does god send you...

[skrogman]

If my Bible cannot stand as evidence in and of itself, then how are those you are quoting (humans created by God, given the ability of that freedom of thought by God) any better sources of reference?

[falcon9]

If my Bible cannot stand as evidence in and of itself ...

It's irrational to claim that premise supports itself in a circular fest of unreason, (e.g., 'the bible says that the bible says stuff so, the stuff said in the bible is evidence that stuff said in the bible is true').

... then how are those you are quoting (humans created by God, given the ability of that freedom of thought by God) any better sources of reference?

Firstly, the premise that "humans" were "created by g-d, given the ability of that freedom of thought by g-d" is an unwarranted and unsupported assumption with no substantiating evidence), other than a faith-based claim, which does not constitute evidence).  
  Secondly, the emergent meta-debate is between those who adhere to irrational superstitions and those who utilize logical reasoning to discern the difference between sense and nonsense.  What's truly ironic is that the irrational religious adherents either try to use pseudo-logic to bolster an illogical position or, eschew reasoning altogether and run with the irrational faith-based nonsensical 'arguments'.

"He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a fool; he that dares not reason is a slave."
-- William Drummond

[skrogman]

Actually,  the emergent meta-debate is no longer even about those who adhere to a certain morally based code of ethics, but boiling down to just who would dare to disagree with Falcon9's over-inflated egotistical male overcompensating denial of our whole country's founding principles of religious freedom without fear of persecution.  And if you want to call me a slave to my Master's orders, again I say thank you and take that as a compliment.   I am in no way hurt or insulted by being called a Christian fundamentalist.  I wear the full armor of that, but not His robe.    You throw that out as though it were meant as an insult or to hurt someone, but it is the entire fiber of my being and if it comes out so that even you see it, I am accomplishing my mission.

[falcon9]

Actually,  the emergent meta-debate is no longer even about those who adhere to a certain morally based code of ethics, but boiling down to just who would dare to disagree with Falcon9's over-inflated egotistical male overcompensating denial of our whole country's founding principles of religious freedom without fear of persecution.

“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
--– John Adams
 

And if you want to call me a slave to my Master's orders, again I say thank you and take that as a compliment.   I am in no way hurt or insulted by being called a Christian fundamentalist.  I wear the full armor of that, but not His robe.    You throw that out as though it were meant as an insult or to hurt someone, but it is the entire fiber of my being and if it comes out so that even you see it, I am accomplishing my mission.

A slave can remain a slave but, the slave who rejects freedom and embraces his own slavery is a fearful fool.  Your admission to being a faith-blinded religious fundamentalist invalidates any implied claims of rationality for there is none in unreasoned fundamentalism.  It isn't "armor", it's a while cane with a red tip, tapping fearfully in the darkness of religious ignorance.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."
-- Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1758

[skrogman]

Wow...couldn't debate that one so had to misquote me and twist my words again.  The government of the United States is indeed not founded on the Christian religion, nor is that what I said.  Did I not say religious freedom?  And is that not exactly what our men and women in uniform are standing watch day in and day out to defend?  Now, I have answered all you have thrown at me...now let me give you a few....Where did your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandmother get her umbilical cord?  And what is your definition of the term "original sin"?

[Falconer02]

Ok, first, troll #2 edges his way into a conversation challenging me to fight a spiritual battle without straight out quoting from the Bible, which is like being challenged to a knife fight and saying no blades, but ok. And he comes at me with 1st Peter?  Wow. But ok  

I've simply asked some questions. Name-calling with no substance to the insults used is childish. And I came to you with a basic lesson in manners quoted from the bible, which you obviously have failed to follow.

And to answer why does an omnipotent, loving God allow for the existence of an evil antagonist...the antagonist to which you are referring is actually a jealous fallen angel who once had his place in the Kingdom.  From that jealousy, he thought that he could rise up and be as God (his creator).  Therefore in answer to his jealous behavior God did indeed give him a place to rule and put him in his place.  Therefore, he was not created as evil...again, consequences of his own choice in actions.

I did not ask for the story and you have completely hovered over the question. I will restate it and make is simpler to understand- How is it not malevolent for this god to create an evil entity that he knew would screw with mankind considering his omniscience? Remember that you stated later in your post that you believe in predestination and believe your god is all-knowing.

And why is God bothered so much by the doubts of unbelievers?  Because as stated over and over, He has laid His proof all around us and watched His one and only Son die for us and some still say "oh well".

Surely the rational thinkers would see basic proofs before the delusionals in the majority of situations, correct? It's very practical. I asked you for proof earlier, and you have not given any. Please provide proof w/o your biblical circular logic because it's a completely fallible foundation which has already been discussed. If you can't, then your argument has already crumbled.
:-/

And I will count it all joy to spend my eternity with not a God, but the God, who has separated His Church from those who have turned on Him.

Your haughty ignorance to other religions and their gods is absurd. Yours is just one in the crowd unless you can provide proof of your own. The "My god is real! The bible says so!" fallacy holds no weight since a Hindu could do the exact same thing. "My gods are real! The Vedas says so!".

He is absolutely not punishing people for making choices, He is rewarding His people for true and faithful service and honor to Him.

And choosing God over Hell is a simple choice.  Did not say it did not involve a lot of hard work, but it's a simple choice.  

"Worship me or suffer for eternity. The choice is yours."
"Give me your money or I'll shoot you. The choice is yours."

Both cases are very similar and both are illogical punishment and coercive tactics. And you support this mob-boss tactic? "Make him an offer he can't refuse!"

And, yes, you are very right in the statement of predestination.  Indeed, nothing we do can surprise God.

Well therefore you cannot exercise freewill or make choices. Saying otherwise is an obvious contradiction since you admit this entity knows your every move before you make it. It would seem that your god is a malevolent cheater who stacks the deck.

When I pray and say to Him "Lord, why did I do that?"  He reveals later that whatever I did was a part of a greater plan and it all comes together for His glory.  

"A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. Unlike hallucinations, delusions are always pathological (the result of an illness or illness process)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion

[jcribb16]

Actually,  the emergent meta-debate is no longer even about those who adhere to a certain morally based code of ethics, but boiling down to just who would dare to disagree with Falcon9's over-inflated egotistical male overcompensating denial of our whole country's founding principles of religious freedom without fear of persecution.  And if you want to call me a slave to my Master's orders, again I say thank you and take that as a compliment.   I am in no way hurt or insulted by being called a Christian fundamentalist.  I wear the full armor of that, but not His robe.    You throw that out as though it were meant as an insult or to hurt someone, but it is the entire fiber of my being and if it comes out so that even you see it, I am accomplishing my mission.

   Thank you! 

[JediJohnnie]

No one will ever be able to disprove God's existence.It's useless to even try to reason will these "enlightened" individuals.Common sense alone dictates that order does not come from chaos.A creation must have a creator.The Bible is historically accurate.What more do I really need to say?It "goes through one ear and out the other" as the old saying goes.

[falcon9]

No one will ever be able to disprove God's existence.

No one will ever be able to "disprove" any number of imaginary things.  Your assertion is an illogical non sequitur.

It's useless to even try to reason will these "enlightened" individuals.

You xtian fundies don't use reasoning in your illogical, religiously-based empty claims, (no substantive evidence for them).  Although you cannot be compelled to cease misusing a term with which you are practically unfamiliar with, (reason), your illogic is easily refuted.

Common sense alone dictates that order does not come from chaos.A creation must have a creator.The Bible is historically accurate.

On the contrary, if you knew fluid dynamics or chaos theory's mathematical basis, you would have known that "islands of stability", (order), can and do arise out of apparent "chaos".  This eliminates the presumption of a "creator", which in turn, negates your objection.
[/quote] 

What more do I really need to say?It "goes through one ear and out the other" as the old saying goes.

Of course it does; actual reasoning never penetrates the blind faith of religious fundies.

[egypt31]

I would definitely say that mean rejoice be happy teach the child how to be a Godly person also how to trust and believe in Christ Jesus. Yes I have been sent a few dreams I believe were sent from God, and messages while I was awake as well. It makes me so happy to know the truth, now only if I could break my sinful habits.

[falcon9]

I would definitely say that mean rejoice be happy teach the child how to be a Godly person also how to trust and believe in Christ Jesus. Yes I have been sent a few dreams I believe were sent from God, and messages while I was awake as well.

It makes me so happy to know the truth, now only if I could break my sinful habits.

[skrogman]

JediJohnny and jcribb, thank you...that is why I left it and dropped it...I have proven myself time and time again and he can only come back with the same circular reasoning over and over...so, it is what it is and I'm beyond it, have gone on to why we are really here at FC and just left it to go increase that number on my banner.  I've said what I've said, am convicted of it, and am leaving it here.  The only remaining thing I have to repeat myself on, though, is that I am truly glad that he did bring that out in me and showed even myself something I needed to see...AND IT'S DONE.

[falcon9]

...that is why I left it and dropped it...I have proven myself time and time again and he can only come back with the same circular reasoning over and over...

You've "proven" nothing more than that you're blinded by your religious faith.  The logic used to challenge your circular, (faith=belief=faith, ad infinitum), was not circular and demonstrates that you have no awareness of what constitutes inferential, deductive, symbolic or basic logic.  You virtually wallow in your irrationality and unreason and that's your choice.  Mine is to reject your illogic and superstitious religious mythology.

I've said what I've said, am convicted of it, and am leaving it here. 

I agree; your own words "convicted" you of religious blind faith and inability to see reason.   

The only remaining thing I have to repeat myself on, though, is that I am truly glad that he did bring that out in me and showed even myself something I needed to see...AND IT'S DONE.

If your repeating the same circular 'faith-belief-faith-belief' invalid premise didn't show your own self-delusion to yourself, nothing will.
Since you're attempting to get in the 'last word' in making another false claim which you have no intention of backing up with evidence, you may as well employ that ignore function which FC has thoughtfully provided, (unless you're another one who "ignores" by continuing to not ignore).

[skrogman]

Hmmmmm, not sure, but gee, I think that post started out with...jedijohnny and jcribb.....so ok, other than that all I have to say at this point is ho hum, you bore me.  But, thanks.

[falcon9]

Hmmmmm, not sure, but gee, I think that post started out with...jedijohnny and jcribb.....so ok, other than that all I have to say at this point is ho hum, you bore me.  But, thanks.

This is a thread posted in the debate & discuss subforum of an FC discussion board; not some private xtian back-patting exclusive club.  Therefore, any member of FC who wants to reply to a post on can do so.  It's not surprising that a response containing more than monosyllables "bores" you so, you might want to take advantage of the ignore button to prevent over-taxing your limited mental resources.