daily Bible verse

[Flackle]

Righteous anger is allowed.

Such self-"righteous anger" is still "judging" and still a xtian hypocrisy.  Since I'm not xtian, my admission to judging is not hypocrital.  

You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

I didn't presume the "free pass" your fellow fundie did when he posted a religious admonishment against judging when he judges often, (and incorrectly to boot).  My posted words are accountable here insofar as they must comply with FC's posting policies and TOS, not to some hypothetical egregore in which I don't believe.

Well, see, here's the thing.  What he posted also complied with FC's posting policies and TOS.  You are the one who took it and made something of it, thinking that you are given a "free pass" to judge others, just because you are not a believer.  Judging others is way more involved than just in the Bible.  

You are judging believers contemptuously simply because you don't approve of their choice.  It's none of your business what their choice is.  You made your choice and that's your business.  Respect and courtesy are also a given, in general, when speaking with others.  It's called good manners.  But you know this, right?  You just choose to be unmannerly towards believers because of how you view what they are choosing to base their decision on.  That does not mean that you have the privilege and right of being so hateful to believers - you are choosing to act that way.

Actually we do have that right. I have a right to feel, say, and do whatever I want as long as that does not directly harm another individual. And no, you getting your feelings hurt doesn't count. I, nor any other poster in this thread has used any "bad" language. I haven't defamed nor harassed any individual. As far as I know, me and everyone else in this thread has followed this website's TOS and have not broken any laws. "Good Manners" can sometimes be borderline censorship. How about we either get back to the actual topic at hand, and stop trying to discredit what other people are saying by making believe we are being personally attacked.

[jcribb16]

Here's in example of 'encouraging' irrational blind faith, (as opposed to logicalthought processes of rationality). Doubtless you're still unable to discern the difference in your faith-blindness.

(Galatians 6:9, NLT)

Great encouraging verse!  Thank you!

[...]

Absolutely! 

So?  Believers are encouraging believers.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with that.  You choose to not believe, so those verses don't pertain to you.  So why in the world are you so worried about conversation between those on a subject you choose not to partake of.  You are really reaching on this one.  Nice try, though...

[jcribb16]

You seem to forget that anyone in here can choose to or choose not to respond in a certain way...

On the contrary, you seem to forget that I'd previously reminded you of that very same thing before pretended this was your idea.

... just to appease certain posters who would rather prey on believers and make fun of them. 

making posts opposing religious blind faith on a forum is not 'preying' "on believers", as much as you'd prefer to over-dramatize the actual situation here.

You make me laugh when you say you've been 'encouraging.'  Your 'encouragement' in the light of its definition is quite questionable since you are more provoking and mocking such personal choice. 

Once again, you misunderstand the use of a word in context.  In this instance, I stated that I was encouraging those who are able to use secular rational thought processes, rather than religious faith-based irrational processes.  The former doesn't constitute religious proselytization since 'logic' isn't a religion.  While the latter is religious proselytization because the blind faith-based paradigm underlying it is a religion.

You are not tolerant of a believer's choice, except in your way of still mocking their choice and trying to make them look foolish. 

I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".

Yes, you have proven over and over how intolerant and disrespectful you are to believers.  AND, you have proven over and over of how who do not accept anything a believer offers.  You are simply enjoying causing dissension and trying to provoke anger, trying to spam and smash a simple Bible verse thread, and trying your best to make believers look foolish.  

You have a difficult time understanding that in the end, it matters not how much you trolled and spammed believers - their choice doesn't affect your choice one way or the other.  You seem to really be bothered that people choose to believe in God.  It shouldn't matter to you - you choose to do your own thing.  You have to just keep on and on, making yourself look the most foolish one of all.  

Because religion has been so tolerant of atheism in the past.

You seem to think that somehow we are attacking you. That by disagreeing with you we are trolls. A troll is someone who shares an opinion that they don't actually hold to get a reaction from someone else. Guess what? Me, Falcon9, and all the other atheist/non-religious proponents on this thread ACTUALLY hold these opinions to be true and factual. They don't just simply believe in them, they live these ideas and use it to affect and alter their lives. We are not trolls trying to prey on week little Christians. A simple search in that search bar up there would reveal several threads started by atheist that has Christians and other religious proponents posting in them, disagreeing with the original poster and other atheist who where sharing their thoughts.

If they are what you truly believe, then you would accept that believers truly believe their choice, and there would be no need for the mocking words, quotes, and ridiculous mocking pictures posted by some 'atheists' in this forum.  Nice try.  I accept your choice and don't go making fun of your dis-belief by pictures and quotes that mock atheists.  But some atheists do not seem to think they should offer the same courtesy in return.  Discussing is one thing, but mocking and ridiculing is totally different and intolerant, no matter which side is doing it.

[falcon9]

 

You are not tolerant of a believer's choice, except in your way of still mocking their choice and trying to make them look foolish. 

I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".

Yes, you have proven over and over how intolerant and disrespectful you are to believers.

I'm not required to be 'respectful' of someone just because they're a religious "believer". 'I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".'

AND, you have proven over and over of how who do not accept anything a believer offers.

Since I've been awaiting valid evidence, (not more unsupported 'biblical quotes', nor illogical non-reasoning), for over two years - and others have been waiting even longer, no such unambiguous evidence has been offered as yet.  

You are simply enjoying causing dissension and trying to provoke anger ...

No, I'm opposing blind religious faith reflected in the posts of religious adherents here because it's irrational and offensive to rationality.

...trying to spam and smash a simple Bible verse thread, and trying your best to make believers look foolish.  

'No, I'm opposing blind religious faith reflected in the posts of religious adherents here because it's irrational and offensive to rationality.'  Posting viewpoints which oppose irrational and blind religious faith is neither 'spamming' nor 'smashing' an initially offensive thread.  While religious adherents will inherently view such material as 'inoffensive', those who haven't self-inflicted such faith-blindness may.

You have a difficult time understanding that in the end, it matters not ...

It does matter if the choice to be a blind faith religious believer begins to affect others negatively, (like when that same blind faith in the same beliefs resulted in the crusades, inquistions, airplanes crashed into buildings and baptists dishonoring military personnel who gave their lives to protect the 'freedom of speech' of such religious whackjobs).

You seem to really be bothered that people choose to believe in God.  It shouldn't matter to you - you choose to do your own thing.  

On the contrary, I support the freedom to choose for everyone.  When such a choice involves blind religious faith, it's also the choice of the 'believer' to keep their choice to themselves or, offensively proselytize it by posting in publically-available forums.  If their 'beliefs' stayed in their own heads, who would oppose such an unknown choice?  Once a religious adherent makes a choice to vent their irrationality in 'public', they have no say over what responses they receive at that point.  They don't get to censor such responses by whinging about "rudeness" or "disrespect" in order to silence dissent or in lieu of rebuttal of opposing viewpoints.  Of course, it remains the religious adherent's choice to continue flailing ineffectively with such disingenuous tactics or, they could try producing some valid evidence to support their empty religious assertions.  I'll not be holding my breath awaiting the latter.

[falcon9]

So?  Believers are encouraging believers.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with that.  

Why is that necessary if you all have "faith", unless such blind faith is weak and requires such 'bolsterings'?

[jcribb16]

Righteous anger is allowed.

Such self-"righteous anger" is still "judging" and still a xtian hypocrisy.  Since I'm not xtian, my admission to judging is not hypocrital.  

You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

I didn't presume the "free pass" your fellow fundie did when he posted a religious admonishment against judging when he judges often, (and incorrectly to boot).  My posted words are accountable here insofar as they must comply with FC's posting policies and TOS, not to some hypothetical egregore in which I don't believe.

Well, see, here's the thing.  What he posted also complied with FC's posting policies and TOS.  You are the one who took it and made something of it, thinking that you are given a "free pass" to judge others, just because you are not a believer.  Judging others is way more involved than just in the Bible.  

You are judging believers contemptuously simply because you don't approve of their choice.  It's none of your business what their choice is.  You made your choice and that's your business.  Respect and courtesy are also a given, in general, when speaking with others.  It's called good manners.  But you know this, right?  You just choose to be unmannerly towards believers because of how you view what they are choosing to base their decision on.  That does not mean that you have the privilege and right of being so hateful to believers - you are choosing to act that way.

Actually we do have that right. I have a right to feel, say, and do whatever I want as long as that does not directly harm another individual. And no, you getting your feelings hurt doesn't count. I, nor any other poster in this thread has used any "bad" language. I haven't defamed nor harassed any individual. As far as I know, me and everyone else in this thread has followed this website's TOS and have not broken any laws. "Good Manners" can sometimes be borderline censorship.

See?  You just admitted that it's "sometimes borderline censorship."  That means some are pushing the boundaries of the "golden rules."  I disagree with you - believers are being harassed in here, when most every single poster, posting in any Bible verse thread, is followed and responded to with mocking, hatefulness, and disrespect.  Some people have gotten their feelings stepped on deliberately, and some have left the forum because of the treatment done to them, even though, "technically," it's within the TOS.  You said it right with that - "borderline."  As close as some can get to bothering without actually getting called out on it.

To clarify, my feelings are not hurt in the least.  The main reason I am saying anything to a couple in here, is to back and support those believers who are being treated ugly by just posting inspiration, encouragement, verses, prayers, for those who ask for it, need it, or want to share it.  They should not have to feel they can't post in a thread because they know they will be targeted because of their faith.  

Oh, and I said nothing about "bad" language.  A requirement in here is PG, and for the most part, it stays that way, and when something is posted beyond PG, it is usually dealt with quickly and efficiently.  So I would appreciate you not twisting my words - thank you.

[Flackle]

You seem to forget that anyone in here can choose to or choose not to respond in a certain way...

On the contrary, you seem to forget that I'd previously reminded you of that very same thing before pretended this was your idea.

... just to appease certain posters who would rather prey on believers and make fun of them.

making posts opposing religious blind faith on a forum is not 'preying' "on believers", as much as you'd prefer to over-dramatize the actual situation here.

You make me laugh when you say you've been 'encouraging.'  Your 'encouragement' in the light of its definition is quite questionable since you are more provoking and mocking such personal choice.  

Once again, you misunderstand the use of a word in context.  In this instance, I stated that I was encouraging those who are able to use secular rational thought processes, rather than religious faith-based irrational processes.  The former doesn't constitute religious proselytization since 'logic' isn't a religion.  While the latter is religious proselytization because the blind faith-based paradigm underlying it is a religion.

You are not tolerant of a believer's choice, except in your way of still mocking their choice and trying to make them look foolish.  

I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".

Yes, you have proven over and over how intolerant and disrespectful you are to believers.  AND, you have proven over and over of how who do not accept anything a believer offers.  You are simply enjoying causing dissension and trying to provoke anger, trying to spam and smash a simple Bible verse thread, and trying your best to make believers look foolish.  

You have a difficult time understanding that in the end, it matters not how much you trolled and spammed believers - their choice doesn't affect your choice one way or the other.  You seem to really be bothered that people choose to believe in God.  It shouldn't matter to you - you choose to do your own thing.  You have to just keep on and on, making yourself look the most foolish one of all.  

Because religion has been so tolerant of atheism in the past.

You seem to think that somehow we are attacking you. That by disagreeing with you we are trolls. A troll is someone who shares an opinion that they don't actually hold to get a reaction from someone else. Guess what? Me, Falcon9, and all the other atheist/non-religious proponents on this thread ACTUALLY hold these opinions to be true and factual. They don't just simply believe in them, they live these ideas and use it to affect and alter their lives. We are not trolls trying to prey on week little Christians. A simple search in that search bar up there would reveal several threads started by atheist that has Christians and other religious proponents posting in them, disagreeing with the original poster and other atheist who where sharing their thoughts.

If they are what you truly believe, then you would accept that believers truly believe their choice, and there would be no need for the mocking words, quotes, and ridiculous mocking pictures posted by some 'atheists' in this forum.  Nice try. I accept your choice and don't go making fun of your dis-belief by pictures and quotes that mock atheists.  But some atheists do not seem to think they should offer the same courtesy in return.  Discussing is one thing, but mocking and ridiculing is totally different and intolerant, no matter which side is doing it.

Of course not. Just because you don't do something doesn't mean that someone else can't do it. You may, for example, choose not to express your freedom to speak but that doesn't mean everyone else should comply with that same standard. Your ideas of mannerism is not universal, and just because someone may not take mocking seriously and don't get their feelings hurt from it doesn't mean they have to watch what they say around you or anyone else. Again, I would like to bring up the idea of censorship yet again. By the way, I found many of your post to be insulting. I just never brought it up before, because I don't think it adds to the discussion in any positive way.

[jcribb16]

You are not tolerant of a believer's choice, except in your way of still mocking their choice and trying to make them look foolish. 

I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".

Yes, you have proven over and over how intolerant and disrespectful you are to believers.

I'm not required to be 'respectful' of someone just because they're a religious "believer". 'I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".'

AND, you have proven over and over of how who do not accept anything a believer offers.

Since I've been awaiting valid evidence, (not more unsupported 'biblical quotes', nor illogical non-reasoning), for over two years - and others have been waiting even longer, no such unambiguous evidence has been offered as yet.  

You are simply enjoying causing dissension and trying to provoke anger ...

No, I'm opposing blind religious faith reflected in the posts of religious adherents here because it's irrational and offensive to rationality.

...trying to spam and smash a simple Bible verse thread, and trying your best to make believers look foolish.  

'No, I'm opposing blind religious faith reflected in the posts of religious adherents here because it's irrational and offensive to rationality.'  Posting viewpoints which oppose irrational and blind religious faith is neither 'spamming' nor 'smashing' an initially offensive thread.  While religious adherents will inherently view such material as 'inoffensive', those who haven't self-inflicted such faith-blindness may.

You have a difficult time understanding that in the end, it matters not ...

It does matter if the choice to be a blind faith religious believer begins to affect others negatively, (like when that same blind faith in the same beliefs resulted in the crusades, inquistions, airplanes crashed into buildings and baptists dishonoring military personnel who gave their lives to protect the 'freedom of speech' of such religious whackjobs).

You seem to really be bothered that people choose to believe in God.  It shouldn't matter to you - you choose to do your own thing.  

On the contrary, I support the freedom to choose for everyone.  When such a choice involves blind religious faith, it's also the choice of the 'believer' to keep their choice to themselves or, offensively proselytize it by posting in publically-available forums.  If their 'beliefs' stayed in their own heads, who would oppose such an unknown choice?  Once a religious adherent makes a choice to vent their irrationality in 'public', they have no say over what responses they receive at that point.  They don't get to censor such responses by whinging about "rudeness" or "disrespect" in order to silence dissent or in lieu of rebuttal of opposing viewpoints.  Of course, it remains the religious adherent's choice to continue flailing ineffectively with such disingenuous tactics or, they could try producing some valid evidence to support their empty religious assertions.  I'll not be holding my breath awaiting the latter.

They are in the archives.  If you are so interested, then go look them up.  You support the "freedom" within your own laid out guidelines that do not represent the mode that everyone should try to adhere to in this country.  You are only allowing their freedom of choice, by adding your biased words, which mock and name call what the believers choose.  Your way of thinking is way more harsh than the normal person who respects someone even when they believe things differently.  You can't leave the bias out of it and it shows clear through your words.

[jcribb16]

So?  Believers are encouraging believers.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with that.  

Why is that necessary if you all have "faith", unless such blind faith is weak and requires such 'bolsterings'?

Wow, sarcasm?  People encourage people in all walks of life.  Some for wishing others well on their tests, keeping up the great work, hang in there, you're doing great, etc.  Believers and non-believers all encourage each other in one way or another.  You are still reaching - keep up the great trying.

[jcribb16]

You seem to forget that anyone in here can choose to or choose not to respond in a certain way...

On the contrary, you seem to forget that I'd previously reminded you of that very same thing before pretended this was your idea.

... just to appease certain posters who would rather prey on believers and make fun of them.

making posts opposing religious blind faith on a forum is not 'preying' "on believers", as much as you'd prefer to over-dramatize the actual situation here.

You make me laugh when you say you've been 'encouraging.'  Your 'encouragement' in the light of its definition is quite questionable since you are more provoking and mocking such personal choice.  

Once again, you misunderstand the use of a word in context.  In this instance, I stated that I was encouraging those who are able to use secular rational thought processes, rather than religious faith-based irrational processes.  The former doesn't constitute religious proselytization since 'logic' isn't a religion.  While the latter is religious proselytization because the blind faith-based paradigm underlying it is a religion.

You are not tolerant of a believer's choice, except in your way of still mocking their choice and trying to make them look foolish.  

I'm not required to be tolerant of an irrational choice; just as I'm to required to be "tolerant" of a cannibal, child molester or serial killers "choice".

Yes, you have proven over and over how intolerant and disrespectful you are to believers.  AND, you have proven over and over of how who do not accept anything a believer offers.  You are simply enjoying causing dissension and trying to provoke anger, trying to spam and smash a simple Bible verse thread, and trying your best to make believers look foolish.  

You have a difficult time understanding that in the end, it matters not how much you trolled and spammed believers - their choice doesn't affect your choice one way or the other.  You seem to really be bothered that people choose to believe in God.  It shouldn't matter to you - you choose to do your own thing.  You have to just keep on and on, making yourself look the most foolish one of all.  

Because religion has been so tolerant of atheism in the past.

You seem to think that somehow we are attacking you. That by disagreeing with you we are trolls. A troll is someone who shares an opinion that they don't actually hold to get a reaction from someone else. Guess what? Me, Falcon9, and all the other atheist/non-religious proponents on this thread ACTUALLY hold these opinions to be true and factual. They don't just simply believe in them, they live these ideas and use it to affect and alter their lives. We are not trolls trying to prey on week little Christians. A simple search in that search bar up there would reveal several threads started by atheist that has Christians and other religious proponents posting in them, disagreeing with the original poster and other atheist who where sharing their thoughts.

If they are what you truly believe, then you would accept that believers truly believe their choice, and there would be no need for the mocking words, quotes, and ridiculous mocking pictures posted by some 'atheists' in this forum.  Nice try. I accept your choice and don't go making fun of your dis-belief by pictures and quotes that mock atheists.  But some atheists do not seem to think they should offer the same courtesy in return.  Discussing is one thing, but mocking and ridiculing is totally different and intolerant, no matter which side is doing it.

Of course not. Just because you don't do something doesn't mean that someone else can't do it. You may, for example, choose not to express your freedom to speak but that doesn't mean everyone else should comply with that same standard. Your ideas of mannerism is not universal, and just because someone may not take mocking seriously and don't get their feelings hurt from it doesn't mean they have to watch what they say around you or anyone else. Again, I would like to bring up the idea of censorship yet again. By the way, I found many of your post to be insulting. I just never brought it up before, because I don't think it adds to the discussion in any positive way.

You are choosing to be rude, then. 

You may see some of mine as insulting - I can see why you would say that.  I am not going to sit back and watch a couple of posters knock and ridicule believers without saying something in their defense.  You think it's okay to make fun of posters - I don't.  When posters are not nice to others, then I will say something in defense.  So, thanks for your opinion and thoughts on what you think of my "insulting" posts. 

I'm still not the one going after atheists, making stupid and hateful quotes about them, posting mocking pictures of them, etc., just because they don't see things like I do.  I respect their choice in life and only would appreciate the same courtesy in return.

[JediJohnnie]

Why repost a requoted bit of religious nonsense you don't follow?  You're in these forums judging constantly, (so am I but, I subscribe to judging and you, the hypocritical pseudo-xtian allegedly do not).

Romans 14:10-13

Righteous anger is allowed.   You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

King James Version (KJV)
Ephesians 4:26

26"Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:"

The context of the verse is to not judge hypocritically.(not that I expect Falcon to understand or except that.)If we as Christians were not to render judgement when needed,things would quickly turn to lawlessness.

[falcon9]

Righteous anger is allowed.

Such self-"righteous anger" is still "judging" and still a xtian hypocrisy.  Since I'm not xtian, my admission to judging is not hypocritical.  

You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

I didn't presume the "free pass" your fellow fundie did when he posted a religious admonishment against judging when he judges often, (and incorrectly to boot).  My posted words are accountable here insofar as they must comply with FC's posting policies and TOS, not to some hypothetical egregore in which I don't believe.

Well, see, here's the thing.  What he posted also complied with FC's posting policies and TOS.  You are the one who took it and made something of it, thinking that you are given a "free pass" to judge others, just because you are not a believer.  Judging others is way more involved than just in the Bible.

 

You are judging believers contemptuously simply because you don't approve of their choice.  It's none of your business what their choice is.  You made your choice and that's your business.  Respect and courtesy are also a given, in general, when speaking with others.  It's called good manners.  But you know this, right?  You just choose to be unmannerly towards believers because of how you view what they are choosing to base their decision on.  That does not mean that you have the privilege and right of being so hateful to believers - you are choosing to act that way.

Actually we do have that right. I have a right to feel, say, and do whatever I want as long as that does not directly harm another individual. And no, you getting your feelings hurt doesn't count. I, nor any other poster in this thread has used any "bad" language. I haven't defamed nor harassed any individual. As far as I know, me and everyone else in this thread has followed this website's TOS and have not broken any laws. "Good Manners" can sometimes be borderline censorship.

See?  You just admitted that it's "sometimes borderline censorship."  That means some are pushing the boundaries of the "golden rules."

He was indicating that your continued insistance upon "good manners" IS borderline censorship.  That's because you've been using a biased selective application of what's "rude" and "disrepectful" to you in order to coerce censorhip, (and at the same time, self-righteously contend that your crap isn't rude, impolite or disrespectful when called on it - that's your hypocrisy, as archived by FC).

I disagree with you - believers are being harassed in here ...

That's fine since I disagree with you when "believers" are spamming unrealted threads with religious proselytions, (check the Offers, Payments and other forums for religious spam or, message ID#s can be listed as evidence), and "harassing" others with such religious propaganda.

To clarify, my feelings are not hurt in the least.  The main reason I am saying anything to a couple in here, is to back and support those believers who are being treated ugly by just posting inspiration, encouragement, verses, prayers, for those who ask for it, need it, or want to share it.  They should not have to feel they can't post in a thread because they know they will be targeted because of their faith.

Such a faux 'white knighting' is unnecessary because those religious adherents have an unreasonable expectation of FC forums being a place for uncontended religious proselytization.  They aren't.  Others are as permitted to dissent/oppose in REPLY to initially-posted religious propaganda as the religious adherents are to initially post such religious proselytizing.

[jcribb16]

Why repost a requoted bit of religious nonsense you don't follow?  You're in these forums judging constantly, (so am I but, I subscribe to judging and you, the hypocritical pseudo-xtian allegedly do not).

Romans 14:10-13

Righteous anger is allowed.   You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

King James Version (KJV)
Ephesians 4:26

26"Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:"

The context of the verse is to not judge hypocritically.(not that I expect Falcon to understand or except that.)If we as Christians were not to render judgement when needed,things would quickly turn to lawlessness.

And sadly, in our country, we are seeing more and more of the "lawlessness" or laxness of it, happening.  Christians aren't supposed to cower - they are to defend themselves and others when needed.  Thanks for posting that.

[falcon9]

The context of the requoted biblical nonsense was selective judgments; where faith-based irrational ones are okay and reasoned logical ones are not.

The context of the verse is to not judge hypocritically.(not that I expect Falcon to understand or except that.)If we as Christians were not to render judgement when needed,things would quickly turn to lawlessness.

[JediJohnnie]

Why repost a requoted bit of religious nonsense you don't follow?  You're in these forums judging constantly, (so am I but, I subscribe to judging and you, the hypocritical pseudo-xtian allegedly do not).

Romans 14:10-13

Righteous anger is allowed.   You don't have a "free pass" just because you aren't a believer.  You are still accountable for your words and actions, as well as the next person.  

King James Version (KJV)
Ephesians 4:26

26"Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:"

The context of the verse is to not judge hypocritically.(not that I expect Falcon to understand or except that.)If we as Christians were not to render judgement when needed,things would quickly turn to lawlessness.

And sadly, in our country, we are seeing more and more of the "lawlessness" or laxness of it, happening.  Christians aren't supposed to cower - they are to defend themselves and others when needed.  Thanks for posting that.

Thanks.Jcribb.

I give you credit for you patience and perseverance.As I'm sure many can see how thankless a task -even attempting-to converse with Falcon can be.