Daily Bible Verse

[jcribb16]

I don't drink that kind of koolaid.

No?  It comes in the 'flavors' of "blind faith", (no actual substance), "specious beliefs", (over-sweetened by 'faith'), and "proselyting purple", (sour grape).
 

Wrong, it does not.   

Wow, another one of your unconvincing rebuttals, eh?  What, are you 6.66 years old or something?   

You are full of sarcastic disrespect.       Totally not impressive.   

You're full of something else as well, (normally utilized as fertilzer).  Metaphors aren't your forte either, apparently.

I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly.  That last sentence of yours is getting ugly.  I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place.  Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as. 

[falcon9]

I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly.  That last sentence of yours is getting ugly.  I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place. 

"I don't drink that kind of koolaid" is a metaphorical remark you just made, a few posts down-thread.  Although it could be considered as 'disrespectful' of the "people's temple" xtian cult and their surviving family members, would your remark be "ugly" in that regard as well?

Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as. 

I don't have to try, it comes naturally.

[jcribb16]

I'm just trying to use respectful words and not get ugly.  That last sentence of yours is getting ugly.  I'm not trying to use or not use metaphors in the first place. 

"I don't drink that kind of koolaid" is a metaphorical remark you just made, a few posts down-thread.  Although it could be considered as 'disrespectful' of the "people's temple" xtian cult and their surviving family members, would your remark be "ugly" in that regard as well?

Just another attempt of yourself to try and make yourself appear smarter and wiser than what many actually really perceive you as. 

I don't have to try, it comes naturally.

I don't see why you would be interested about my remark being "ugly" or "disrespectful" since you don't seem to extend respect to Christians regarding their beliefs in God.  I merely mean that I would not ever follow someone who makes such demands of believers to follow through with something like what he did with the koolaid, with him and his "followers" knowing what the end result would be.

Quote from falcon9:
"Reminiscing again are you?  Regardless of skull-thicknesses, some people find it easier to resist 'drinking the koolaid' than others due to the ability to reason."

“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan

Don't Drink The Kool-Aid

"In November of 1978, the world was shocked by the suicide deaths of 913 members of the People's Temple cult. Jim Jones, the leader of the group, convinced his followers to move to Jonestown, Guyana, a remote community that Jones carved out of the South American jungle and named after himself. Jones constantly feared losing control of his followers. His paranoia was the main reason he moved the cult to Guyana.

The mass suicide occurred after U.S. Rep. Leo Ryan of California and a team of reporters visited the compound to investigate reports of abuse. After some members tried to leave with the congressman's group, Jim Jones had Ryan and his entourage ambushed at the nearby airstrip. He then ordered his flock to commit suicide by drinking grape-flavored Kool-Aid laced with potassium cyanide.

The mass suicide wasn't a spur-of-the-moment decision. During the weeks that preceded the dreadful event, Jones had conducted a series of suicide drills, according to survivors. An alarm call would sound and every person in the camp would line up to receive a fatal dosage. These exercises in insanity proved that all of the adults at the compound knew what would be the result of their actions.

The People's Temple did not start off as your average mind-controlling cult. It initially gained much respect as an interracial mission for the sick, homeless and jobless. Jim Jones did not manifest his darker side until near the end.

It is a horrendous calamity for more than 900 people to lose their lives to a madman, but their mistake provides us with a valuable case study of what not to do. The lessons of Jonestown certainly could have helped the 74 folks who followed David Koresh to their fiery deaths in Waco, Texas."

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-kool-aid.html

[falcon9]

I don't see why you would be interested about my remark being "ugly" or "disrespectful" since you don't seem to extend respect to Christians regarding their beliefs in God. 

This is likely because you don't view such initial proselytizing of such beliefs as being "disrespectful" of others as I do, (thus eliciting my subsequent remarks which you view as "disrespectful" ... oddly enough, in contradiction of the "golden rule").

I merely mean that I would not ever follow someone who makes such demands of believers to follow through with something like what he did with the koolaid, with him and his "followers" knowing what the end result would be.

Jones was self-declared xtian, you're a self-declared xtian.  Self-declared xtians nominally "follow" the xtian belief system, (while some may choose to selectively follow bit and pieces, they all still call it xtianity).

“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-kool-aid.html

Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct?  If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do.  If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'?  The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.

[jcribb16]

I don't see why you would be interested about my remark being "ugly" or "disrespectful" since you don't seem to extend respect to Christians regarding their beliefs in God. 

This is likely because you don't view such initial proselytizing of such beliefs as being "disrespectful" of others as I do, (thus eliciting my subsequent remarks which you view as "disrespectful" ... oddly enough, in contradiction of the "golden rule").

I merely mean that I would not ever follow someone who makes such demands of believers to follow through with something like what he did with the koolaid, with him and his "followers" knowing what the end result would be.

Jones was self-declared xtian, you're a self-declared xtian.  Self-declared xtians nominally "follow" the xtian belief system, (while some may choose to selectively follow bit and pieces, they all still call it xtianity).

“You can not convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it is based on a deep-seated need to believe.”
-– Carl Sagan

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-kool-aid.html

Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct?  If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do.  If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'?  The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.

You are twisting words again so you can let yourself believe you are in your "rights" of being disrespectful.  It's not working. 

You cannot put ALL believers into ONE box.  There are many faiths, religious sects, and various differences in some tenets, etc.  Committing group "suicide" is not in my beliefs nor tenet, nor perceived or shown to be acceptable in God's Word.  You should already know this since you "know" so much about religions and beliefs, right?

[falcon9]

Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct?  If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do.  If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'?  The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.

You are twisting words again so you can let yourself believe you are in your "rights" of being disrespectful.  It's not working. 

What's not really working is your dodging/twsiting away from the first question, do you believe in the "rapture" notions or not?

You cannot put ALL believers into ONE box.  There are many faiths, religious sects, and various differences in some tenets, etc.  Committing group "suicide" is not in my beliefs nor tenet ...

I'm already aware that there are various sects, cults, denominations of the same religious belief system.  Many of these have selective or, conflicting beliefs-within-beliefs which is what separates them from one another.  While this may seem a somewhat tangential point, it isn't.  All of these various belief systems are subsets of the xtian belief system, (despite denials and attempts to distance themselves from one another).  Yes, that means even those Westboro Baptists who claim to be xtians have as much self-declarative 'right' to do so as any random lutheran, protestant, catholic or methodist does.

[jcribb16]

Just to clarify; you've implied that you believe in the religious notion of "rapture", correct?  If not, you can stop reading the reply sooner than you usually do.  If so, what's the cognizant difference between Jones and his "people's temple" wanting to "go" sooner and your wanting to wait for the same religious notion beyond 'suiciding'?  The religious notion of "rapture" is based entirely on evidence-lacking "faith" alone - same as Jones' notions.

You are twisting words again so you can let yourself believe you are in your "rights" of being disrespectful.  It's not working. 

What's not really working is your dodging/twsiting away from the first question, do you believe in the "rapture" notions or not?

You cannot put ALL believers into ONE box.  There are many faiths, religious sects, and various differences in some tenets, etc.  Committing group "suicide" is not in my beliefs nor tenet ...

I'm already aware that there are various sects, cults, denominations of the same religious belief system.  Many of these have selective or, conflicting beliefs-within-beliefs which is what separates them from one another.  While this may seem a somewhat tangential point, it isn't.  All of these various belief systems are subsets of the xtian belief system, (despite denials and attempts to distance themselves from one another).  Yes, that means even those Westboro Baptists who claim to be xtians have as much self-declarative 'right' to do so as any random lutheran, protestant, catholic or methodist does.

Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations.  Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others.  It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.

[falcon9]

Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations.

What limits your expounding of specious religious beliefs? Even logical dissent doesn't limit your "right" to proselytize, nor do continued attempts to censor such dissent limit it.  As far as the Westboro Baptists go, they are limited by secular laws and not by rationality nor respect.

Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others.  It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.

One or more religious sects do not need other religious sects to make them "look bad".  They can do that all by themselves.  It's always amusing when when religious sect, (based upon the same underLying religious beliefs), 'disowns' another.

[jcribb16]

Having "rights" does not mean exploiting those rights - there are limitations.

What limits your expounding of specious religious beliefs? Even logical dissent doesn't limit your "right" to proselytize, nor do continued attempts to censor such dissent limit it.  As far as the Westboro Baptists go, they are limited by secular laws and not by rationality nor respect.

Westboro may think they are within their rights, but when they harass people like they do, or threaten to burn others' "Bibles," and try and "be" God in their judgments of others, including what they threaten to do, but they are outside of certain limitations threatening the safety and rights of others.  It's ones like those who make other Christian sects look bad - actually it just plain makes Christians look bad, period, when other Christians, like myself, do not approve of nor agree with what they are doing.

One or more religious sects do not need other religious sects to make them "look bad".  They can do that all by themselves.  It's always amusing when when religious sect, (based upon the same underLying religious beliefs), 'disowns' another.

Aww... it's amusing?  It's not disowning, it's separating from those who are playing God and messing with other people in hateful and/or hurtful ways.  And you think it's "amusing..."

[falcon9]

It's always amusing when when religious sect, (based upon the same underLying religious beliefs), 'disowns' another.

Aww... it's amusing?  It's not disowning, it's separating from those who are playing God and messing with other people in hateful and/or hurtful ways. 

Separating, distancing, disowning themselves from other self-declared xtians ... there's no significant different in such 'that is not us, it's them' attitudes.

And you think it's "amusing..."

Only in a sardonic way, like satanism being inverted xtianity.

[2getherwewin]

Mark 9:35

King James Version (KJV)

And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.

[falcon9]

Mark 9:35

King James Version (KJV)

[joannaingram84]

To all those who have taken the time to falcon9's replies in the Christian posts have you noticed how he never spells out Christian using instead xstian. I do not know about you but I find that somewhat insulting.

[falcon9]

To all those who have taken the time to falcon9's replies in the Christian posts have you noticed how he never spells out Christian using instead xstian. I do not know about you but I find that somewhat insulting.

Then xtians are insulting themselves since the term "xtian" is a xtian diminutive.  Presumably, the "X" refers symbolically to the actual shape of the 'crosses' used by the Romans, (which were not generally only 'plus sign' shaped).

[jcribb16]

To all those who have taken the time to falcon9's replies in the Christian posts have you noticed how he never spells out Christian using instead xstian. I do not know about you but I find that somewhat insulting.

I do agree with you.  The explanation given for using it is one thing, but like you, and considering how it is presented, I perceive it as an insult.