Don't dictate beliefs

[KJV]

Adam wrote:

<quoted text>Its a great point, worth repeating.

If it was true, but repeating rubbish is just that, more rubbish.

[Givemeliberty]

Which is why he needs to be reported. He has even posted clusters of the same off topic spam up to 18 times! It's a waste of bandwidth and just obnoxious.

Time to flush.

polymath257 wrote:

<quoted text>
If you are not willing to actually have a discussion about the material you post, then you shouldn't post it in the first place. Otherwise, you are simply a spamming troll. your choice.

[KJV]

derek4 wrote:

<quoted text>Go to google, type this in:“convert definition”.

This is what you will find:

“Verb - Cause to change in form, character, or function.”
“Noun - A person who has been persuaded to change their religious faith or other beliefs.”

So, if a person is a Christian, but they have “been persuaded to change their religious faith or other beliefs”[to the belief there is no God] they have converted from Christianity to atheism, or at least agnosticism.

I notice you were once a Mormon. You converted to atheism from Mormonism.

I don't have “notions” for you to “buy into”, LMAO – nor is the Christian faith a “notion”.

Do you think I would care what you “buy into”?[Don't overrate yourself.]

I should have a burden for your soul, but you have blasphemed God and made your choice, so it's rather difficult to feel sorry for you. I'm not here to try to convert you. God will see that you get what you are due.

Don't you tire of her self righteous holier then thou attitude then just babbles dribble?

[KJV]

swerty wrote:

<quoted text>slaves traders

What do you have to trade?

[KJV]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>polymath257 wrote:

"You claimed that living matter cannot come from non-living matter and I pointed out that *all* living matter is built from non-living matter, that the only difference between living and non-living matter is organization. You have offered no refutation of this point.

In other words Poly, Dim here has no idea what he really posted and cannot address any of the content as it is far beyond his ability to understand. And of course he also has no idea what it means to actually take responsibility for one's actions ....

....Which is to say, Dim's a typical Christian.

Derek. Thanks for the post. I always enjoy reading them. Keep up the good work.

[KJV]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>According to his own words, Hitler felt he was carrying out the Lord's plan in exterminating the Jews for not believing. And he had a willing following of sheeple to carry out his "final solution" - Gott Mit Uns.

So you believe Hitler. I guess that's no surprise. You seem to believe a lot crap.

[derek4]

polymath257 wrote:

<quoted text>
If you are not willing to actually have a discussion about the material you post, then you shouldn't post it in the first place.

So you can argue in a circle for 20 posts that go nowhere about it?

No one tells me what, how, or when to post, and my participation in the forum creates no obligation to respond to you in any way, shape or form. We have opposing views, and we always will. It is not essential that we agree, and I couldn't care less if we ever do, nor do I feel any compelling desire to convince you of the material I post. In other words, your opinion really makes me no difference whatsoever.

You don't like the material I posted, so take it up with the link that was provided, or let it go – the choice is yours. But - you're rather dense not to catch on after being told that 3 or 4 times. That's rather typical of trolls and atheists.

[derek4]

Adam wrote:

<quoted text>
Au contraire. I am not out to impress anyone.

It's good to know you're not trying to impress, because you certainly are NOT impressing anyone. LMAO

[derek4]

Khatru wrote:

<quoted text>
But you have no problem in taking what someone says and deliberately passing it off as someone else's quotation?
You're going to burn, Dim.

Thanks for admitting your belief in hell. They're warming it up fer 'ya.

[derek4]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't you tire of her self righteous holier then thou attitude then just babbles dribble?

She doesn't know anything. Seventy-five percent of what she posts says nothing – not worth the effort she spends typing it, but with atheists, that's what we expect, lol.

[derek4]

“Why Atheism Fails: The Four Big Bangs”

Their titles sound so confident:

The Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism and Islam by Michel Onfray.

God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens.

Letter to a Christian Nation: A Challenge to Faith by Sam Harris.

and of course, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

Yet, like all atheists before them, they still can’t answer the fundamental questions of origins.

1) What is the origin of the universe? Why is there something rather than nothing? How do you get matter and energy from nothingness? How do you get a rock out of nothing?

2) What is the origin of life? How do you get life from non-life? How do you go from a rock to a tree?

3) What is the origin of mind? How does a living thing become a self-conscious being? How do you go from a tree, to an animal, to a human?

4) What is the origin of good and evil? How does an amoral being become morally aware?

Atheists respond to all these types of questions with essentially the same style answer.“We know God doesn’t exist. Therefore, since we’re here, though, it had to have happened this way. Thus, like the universe itself, life, mind, and mo-rality all ‘just popped’ into existence out of nothingness.”

I call them the Four Big Bangs:

1’) the Cosmological (the universe “just popped” into existence out of nothingness).

2’) the Biological (life “just popped” into existence out of a dead thing).

3’) the Psychological (mind “just popped” into existence out of a brain).

4’) and the Moral (morality “just popped” into existence out of amorality).

For their many obfuscating words, the authors still don’t improve much beyond the “just popped” thesis, if at all.

I was an atheist for 27 years. I used to play on that team. I used to pick on religious people too. I knew the arguments to press and those to avoid.

[CONTINUED IN NEXT POST]

[derek4]

[continuation of “Why Atheism Fails: The Four Big Bangs”:]

“Attack with how unscientific theism is, how religious people aren’t very smart because they don’t chair any departments in the hard sciences at the right schools (it’s really called censorship). Raise the problem of evil: How could an omnipo-tent, loving God allow evil? Either God is not all powerful and can’t destroy it, or He doesn’t want to. Either way there can’t be a God because evil exists (don’t bring up the existence of good though, it’s too problematic). And, finally, go for the jugular with the hypocrisy of religious believers (You know, mention “all the wars in the name of religion,” and “all the fallen pastors” and especially,“the founders owned slaves” stuff, it’s really a good distraction.)

Avoid the pesky problem of freewill. If atheism is true, if all that exists is mere matter and energy, then I don’t have a brain, I am my brain. But if the brain is exhaustively physical, then it is just as incapable of acting freely as a computer or any other machine. Which is why the idea of Artificial Intelligence makes for such fun science fiction – the more peo-ple believe that a computer can become a person, the less likely they will have need to believe they were created in God’s image. Thus, more AI, less theism – that’s the game plan. Same with the search for ET. Find life elsewhere so we can dismiss Genesis.

But, above all, avoid being cornered and forced to answer the questions of origins. Throw out lots of words that people can’t understand. Talk over them. Blind them with science. Talk about the details of the leaves on the trees but don’t allow them to bring it back to “Why the forest at all?” Assert the fact/value distinction. Claim that only science deals with knowledge. Drop in some postmodern gobbledygook. Distract them with how science deals with the “what, where, how and when” and not the “who and the why.” Especially avoid people who have had training in the philosophy of science – they’re dangerous because they see through us and know who we are – they don’t see the shimmering lab coats that everyone else sees. They don’t see any clothes at all.

Since the pre-Socratics, atheists have been intellectual parasites living off the host of Western Civilization. Able to con-struct so very little of their own that is either true, good, or beautiful, they live on the borrowed capital of their believing intellectual parents. Atheists have been asserting the same basic mechanistic worldview, and with roughly the same suc-cess, for centuries. They sell books and win converts from time to time, sure, especially among those gullible enough to buy the “just popped” thesis. Don’t be gullible.

But, for me, the real value of atheism lies in bolstering belief in God. When I doubt, I can begin to doubt my doubts by returning to the Four Big Bangs. And, I eventually fall to my knees and worship,“In the beginning, God.”
http://townhall.com/columnists/frankpastore/2...

[derek4]

Soldiers of the Cross
THE SALVATION ARMY STORY

The way the World War II veterans in my hometown told the story, The Salvation Army was always there. On the front lines, where the shelling was worst, in the churning hell of war where even medics sometimes feared to tread, the men would look up and there they were. The distinctive colors of The Salvation Army would be in the thick of it as often as not, living out their slogan, "Heart to God, Hand to Man."

We witnessed and experienced the same service and care in Northridge, California, in January 1994. The Army's relief trucks were the first through the carnage of the most costly earthquake in American history.

When my editor felt we needed background on the people we see on almost every street corner in December collecting for the poor and needy, I looked forward to telling the story. It was a debt I felt I owed to the men and women who seem to be there when the going gets toughest.

The story begins in London, England, in the 1860s. The elegant heart of the British Empire was not always a pretty place. In the midst of Victorian opulence and splendor, the lives of those who were not able to keep up in the churning, expanding industrial democracy were often dispirited and hopeless.

In London, 30 percent of the people fell habitually below the poverty line. Parts of the city were described as "an ever-spreading pool of stagnant misery." Vice thrived. Mortality rates were horrific.

Into this scene of near-total despair, of class division, disease, prostitution, drunkenness and malnutrition, walked a turbulent dynamo of a man and his wife, former zealots in the Methodist religion--William and Catherine Booth.

William had been an impulsive and headstrong youth. He had broken with the Methodists when he was refused permission to be an itinerant evangelist.

The sun never sets on the Army tricolor. It is a restless banner, proclaiming its Gospel message in nearly 100 countries around the world.... Banned for four decades in countries oppressed by atheistic communism, it marches forward once again in the triumph of the cross.”- Henry Gariepy, General of God's Army”
http://www.ptm.org/NovSalvArmy.htm

[“Banned for four decades in countries oppressed by atheistic communism, it marches forward once again in the triumph of the cross.”]

[derek4]

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
So you believe Hitler. I guess that's no surprise. You seem to believe a lot crap.

The poster is also typical of atheists, lol. They say they want to discuss an issue, but they have no intention of doing so. They simply continue to present the same endless lies and circular arguments regardless of credible rebuttals, so there is no need for discussion - that's why I refer them back to the links I provide. It is a well establised fact that Hitler was not a Christian, and link after link of non-Christian web sources have confirmed it. Anyone can falsely claim to be something they are not. Actions speak louder than words. Hitler tried to destroy Christianity. He failed, just as atheists will always fail. Christianity is here to stay.

[derek4]

An atheist writes:

“Why I Refuse to Donate to the Salvation Army”

“There are many worthwhile charities in Mississippi who do good work locally. Of course, nobody has enough money to support all of them. In selecting which organizations to support, it seems like there are some fairly obvious decision points. For example, I refuse to support organizations that engage in any form of bigotry or religious proselytizing. Sadly, this excludes the Salvation Army and the local chapter of the United Way.

Pam's House Blend recently reminded us that the Salvation Army discriminates against LGBT individuals on religious grounds. They also discriminate against non-Christians in their hiring practices even though they receive federal funds. As far as I am concerned, this is more than enough to exclude them as a charity I am interested in supporting.

I am not denying that the Salvation Army and similar groups can do good in Mississippi and elsewhere. However, I would prefer to support charitable organizations that do not find it necessary to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or religion.
http://www.msatheists.org/2009/12/why-i-refus...

[Better hope a storm doesn't tear up your house. If it does, the Salvation Army would probably be there.]

[I think the Salvation Army can survive without your pennies.]

[derek4]

“The National Atheist Party seeks to politically represent U.S. atheists and all who share the goal of a secular government by gathering the political strength of secularists nationwide while being guided by the values of secular humanism and evidenced-based reasoning.


The National Atheist Party is a Constitutional movement dedicated to the preservation of the Founding Fathers’ vision of a secular nation. We are a progressive secular political organization whose current incarnation is as a non-profit 527 political organization. As we grow and evolve, we intend and expect to develop into a full-fledged political party. We are assembled for two important reasons: to give a political voice to U.S. atheists, who have never enjoyed political representation before; and to stand athwart those elements and groups that would seek to undermine the secular foundations of this great country.

The National Atheist Party is open to people of all races, sexes and sexual orientations, and cultures. We are committed to a government free of superstition and bias and are guided by principles of equal opportunity, recognition of merit, and economic responsibility. The National Atheist Party does not seek to inhibit the religious practices or beliefs of any group, but is committed to the idea that religious preference is a private matter and has no place in the government or workplace. We support the separation of church and state, and seek to ensure its strictest interpretation.
http://www.usanap.org/

[“religious preference is a private matter and has no place in the government or workplace”
How about atheism – does it have a place in the government or workplace? If so, why?]

[“religious preference is a private matter”- so religion is to be hidden, not spoken about, like in Communist Russia? Isn't atheism a “private matter”?- or is it to be shouted from the rooftops and proclaimed by our politicians? The majority voice -the voters - will win in the United States. Most Americans do not and will not ever support atheism.]

[“... we intend and expect to develop into a full-fledged political party”- LMAO – feel free to try, but you're going nowhere......]

[KittenKoder]

derek4 wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks for admitting your belief in hell. They're warming it up fer 'ya.

Yes, I love you sadistic people with a delusion, you make excellent comedic fodder.

[polymath257]

derek4 wrote:

“Why Atheism Fails: The Four Big Bangs”
Their titles sound so confident:
The Atheist Manifesto: The Case Against Christianity, Judaism and Islam by Michel Onfray.
God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens.
Letter to a Christian Nation: A Challenge to Faith by Sam Harris.
and of course, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.
Yet, like all atheists before them, they still can’t answer the fundamental questions of origins.
1) What is the origin of the universe? Why is there something rather than nothing? How do you get matter and energy from nothingness? How do you get a rock out of nothing?
2) What is the origin of life? How do you get life from non-life? How do you go from a rock to a tree?
3) What is the origin of mind? How does a living thing become a self-conscious being? How do you go from a tree, to an animal, to a human?
4) What is the origin of good and evil? How does an amoral being become morally aware?
Atheists respond to all these types of questions with essentially the same style answer.“We know God doesn’t exist. Therefore, since we’re here, though, it had to have happened this way. Thus, like the universe itself, life, mind, and mo-rality all ‘just popped’ into existence out of nothingness.”
I call them the Four Big Bangs:
1’) the Cosmological (the universe “just popped” into existence out of nothingness).
2’) the Biological (life “just popped” into existence out of a dead thing).
3’) the Psychological (mind “just popped” into existence out of a brain).
4’) and the Moral (morality “just popped” into existence out of amorality).
For their many obfuscating words, the authors still don’t improve much beyond the “just popped” thesis, if at all.
I was an atheist for 27 years. I used to play on that team. I used to pick on religious people too. I knew the arguments to press and those to avoid.
[CONTINUED IN NEXT POST]

I assume you have taken the road of being a spamming troll. If you want to actually carry on a conversation, please post something you are willing to defend.

[polymath257]

derek4 wrote:

<quoted text>
So you can argue in a circle for 20 posts that go nowhere about it?
No one tells me what, how, or when to post, and my participation in the forum creates no obligation to respond to you in any way, shape or form. We have opposing views, and we always will. It is not essential that we agree, and I couldn't care less if we ever do, nor do I feel any compelling desire to convince you of the material I post. In other words, your opinion really makes me no difference whatsoever.
You don't like the material I posted, so take it up with the link that was provided, or let it go – the choice is yours. But - you're rather dense not to catch on after being told that 3 or 4 times. That's rather typical of trolls and atheists.

So you admit to being a spamming troll. OK, I can deal with that.

[Givemeliberty]

Jesus ate yours and is still munching on it now.

Talking snakes lmfao!

KJV wrote:

<quoted text>
Did your zombies eat your brain?