daily Bible verse

[falcon9]

"Militant" is too aggressive a word for what you think you are trying to prove here.  "Militant" proselytizing is greatly associated with the radical Islam. 

"militant": adjective -
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause.

We're both "militants" on opposite sides of a spectrum.

My faith does not involve forcing people to become one with God, nor does it kill or threaten to kill others if they don't.

While 'force' isn't an integral part of being a militant, a 'militant religious activist' often proselytizes their beliefs by excessiely quoting "scriptures", (while a 'militant irreligious activist' will often oppose such with counter-quotes).  As far as your particular "faith" goes; if it's xtian, it's the same one that did try to force people to believe as they did, (the Inquisitions), as well as killing many of them who refused, (the Crusades).  The same belief system was directly responsible for such 'threats' then as it is for 'threatening' "damnation" for those who don't believe as they do.  As a related aside; those "damnation threats" are presumptuous; they attempt to apply xtian beliefs to non-xtians, despite the empty faith-basis of such beliefs.
 

"Ever get the feeling that some militant atheists proselytize as much as the evangelists they claim to detest?"  Would you think this question aptly fits your actions of what you do in here?  Or is the word "militant" too disrespectful to apply to what you consistently do?

Not at all, since I've conceded that my opposition to your 'militant religious activism' is nearly as "militant", (sans the evangelical proselytizing, since that term does not fit promoting rationality by example).

[jcribb16]

"Militant" is too aggressive a word for what you think you are trying to prove here.  "Militant" proselytizing is greatly associated with the radical Islam. 

"militant": adjective -
1. vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause.

We're both "militants" on opposite sides of a spectrum.

My faith does not involve forcing people to become one with God, nor does it kill or threaten to kill others if they don't.

While 'force' isn't an integral part of being a militant, a 'militant religious activist' often proselytizes their beliefs by excessiely quoting "scriptures", (while a 'militant irreligious activist' will often oppose such with counter-quotes).  As far as your particular "faith" goes; if it's xtian, it's the same one that did try to force people to believe as they did, (the Inquisitions), as well as killing many of them who refused, (the Crusades).  The same belief system was directly responsible for such 'threats' then as it is for 'threatening' "damnation" for those who don't believe as they do.  As a related aside; those "damnation threats" are presumptuous; they attempt to apply xtian beliefs to non-xtians, despite the empty faith-basis of such beliefs.
 

"Ever get the feeling that some militant atheists proselytize as much as the evangelists they claim to detest?"  Would you think this question aptly fits your actions of what you do in here?  Or is the word "militant" too disrespectful to apply to what you consistently do?

Not at all, since I've conceded that my opposition to your 'militant religious activism' is nearly as "militant", (sans the evangelical proselytizing, since that term does not fit promoting rationality by example).

In this thread, no one is pushing scripture on anyone else.  Those who do not read scripture or believe in God are not being forced to enter a Bible verse thread.  As you are not.  Many will by pass the thread.  You choose to come in to agitate because you don't like it.  Your choice.  Others will respond back to you for that and/or ignore you.  Their choice to speak up for themselves and what they believe.

Forcing someone in here would be like telling them they won't get paid if they don't enter, or anything else to make it coercive.  That is not happening.  There are threads made on different subjects, different ideas, are no different than Bible verse threads.  People enjoy different things and they express it.  You seem to have an issue with only the Bible verse threads, which, like many have already said over and over, does not mean anyone else has to come in.

I am not "militant."  You are constantly belittling Christians with your nonsensical words and pictures.  They are not funny in the least, except to those who "share" your thoughts.  I don't feel it's right to disrespect others with their interests or religions, because it's no one's business but their own.  I leave them alone and they leave me alone, unless we both choose to speak with each other with comparing and contrasting.  That is not being "militant."  And my posting verses with others in a specified thread for verses is also not militant.  You are choosing to make it appear "militant" while mocking with your words and pictures.  Not very mature of you to other adults.

[pattersondebra]

though I walk through the valley of death I fear no evil for thou art with me

[falcon9]

In this thread, no one is pushing scripture on anyone else.  Those who do not read scripture or believe in God are not being forced to enter a Bible verse thread.  As you are not.  Many will by pass the thread.

You misunderstand the nature of the exchange. No one is 'forcing' others to proselytize their religious beliefs by posting multiple bible-thumping quotes in multiple threads either.  This is the choice of the thumpers.  Just as it is the choice of those who oppose such religious proselytizing to post in opposition, (or, skip those threads).

You choose to come in to agitate because you don't like it.  Your choice.

Conversely, you choose to excessively post xtian religious propaganda which no one has to "like", (despite your 'freedom' to do so while disparging the freedom of others to oppose it ... now isn't that more than a little intolerant of a xtian?).
  

Others will respond back to you for that and/or ignore you.  Their choice to speak up for themselves and what they believe.

I've always maintained that this is their choice as well, (including the choice to use the ignore function or not).

There are threads made on different subjects, different ideas, are no different than Bible verse threads.

Actually, those other threads on different subject matters are extremely different from the bible-thumping threads in that they lack the bible-thumping part.
  

You seem to have an issue with only the Bible verse threads ...

On the contrary, I'd have "an issue" with any specious belief being propounded sans evidence, (and while baseless opinions are not prohibited any more than declaring specious beliefs are, neither is pointing out that such are specious/baseless because they have no substantive basis).  You seem to have "an issue" with others accurately pointing out that beliefs/faith/baseless opinions are without substantive basis.  Has it occurred to you to 'embrace' such a realization instead and simply recognise that you prefer doing so, (selectively), rather than operate on a more pragmatic/rational basis?  
I had a friend in the military who was quite proud of being more 'emotionally-based' than logically-based.  Do you feel that the is some 'stigma' attached to irrationality/illogic which you are attempting to evade?
 

[jwilburn3]

For those such as myself, it's helpful.  I'm not always get to my Daily Bread booklet, to read.  Everyone has their own choice to believe or not.  This is free speech.  My daily verse for today is:  Luke 19:38 "Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord!  Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!"

[falcon9]

This is free speech.  My daily verse for today is:  

That "free speech" thing is a two-way street.  That means remarks opposing the "free speech" of others is also "free speech".  This can be problematic for those attempting to 'coerce' or curtail the "free speech" of others, (apparently under the mistaken impression that characterizing opposing viewpoints as "rude", "disrepectful", etc. will result in censoring opposing points of view which others don't characterize under such self-serving bias).

[jcribb16]

In this thread, no one is pushing scripture on anyone else.  Those who do not read scripture or believe in God are not being forced to enter a Bible verse thread.  As you are not.  Many will by pass the thread.

You misunderstand the nature of the exchange. No one is 'forcing' others to proselytize their religious beliefs by posting multiple bible-thumping quotes in multiple threads either.  This is the choice of the thumpers.  Just as it is the choice of those who oppose such religious proselytizing to post in opposition, (or, skip those threads).

You choose to come in to agitate because you don't like it.  Your choice.

Conversely, you choose to excessively post xtian religious propaganda which no one has to "like", (despite your 'freedom' to do so while disparging the freedom of others to oppose it ... now isn't that more than a little intolerant of a xtian?).
  

Others will respond back to you for that and/or ignore you.  Their choice to speak up for themselves and what they believe.

I've always maintained that this is their choice as well, (including the choice to use the ignore function or not).

There are threads made on different subjects, different ideas, are no different than Bible verse threads.

Actually, those other threads on different subject matters are extremely different from the bible-thumping threads in that they lack the bible-thumping part.
  

You seem to have an issue with only the Bible verse threads ...

On the contrary, I'd have "an issue" with any specious belief being propounded sans evidence, (and while baseless opinions are not prohibited any more than declaring specious beliefs are, neither is pointing out that such are specious/baseless because they have no substantive basis).  You seem to have "an issue" with others accurately pointing out that beliefs/faith/baseless opinions are without substantive basis.  Has it occurred to you to 'embrace' such a realization instead and simply recognise that you prefer doing so, (selectively), rather than operate on a more pragmatic/rational basis?  
I had a friend in the military who was quite proud of being more 'emotionally-based' than logically-based.  Do you feel that the is some 'stigma' attached to irrationality/illogic which you are attempting to evade?
 

People voting Bible verses are not posting religious propaganda, to them.  They are believers in God and enjoying sharing with each other.  You do NOT have to enter that thread - you CHOOSE to enter just to agitate.  What thrill are you getting out of it?  People are not going to be deterred by your immature postings/pictures, no matter what you say, do, or how long you keep doing it.  Yes, you have the right and choice to come in and agitate, but you are just showing your immaturity and unacceptance of people's choices and rights to post together in threads they have in common.  You wouldn't even know what goes on in them if you didn't have such a need to trample in and on, and show your disrespect. 

[jcribb16]

This is free speech.  My daily verse for today is:  

That "free speech" thing is a two-way street.  That means remarks opposing the "free speech" of others is also "free speech".  This can be problematic for those attempting to 'coerce' or curtail the "free speech" of others, (apparently under the mistaken impression that characterizing opposing viewpoints as "rude", "disrepectful", etc. will result in censoring opposing points of view which others don't characterize under such self-serving bias).

This free speech thing:  People of opposing views are much more accepted when their views, though disagreeable, have substance to them.  Like when you finally said how you honestly feel about religion.  Then talk about it and compare/contrast with comments, other than the immature remarks made over and over again, with the ridiculous mocking pictures.  You are not debating or discussing anything when you make those same demeaning remarks and show those same ridiculous immature pictures.  I keep saying this over and over, and I guess I will keep doing it when you continue to belittle and demean those who simply want to share verses with each other, because what you are doing is rude and uncalled for.

[falcon9]

People voting Bible verses are not posting religious propaganda, to them. 

"Voting"[sic] or quoting, the contention isn't whether or not proselytizing is/isn't religious propaganda to a religious propagandist, (see the problem with *that* inherent bias or, too biased to see it?).

They are believers in God and enjoying sharing with each other. 

Yeah, "sharing" with whom?  Other xtians who already have as much online access to the same source of b-thumpings or,
"sharing"/propagandizing/proselytizing at non-believers?  If the former, why is such being 'over-shared' in so many threads, in such quantities?  That seems a bit obsessive and the stated intention, dubious.

You do NOT have to enter that thread -  

Your repetitions of attempts to implicitly censor responses you don't like by characterizing them in a biased manner has already been addressed several times.  One must conclude that, due to the current lack of response addressing this aspect of the 'freedom to post where FC members wish to - as long as it doesn't violate the TOS - (and going around calling what you don't like "rude" and "disrespectful" neither constitutes evidence of same nor, a TOS violation), there may be no intention of doing so.  Therefore, see previous replies to your repetitions.

[falcon9]

This free speech thing:  People of opposing views are much more accepted when their views, though disagreeable, have substance to them.

Mine have, (especially in d&d threads), yours have not.  This difference is discernable.

You are not debating or discussing anything ...

That may be somewhat due to the bible-thumpings understandably not appearing in the Debate & Discuss subforum of Off Topic, (where they are correctly "off topic").

 I keep saying this over and over, and I guess I will keep doing it ...

That's your choice, just as it's mine to indicate that such repetition of attempted censorship, (by way of characterizing what you don't like as "rude", etc.), does not confer validity upon such perceptions.  They're your opinions and opinions aren't all equal.

[jcribb16]

This free speech thing:  People of opposing views are much more accepted when their views, though disagreeable, have substance to them. 

Mine have, (especially in d&d threads), yours have not.  This difference is discernable.

You are not debating or discussing anything ...

That may be somewhat due to the bible-thumpings understandable not appearing in the Debate & Discuss subforum of Off Topic, (where they are correctly "off topic").

  I keep saying this over and over, and I guess I will keep doing it ...

That's your cchoice, just as it's mine to indicate that such repetition of attempted censorship, (by way of characterizing what you don't like as "rude", etc.), does not confer validity upon such perceptions.  They're your opinions and opinions aren't all equal.

No, they have not substance with your same old remarks and same old beating someone over the head with a Bible picture - not at all.  You test the waters with the boundary lines of respect and the Golden Rule in here.  Things tend to catch up eventually.  And by the way, I am not censoring - I'm for respect of others with differing opinions, thoughts, and beliefs.  You don't like debating as much as you do stirring up.  Actually, you are trying to censor - trying to stomp the Bible verses out - but you won't see it that way, because you are always right, in your eyes.      That's just my choice to indicate that such repetition of attempted snarling at others' beliefs are not getting you anywhere but showing your disrespect.  I don't like how you treat some; you don't like how I react to your treatment; you react to my reacting of your treatment; I react to your reacting of my reacting of your treatment.  In other words, it's getting to be a boring circle of blah, blah, blah...     Have a nice night.

[falcon9]

No, they have not substance with your same old remarks ...

Made to the same old specious bible-thumping ...

You test the waters with the boundary lines of respect and the Golden Rule in here.

As do you bible-thumpers by initially posting such presumptuously-disrespectful religious proselytizing "quotes".  By now, it's possible to denote that you thumpers don't perceive the bible-thumping as disrespectful to those who don't believe such nonsense.  "Don't read it", you exclaim while not applying your own advise to dissenting responses.  Under the auspices of the "golden rule", you are tacitly inviting responses to what's perceived as your disrespect by posting religious propaganda in the first place.  I'm not trying to censor your choice to post such presumptuous religious proselytizations like you've been trying to censor dissenting replies.
 

And by the way, I am not censoring ...

Of course not; I wrote 'attempting to censor', (and failing to do so).
 

- I'm for respect of others with differing opinions, thoughts, and beliefs. 

Not really, no.  Oh, you keep proclaiming such things however, your other statements contradict those protestations.
 

You don't like debating as much as you do stirring up.  Actually, you are trying to censor - trying to stomp the Bible verses out - but you won't see it that way ...

On the contrary, until you xtians started these sanctimonious complaints in regard to your rude/presuptuous/disrespectful religious proselytizations concerning responses to such being "rude" and such, nothing was said about your daily propaganda threads.  More recently, you've been complaining about "disrespectful" responses to your initially disrespectful thumping.  'Round and 'round it goes to try to blur the distinction between provocation and response.  Nothing occurs in a vacuum except blind faith; nothing happens 'out-of-the-blue', even a specious opinion.
 

In other words, it's getting to be a boring circle of blah, blah, blah...     Have a nice night.

"Getting to be?"  Your repetitions were tedious after the first time.

[2getherwewin]

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death-that is, the devil – and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

– Hebrews 2:14-15

[JediJohnnie]

Ephesians 6:23-24
 Peace to the brothers and sisters, and love with faith from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.  Grace to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with an undying love.


 

[jcribb16]

No, they have not substance with your same old remarks ...

Made to the same old specious bible-thumping ...

You test the waters with the boundary lines of respect and the Golden Rule in here.

As do you bible-thumpers by initially posting such presumptuously-disrespectful religious proselytizing "quotes".  By now, it's possible to denote that you thumpers don't perceive the bible-thumping as disrespectful to those who don't believe such nonsense.  "Don't read it", you exclaim while not applying your own advise to dissenting responses.  Under the auspices of the "golden rule", you are tacitly inviting responses to what's perceived as your disrespect by posting religious propaganda in the first place.  I'm not trying to censor your choice to post such presumptuous religious proselytizations like you've been trying to censor dissenting replies.
 

And by the way, I am not censoring ...

Of course not; I wrote 'attempting to censor', (and failing to do so).
 

- I'm for respect of others with differing opinions, thoughts, and beliefs. 

Not really, no.  Oh, you keep proclaiming such things however, your other statements contradict those protestations.
 

You don't like debating as much as you do stirring up.  Actually, you are trying to censor - trying to stomp the Bible verses out - but you won't see it that way ...

On the contrary, until you xtians started these sanctimonious complaints in regard to your rude/presuptuous/disrespectful religious proselytizations concerning responses to such being "rude" and such, nothing was said about your daily propaganda threads.  More recently, you've been complaining about "disrespectful" responses to your initially disrespectful thumping.  'Round and 'round it goes to try to blur the distinction between provocation and response.  Nothing occurs in a vacuum except blind faith; nothing happens 'out-of-the-blue', even a specious opinion.
 

In other words, it's getting to be a boring circle of blah, blah, blah...     Have a nice night.

"Getting to be?"  Your repetitions were tedious after the first time.

People can post what they want.  Others who don't like what they post don't have to go into them.  If the topics are breaking rules, they would be removed.  Since the Bible verse threads are just sharing verses between posters, there is nothing wrong nor breaking rules.  You keep acting like because YOU don't like them and see them as starting trouble, that apparently you are the only one right in seeing them that way.  Since FC does not remove them, then apparently not all see eye to eye with your "reasoning" of not starting those threads. 

Your repetitions in the Bible verse threads, when directed specifically toward Christians sharing verses back and forth, are indeed monotonous, annoying, tiresome, humdrum, uninteresting, long-drawn-out, mind-numbing, irksome, unexciting, soporific, ho-hum, to many in them.  Sounds like we're pretty much even and agreeable about what we both think about each.