daily Bible verse

[falcon9]

I sense your "paraphrase" as an implied threat.

You also "sense" such things as invisible supernatural egregores, (sans substantive evidence), so this puts the veracity of what you "sense" in doubt.

It's what is in your brain that is "seeing" the things you are seeing and accusing ones of.  

Coincidenctally, that's what you're trying to do in attempting to impose a skewed meaning on a TV series paraphrasing.  You do realize that the "werewolves" are a supersitious belief on par with xtian egregores, (unless you're a 'werewolf' who feels 'threatened')?

I know "werewolves" are not real - you think people are stupid apparently.

Not all people - mostly just xtians who've apparently decided to opt-out of thinking for themselves and rely instead upon blind faith in their religion.
 

You implied, through a "paraphrase," about shooting a Christian over an "imaginary werewolf."

You've previously admitted that you don't follow metaphors very well so, to spell this one out as simply as possible; the metaphor indicated that the xtian was more of a 'threat' than the "werewolf" was.  This implies that a ficticious werewolf is just as ficticious as the xtian egregore they call "g-d" however, the juxtapostioning of two ficticious 'entities' probably doesn't elude *all* blind faithers by taking a metaphor literally.

You have already shown your intolerance towards Christians, who I might add, are just as important as non-christians, in this forum.

I don't base my tolerances solely upon any particular xtian, I base them on the religious belief system itself.  You've already indicated that this distinction is too subtle for you, however, there it is.

You show a lack of respect to someone once you find out they are a Christian and challenge you on your responses.

I'm not required to "respect" a superstitious religious belief system and no xtian has successfully 'challenged' my posted responses on a factual basis, (I don't count specious faith-based pseudo-challenges due to their irrational basis).

You are getting more hateful and now you start including "paraphrases" that imply harm to a Christian.

No, the paraphrasing from a fictional television series, ("Buffy The Vampire Slayer", didn't name any particular xtian and neither did I.  That's because it's a friigin' metaphor, you abysmal idiot.  To reitrate the metaphorical basis; it implies that an existing xtian and their fundie beliefs are a more 'dangerous threat' than a ficticional werewolf.  No 'threat' was made to any existing xtian on these forums and any false accusation of such will be dealt with legally in the state of California as per FusionCash's TOS.

You should think before you "quote" with what meanings are being implied with them.

And you should learn what a metaphor is and what it actually implies before you engage in potential libel or, avoid metaphors as you stated you tend to do.
 

You have over-stepped the boundary of keeping nice in a forum, especially implying "danger" to a Christian.

Which exact xtian, you?  Hardly; the werewolf in the metaphor is far more of a personal "danger" to a non-xtian. If someone quoted Clint Eastwood's "make my day" line, you'd "sense" a "threat" in that too?  If so, your mental stability is in doubt.
 

I haven't reported this as of yet, but it doesn't mean I won't turn in a private message to the owner of this forum, indicating how intolerant you are becoming, including "implying" threats to a Christian.

Now that is a "threat" from you; threatening to report me to FC's owner by making a false accusation based on what you "sense" on a
non-evidentiary basis.  Anything goes when you're trying to suppress dissent to your religious proselytization, eh?  Including violating your own
xtian injuctions against "bearing false witness", (or, 'threatening' to).  You're such a 'shining' example of xtian fundamentalism that you'd make an appropriate poster child for it.

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”
--– Richard Dawkins

[falcon9]

No, it's clearly labeled as a paraphrasing of a line from Buffy The Vampire Slayer.  A "threat", (sans implication), would be something like another xtian Inquisition, Crusades against "non-believers" or, biblical quotes about not "suffering a witch to live".  Archive that.

So it would be like the persecution of religions in Soviet European and Asian countries and Mexico in the 1920s? 

No, it would be like xtians hanging/crushing/drowning/burning those they accused of being "witches" during the Inquistions.  It would be like xtians killing muslims because their superstitious religious beliefs varied from xtianity's during the Crusades. In other words, it would be like xtians doing the previous persecuting and then whining about "implied threats" when juxtaposed with a ficticious werewolf.

"Whoever has read 'Prometheus' will remember the words of the hero to Hermes, the servant of the gods:  'Be sure, I would never want to exchange my miserable fate for your servitude, because I would rather be bound with chains to this rock than be the obedient lackey of Zeus...'  In a word, I hate all Gods."
-– Enver Hoxha

That's a good quote, although some xtian fundies won't think so.

[falcon9]

Careful - you may start receiving an "implied threat" through "paraphrased quotes" like I have, for the fact that you are a Christian. 

Such false accusations are as opposed to the "implied threat" xtianity poses as shown by the evidence of the dark ages, the inquisitions, the crusades and the suppression of man's progress by xtianity, (“The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church.” -– Ferdinand Magellan). As many of those of the jewish faith have proclaimed, "never again".
 

The thing is, is what is the expected outcome of bashing a simple Bible verse thread that can be passed over because it doesn't cater to someone?

Consider the 'expectations' of xtian proselytizers who somehow 'believe' that an FC thread entitled "daily bible verse" is some sort of private country club for xtian members only.  Who said anything about 'catering'?  Is that a veiled reference to a false belief that religious propaganda should go unopposed because opposition is "sensed" as being 'rude', (even as the initial proselytizing bible-thumpings are "sensed" as being rude in the first place)?  Members of FC are not required to "cater to" religious adherents who post bible verses by self-censoring or, by attempts to externally censor them from the thumpers.

There are many people in this forum, Christian, non-christian, other believers within their religious sect.  Everyone is allowed to post whatever they like or enjoy, within the guidelines of course, yet Christians are getting stomped on by a certain couple of posters.

Indeed, perhaps it's time for those of other belief systems, (or none), to be able to post what they like, (within FC TOS/policies), without being "bashed" by xtian fundies who don't actually respect non-xtian viewpoints and demonstrate that by continued attempts to suppress dissent.
 

Why?  To shut them up?  To make them go away? 

No, unlike you fundies, I support your 'freedom' to post whatever specious superstitious beliefs you decide to.  By the same token, I support the 'freedom' of non-xtians to post dissenting viewpoints.  If that distinction is too subtle for you, are you directly-implying that your attempts to censor dissenting viewpoints are intended to "shut them up"/"make them go away?"
 

That's not going to happen. 

I concur.  Just as the attempts to suppress dissenting viewpoints aren't going to succeed.
 

What gumption and arrogance of someone to bully Christians by coming directly into a Bible verse thread, just because they hate the idea of a God existing and people sharing verses with each other. 

Conversely, what kind of "gumption", "arrogance" and sanctimonious self-righteousness does it take for xtians to "bully" non-xtians with proselytizing 'bible verses' and threats of reporting metaphors to the moderator/owners of the forum?  Seemingly, it takes a fundamentalist xtian to do so.

“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

[jcribb16]

You sense what you like, sir.  I sensed what came across the internet to me with your hiding behind a "paraphrase" to make a point to a Christian because you don't like what they have to say.  You can down-play it, insist on what is "really" means and how it was just a quote, or whatever.  The point is that you are becoming too confident in your "power" to belittle Christians in these threads.  You are completely disrespecting whatever you say.  Calling names is included with your disrespect: "you abysmal idiot." 

Have fun starting your own thread, whether Wiccan, Satan, or otherwise - you are free to do whatever you want within the guidelines.  Just as Bible verse threads are within the guidelines.  If it makes you feel that you are in "control" and have the "power" to shut the posts up of Christians, then have it.  No one is stopping you. 

You better well believe, if things go further with your antagonizing Christians, and me - as you are doing with your little "paraphrase" implied threat quote, that trying to "scare" me with your all out "knowledge" of the State of California, and Fusion Cash, and what will happen with libel, etc., will not scare me into shushing up just because you can't back down from your disparaging words and intolerance of Christians, while continuing to bash them, including strong quotes that imply things that you know you would not be allowed to say yourself because of the rules.

 You are the one stomping on Christians.  You are not just going after their belief system, you are going after them.  Some Christians, including myself, aren't going to be stomped on - you don't have that kind of "power" and "influence" you seem to think you have.

You don't even have the decency to leave them alone in a Bible thread that has nothing whatsoever to do with you.  You choose to come in there to aggravate and stir up trouble.  Are you that afraid of the idea of God existing?  That is very much what is coming across with your remarks - and you are trying to squash the Christians from saying anything about their beliefs of God by being so hateful to them.  You believe what you want or don't want.  I'll believe in God.  I don't tell you you're wrong because that is your choice to believe or not believe.  You should not, out of respect, tell me I'm wrong for what I believe.  It's my business not yours. 

If you think I'm living a fairytale, then bravo!  Think it all you want.  You do not listen to anyone's explanations because you think it's a fairytale.  So what?  I'll live my own life with my beliefs - you are doing the same with yours.  You don't support the freedom of Christians even posting Bible verses.  If you really did that, you would ignore a daily Bible verse thread instead of going in and bashing and mocking.  That's not supporting the freedom of at all. 

[jcribb16]

"All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever."

1 Peter 1:24

[falcon9]

"All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever."

1 Peter 1:24

So, even the 'bible', (which does not 'stand forever' but, is less than 2,000 years old), calls xtians 'weeds'. 

[jcribb16]

"All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord stands forever."

1 Peter 1:24

So, even the 'bible', (which does not 'stand forever' but, is less than 2,000 years old), calls xtians 'weeds'. 

No, He said they are LIKE weeds, in that all eventually die.  However, generations pass, and the Word of God stands as firm as ever, and it will continue to do so.

[falcon9]

No, He said they are LIKE weeds, in that all eventually die.

That's not exactly rocket-science since all that lives, dies.  What's next, a 'divine proclaimation' that "water is wet?"
 

However, generations pass, and the Word of God stands as firm as ever, and it will continue to do so.

This is simply not true and remains speculative.  First, "forever" is nominally longer than the 2,000 existance of the xtian belief system, (and no, they're not allowed to retroactively claim the previous billions of years post hoc).  Secondly, the only way that the currently extant xtianity has managed to last that long was by assimulating pagan believe systems along the way, ('got Borg?').  There aren't many paradigms left for xtianity to assimulate these days so, they've set their sights on 'science', (while seeming to forget that the scientific method is not religion's friend).


"Almost from the beginning of Christianity, its followers have belived in and used certain ritual practices to obtain help in their times of need. Prayers alone are often used and they sometimes obtain the desired result. There are many other instances, however, (even mentioned in the Bible) when a specific procedure (ie,magic) must be used to achieve one's objective.

We have only to recall Moses using a certain act to produce a serpent from his staff or water from stone, Joshua had his men engage in precise activities days before the felling of Jericho's walls and Jesus gave specific instructions to the blind man to return his sight. Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh.

Even the Sacraments of the Church have a magcal aspect to them. For example, one can't just take a swig of Four Roses and take bite of Wonder Bread and expect that he has partaken of the Body and Blood of Christ. That mystery can only be done by a priest and only through a specific consecration ritual."
--© 1998 By John R. Milam

[jcribb16]

Are you dense in thinking you are trying to make me look foolish?  My NO was in response to you saying that Christians are called weeds by God, too. My "He said they are LIKE weeds" continued to show your apparent "pretending" to not understand, that God compared that humans are as weeds/flowers, in that they both eventually die."  This had nothing to do with me bringing up a statement out of nowhere to show "smartness or dumbness" as you are implying.

Then I finished by saying that God's Word has withstood time and will continue to do so.  If you don't agree with this statement, that's fine.  I do not use "magic" in my belief system, period.  Prayer is not magic - it is conversing with God.  There was a major difference between what God allowed to happen, for example with Moses, than with what the Pharoah's men did with their magic, that was not godly, according to God.
 
If you wish to continue to push or believe Christianity assimilated pagan ways, then have that your way.  It doesn't affect my belief in God; I do not "intercede" through dead "saints" - I go through Jesus Christ - He is our mediator between us and God.  You are "assimilating" many different religious sects and faiths together in one "box."  Not all are the same. The one "same" that many of the believers do have in common is our belief in Jesus Christ.  But many faiths do NOT do the same exact things nor necessarily approve or agree with certain tenets, etc., with other sects/faiths.  But, I am not God, and I just believe in Christ, study His Word, and live the best I can - I may find out later that some of my tenets were incorrect and that some tenets in other faiths were correct.  I can't say yay or nay to anyone who, above, anything else, believes in the same Jesus Christ I do - that I do know is our way to eternal life with God.

However, for those who do not choose that for their personal reasons, or choose a totally different type of "religion" with what they feel led to do, that is their decision, and not mine to tell them they are wrong.  If asked, I will share about my beliefs, but I will not "coerce" or try to "coerce" anyone into doing something they do not wish to do, refuse to do, or don't feel comfortable about.  They may not agree with my beliefs, and I may not agree with theirs, but respectfully leaving them to their choice is needed and expected.

No, He said they are LIKE weeds, in that all eventually die.

That's not exactly rocket-science since all that lives, dies.  What's next, a 'divine proclaimation' that "water is wet?"
 

However, generations pass, and the Word of God stands as firm as ever, and it will continue to do so.

This is simply not true and remains speculative.  First, "forever" is nominally longer than the 2,000 existance of the xtian belief system, (and no, they're not allowed to retroactively claim the previous billions of years post hoc).  Secondly, the only way that the currently extant xtianity has managed to last that long was by assimulating pagan believe systems along the way, ('got Borg?').  There aren't many paradigms left for xtianity to assimulate these days so, they've set their sights on 'science', (while seeming to forget that the scientific method is not religion's friend).


"Almost from the beginning of Christianity, its followers have belived in and used certain ritual practices to obtain help in their times of need. Prayers alone are often used and they sometimes obtain the desired result. There are many other instances, however, (even mentioned in the Bible) when a specific procedure (ie,magic) must be used to achieve one's objective.

We have only to recall Moses using a certain act to produce a serpent from his staff or water from stone, Joshua had his men engage in precise activities days before the felling of Jericho's walls and Jesus gave specific instructions to the blind man to return his sight. Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh.

Even the Sacraments of the Church have a magcal aspect to them. For example, one can't just take a swig of Four Roses and take bite of Wonder Bread and expect that he has partaken of the Body and Blood of Christ. That mystery can only be done by a priest and only through a specific consecration ritual."
--© 1998 By John R. Milam

[falcon9]

Are you dense in thinking you are trying to make me look foolish?  My NO was in response to you saying that Christians are called weeds by God, too. My "He said they are LIKE weeds" 

There's no evidence to support the belief that 'g-d' said any such thing, (are you too dense to apprehend that hearsay is not evidence?).
 

I do not use "magic" in my belief system, period.  Prayer is not magic - it is conversing with God. 

"Prayer" is either invoking or evoking supernatural entities in an intercessory ritual, (the form of the "spell" or, "prayer").  The intent remains validly described as "magic", whether you disagree with "prayer" being a magical ritual or not.

There was a major difference between what God allowed to happen, for example with Moses, than with what the Pharoah's men did with their magic, that was not godly, according to God.

The only "difference" is the degree of hypocrisy attributed to such a 'g-d' since "Moses" was allegedly trained by the pharoah's Egyptian priesthood in magic.  The inherent hypocrisy lies within the presumption that the "magic" Moses was alleged to have done was okay, whereas the "magic" any Egyptian priests who supposedly trained "Moses" is not okay.  Summarily, hypothetical egregores, (the xtian 'g-d', for instance), are unable to "allow" or 'disallow' anything.

If you wish to continue to push or believe Christianity assimilated pagan ways, then have that your way.  It doesn't affect my belief in God ...

Of course not; why should centuries of tangible supporting evidence contradict an intangible "belief"?

I do not "intercede" through dead "saints" -

I stated nothing to do with "dead saints", (however, there are xtians that "pray" to such to intercede on their behalf; which embodies a magical ritual).  Intercessory magic, ("prayers"), aren't restricted to "dead saints" since the term applies to "gods, goddesses, neteru, spirits, invisible pink unicorns and various sundry hypothetical supernatural entities.

I go through Jesus Christ - He is our mediator between us and God. 

Is such a supernatural entity alive or dead?  If dead, such "prayers" are to an alleged 'spirit' and remain a magical intercessory ritual, (btw, it's entirely possible to attempt to "invoke" a live something as well).
 

You are "assimilating" many different religious sects and faiths together in one "box."  Not all are the same.

The various sects, denominations, cults, (as an applicable aside; xtianity started-off as a cult of monotheism among extant polytheistic belief systems - save for the Aegyptians, from whom the xtians stole that idea when the Aegyptians came up with a monotheistic "Ra"), all stem from the same underLying religious belief system.  All of these stem, in turn, from pagan superstitious belief systems.  This is not to assert that xtians are pagans; they're merely cultural theives.

If asked, I will share about my beliefs, but I will not "coerce" or try to "coerce" anyone into doing something they do not wish to do, refuse to do, or don't feel comfortable about.  

On the contrary, there are numerous archived posts where such "coercion" has been attempted by you in the form of characterizing dissenting opposition as "rude", "bashing", etc., (e.g., in the obvious attempt to coerce suppression of such).

"Almost from the beginning of Christianity, its followers have belived in and used certain ritual practices to obtain help in their times of need. Prayers alone are often used and they sometimes obtain the desired result. There are many other instances, however, (even mentioned in the Bible) when a specific procedure (ie,magic) must be used to achieve one's objective.

We have only to recall Moses using a certain act to produce a serpent from his staff or water from stone, Joshua had his men engage in precise activities days before the felling of Jericho's walls and Jesus gave specific instructions to the blind man to return his sight. Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh.

Even the Sacraments of the Church have a magcal aspect to them. For example, one can't just take a swig of Four Roses and take bite of Wonder Bread and expect that he has partaken of the Body and Blood of Christ. That mystery can only be done by a priest and only through a specific consecration ritual."
--© 1998 By John R. Milam
[/quote]

[jcribb16]

1.  You do not accept anything from believers in the way of evidence, whether through history, the historical people, God's Word, etc.  That's your choice.  People have tried and you refute immediately.  It does not mean you are correct, even if you like to think you are.

2.  A believer's prayer is not a spell or magic.  Keep refuting it, but it is not.  With other sects/faiths, maybe, but to us, it is simply conversing with God.

3.  Not a good point.  Yes, Moses was "trained" by Pharoah.  God was working through His people to prove a point to the Pharoah, in which we know he then had his men copy.  However, that did not end up smartly - those snakes were not enlisted of God, like Moses' were.  God doesn't need "magic" to prove Himself today, and only chose to do it then. 

4.  This was your comment: "Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh."  Once again, within my faith, I do not believe in doing this, but I cannot say it's wrong for them.  I just know that Jesus is our "inter-ceder" between us and God, and there is no need to go through anyone else, dead or alive.  I may learn I am wrong, but until then I go through Jesus.

5.  Jesus died, was buried for 3 days, as prophesied, and rose again on that 3rd day.  He transcended to God the Father, in Heaven, until God sends Him the 2nd time for all believers, dead or alive.  He is alive and in heaven.  However, I know you don't agree with this at all.  That's perfectly fine with me.  I'm just responding with what I know and believe for me.

6.  Christians are not cultural thieves.  There are so many sects and faiths.  Everything started from something and progressed or changed through today.  There are many churches who do pagan rituals even today.  What difference does that moot point make?  It's not going to change the fact that there are many different sects and faiths who worship God, and it's not going to stop just because some people believe worshipers ancestors stole their ideas.  There are truths in that and there is also poppycock!  Part of history that cannot be changed and people need to move on.

7.  Coercion would be me telling you that you are absolutely wrong in not believing there is a God, and that you need to accept Him or go to Hell.  I am not doing that, nor will I - that is wrong, rude, and demanding.  What I am saying, for the umpteenth time, is that disrespect in the way of mockery, mean and spiteful words of peoples' beliefs, and certain quotes and pictures being posted out of seemingly hatred for Christians and their belief in God, is wrong.

[falcon9]

1.  You do not accept anything from believers in the way of evidence, whether through history, the historical people, God's Word, etc.  That's your choice.  People have tried and you refute immediately.  It does not mean you are correct, even if you like to think you are.

1.a) Hearsay does not constitute evidence and is refuted on that basis, (e.g., people can make up any fiction they choose however, fiction is not valid evidence).

2.  A believer's prayer is not a spell or magic.  Keep refuting it, but it is not.  With other sects/faiths, maybe, but to us, it is simply conversing with God.

2.a) A bland denial of the corresponding parallels, (and exact matches), between xtian intercessory prayer and non-xtian intercessory magical rituals does not constitute your refuting these facts.  There is no "conversing with g-d" since the egregore does not answer correspondingly; that makes such 'conversational prayers' invocational magical rituals to a hypothetical supernatural egregore.

3.  Not a good point.  Yes, Moses was "trained" by Pharoah.

3.a)  No, not by "pharaoh", by some of the Aeygptian priesthood, (who were not pharoah).
 

God was working through His people ...

3.b)  That's a religious belief, not a fact.  It's also a cop-out to claim some supernatural egregore can 'work through his people' without non-hearsay evidence to support such an extradinary claim.  First there's the hearsay claim that 'Aegyptian magic' is not okay with the hebrew
'g-d'/egregore, (because it's not xtian magic, it was pagan).  Then there's the hearsay claim that, if "moses" used that same "magic" against the hebrew's enemies, it's perfectly okay and that it was the hebrew 'g-d' working through "moses".  Uh-huh.

God doesn't need "magic" to prove Himself today, and only chose to do it then.

3.c) Look up the term, "xtian apologetics".
 

4.  This was your comment: "Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh."  Once again, within my faith, I do not believe in doing this, but I cannot say it's wrong for them.

4.a)  It's immaterial whether or not you or, any particular xtian sect/denomination/cult performs that specific magical ritual since all of them nominally "pray" and that's an intercessory magical ritual whether you disagree without refuting the context or not.
 

I just know that Jesus is our "inter-ceder" between us and God, and there is no need to go through anyone else, dead or alive.  I may learn I am wrong, but until then I go through Jesus.

4.b) If you fail to see the direct connection between an "interceder" and a magical ritual requesting such intercession, ("prayer"), then you've missed the point entirely.

5. However, I know you don't agree with this at all.  That's perfectly fine with me.  I'm just responding with what I know and believe for me.

5.a) That's fine, I don't share such specious/superstitious beliefs and am responding with skeptical rationality.

6.  Christians are not cultural thieves.  There are so many sects and faiths.  Everything started from something and progressed or changed through today.  There are many churches who do pagan rituals even today.

6.a) The extensive evidence of xtian cultural thefts contradicts your bland denial, (which is not a refutation).  Even while blanding denying this, you go on to assert that "There are many churches who do pagan rituals even today", which means the xtians assimulated/stole such pagan rituals from pre-existing pagans.  That makes them cultural thieves like unto the "Borg".

What difference does that moot point make?

6.b)  The difference that non-moot point makes is that the basis of xtianity itself is one of thievery, lies, co-opting of other belief systems and the decptions which arise from such practices.
 

... it's not going to stop just because some people believe worshipers ancestors stole their ideas.

6.c) Exactly, being part of a religious belief system which assimulated/stole major chunks of that jumbled belief system from previous pagan belief systems means that current 'believers' are accomplices after the fact in such cultural thefts.

7.  Coercion would be me telling you that you are absolutely wrong in not believing there is a God, and that you need to accept Him or go to Hell.

7.a)  Incorrect. "coercion: use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance."  The word you're looking for instead would be either 'propaganda' or, 'proselytizing', (or perhaps 'pseudo-intimidation' by way of threats to report falsely-designated "rude"/"disrespectful" comments).

I am not doing that, nor will I - that is wrong, rude, and demanding.

7.b)  On the contrary, there are several "rude and demanding" posts wherein you've attempted to 'intimidate' those posting an opposing view of your 'religion', (not necessarily of the believer in that religion), into suppression by characterizing dissenting viewpoints as "rude/disrespectful."

7.c.)  Apparently, your 'faith' blinds you to the distinct probability that religious propaganda/proselytizing is seen as "rude/disrespectful" of those who do not believe in such superstitious concepts.
 

[jcribb16]

1.  You do not accept anything from believers in the way of evidence, whether through history, the historical people, God's Word, etc.  That's your choice.  People have tried and you refute immediately.  It does not mean you are correct, even if you like to think you are.

1.a) Hearsay does not constitute evidence and is refuted on that basis, (e.g., people can make up any fiction they choose however, fiction is not valid evidence).

2.  A believer's prayer is not a spell or magic.  Keep refuting it, but it is not.  With other sects/faiths, maybe, but to us, it is simply conversing with God.

2.a) A bland denial of the corresponding parallels, (and exact matches), between xtian intercessory prayer and non-xtian intercessory magical rituals does not constitute your refuting these facts.  There is no "conversing with g-d" since the egregore does not answer correspondingly; that makes such 'conversational prayers' invocational magical rituals to a hypothetical supernatural egregore.

3.  Not a good point.  Yes, Moses was "trained" by Pharoah.

3.a)  No, not by "pharaoh", by some of the Aeygptian priesthood, (who were not pharoah).
 

God was working through His people ...

3.b)  That's a religious belief, not a fact.  It's also a cop-out to claim some supernatural egregore can 'work through his people' without non-hearsay evidence to support such an extradinary claim.  First there's the hearsay claim that 'Aegyptian magic' is not okay with the hebrew
'g-d'/egregore, (because it's not xtian magic, it was pagan).  Then there's the hearsay claim that, if "moses" used that same "magic" against the hebrew's enemies, it's perfectly okay and that it was the hebrew 'g-d' working through "moses".  Uh-huh.

God doesn't need "magic" to prove Himself today, and only chose to do it then.

3.c) Look up the term, "xtian apologetics".
 

4.  This was your comment: "Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh."  Once again, within my faith, I do not believe in doing this, but I cannot say it's wrong for them.

4.a)  It's immaterial whether or not you or, any particular xtian sect/denomination/cult performs that specific magical ritual since all of them nominally "pray" and that's an intercessory magical ritual whether you disagree without refuting the context or not.
 

I just know that Jesus is our "inter-ceder" between us and God, and there is no need to go through anyone else, dead or alive.  I may learn I am wrong, but until then I go through Jesus.

4.b) If you fail to see the direct connection between an "interceder" and a magical ritual requesting such intercession, ("prayer"), then you've missed the point entirely.

5. However, I know you don't agree with this at all.  That's perfectly fine with me.  I'm just responding with what I know and believe for me.

5.a) That's fine, I don't share such specious/superstitious beliefs and am responding with skeptical rationality.

6.  Christians are not cultural thieves.  There are so many sects and faiths.  Everything started from something and progressed or changed through today.  There are many churches who do pagan rituals even today.

6.a) The extensive evidence of xtian cultural thefts contradicts your bland denial, (which is not a refutation).  Even while blanding denying this, you go on to assert that "There are many churches who do pagan rituals even today", which means the xtians assimulated/stole such pagan rituals from pre-existing pagans.  That makes them cultural thieves like unto the "Borg".

What difference does that moot point make?

6.b)  The difference that non-moot point makes is that the basis of xtianity itself is one of thievery, lies, co-opting of other belief systems and the decptions which arise from such practices.
 

... it's not going to stop just because some people believe worshipers ancestors stole their ideas.

6.c) Exactly, being part of a religious belief system which assimulated/stole major chunks of that jumbled belief system from previous pagan belief systems means that current 'believers' are accomplices after the fact in such cultural thefts.

7.  Coercion would be me telling you that you are absolutely wrong in not believing there is a God, and that you need to accept Him or go to Hell.

7.a)  Incorrect. "coercion: use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance."  The word you're looking for instead would be either 'propaganda' or, 'proselytizing', (or perhaps 'pseudo-intimidation' by way of threats to report falsely-designated "rude"/"disrespectful" comments).

I am not doing that, nor will I - that is wrong, rude, and demanding.

7.b)  On the contrary, there are several "rude and demanding" posts wherein you've attempted to 'intimidate' those posting an opposing view of your 'religion', (not necessarily of the believer in that religion), into suppression by characterizing dissenting viewpoints as "rude/disrespectful."

7.c.)  Apparently, your 'faith' blinds you to the distinct probability that religious propaganda/proselytizing is seen as "rude/disrespectful" of those who do not believe in such superstitious concepts.
 

You are someone who thinks they know everything there is to know about Christianity being irrational and false, and what it "isn't, and always have to be the one whose opinions are always correct, and that you are never disrespectful to Christians, and to you, the Christians are the disrespectful ones.  Your over-confidence and what you think is your "power" to squash Christians and their belief in the ground is held back because of the rules and guidelines allowing people to post just about any subject they choose, and that rankles you to no end because Christian posts "bother" you, when no one is forcing you to open that thread and read anything in there.  That's not enough for you.  You have to deliberately go in them and mock Christians.  No matter what you say or choose to think, you are showing your loathing of Christianity and Christians.

I actually pity you in that this bitterness affects your attitude towards and your postings with Christians, to the point of not being able to have rational and respectful discussions.  What a shame, because you are definitely very intellectual and knowledgeable on subjects relating to Biblical history, though you believe it to be untrue, and there could be some really neat discussions about some of the events in history, whether Biblical or not.

[falcon9]

You are someone who thinks they know everything there is to know about Christianity being irrational and false ...

Why bother quoting the replies, (they were even numbered responses for your convenience too), if you're not going to respond to point and counter-points? <--largely rhetorical question but, perhaps not ...

”When I point out fallacies in religious logic, adherents tell me that the human brain cannot comprehend God. They also tell me that God created the human brain. God is clearly inept.”
--– Matthew Benjamin Smith

[jcribb16]

Quote from: jcribb16 on Today at 04:03:26 pm
4.  This was your comment: "Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh."  Once again, within my faith, I do not believe in doing this, but I cannot say it's wrong for them.

Quote from falcon9:
4.a)  It's immaterial whether or not you or, any particular xtian sect/denomination/cult performs that specific magical ritual since all of them nominally "pray" and that's an intercessory magical ritual whether you disagree without refuting the context or not.

I'm so sorry.  I failed to address this earlier.  Your response is understandable, however, the reason I posted that is because you said you did NOT say something and I was showing you that indeed, you did:

Quote from falcon9:« Reply #503 on: Today at 01:51:01 pm »:
We have only to recall Moses using a certain act to produce a serpent from his staff or water from stone, Joshua had his men engage in precise activities days before the felling of Jericho's walls and Jesus gave specific instructions to the blind man to return his sight. Christianity has also held that there exists a communion, or community, of saints who, though deceased, can intercede for those still in the flesh.

Quote from falcon9:« Reply #505 on: Today at 03:26:44 pm:
I stated nothing to do with "dead saints",

Last time I looked, dead and deceased mean pretty much the same.