" existed, you would know that "this is not the end" and would therefore understand that jumping off the cliff is not death, it is your route to "the next life".
If you think there is some sort of "punishment" for suicide, understand that while you have "free will", the ground against which you smack does not have "free will" - and thus, your deity is able to prevent your death. Inaction by your deity shows that you're
... forsaken. If "God" had some purpose for you, then you'd be rescued and allowed to live. If you die, then your "God" wasn't on your side, anyway; therefore, your chances at "Heaven" were slim in the first place.
"If [Satan] is "evil", why then does [Satan] punish the wicked?"
@Xan81 This is one of the poorest arguments I've seen you make yet. God didn't make robots to blindly obey. You want to jump off that cliff? Sad, but go ahead, free will. Satan hates us. All of us. He leads people away from God then destroys them, kinda like pulling the wings off of flies. “One of Satan’s best tricks in the Twentieth Century, is to make people believe he doesn’t exist”. C.S.Lewis Screwtape Letters
@eb52megafortress Suicide is a sin. It is an act of Pride, and destruction of God's property. ALL things are God's property, and ALL actions are God's doing.
@Xan81 The sin part is true. The last phrase, not so much. I can decide, I'm not preprogrammed. He didn't make Dahmer or Gacy freaks, or Michael Jackson a pervert. In fact He prohibited what they did. They decided. He didn't make Eve take that fruit, she listened to the wrong reptile. Bad argument.
@Xan81 Where are you getting this stuff? I don't see anything in the Commandments or the Law about pride. Of course Adam philandered...he ate the fruit. Free will. Sin or don't sin. And are you absolutely sure of my literary experience? I've read Macabees, too. And the gnostic gospels. Don't assume.
@eb52megafortress Uhhh he philandered BEFORE he ate the fruit... remember? Lilith was his first wife - but then left her because she demanded equality. Then, God took the rib from Adam to create Eve - thus producing a subordinate and docile sibling for Adam to have his way with.
@eb52megafortress That's right: Eve was no more than masturbation. God created Eve with the genetic material of ADAM. Therefore, to sleep with Eve is incest or masturbation (auto-erotica).
@eb52megafortress [ In 1589, Peter Binsfeld paired each of the deadly sins with a demon, who tempted people by means of the associated sin. According to Binsfeld's classification of demons, the pairings are as follows
Lucifer: Pride (superbia) ]
[ Ὑπερηφανία (hyperēphania) hubris - in the Philokalia, this term is rendered as self-esteem. ]
@eb52megafortress [ In the Book of Proverbs (Mishlai), King Solomon stated that the Lord specifically regards "six things the Lord hateth, and the seventh His soul detesteth." namely:
@eb52megafortress If I am wrong, then "God" has a lot of explaining to do. Why has [God] been hiding for so long? Why is [God] such a glutton, a sadist, a masochist (because [God] created those that would destroy the idea of [God]), greedy, narcissistic, etc.?
@Xan81 1. God doesn't answer to you, you answer to Him. 2. Hiding? He's been announcing His presence for thousands of years. 3. Glutton? 4. When has He hurt anyone without cause? 5. What? 6. Greedy? He gave us everything and asks for only love in return. 7. Narcissistic? Not nearly as much as one who places himself as His better.
Intelligent conversation really isn't the place for name calling. That last line didn't earn you any points.
@Xan81 Genesis Chapter 7 Exodus chapters 7,8,9and10. Exodus Chapter 14 John Chapter 2:1-11 John 6:1-14 Acts Chapter 2. There are many more. Archaeological sites at Sodom and Gomorrah, Jericho. Daisies. Little girls. The amazing complexity of the cell. Solar eclipses. The incredible orderliness of the DNA molecule. Entropy. Quantum physics. The Big Bang. Grandmothers.
@eb52megafortress Explain in your own words a strand of DNA. Don't talk about shit that you don't understand. Up to this point, I've been trying to not demonstrate my intellectual superiority.
Quoting fictional books is not a bright idea. Stop doing it. This is a discussion about verified FACT. So cut out the fairy tails, please.
And it would be wise to not discuss little girls - I am quite aware of the fondness of children in the Church's sphere of influence...
@Xan81 Your language is offensive, I'm not talking to YOU that way. Quit it. You want to talk about gene sequences, RNA polymerase, transfer RNA's, guanine nucleotides, ribonucleotides? Introns? Esons? How about codons? Shall we go into electron transfer phosphorylation, and the Krebs cycle? Want to know about peroxisomes or the Golgi Complex? Intellectual superiority? Khan, I am laughing at your intellectual superiority. I like quoting fiction. Lewis was once an atheist, too.
@eb52megafortress And I don't think you mean my "language" is offensive - you are, after all, using the same language (Her Majesty the Queen's Royal English Language).
@Xan81 What is all this The Church stuff? Is it Catholic theology you have a problem with? Because I do too. Fairies don't have tails, people tell tales about them. And as a grandparent I find your last statement offensive, especially if it is aimed at me. Little girls are a miracle. And untouchable. You are offensive, I'll be praying for you, in fact I'll have a LOT of people praying for you, and this thread is OVER.
Religious nationalism is the relationship of nationalism to a particular religious belief, dogma, or affiliation. This relationship can be broken down into two aspects; the politicisation of religion and the influence of religion on politics.
@eb52megafortress You say "Yes" while ignoring the rights of non-theists. THAT is why there is a "Separation of Church and State" - you are infringing upon the beliefs of the non-theists.
@eb52megafortress I do. And part of that is being secular - one cannot be a "good person" if one has preconceptions about the Universe that clash with very many people.
@eb52megafortress Yes. I understand that to force the idea of "God" upon the minds of children is wrong. Who else says the Pledge on a regular basis? Only children. They learn it rote and repeat it verbatim.
@Xan81 Okay, so what's unclear? I asked you if there was a right or wrong. That's pretty straightforward. Yes or no. On or off. Black or white. True or false. Completely binary. I asked you if you had every told a lie. Is that unclear? Just give me an honest straight forward answer, instead of deflecting.
@eb52megafortress Oh, the lie. I did answer; I said "No". However, if I am a liar, there is a chance that I am lying about not lying.... I was just showing you some philosophy.
@eb52megafortress Do you really think teachers in the Bible-Belt will allow the chorus of the morning Pledge to be interrupted by an unsanctioned deviation?
No - you'll be seeing the principal. Maybe then they would take the time to understand.... but unlikely. "Terrorists!!" shall be the fear of that day....
@eb52megafortress See, I could /never/ be certain that you truly love anything (other than "God") - your life and actions are coerced and guided not by your heart and mind but by the musings of some dead dude that probably made rape a daily routine. "Woman shall lie under a man..." and all that psychotic shit.
@eb52megafortress And if you're "faithful" to the Bible, you should be aware that what you're reading is a shadow of what it was, originally. Where's the Book of Enoch? The Book of Jubilee?
You don't even know what you're reading, dude... you can't keep on like that. YOU don't even know the TRUTH of what you spend SO MUCH ENERGY defending.
@Xan81 Who said anything about law? The first definition is the one I am talking about. Enoch isn't there because nobody can agree just who wrote it or when. Some parts appear to go back to 200-300bc, others to the first century ad. There's nothing to nail it down as inspired writing.Jubilee draws so much from Enoch that it is suspect too. Both are interesting reading, and I won't neccesarily discount them.. I gotta hand it to you, you are well read.
@eb52megafortress "Nobody can agree".... doesn't that strike you as an indication of deceit/social-engineering that could possibly permeate the ENTIRE Bible?
@Xan81 Not really. How should we judge the validity of these books? Why the Gospel of Matthew and not the Gospel of Thomas? We have to have SOME basis of judging these things. What would you suggest? The Bible is just a collection of books that carry the same theme dependably. Bible - Greek "Biblios" - Library. Should I include Harry Potter books, just because they exist? Sorry, they don't fit the collection. Should the Heinlein Virginia Collection include cookbooks? Doesn't fit
@eb52megafortress You're still dissecting "The Word of God". Who are we to decide what's important to keep and what to dismiss? Such self-righteousness. What about the religions before Christianity? Looking at the Pyramids, I'd say that those gods were more powerful. So who's right? No one knows. And so far, we haven't seen "God" lash out against even the likes of Atheists.
@Xan81 Xan, you've studied religion, you know the answer to that. God gave us the ultimate gift at creation...freedom. We're ALLOWED to be atheist, we're allowed to CHOOSE. Just choose wisely, the consequences at the end could be rough. And why would a loving God lash out against His children? Even in the OT He never really punished Israel, He just withheld blessing. Pyramids? Strong men, not gods. Oh, and editing? I don't read Ecclisiastes much, even if it's there. Self-editing.
@eb52megafortress If God(s) didn't create the Pyramids, explain them. Can't? I guess the jury is still out on whether or not God(s) created or helped humans create them - then some might suggest extraterrestrials... but that's unlikely... though, more plausible than some deity (even though "God(s)" would be "extraterrestrial").
The only people 2000 years ago that appreciated any aspect of "Israel" were the Israelis. For example, the Egyptians considered Israel to be full of potential slaves.
@Xan81 Come on, Xan, that's just foolish. When I look at the pyramids, I see colossal works of man, lot of sweat and blood, not any supernatural power. Strong men overpowering strong men. You don't wear a tinfoil hat.
@Xan81 Why did my Bio professor choose one book to teach out of instead of all of them? There are a lot of great biology texts out there, who is she to choose? Same situation.
Didn't you say something about "critical thinking"? Consider your question. Somehow, they were biased towards that text - otherwise, they would have encouraged you to expand your base-of-sources and references.
@eb52megafortress YOU happen to be mentally-locked in Religious Nationalism. Religion and spirituality should never cross the desk of any politician. It's not the allowance of religion so much as the dismissal of all ideas supernatural.
Congress would be wise to shrug and dismiss religion as something of non-thought. If it doesn't affect the freedoms, liberties and happiness of other citizens, there's no reason to even acknowledge the idea. To do so would to be granting that religion exception.
@Xan81 Excuse me? I've never advocated any such thing. Theocracy is never a good idea. It sure hasn't done much for Iran. But why should anyone have such strenuous objections to the mere acknowledgment of God? Even if He doesn't exist, where's the harm? And if it gives us a moral anchor, so much the better. This was a better country when every backwoods farmer had a knowledge of both the Bible and Cicero.
@eb52megafortress Not all dentists have to "fold up". Remember "critical thinking"? Well, such thought would help you to understand that not everyone is as "watched" as your paranoia would lead you to believe.
For example, in a small town with only one dentist but many desperate people, that dentist could do nearly anything he or she wanted without fear of reprisal.
Are you aware of other things that are sold as "this" but don't actually do "that"? You know, "Quack Pills".
@eb52megafortress And remember, in the realm of critical thought, there are no "stupid questions" nor "stupid ideas" - so long as those questions and ideas are plausible, they MUST be considered.
@eb52megafortress YOU only exist in YOUR mind. There is /NOTHING/ indicating to me that you're an actual person and not some sophisticated machine. So... uhhh.... what's new?
I am of the mind that "solipsism" is merely an attempt at understanding something that cannot be understood; and this idea is part of the human condition, innate to each of us.
Otherwise, "Hide and Go Seek" would be a boring game.
To you, the sky is blue. I agree. However, your perception of "blue" is likely different.
@eb52megafortress "OK, this thread is really going off topic. The question is: Should "Under God" remain in the Pledge of Allegiance? I say yes." It's a violation of the separation of church and state. By asserting a god as watcher over a nation, in the pledge of allegiance on top of that, is the establishment of religion by government.
@thomaseshuis It's "Hitler's Youth" all over again. Religious Nationalism is Religious Nationalism.
It's a powerful weapon wherein your People will obey you in fear of the local "God"/Deity.
Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"
(1:5-6) The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger
If "God" is dictating what "morality" means, then it's easy to get the People behind whatever you.
@Xan81 ^ do and whatever war you wage. Think about the conflict in the Middle East. Imagine if we were able to strip-away all the "Islamophobia" in the United States and among its people.
(continued...) claiming that the imposition of Social Security taxes violated the First Amendment rights of both he and his employees to the free exercise of their religion. Relying upon both the First Amendment and 26 U.S.C. 1402(g), which provides an exemption for self-employed Amish, the district court held the statutes requiring the claimant to pay Social Security taxes to be unconstitutional.
The appellee, a member of the Old Order Amish who employed several other Amish to work on his farm and in his carpentry shop, failed to withhold Social Security taxes from the wages of his employees or to pay the employer's share of those taxes. After the Internal Revenue Service assessed an amount for unpaid taxes against him, the appellee made a partial payment and sued for a refund, (continued...)
The Religious Society of Friends, or Friends Church, is a Christian movement which stresses the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. Members are known as Friends, or popularly as Quakers. It is made of independent organisations which have split from one another due to doctrinal differences
You know that I won! You keep spinning everything I say just to engage me. I'll not play your game. God bless you, have a BLESSED life, we know you need it.
@JonaVicis Yes, actually - you are claiming love for your family above God's.
You can NEVER love ANYONE more than God does.
The problem with that is, you would be PRIDEFUL to assume you know how much God loves you and your family... therefore, you're always in sin when you claim love for your family.
@Xan81 Show me how is is possible to say I am not accepting of various religions of have any hate. Again, you are just spewing nonsense and spinning what I really do say.
@Xan81 You are showing everyone here what a liar your are. Di I ever "Claim" such a thing? No! Do you think being a liar makes you right or smart? Do you think you are without sin when you lie?
@JonaVicis In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is also closely associated with separation of church and state, a concept advocated by Thomas Jefferson.
@Xan81 Actually, Xan, it isn't. The First Amendment doesn't read that way. Check it out for yourself, there's an excellent article on Wikipedia. Search: First Amendment To The Constitution
@eb52megafortress@eb52megafortress "Separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson (in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists) and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
@eb52megafortress "And religious freedom is mine, too, not just yours" Religious freedom does not include the right to force your god on the rest of the U.S. population, which is what happens when you make him part of a national pledge.
@eb52megafortress "Actually, there IS no separation of church and state clause."
Wrong: "The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."" As you can see it does say so.
"Separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson. The phrase has since been repeatedly cited by the Supreme Court of the United States."
“pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall. Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud.” Satan was cast out of heaven because of pride (Isaiah 14:12-15 )
Speaking of "Satan", did you know that "Satan" is also known as "The Peacock Angel"?
The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist, and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898). The original "Pledge of Allegiance" was published in the September 8 issue of the popular children's magazine The Youth's Companion as part of the National Public-School Celebration of Columbus Day, a celebration of the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas.
@Xan81 NO! YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO TELL ME THAT THERE IS NO GOD! If I don't want to hear you, you want to force me by some means to listen? No! Just like I don't have a "Right" to force you to listen to God. You do not have a right to stop others from praying or mentioning God either, Just like I can't tell you not to say anything that does not include God.
Xan81, if the idea of an organized religion does not appeal to you. Please read some of Dr. Wayne Dyer's books or listen to his videos. He is a Psychologist and motivation speaker. He talks about the "Universal Energy". Asian cultures have CHI, an energy. Energy is God, God is Energy.
@Xan81 God isn't about being a "good person". I'm sure you're a good person. Have you ever told a lie? Have you ever stolen anything? That makes you a liar and a thief. And if you're content to stay that way, that's your free choice. God still loves you, and wants to know you. Your sinful nature keeps you separated from Him. That's why He sent His Son to take the punishment for you. What a gift! Would YOU do that for anyone you know? Raise your kid to be killed to save their life?
@Xan81 They were against the State sponsoring any one religion, thus the First Amendment. But they acknowledged that our freedoms were a gift from God, not given to us by any leader or government. That was the first time in history that anyone ever acknowledged that our freedoms are owed to us, not just given.
@eb52megafortress Pfft.. When religion tried to explain rainbows, the claimed it was "A sign of God!!"
But then some loser scientist spat water at them through a beam of light, and showed them how he can create a rainbow just by spraying the zealots with his saliva - and that spray produced a rainbow, showing that if God was behind rainbows, God is also against these religious nuts.
We went through this time and time again. You start this argument every 6 months hoping to win, but you loose every time. Get a life and stop bringing this up.
@JonaVicis Why are you saying this about me? I'm supporting your argument. "Under God" definitely has a place in the Pledge, we were established as a Christian nation, and I never said anything offensive, I still don't know why those posts were removed and wish I could see them to figure out why. And I am the Director of Ministries for New Beginnings Church in Los Banos, California. And lose only has one "O".
The fact that this thing has even has 100 views gives me two options, Either A.) People like Laughing at ass-hurt Christians or B.) This guy just did it for the views
@eb52megafortress IT IS YOU WHO ARE WAY OFF! YOU'RE WAY, WAY OFF. I have been attacked for being Christian. I made no personal assaults, aside from telling some people that they don't know the 1st Amendment. And THAT is not an assault, it's a fact.
@JonaVicis Sorry, I'm a Christian too, in fact I'm a Minister. But you say you didn't make any personal assaults, so I went back and reviewed the posts that prompted my comments. Here are the cut-and-pastes from your comments to JamesMorlan:
Moron, IT DOES NOT ESTABLISH a religion. Obviously, the name of God referes to religion.
@eb52megafortress, Only a moron could possibly think that the Word God is establishing a religion. BTW, no one believes you are a christian minister. Speaking of personal assaults, you are the king. I also went back, but they had too many negitive votes, that You Tube removed them.
@JonaVicis Actually, using the word "God" in such a context ignores irreligious people... which is another way of saying "oppressing people".
There is -0- evidence to the notion of creationism. -0-, none, nada, not a scrap of real evidence.
Sure, there are stories... but those stories also say that someone can live in a whale - sorry, "big fish". You've gotta be the dumbest motherf-cker on the face of Earth if you believe that.
@Xan8, There is -0- evidence to the notion that God does not exist. -0-, none, nada, not a scrap of real evidence. If you choose not to believe, that is your problem, but you have no right to try to take God out of anything! May God bless you and show you the way. Always remember, God loves you.
@JonaVicis Fine: I'll concede that there is no evidence that there is no "God" if you concede that, insofar and as of late, "God" has been more or less cowardly and unable to prove [God's] own existence. [God] behaves like a hermit; and when [God] /does/ show up, he's impotent (unless [God's] either taking credit for work not of [God's] own, allowing plague and pestilence to kill [God's] creations - the same creations that [God] tortures by demanding sacrifice, suffering (little kids die of star
@JonaVicis ve, dude?), absolute obedience (acting as a dictator or worse), throwing rocks at us (meteorites and entire worlds - see "Creation of Earth's moon"), hypocritically creating intelligent beings then demanding that they not think for themselves, that fucking dog in my neighbor's back yard, giving priests power and keeping them in power after raping children, confusing our language (but we fought back - Google Translate ftw).... should I continue?
If you're right about no God, then when I die I'll just die, cease to exist. If you're right, no harm done. BUT...what if you're wrong?
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress Need proof that there is no God? Jump off a cliff. If "God" existed, you would know that "this is not the end" and would therefore understand that jumping off the cliff is not death, it is your route to "the next life".
If you think there is some sort of "punishment" for suicide, understand that while you have "free will", the ground against which you smack does not have "free will" - and thus, your deity is able to prevent your death. Inaction by your deity shows that you're
Xan81 2 days ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
... forsaken. If "God" had some purpose for you, then you'd be rescued and allowed to live. If you die, then your "God" wasn't on your side, anyway; therefore, your chances at "Heaven" were slim in the first place.
"If [Satan] is "evil", why then does [Satan] punish the wicked?"
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 This is one of the poorest arguments I've seen you make yet. God didn't make robots to blindly obey. You want to jump off that cliff? Sad, but go ahead, free will. Satan hates us. All of us. He leads people away from God then destroys them, kinda like pulling the wings off of flies. “One of Satan’s best tricks in the Twentieth Century, is to make people believe he doesn’t exist”. C.S.Lewis Screwtape Letters
eb52megafortress 1 day ago
@eb52megafortress Show me a direct quote from Satan.
And the whole thing about "making us believe he doesn't exist" is a weak argument any paranoid imbecile can make about anything.
"The tomatoes are tricking us into believing that they aren't gonna eat US!!"
Xan81 1 day ago
@eb52megafortress and uhh.. rofl the "Screwtape Letters" is satire/comedy/fiction.
Sure, Lewis wrote them... but some naked assclown also misunderstood mirages and actually thought that some other dude was walking on water...
Xan81 1 day ago
The Screwtape Letters
Author(s) C. S. Lewis
Country United Kingdom
Language English
Genre(s) Christian, satire < lmao
Xan81 1 day ago
@Xan81 Peter got out of the boat
eb52megafortress 23 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Suicide is a sin. It is an act of Pride, and destruction of God's property. ALL things are God's property, and ALL actions are God's doing.
Xan81 1 day ago
@Xan81 The sin part is true. The last phrase, not so much. I can decide, I'm not preprogrammed. He didn't make Dahmer or Gacy freaks, or Michael Jackson a pervert. In fact He prohibited what they did. They decided. He didn't make Eve take that fruit, she listened to the wrong reptile. Bad argument.
eb52megafortress 23 hours ago
@eb52megafortress You can decide, but you aren't allowed to.
All action is God's way and God's action. THIS IS WHY PRIDE IS SIN - you are taking credit for God's work.
You aren't even allowed to be proud of getting getting a good score on a test in your class.
And if you want to talk Adam and Eve, I will remind you that Adam was a philanderer - where did Lilith go?
Oh, that's right... you didn't read the Book of Jubilee.
How sad for you.
Xan81 23 hours ago
@Xan81 Where are you getting this stuff? I don't see anything in the Commandments or the Law about pride. Of course Adam philandered...he ate the fruit. Free will. Sin or don't sin. And are you absolutely sure of my literary experience? I've read Macabees, too. And the gnostic gospels. Don't assume.
eb52megafortress 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Uhhh he philandered BEFORE he ate the fruit... remember? Lilith was his first wife - but then left her because she demanded equality. Then, God took the rib from Adam to create Eve - thus producing a subordinate and docile sibling for Adam to have his way with.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress That's right: Eve was no more than masturbation. God created Eve with the genetic material of ADAM. Therefore, to sleep with Eve is incest or masturbation (auto-erotica).
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress [ In 1589, Peter Binsfeld paired each of the deadly sins with a demon, who tempted people by means of the associated sin. According to Binsfeld's classification of demons, the pairings are as follows
Lucifer: Pride (superbia) ]
[ Ὑπερηφανία (hyperēphania) hubris - in the Philokalia, this term is rendered as self-esteem. ]
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress [ In the Book of Proverbs (Mishlai), King Solomon stated that the Lord specifically regards "six things the Lord hateth, and the seventh His soul detesteth." namely:
A proud look. ]
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress lol where do you think the name "Lilith Fair" comes from? It's all about women's rights and gender equality.
Duh.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Here's a different perspective of Cain and Able: w w w . thebookofnod . c o m.
Xan81 22 hours ago
Comment removed
Xan81 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress or or w w w . caineandable . c o m
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress and BTW, all arguments are absurd when dealing with imaginary beings. :)
Xan81 1 day ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress If I am wrong, then "God" has a lot of explaining to do. Why has [God] been hiding for so long? Why is [God] such a glutton, a sadist, a masochist (because [God] created those that would destroy the idea of [God]), greedy, narcissistic, etc.?
What an asshole [God] has proven to be...
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 1. God doesn't answer to you, you answer to Him. 2. Hiding? He's been announcing His presence for thousands of years. 3. Glutton? 4. When has He hurt anyone without cause? 5. What? 6. Greedy? He gave us everything and asks for only love in return. 7. Narcissistic? Not nearly as much as one who places himself as His better.
Intelligent conversation really isn't the place for name calling. That last line didn't earn you any points.
eb52megafortress 1 day ago
@eb52megafortress God is probably the most insecure being in this Universe.
God is also the most impotent: God does not even have the power to empirically demonstrate God's own existence.
If what "God" does is an indication, then you MUST offer that same credibility to "imaginary friends".
Xan81 1 day ago
@Xan81 Genesis Chapter 7 Exodus chapters 7,8,9and10. Exodus Chapter 14 John Chapter 2:1-11 John 6:1-14 Acts Chapter 2. There are many more. Archaeological sites at Sodom and Gomorrah, Jericho. Daisies. Little girls. The amazing complexity of the cell. Solar eclipses. The incredible orderliness of the DNA molecule. Entropy. Quantum physics. The Big Bang. Grandmothers.
eb52megafortress 23 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Explain in your own words a strand of DNA. Don't talk about shit that you don't understand. Up to this point, I've been trying to not demonstrate my intellectual superiority.
Quoting fictional books is not a bright idea. Stop doing it. This is a discussion about verified FACT. So cut out the fairy tails, please.
And it would be wise to not discuss little girls - I am quite aware of the fondness of children in the Church's sphere of influence...
Xan81 23 hours ago
@Xan81 Your language is offensive, I'm not talking to YOU that way. Quit it. You want to talk about gene sequences, RNA polymerase, transfer RNA's, guanine nucleotides, ribonucleotides? Introns? Esons? How about codons? Shall we go into electron transfer phosphorylation, and the Krebs cycle? Want to know about peroxisomes or the Golgi Complex? Intellectual superiority? Khan, I am laughing at your intellectual superiority. I like quoting fiction. Lewis was once an atheist, too.
eb52megafortress 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Are you upset to realize that your God supports incest?
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress And I don't think you mean my "language" is offensive - you are, after all, using the same language (Her Majesty the Queen's Royal English Language).
I think you mean my rhetoric offends you.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@Xan81 What is all this The Church stuff? Is it Catholic theology you have a problem with? Because I do too. Fairies don't have tails, people tell tales about them. And as a grandparent I find your last statement offensive, especially if it is aimed at me. Little girls are a miracle. And untouchable. You are offensive, I'll be praying for you, in fact I'll have a LOT of people praying for you, and this thread is OVER.
eb52megafortress 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress No - it is Judio-Christian mythology. So is the New Testament.
If you are Islamic, Jewish or Christian, you worship the same God.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Little girls are playthings, according to your religious texts.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress Run away, coward. Preserve your pride, because we both know that you cannot win.
Xan81 22 hours ago
@eb52megafortress But, you bore me. I'm glad that you have grandchildren to be PROUD of, sinner.
Shed your damnation upon those innocent children - they won't mind. Be PROUD of them.
Xan81 21 hours ago
@Xan81 lol obvious typo... Fairy Tales. And, yes.... they are certainly tales with no merit.
Xan81 21 hours ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
Comment removed
Xan81 2 days ago
Religious nationalism is the relationship of nationalism to a particular religious belief, dogma, or affiliation. This relationship can be broken down into two aspects; the politicisation of religion and the influence of religion on politics.
Xan81 6 days ago
Under Who?
Under Santa Clause?
Under The Easter Bunny?
Under The Tooth Fairy?
Under......
ALL THE SAME!!
JamesWorley 1 week ago
OK, this thread is really going off topic. The question is: Should "Under God" remain in the Pledge of Allegiance? I say yes.
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress You say "Yes" while ignoring the rights of non-theists. THAT is why there is a "Separation of Church and State" - you are infringing upon the beliefs of the non-theists.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 Question for you, Xan, do you consider yourself to be a good person?
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress I do. And part of that is being secular - one cannot be a "good person" if one has preconceptions about the Universe that clash with very many people.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 Well...at least you acknowledge that there is a right and wrong?
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress Yes. I understand that to force the idea of "God" upon the minds of children is wrong. Who else says the Pledge on a regular basis? Only children. They learn it rote and repeat it verbatim.
In other words, it is mental-rape.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 I love the way you evade a simple yes-or-no question.
eb52megafortress 6 days ago
@eb52megafortress Which question? The unclear one? Clarify, and I will answer.
Xan81 6 days ago
@Xan81 Okay, so what's unclear? I asked you if there was a right or wrong. That's pretty straightforward. Yes or no. On or off. Black or white. True or false. Completely binary. I asked you if you had every told a lie. Is that unclear? Just give me an honest straight forward answer, instead of deflecting.
eb52megafortress 4 days ago
@eb52megafortress Oh, the lie. I did answer; I said "No". However, if I am a liar, there is a chance that I am lying about not lying.... I was just showing you some philosophy.
Xan81 6 days ago
@eb52megafortress Do you really think teachers in the Bible-Belt will allow the chorus of the morning Pledge to be interrupted by an unsanctioned deviation?
No - you'll be seeing the principal. Maybe then they would take the time to understand.... but unlikely. "Terrorists!!" shall be the fear of that day....
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress You're also forgetting that I study religion, philosophy, psychology, child development, civics, etc.
I know the difference between right and wrong - even in non-American, non-Christian cultures.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 Ever tell a lie?
eb52megafortress 6 days ago
@eb52megafortress No. ;) However, as I am either lying about that or telling the truth, you'll never know.
Xan81 6 days ago
@eb52megafortress See, I could /never/ be certain that you truly love anything (other than "God") - your life and actions are coerced and guided not by your heart and mind but by the musings of some dead dude that probably made rape a daily routine. "Woman shall lie under a man..." and all that psychotic shit.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress And if you're "faithful" to the Bible, you should be aware that what you're reading is a shadow of what it was, originally. Where's the Book of Enoch? The Book of Jubilee?
You don't even know what you're reading, dude... you can't keep on like that. YOU don't even know the TRUTH of what you spend SO MUCH ENERGY defending.
It is SO SAD.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 I gotta give you credit, you are convicted. Actually I'm a Bible student at Liberty University. You familiar with the word "canon"?
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress Yeap. You mean like Sharia law, right?
can·on/ˈkanən/
Noun:
A general law, rule, principle, or criterion by which something is judged.
A member of the clergy on the staff of a cathedral, esp. a member of the chapter.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 Who said anything about law? The first definition is the one I am talking about. Enoch isn't there because nobody can agree just who wrote it or when. Some parts appear to go back to 200-300bc, others to the first century ad. There's nothing to nail it down as inspired writing.Jubilee draws so much from Enoch that it is suspect too. Both are interesting reading, and I won't neccesarily discount them.. I gotta hand it to you, you are well read.
eb52megafortress 6 days ago
@eb52megafortress "Nobody can agree".... doesn't that strike you as an indication of deceit/social-engineering that could possibly permeate the ENTIRE Bible?
Xan81 6 days ago
@Xan81 Not really. How should we judge the validity of these books? Why the Gospel of Matthew and not the Gospel of Thomas? We have to have SOME basis of judging these things. What would you suggest? The Bible is just a collection of books that carry the same theme dependably. Bible - Greek "Biblios" - Library. Should I include Harry Potter books, just because they exist? Sorry, they don't fit the collection. Should the Heinlein Virginia Collection include cookbooks? Doesn't fit
eb52megafortress 4 days ago
@eb52megafortress You're still dissecting "The Word of God". Who are we to decide what's important to keep and what to dismiss? Such self-righteousness. What about the religions before Christianity? Looking at the Pyramids, I'd say that those gods were more powerful. So who's right? No one knows. And so far, we haven't seen "God" lash out against even the likes of Atheists.
God either must not care or is not there.
Xan81 3 days ago
@Xan81 Xan, you've studied religion, you know the answer to that. God gave us the ultimate gift at creation...freedom. We're ALLOWED to be atheist, we're allowed to CHOOSE. Just choose wisely, the consequences at the end could be rough. And why would a loving God lash out against His children? Even in the OT He never really punished Israel, He just withheld blessing. Pyramids? Strong men, not gods. Oh, and editing? I don't read Ecclisiastes much, even if it's there. Self-editing.
eb52megafortress 3 days ago
@eb52megafortress If God(s) didn't create the Pyramids, explain them. Can't? I guess the jury is still out on whether or not God(s) created or helped humans create them - then some might suggest extraterrestrials... but that's unlikely... though, more plausible than some deity (even though "God(s)" would be "extraterrestrial").
The only people 2000 years ago that appreciated any aspect of "Israel" were the Israelis. For example, the Egyptians considered Israel to be full of potential slaves.
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 No, they considered Goshen to be full of potential slaves. Canaan was still full of Canaanites.
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@Xan81 Come on, Xan, that's just foolish. When I look at the pyramids, I see colossal works of man, lot of sweat and blood, not any supernatural power. Strong men overpowering strong men. You don't wear a tinfoil hat.
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress [ RE: Come on, Xan... ] When I look at religion, I see the same thing.
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 Why did my Bio professor choose one book to teach out of instead of all of them? There are a lot of great biology texts out there, who is she to choose? Same situation.
eb52megafortress 3 days ago
@eb52megafortress RE: "Why did my Bio professor choose one book"
Didn't you say something about "critical thinking"? Consider your question. Somehow, they were biased towards that text - otherwise, they would have encouraged you to expand your base-of-sources and references.
Xan81 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress YOU happen to be mentally-locked in Religious Nationalism. Religion and spirituality should never cross the desk of any politician. It's not the allowance of religion so much as the dismissal of all ideas supernatural.
Congress would be wise to shrug and dismiss religion as something of non-thought. If it doesn't affect the freedoms, liberties and happiness of other citizens, there's no reason to even acknowledge the idea. To do so would to be granting that religion exception.
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 Excuse me? I've never advocated any such thing. Theocracy is never a good idea. It sure hasn't done much for Iran. But why should anyone have such strenuous objections to the mere acknowledgment of God? Even if He doesn't exist, where's the harm? And if it gives us a moral anchor, so much the better. This was a better country when every backwoods farmer had a knowledge of both the Bible and Cicero.
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress CRITICAL THOUGHT: Some people feel that not washing their jock-straps will bring them good fortune.
Why should the government care about the cleanliness of jock-straps? Ridiculous regulation, right?
What if that person was a dentist? Now it's getting "iffy"... perhaps there should be sanitation standards (regulation), ya?
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 OK, so why should the government regulate it? If the dentist starts losing patients, he won't be in business for long.
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress Not all dentists have to "fold up". Remember "critical thinking"? Well, such thought would help you to understand that not everyone is as "watched" as your paranoia would lead you to believe.
For example, in a small town with only one dentist but many desperate people, that dentist could do nearly anything he or she wanted without fear of reprisal.
Are you aware of other things that are sold as "this" but don't actually do "that"? You know, "Quack Pills".
Xan81 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress And remember, in the realm of critical thought, there are no "stupid questions" nor "stupid ideas" - so long as those questions and ideas are plausible, they MUST be considered.
Xan81 2 days ago
@Xan81 Why am I arguing this with you? You only exist in my mind anyway. You're not one of my best creations. I like solipsism.
eb52megafortress 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress YOU only exist in YOUR mind. There is /NOTHING/ indicating to me that you're an actual person and not some sophisticated machine. So... uhhh.... what's new?
I am of the mind that "solipsism" is merely an attempt at understanding something that cannot be understood; and this idea is part of the human condition, innate to each of us.
Otherwise, "Hide and Go Seek" would be a boring game.
To you, the sky is blue. I agree. However, your perception of "blue" is likely different.
Xan81 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress I think, therefore I am.
Xan81 2 days ago
@eb52megafortress Sorry, the stuff about nationalism wasn't for you. I debate A LOT. =\
Xan81 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress "OK, this thread is really going off topic. The question is: Should "Under God" remain in the Pledge of Allegiance? I say yes." It's a violation of the separation of church and state. By asserting a god as watcher over a nation, in the pledge of allegiance on top of that, is the establishment of religion by government.
thomaseshuis 2 weeks ago
@thomaseshuis It's "Hitler's Youth" all over again. Religious Nationalism is Religious Nationalism.
It's a powerful weapon wherein your People will obey you in fear of the local "God"/Deity.
Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"
(1:5-6) The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger
If "God" is dictating what "morality" means, then it's easy to get the People behind whatever you.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 ^ do and whatever war you wage. Think about the conflict in the Middle East. Imagine if we were able to strip-away all the "Islamophobia" in the United States and among its people.
The "war" would have NO SUPPORT from the People.
JUST
LIKE
IN
VIETNAM.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress Oh, I'm sorry... I forgot to mention that I also study Game Theory....
Xan81 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
petition to have it removed:
wh.[removeThis]gov/0XC
copy it into the URL bar, and remove the stuff in brackets, including the brackets
notme98 2 weeks ago
In FACT, you aren't allowed to start conflicts unless it is sanctioned by your matron or patron God.
The reason for this is simply because it would be prideful.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
Conservatives would have told the Amish to go blow themselves, and that they had to pay taxes - NO MATTER WHAT.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
(continued...) claiming that the imposition of Social Security taxes violated the First Amendment rights of both he and his employees to the free exercise of their religion. Relying upon both the First Amendment and 26 U.S.C. 1402(g), which provides an exemption for self-employed Amish, the district court held the statutes requiring the claimant to pay Social Security taxes to be unconstitutional.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
U.S. v. Lee, 102 S. Ct. 1051 (1982)
The appellee, a member of the Old Order Amish who employed several other Amish to work on his farm and in his carpentry shop, failed to withhold Social Security taxes from the wages of his employees or to pay the employer's share of those taxes. After the Internal Revenue Service assessed an amount for unpaid taxes against him, the appellee made a partial payment and sued for a refund, (continued...)
Xan81 3 weeks ago
The Religious Society of Friends, or Friends Church, is a Christian movement which stresses the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. Members are known as Friends, or popularly as Quakers. It is made of independent organisations which have split from one another due to doctrinal differences
Xan81 3 weeks ago
You know that I won! You keep spinning everything I say just to engage me. I'll not play your game. God bless you, have a BLESSED life, we know you need it.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis SUCH pride. You dirty little sinner.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 I am proud! I am proud that I Love God, proud of my family, etc. That is NOT a sin.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Proverbs 16:18–19
18 mPride goes before destruction,
and a haughty spirit before a fall.
19 nIt is better to be of a lowly spirit with the poor
than to odivide the spoil with the proud.
"God resists the proud but He gives grace to the humble". (James 4:6).
Your god isn't fond of pride, it is a sin according to your book.
thomaseshuis 3 weeks ago
@thomaseshuis Being proud of Loving God, does not fall into this.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Actually, it does. Unless you are ordained to examine God's love.
Without that examination, you're claiming something (knowledge of God's love) that you can never have... See Proverbs.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 KEEP EMBARRASSING YOURSELF.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Pride, pride, pride.
"Everybody!! Look!! I am assuming this person should be embarrased!!"
just like Joan.
You're buying tickets to hell with your words...
Xan81 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JonaVicis "KEEP EMBARRASSING YOURSELF."
Says the person who thinks writing in capital letters somehow validates the statement...
thomaseshuis 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JonaVicis "Being proud of Loving God, does not fall into this."
1. Evidence?
2. You mentioned family and a bunch of other stuff besides being proud of god. You are in fact sinning, at least according to your book.
thomaseshuis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Yes, actually - you are claiming love for your family above God's.
You can NEVER love ANYONE more than God does.
The problem with that is, you would be PRIDEFUL to assume you know how much God loves you and your family... therefore, you're always in sin when you claim love for your family.
Sorry.. =\
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Joan de Arc was burned at the stake - for having LESS pride than you're displaying.
It is the DUTY of every God-Fearing Christian to burn you at the stake.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 SPIN, SPIN, SPIN...
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Lucky for you, I am not a Christian, nor do I fear God.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Why does that make me lucky? It makes you ignorant.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis By accepting others' different viewpoints, I am not being prideful.
You, however, are /EXCEEDINGLY/ prideful and full of hate and prejudice.
Good work. I'm sure God will be pleased.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Show me how is is possible to say I am not accepting of various religions of have any hate. Again, you are just spewing nonsense and spinning what I really do say.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis By claiming in ANY way that your interpretation of "God's Word" is more valid than anyone's - even the unfaithful.
You're prideful and hateful.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 You are showing everyone here what a liar your are. Di I ever "Claim" such a thing? No! Do you think being a liar makes you right or smart? Do you think you are without sin when you lie?
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis You're being prideful in claiming that you know something.
Knock it off. Beelzebub has a devil put aside for you, bud. (Queen)
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Who's claiming to know something? You claim to know more than God, because you think he does not exist. PRIDEFUL! SHAME ON YOU!
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis You claim you know that God loves you, and at what capacity.
That is pride of foreknowledge.
A deadly sin.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis In the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. Freedom of religion is also closely associated with separation of church and state, a concept advocated by Thomas Jefferson.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Which ONLY means that a State may not force people to attend a State run "Religion".
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis No, but adding "In God We Trust" or "So help me God" or "one nation, /under God/..."
All of those put God before State - and that is unconstitutional.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 NOT IN THE LEAST. BUT GOD IS ABOVE THE STATE. GOD IS ABOVE ALL.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis How do you know that God is above State?
Are you claiming something, pridefully?
You are not a Cardinal - you're not even a minister. Well, maybe you are, either...
But if you aren't, you'd better not claim to be so...
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Actually, Xan, it isn't. The First Amendment doesn't read that way. Check it out for yourself, there's an excellent article on Wikipedia. Search: First Amendment To The Constitution
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress What are you talking about? When I said, "In FACT, you...", I was citing the religious rules of that religious fool. (JonaVicis)
Xan81 2 weeks ago
@Xan81 Actually, there IS no separation of church and state clause. Read the article. And religious freedom is mine, too, not just yours
eb52megafortress 2 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress @eb52megafortress "Separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson (in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists) and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Xan81 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress "And religious freedom is mine, too, not just yours" Religious freedom does not include the right to force your god on the rest of the U.S. population, which is what happens when you make him part of a national pledge.
thomaseshuis 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress "Actually, there IS no separation of church and state clause."
Wrong: "The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."" As you can see it does say so.
thomaseshuis 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eb52megafortress Even the supreme court acknowledges this:
"Separation of church and state" (sometimes "wall of separation between church and state") is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson. The phrase has since been repeatedly cited by the Supreme Court of the United States."
thomaseshuis 2 weeks ago
@JonaVicis lol you're such a narcissist... That's good Christian behavior.
Xan81 6 days ago
“What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?” (1 Corinthians 4:7 )
Xan81 3 weeks ago
“pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall. Better to be lowly in spirit and among the oppressed than to share plunder with the proud.” Satan was cast out of heaven because of pride (Isaiah 14:12-15 )
Speaking of "Satan", did you know that "Satan" is also known as "The Peacock Angel"?
Xan81 3 weeks ago
“Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3 )
Which might be interpreted as, "If you are rich in spirit(uallity), you cannot ascend to heaven."
Xan81 3 weeks ago
There is no God. Simple as that.
ushipp 3 weeks ago
@ushipp Not in your life.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
Oh, and the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a SOCIALIST.
Go ahead... recite that socialist pledge.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist, and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898). The original "Pledge of Allegiance" was published in the September 8 issue of the popular children's magazine The Youth's Companion as part of the National Public-School Celebration of Columbus Day, a celebration of the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis I do have the right to show you that "God", if there is one, can take no part in your life so as not to spoil it.
There's a difference between religiosity and spiritualism.
Why not follow science and reason and join in on the search for the origins of existence, rather than give in to the musings of Bronze Age men?
Humanity has a record for turning "hearts and minds" against themselves and each other. Make certain that your actions are for Good, not God.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 NO! YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO TELL ME THAT THERE IS NO GOD! If I don't want to hear you, you want to force me by some means to listen? No! Just like I don't have a "Right" to force you to listen to God. You do not have a right to stop others from praying or mentioning God either, Just like I can't tell you not to say anything that does not include God.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
Xan81, if the idea of an organized religion does not appeal to you. Please read some of Dr. Wayne Dyer's books or listen to his videos. He is a Psychologist and motivation speaker. He talks about the "Universal Energy". Asian cultures have CHI, an energy. Energy is God, God is Energy.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago in playlist porky pig
@JonaVicis What "doesn't appeal" to me is that religion is based on taking something that isn't theirs and claiming it as their own.
If you feel that God needs you, you are prideful.
Look at it this way:
Are you a good person because...
A.) You truly desire to be good,
or
B.) Your God tells you to be a good person.
If you say that your God tells you to be good and so you do, you've lost "free will".
If you say that you do it for the fuzzy feelings inside, you're being selfish and prideful.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 You really have no clue as to what you're talking about, do you.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 God isn't about being a "good person". I'm sure you're a good person. Have you ever told a lie? Have you ever stolen anything? That makes you a liar and a thief. And if you're content to stay that way, that's your free choice. God still loves you, and wants to know you. Your sinful nature keeps you separated from Him. That's why He sent His Son to take the punishment for you. What a gift! Would YOU do that for anyone you know? Raise your kid to be killed to save their life?
eb52megafortress 3 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress Yeah, well, God shouldn't have made me that way.
Oh, wait! "Free-Will"!! But, as I've shown you before, if God does anything, then "Free-Will" ends.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
Only 48 stars on Porky's flag. Kinda interesting.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
I like the Pledge the way it is...why argue more about that?
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@eb52megafortress Because that goes against everything this nation stands upon.
This nation was founded by people seeking to escape religious persecution from the Church of England.
The Founding Fathers were wise and knew that religion in government destroyed government. They went to work on December 25th.
Pledge of Allegiance in 1892 and earlier:
"I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands: one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 They were against the State sponsoring any one religion, thus the First Amendment. But they acknowledged that our freedoms were a gift from God, not given to us by any leader or government. That was the first time in history that anyone ever acknowledged that our freedoms are owed to us, not just given.
eb52megafortress 3 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress Pfft.. When religion tried to explain rainbows, the claimed it was "A sign of God!!"
But then some loser scientist spat water at them through a beam of light, and showed them how he can create a rainbow just by spraying the zealots with his saliva - and that spray produced a rainbow, showing that if God was behind rainbows, God is also against these religious nuts.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@eb52megafortress So much for what "Flat-Earth" proponents believe.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
We went through this time and time again. You start this argument every 6 months hoping to win, but you loose every time. Get a life and stop bringing this up.
JonaVicis 1 month ago
@JonaVicis Why are you saying this about me? I'm supporting your argument. "Under God" definitely has a place in the Pledge, we were established as a Christian nation, and I never said anything offensive, I still don't know why those posts were removed and wish I could see them to figure out why. And I am the Director of Ministries for New Beginnings Church in Los Banos, California. And lose only has one "O".
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@eb52megafortress, Sorry. Posted to the wrong person.
JonaVicis 1 month ago
@JonaVicis 'Sokay. No harm done. Watch this thread, I'm just getting warmed up!
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@JonaVicis Is your position and belief system so weak that it cannot withstand debate?
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Of course not. You already know that.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
The fact that this thing has even has 100 views gives me two options, Either A.) People like Laughing at ass-hurt Christians or B.) This guy just did it for the views
Ranzua 1 month ago
This thread is so much fun! Nobody's ever gonna win, we just all keep posting! FABULOUS!
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@JonaVicis Sorry, JonaVicis, but you're out of line on this one. Personal assaults don't make your point.
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@eb52megafortress IT IS YOU WHO ARE WAY OFF! YOU'RE WAY, WAY OFF. I have been attacked for being Christian. I made no personal assaults, aside from telling some people that they don't know the 1st Amendment. And THAT is not an assault, it's a fact.
JonaVicis 1 month ago
@JonaVicis Sorry, I'm a Christian too, in fact I'm a Minister. But you say you didn't make any personal assaults, so I went back and reviewed the posts that prompted my comments. Here are the cut-and-pastes from your comments to JamesMorlan:
Moron, IT DOES NOT ESTABLISH a religion. Obviously, the name of God referes to religion.
More to follow...
eb52megafortress 1 month ago
@eb52megafortress, Only a moron could possibly think that the Word God is establishing a religion. BTW, no one believes you are a christian minister. Speaking of personal assaults, you are the king. I also went back, but they had too many negitive votes, that You Tube removed them.
JonaVicis 1 month ago
@JonaVicis Actually, using the word "God" in such a context ignores irreligious people... which is another way of saying "oppressing people".
There is -0- evidence to the notion of creationism. -0-, none, nada, not a scrap of real evidence.
Sure, there are stories... but those stories also say that someone can live in a whale - sorry, "big fish". You've gotta be the dumbest motherf-cker on the face of Earth if you believe that.
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan8, There is -0- evidence to the notion that God does not exist. -0-, none, nada, not a scrap of real evidence. If you choose not to believe, that is your problem, but you have no right to try to take God out of anything! May God bless you and show you the way. Always remember, God loves you.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis Fine: I'll concede that there is no evidence that there is no "God" if you concede that, insofar and as of late, "God" has been more or less cowardly and unable to prove [God's] own existence. [God] behaves like a hermit; and when [God] /does/ show up, he's impotent (unless [God's] either taking credit for work not of [God's] own, allowing plague and pestilence to kill [God's] creations - the same creations that [God] tortures by demanding sacrifice, suffering (little kids die of star
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis ve, dude?), absolute obedience (acting as a dictator or worse), throwing rocks at us (meteorites and entire worlds - see "Creation of Earth's moon"), hypocritically creating intelligent beings then demanding that they not think for themselves, that fucking dog in my neighbor's back yard, giving priests power and keeping them in power after raping children, confusing our language (but we fought back - Google Translate ftw).... should I continue?
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@JonaVicis (why should little kids die of starvation, dude?)
Xan81 3 weeks ago
@Xan81 Get God! No one has to starve.Parents need to feed them and teach them about God. Ad also ask for DAILY BREAD.
JonaVicis 3 weeks ago in playlist porky pig