Trump wins chiller DGF Redskinsfan1983

[Stymietee]

Here's that third theory and in fairness this has been pretty widely dismissed by the creation and evolutionary crowds for obvious reasons.

Ancient astronaut theorists propose that intelligent extraterrestrial beings visited Earth in ancient times and made contact with humans. They believe that these extraterrestrial visitors played a significant role in the development of human civilization, influencing our cultures, technologies, religions, and even biology.

Key Points of Ancient Astronaut Theories​

• Extraterrestrial Influence: Proponents suggest that ancient astronauts brought advanced technologies to Earth, which were interpreted as evidence of divine status by early humans.
• Deities as Extraterrestrials: A common position is that many deities from various religions are actually extraterrestrial beings.
• Human Origins: Some theorists, like Zecharia Sitchin, claim that humans are either descendants or creations of these extraterrestrial visitors. Sitchin, for example, proposed that a race of extraterrestrials called the Anunnaki from a planet called Nibiru were responsible for creating human civilization.
• Archaeological and Historical Evidence: Ancient astronaut theorists often point to ancient structures, artifacts, and texts as evidence of extraterrestrial contact. Examples include the Egyptian pyramids, the Moai statues of Easter Island, Machu Picchu, The Nazca Lines (Peru), Stonehedge, Baalbek, Lebanon, Puma Punku/Tiwanaku, Bolivia, and various carvings, artifacts, ancient myths and legends.

 

[gkekoa]

Everything is a theory... including religion!

And everything is religion, especially Darwinism.

 

[gkekoa]

You asked: “Who did God hate?” Here’s a list:

Leviticus 20:23: Moreover, you shall not follow the customs of the nation which I will drive out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I have abhorred them.

Leviticus 26:30: I then will destroy your high places, and cut down your incense altars, and heap your remains on the remains of your idols, for My soul shall abhor you.

Psalm 5:5: The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity.

Psalm 5:6: You destroy those who speak falsehood; The Lord abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit.

Deuteronomy 18:12: For whoever does these things is detestable to the Lord; and because of these detestable things the Lord your God will drive them out before you.

Deuteronomy 22:5: “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.

Psalm 11:5: The Lord tests the righteous and the wicked; And the one who loves violence His soul hates.

Malachi 1:2: “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have You loved us?” “Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob;

Romans 9:13: Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (Who these people were and who their descendants are today is a whole different story)

Deuteronomy 1:27: and you grumbled in your tents and said, ‘Because the Lord hates us, He has brought us out of the land of Egypt to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites to destroy us.

Deuteronomy 9:28: Otherwise, the land from which You brought us may say, “Because the Lord was not able to bring them into the land which He had promised them and because He hated them He has brought them out to slay them in the wilderness.”

Jeremiah 12:8: “My inheritance has become to Me; Like a lion in the forest; She has roared against Me; Therefore I have come to hate her.

Psalm 106:40: Therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against His people And He abhorred His inheritance.

Hosea 9:15: All their evil is at Gilgal; Indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house!
I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels.

Jeremiah 14:19: Have You completely rejected Judah? Or have You loathed Zion? Why have You stricken us so that we are beyond healing?
We waited for peace, but nothing good came; And for a time of healing, but behold, terror!

You suggested: “Maybe you should investigate that force rather than speak against it.”

Another failing of believers is this either or mystique that holds to a belief that one is either a believer or an atheist (non-believer) when in fact there’s a third option… agnosticism; the belief that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God: This is my position. That said, I have investigated that force and since I'm limited to earth and earthbound things, I have to conclude that in a universe as vast as it is, what I can ascertain is extremely limited, so much so, that it leads me to do the obvious... admit that I don't know what I don't know. Perhaps it's the illogical belief-based limitations found in religious sanctimony that prevent you from reaching the same conclusion. (Belief doesn’t know, it submits)

Finally, your counter is… “It is not a dumb argument. It is a comparison. Scientifically, there is no cold or darkness. We have words to describe the feeling…”

It's an earth-bound comparison that has little significance when you're talking about a Universal God. Let's agree that the universe is vast and all of it was created by some force or another (you call it God and that's ok) but astrophysics tells us that the entire make-up of that universe is 4.6% atoms, 27% Dark matter, and 68% Dark energy, therefore your perspective on light, cold and evil is based on far less than 4.6% of all that is, because we are, if nothing else, molecular. (feel free to look up my stats)

I'm not trying to get you to change your mind about any of this, it is just another in a long line of conversations that you and I have engaged in over the years, so I’ve always appreciated the civility and intellectual challenges. That said, expand your mind for a moment, acknowledge the vastness of the universe, and note that it is cold and dark you'd call it the absence of heat and/or light which is fair enough. Now to get heat and light we'll need an atom-based collision to generate both. As mentioned atoms comprise 4.6% of the entire universe therefore a reasonable mind would surmise that from massive the original thing- cold and darkness, come heat and light, not the archaic reverse incomplete standard that you put forward earlier.

How dark energy functions nobody knows, the same applies to dark matter. Cold and darkness are the constants of the universe; heat and light are its offspring. Even your bible supports this as noted in Genesis where your God says... "Let there be light!" and there’s only one question that arises from that declaration and it’s… instead of what? This is a reference to the sun, a yellow dwarf star that is a massive, nearly perfect sphere of hot plasma, heated to incandescence by nuclear fusion reactions in its core, radiating the energy from its surface mainly as visible light and infrared radiation with 10% at ultraviolet energies. It is by far the most important source of energy for life on Earth. As mentioned before, it's good to admit that you don't know! (Belief doesn’t know, it submits)

SN: I still haven’t given up on the mechanics and theory behind cold fusion.

Now let's talk about "evil" which is a function of man since there's no evidence of it ever existing outside of this planet. Again the logical mind tells us that in a universe beyond Earth where no evil, at least no evidence of evil has ever been recorded, there's "good," that comes in the form of everything else being exactly where and how it's supposed to be. This perspective aligns with certain philosophical and practical views where "goodness" is seen as the harmonious state of affairs, where everything functions according to its purpose and fits perfectly within a broader order. Unless you have some evidence that anything else in the universe is out of order we have to conclude that it is in order and the beings on this planet as relatively minuscule as they are… are out of order, perhaps by design in comparison. Evil (the smaller thing) comes from good (the greater thing) this too is supported by your bible and the God that you "believe" in who used "good" on seven different occasions during creation. However, it was the last one, of his/her, or its' creations, the only thing outside of your God, designed as "good" that's capable of producing evil as you call it. Evil comes from good not because of the absence of it relatively speaking. Your God therefore is, both good and evil OR a bad designer who creates a self-described “good” product in his/her or its own image that's capable of creating evil even in the presence of the good that it made. I lean toward the former because as previously mentioned; “God” is wholly made up by mankind. Worse, these “God” creators (Fred, Barney, Wilma, and Betty) were somewhere between 1st and 3rd-century mankind. (Belief doesn’t know, it submits)

So I guess we should define what it is to hate. Can you love what you hate? Hate in terms of what we as Americans use it may not be the same as what it means if God abhors or hates. When we hate, it is to the core. When God hates, it is the evil within people. If God hated in the manner in which we Americans use the word, he would not have offered them a path to forgiveness. At any point, anybody in the Bible could have found forgiveness which is not something we as humans typically are capable of for something we hate.

Let me ask it again like this. If your son were to be a ********* who murdered 30 children after doing what pedophiles do, would you abhor your son for his actions? Would it be just to abhor him as such? Now imagine being able to justly forgive him. Would that be the definition of hate you would use, or would you hate what he had done?

I can appreciate your agnostic stance. I can’t prove to you that God exists just like I can’t prove that Abraham Lincoln existed. All we can do is follow the evidence. I believe there is far greater existence that God exists and created all we see than the alternative that He does not exist. I also believe there is plenty of historical evidence to not only support the existence of Jesus, to include the biblical miracles, than there is to believe that Alexander the Great did what is taught. Now, if I am being intellectually honest and claim that I believe in Alexander the Great, then I must believe in Jesus Christ.

When we say heat, we are referring to heat energy. There is no such thing as cold energy. Something that is cold, simply lacks heat. Something that is hot does not lack cold. Something that is dark, lacks light. Something that is light does not lack darkness.

For the moral argument, we would have to define evil. What is evil for one person is not evil for another. Unless there is an objective judge of good and evil, a Creator, then evil cannot exist. The Creator is the objective measure of good and anything he states is evil would be an objective measure of that fact. As God created everything in the beginning, he stated and it was good. God gave us free will and we used it and it separated us from him. If we go against what is God’s perfect design, then we are doing evil. For the record, I do evil everyday.

 

[Stymietee]

And everything is religion, especially Darwinism.

Good point! So, until we know for certain, it's all Bullshit!

 

[gkekoa]

Good point! So, until we know for certain, it's all Bullshit!

Yet something has to be true.

 

[Stymietee]

So I guess we should define what it is to hate. Can you love what you hate? Hate in terms of what we as Americans use it may not be the same as what it means if God abhors or hates. When we hate, it is to the core. When God hates, it is the evil within people. If God hated in the manner in which we Americans use the word, he would not have offered them a path to forgiveness. At any point, anybody in the Bible could have found forgiveness which is not something we as humans typically are capable of for something we hate.

Let me ask it again like this. If your son were to be a ********* who murdered 30 children after doing what pedophiles do, would you abhor your son for his actions? Would it be just to abhor him as such? Now imagine being able to justly forgive him. Would that be the definition of hate you would use, or would you hate what he had done?

I can appreciate your agnostic stance. I can’t prove to you that God exists just like I can’t prove that Abraham Lincoln existed. All we can do is follow the evidence. I believe there is far greater existence that God exists and created all we see than the alternative that He does not exist. I also believe there is plenty of historical evidence to not only support the existence of Jesus, to include the biblical miracles, than there is to believe that Alexander the Great did what is taught. Now, if I am being intellectually honest and claim that I believe in Alexander the Great, then I must believe in Jesus Christ.

When we say heat, we are referring to heat energy. There is no such thing as cold energy. Something that is cold, simply lacks heat. Something that is hot does not lack cold. Something that is dark, lacks light. Something that is light does not lack darkness.

For the moral argument, we would have to define evil. What is evil for one person is not evil for another. Unless there is an objective judge of good and evil, a Creator, then evil cannot exist. The Creator is the objective measure of good and anything he states is evil would be an objective measure of that fact. As God created everything in the beginning, he stated and it was good. God gave us free will and we used it and it separated us from him. If we go against what is God’s perfect design, then we are doing evil. For the record, I do evil everyday.

I cannot believe that you wrote this about "hate!" According to your own beliefs (Christianity), you and everyone else were made in the image, so therefore, your God hates to the core or he, she, it is a very poor architect. The creator would be the responsible entity for that which was created, correct? So, "God" in effect hates him/her/itself! OK, got it!
So, why the need for a "path to forgiveness" when the perfect failed to create a being that didn't have this capability? Even then wouldn't the clear course correct be a do-over? It's not like this BS creator didn't see the disobedient ungodly flaw right away or will your defense be the Adam/Eve story is a metaphor? (I hope so) Btw: I've listed many occasions where your "God" hated or worse and you seem to want to narrow the field to only something that you manufactured... "the evil within people." let me ask you this, what evil did the unborn Easu commit?
Therefore, Isaac was one of God's children, but Ishmael wasn’t. Similarly, with Jacob and Esau – God chose Jacob, but not Esau. This was before they were born (Romans 9:11). Therefore, Jacob's election and Esau's rejection by God were not dependent on anything they did – rather it was God’s free sovereign choice.

I wouldn't hate my creation under any circumstance because his actions as horrible as they are don't dictate my feelings toward my child. I also wouldn't hate his actions either, especially if I called myself a Christian, because as you've outlined in your opening, to be Christ-like necessarily means there's a pathway to forgiveness. My goal and responsibility as his father is to try to understand why, which is contrary to what you're putting in your question and outlines the pretty standard hypocrisy in so-called, self-styled American Christians. Hell, I don't buy into any religion and I'm more "Christ-like" than a whole bunch of them.

Interesting take on Lincoln!, but for shits and giggles, you're leaving a fairly good written trail on this site, I'm sure that there are pictures of you somewhere in your family and your earth-time footprint is easily traceable, so, are you now telling me, that, like Lincoln, you don't exist or can't be proven to have existed? (using the common definition of having been alive?) It is also more interesting that you "believe" that "God" exists and question whether or not Lincoln ever did. Hey here's a biblical "miracle" that I can get behind, resurrecting from the dead, of course, today we call it standard or at times emergent CPR! Btw; no one said that Jesus never existed, just that your biblical version of the same is Bullshit!

I've already dismantled your "cold/heat" "light/dark," and "good/evil" perspective and see no reason to repeat this.

Interestingly, Christians try to use "free will" as the get out of jail free card when cornered, but the easy answer to that nonsense is why did this all-knowing, all-powerful, "creator" give it to you in the first place, knowing that his/her/its' pre-ordained, image flawed, creations would use it for something that he/she, it reportedly doesn't have..." hate?" (specifically, by your use of that word, unholy hate)

 

[Stymietee]

Yet something has to be true.

Agreed, as difficult as it appears to be embraced "I don't know!" is true.

 

[gkekoa]

I cannot believe that you wrote this about "hate!" According to your own beliefs (Christianity), you and everyone else were made in the image, so therefore, your God hates to the core or he, she, it is a very poor architect. The creator would be the responsible entity for that which was created, correct? So, "God" in effect hates him/her/itself! OK, got it!
So, why the need for a "path to forgiveness" when the perfect failed to create a being that didn't have this capability? Even then wouldn't the clear course correct be a do-over? It's not like this BS creator didn't see the disobedient ungodly flaw right away or will your defense be the Adam/Eve story is a metaphor? (I hope so) Btw: I've listed many occasions where your "God" hated or worse and you seem to want to narrow the field to only something that you manufactured... "the evil within people." let me ask you this, what evil did the unborn Easu commit?
Therefore, Isaac was one of God's children, but Ishmael wasn’t. Similarly, with Jacob and Esau – God chose Jacob, but not Esau. This was before they were born (Romans 9:11). Therefore, Jacob's election and Esau's rejection by God were not dependent on anything they did – rather it was God’s free sovereign choice.

I wouldn't hate my creation under any circumstance because his actions as horrible as they are don't dictate my feelings toward my child. I also wouldn't hate his actions either, especially if I called myself a Christian, because as you've outlined in your opening, to be Christ-like necessarily means there's a pathway to forgiveness. My goal and responsibility as his father is to try to understand why, which is contrary to what you're putting in your question and outlines the pretty standard hypocrisy in so-called, self-styled American Christians. Hell, I don't buy into any religion and I'm more "Christ-like" than a whole bunch of them.

Interesting take on Lincoln!, but for shits and giggles, you're leaving a fairly good written trail on this site, I'm sure that there are pictures of you somewhere in your family and your earth-time footprint is easily traceable, so, are you now telling me, that, like Lincoln, you don't exist or can't be proven to have existed? (using the common definition of having been alive?) It is also more interesting that you "believe" that "God" exists and question whether or not Lincoln ever did. Hey here's a biblical "miracle" that I can get behind, resurrecting from the dead, of course, today we call it standard or at times emergent CPR! Btw; no one said that Jesus never existed, just that your biblical version of the same is Bullshit!

I've already dismantled your "cold/heat" "light/dark," and "good/evil" perspective and see no reason to repeat this.

Interestingly, Christians try to use "free will" as the get out of jail free card when cornered, but the easy answer to that nonsense is why did this all-knowing, all-powerful, "creator" give it to you in the first place, knowing that his/her/its' pre-ordained, image flawed, creations would use it for something that he/she, it reportedly doesn't have..." hate?" (specifically, by your use of that word, unholy hate)

Actually, God created Adam in his own image. Adam sinned and we all were then born into sin through our flesh because of free choice. Love is a choice and cannot be programmed. Adam made a poor choice, as we all do every day.

Is a do over just?

God’s sovereign choice takes into consideration things that have not happened yet because he knows us, even before the womb (Jeremiah 1:5).

Malachi 1:3 Commentaries: but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness."

biblehub.com

Is that your duty as a father, to understand? I could not disagree more and this is where I believe you are disingenuous. You are saying you don’t hate the action of a ********* and a murderer, something that is universally seen as wrong.

Without free will, we cannot love God. God created us to commune with us but knew we would fall short. That is why from the beginning, God created a way for it to happen, through Jesus Christ, mercy we do not earn. That is just my opinion.

 

[Stymietee]

Actually, God created Adam in his own image. Adam sinned and we all were then born into sin through our flesh because of free choice. Love is a choice and cannot be programmed. Adam made a poor choice, as we all do every day.

Is a do over just?

God’s sovereign choice takes into consideration things that have not happened yet because he knows us, even before the womb (Jeremiah 1:5).

Malachi 1:3 Commentaries: but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness."

biblehub.com

Is that your duty as a father, to understand? I could not disagree more and this is where I believe you are disingenuous. You are saying you don’t hate the action of a ********* and a murderer, something that is universally seen as wrong.

Without free will, we cannot love God. God created us to commune with us but knew we would fall short. That is why from the beginning, God created a way for it to happen, through Jesus Christ, mercy we do not earn. That is just my opinion.

There's only one thing here that I have not already addressed and you haven't offered a competent answer to... why would an all powerful, all knowing, devoid of evil, "God" do any of these things, from Adam to free will, to allowing evil, death and destruction unless all of that served it's selfishness.,which at the end according to Revelations that's exactly what's supposed to happen,correct?

Let me be clear on this point!

Let's say that you wanted to create a game in which you were the good guy, and in this game you created an enemy so vile that it was obvious that you were the good one. Now the rules of this game was so rigged that no matter what happened ( and a lot happened) at its end you would be victorious. Knowing the outcome who in their right mind would choose to play the game?

Finally, about your questions about fatherhood. First, you'd have to assume that the serial killing, pedo, son is an adult who has chosen his own path despite my contrary guidance, he's now exercising his own "free will" as an adult. So, since he's gone against my exemplary example, and decided not to become a chip off of the old block, what's left for me to do, break out in some sort of emotional fit as you seem to suggest? Nope, that's not me! Instead of hating which serves no purpose beyond blinding a perspective I want to understand the motivation behind his actions. I know that you're a pilot, let's say that you were assigned to investigate a crash, do you do your job or get wound up in emotions that could alter your findings? Why do you take this as being disingenuous?
Does " hate" play a role in my life, absolutely, does it influence or control my actions, absolutely not!

 

[gkekoa]

There's only one thing here that I have not already addressed and you haven't offered a competent answer to... why would an all powerful, all knowing, devoid of evil, "God" do any of these things, from Adam to free will, to allowing evil, death and destruction unless all of that served it's selfishness.,which at the end according to Revelations that's exactly what's supposed to happen,correct?

Let me be clear on this point!

Let's say that you wanted to create a game in which you were the good guy, and in this game you created an enemy so vile that it was obvious that you were the good one. Now the rules of this game was so rigged that no matter what happened ( and a lot happened) at its end you would be victorious. Knowing the outcome who in their right mind would choose to play the game?

Finally, about your questions about fatherhood. First, you'd have to assume that the serial killing, pedo, son is an adult who has chosen his own path despite my contrary guidance, he's now exercising his own "free will" as an adult. So, since he's gone against my exemplary example, and decided not to become a chip off of the old block, what's left for me to do, break out in some sort of emotional fit as you seem to suggest? Nope, that's not me! Instead of hating which serves no purpose beyond blinding a perspective I want to understand the motivation behind his actions. I know that you're a pilot, let's say that you were assigned to investigate a crash, do you do your job or get wound up in emotions that could alter your findings? Why do you take this as being disingenuous?
Does " hate" play a role in my life, absolutely, does it influence or control my actions, absolutely not!

Because God wanted a relationship with his creation is the best answer I can come up with. Obviously, I cannot know the answer but can come up with conclusions.

Games have a purpose right? Games are created, correct?

Does it matter if your guidance was contradictory to have him exercise his own free will? Where did I suggest you have a fit? The Creator already knows the motivation because he is the Creator.

Good. Hate should not control your actions. Justice should though. Would you agree that your son deserves punishment for his crimes?

 

[Stymietee]

Because God wanted a relationship with his creation is the best answer I can come up with. Obviously, I cannot know the answer but can come up with conclusions.

Games have a purpose right? Games are created, correct?

Does it matter if your guidance was contradictory to have him exercise his own free will? Where did I suggest you have a fit? The Creator already knows the motivation because he is the Creator.

Good. Hate should not control your actions. Justice should though. Would you agree that your son deserves punishment for his crimes?

If your "God" wanted a relationship with his/her, to its' creation then there was nothing stopping that, but to have one that's contrary to all that he/she, it reportedly is, makes zero sense. I've heard that this "God' had angels that it had zero problems with, except one, correct?
"I don't know," is the wisest thing you've written in the exchange. It is interesting that so-called "Christians" claim to "know" God but when questioned or challenged about him/her/it have zero answers.

Exactly, it's (religion) created by man, and designed to control the masses with two basic "get out of jail free" cards.
1. Free will
2. Forgiveness
The problem with "free will" is that it becomes ungodly most of the time and is ONLY used as a countermeasure when perpetrators of false faith refuse to look at the source for accountability.
The problem with "forgiveness," beyond being counter-godliness, is that nothing destructive is out of bounds. Take an honest look at the world around you and see what these so-called religious types, who comprise the majority of the world's population, have wrought. (I suspect that the counter will be "true faithful") In fact, "religion and religiousness" account for almost all of the human carnage in the world. Is this the grand design that people speak of?

No, it doesn't matter, this ongoing human condition mandates the son leave his father's house and make his way in the world. My guidance was nothing more than a blueprint, a set of standards used by me and at the disposal of my offspring to follow or not follow... you know, the exercise of "free will."

Absolutely!! The son deserves the punishment for the crimes. Now this last line is interesting because it brings us, full circle back to where this all began... this election!

Correct me if I'm wrong your original post that I responded to is...



...And you followed that with this...



...And this jewel;

"Jesus would be king of a country not of this world."

So, you want religion in government, and "the people should align their beliefs with the party that closely resembles (represents) those beliefs." Further, you want the people to separate their religiousness (beliefs) from the government as mandated by the edict... "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's since "Jesus would be king of a country not of this world." (I'm guessing that Jesus is "God" in this scenario and not his son. (sun)) Can we agree that (Federal) Government is manmade and by constitutional design not allowed to mix religion and governance as outlined in the First Amendment?

​

 

[reptec101]

Sty, this is what you believe. A bacterium slime the size of a micro gnat with everything that needed to happen for it to even begin to grow ,..,happen... and not only grow.,, develop consciousness, awareness,, and even the ability to reason logically, and to see hear and feel, and do all that in a beginning world filled with turmoil and extremities. Have you even considered the odds of that. Look, I know it's easy to dispute a higher hand. We all understand that. We haven't seen God nor have we heard him, but have you really looked for him,,and have you really listened. Do you realize the Bible has more prophetic accuracies than a Nostradamus tell all book. You're a smart man I see it in your comments, and you put a lot of thought behind what you say. Much respect; but you just can't grasp the golden goose that lays right before your eyes. We exist not by chance. There's no reason for it. Because nothing comes from nothing.

We are not meant to understand God. We're not capable, but we understand right from wrong, but then what determined that. How do we know right from wrong. If we evolved from a slimy microcosm element sent to us from the astropheric void then what taught us the difference between good and evil. How could we know that murder is bad. Our minds simply wouldn't know whats right,,whats wrong. Man wouldn't know the difference unless it was embedded in his soul. You give to much credit to mans capability, but I do respect your insight, and others on here.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty, this is what you believe. A bacterium slime the size of a micro gnat with everything that needed to happen for it to even begin to grow ,..,happen... and not only grow.,, develop consciousness, awareness,, and even the ability to reason logically, and to see hear and feel, and do all that in a beginning world filled with turmoil and extremities. Have you even considered the odds of that. Look, I know it's easy to dispute a higher hand. We all understand that. We haven't seen God nor have we heard him, but have you really looked for him,,and have you really listened. Do you realize the Bible has more prophetic accuracies than a Nostradamus tell all book. You're a smart man I see it in your comments, and you put a lot of thought behind what you say. Much respect; but you just can't grasp the golden goose that lays right before your eyes. We exist not by chance. There's no reason for it. Because nothing comes from nothing.

We are not meant to understand God. We're not capable, but we understand right from wrong, but then what determined that. How do we know right from wrong. If we evolved from a slimy microcosm element sent to us from the astropheric void then what taught us the difference between good and evil. How could we know that murder is bad. Our minds simply wouldn't know whats right,,whats wrong. Man wouldn't know the difference unless it was embedded in his soul. You give to much credit to mans capability, but I do respect your insight, and others on here.

You're completely wrong, I'm an Agnostic, therefore, I don't buy into any of these things as a known answer. I'm not closed-minded to one thing when all or some combination is possible or better something not yet learned by the masses.

You wrote: "We are not meant to understand God." which is true according to everything I've studied and every clergy I've had conversations with on the subject. So, if you hold to that, the ONLY possible conclusion that you can draw agrees with me when I say... "I don't know!"

We learned right from wrong because mankind created the parameters of these and others in our lives. So, here's a question for you... Since you believe in this omnipresent, all-knowing, creator of everything past, present, and future, how do you know that all good and evil isn't preordained?

...And just in case some people don't know what an Agnostic is... here ya go!
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of God's existence or nature nor anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith (Religion) nor disbelief in God.

 

[gkekoa]

If your "God" wanted a relationship with his/her, to its' creation then there was nothing stopping that, but to have one that's contrary to all that he/she, it reportedly is, makes zero sense. I've heard that this "God' had angels that it had zero problems with, except one, correct?
"I don't know," is the wisest thing you've written in the exchange. It is interesting that so-called "Christians" claim to "know" God but when questioned or challenged about him/her/it have zero answers.

Exactly, it's (religion) created by man, and designed to control the masses with two basic "get out of jail free" cards.
1. Free will
2. Forgiveness
The problem with "free will" is that it becomes ungodly most of the time and is ONLY used as a countermeasure when perpetrators of false faith refuse to look at the source for accountability.
The problem with "forgiveness," beyond being counter-godliness, is that nothing destructive is out of bounds. Take an honest look at the world around you and see what these so-called religious types, who comprise the majority of the world's population, have wrought. (I suspect that the counter will be "true faithful") In fact, "religion and religiousness" account for almost all of the human carnage in the world. Is this the grand design that people speak of?

No, it doesn't matter, this ongoing human condition mandates the son leave his father's house and make his way in the world. My guidance was nothing more than a blueprint, a set of standards used by me and at the disposal of my offspring to follow or not follow... you know, the exercise of "free will."

Absolutely!! The son deserves the punishment for the crimes. Now this last line is interesting because it brings us, full circle back to where this all began... this election!

Correct me if I'm wrong your original post that I responded to is...

View attachment 380565

...And you followed that with this...

View attachment 380567

...And this jewel;

"Jesus would be king of a country not of this world."

So, you want religion in government, and "the people should align their beliefs with the party that closely resembles (represents) those beliefs." Further, you want the people to separate their religiousness (beliefs) from the government as mandated by the edict... "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's since "Jesus would be king of a country not of this world." (I'm guessing that Jesus is "God" in this scenario and not his son. (sun)) Can we agree that (Federal) Government is manmade and by constitutional design not allowed to mix religion and governance as outlined in the First Amendment?

​

“I don’t know” is a response that a Christian should give if they are asked if something is 100% accurate. It would be the equivalent of asking what your spouse was thinking when you did t talk to your spouse about it. We can only guess based on evidence or logic. In a discussion, it should be assumed we do not know 100% about an entity the other doubts he existence of. You know that but sometimes in a discussion, the other person is just trying to be difficult.

God still wants a relationship with us today, and HE has one with many of us. With others, one party is too obstinate to listen.

As for the angels, we all know that one wanted to be on equal footing with God, he was cast out because he was not on equal footing…and Satan had other angels he instigated.

Religion itself is man made but not in relationship. Bible is not man made in the sense you are using it.

For somebody who gets easily offended by terms like Redskin, you do t seem to have a problem trying to offend Christians. I’m sorry but it is not a “get out of jail free” card. What I believe is based on historical record. Jesus is the most historically accurate figure in history based on manuscripts, first hand accounts, and proximity of when it was written to the events occurring. Now the Old Testament, you may question its legitimacy as some of it was written based on oral tradition but you don’t seem to question other oral traditions that were later written. As mentioned by Reptec, Jesus fulfilled some 330 Old Testament prophecies. The likelihood of fulfilling just 8 of the Messionic prophecies is 1x10^17. Also, archaeological evidence is continually uncovered supporting the legitimacy of much of the Old Testament.

Actually, nowhere does the Constitution state or claim that religion and government should be separate. It states the government shall not infringe on religion, not vice versa.

 

[reptec101]

You're completely wrong, I'm an Agnostic, therefore, I don't buy into any of these things as a known answer. I'm not closed-minded to one thing when all or some combination is possible or better something not yet learned by the masses.

You wrote: "We are not meant to understand God." which is true according to everything I've studied and every clergy I've had conversations with on the subject. So, if you hold to that, the ONLY possible conclusion that you can draw agrees with me when I say... "I don't know!"

We learned right from wrong because mankind created the parameters of these and others in our lives. So, here's a question for you... Since you believe in this omnipresent, all-knowing, creator of everything past, present, and future, how do you know that all good and evil isn't preordained?

...And just in case some people don't know what an Agnostic is... here ya go!
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of God's existence or nature nor anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith (Religion) nor disbelief in God.

I only know what my faith tells me is true. I stated above that we weren't meant to understand God, but actually, we're not capable to understand. Man could never understand a God whose been around since time infinity. We only know what the Bible tells us in its earthly form. Though we love to ponder.

Since I believe I therefore believe that everything has been preordained. From day one to days end.

 

[Stymietee]

If your "God" wanted a relationship with his/her, to its' creation then there was nothing stopping that, but to have one that's contrary to all that he/she, it reportedly is, makes zero sense. I've heard that this "God' had angels that it had zero problems with, except one, correct?
"I don't know," is the wisest thing you've written in the exchange. It is interesting that so-called "Christians" claim to "know" God but when questioned or challenged about him/her/it have zero answers.

Exactly, it's (religion) created by man, and designed to control the masses with two basic "get out of jail free" cards.
1. Free will
2. Forgiveness
The problem with "free will" is that it becomes ungodly most of the time and is ONLY used as a countermeasure when perpetrators of false faith refuse to look at the source for accountability.
The problem with "forgiveness," beyond being counter-godliness, is that nothing destructive is out of bounds. Take an honest look at the world around you and see what these so-called religious types, who comprise the majority of the world's population, have wrought. (I suspect that the counter will be "true faithful") In fact, "religion and religiousness" account for almost all of the human carnage in the world. Is this the grand design that people speak of?

No, it doesn't matter, this ongoing human condition mandates the son leave his father's house and make his way in the world. My guidance was nothing more than a blueprint, a set of standards used by me and at the disposal of my offspring to follow or not follow... you know, the exercise of "free will."

Absolutely!! The son deserves the punishment for the crimes. Now this last line is interesting because it brings us, full circle back to where this all began... this election!

Correct me if I'm wrong your original post that I responded to is...

View attachment 380565

...And you followed that with this...

View attachment 380567

...And this jewel;

"Jesus would be king of a country not of this world."

So, you want religion in government, and "the people should align their beliefs with the party that closely resembles (represents) those beliefs." Further, you want the people to separate their religiousness (beliefs) from the government as mandated by the edict... "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's since "Jesus would be king of a country not of this world." (I'm guessing that Jesus is "God" in this scenario and not his son. (sun)) Can we agree that (Federal) Government is manmade and by constitutional design not allowed to mix religion and governance as outlined in the First Amendment?

​

I only know what my faith tells me is true. I stated above that we weren't meant to understand God, but actually, we're not capable to understand. Man could never understand a God whose been around since time infinity. We only know what the Bible tells us in its earthly form. Though we love to ponder.

Since I believe I therefore believe that everything has been preordained. From day one to days end.

First, I want to thank both of you for this civil and thought-provoking online conversation! I had more to say about genetics, the historical Jesus, and how or why a person can't be an "American' and also a "Christian" but instead I want to end this conversation because it has already done the job that I entered into it to do. The nastiness and name-calling that originally littered this thread disappeared, but even if temporarily so, I believe that it has given everyone a beat from which better political conversations can be put forth without the personalized vitriol previously seen here. Our conversations have proven that it can be done despite diametrically opposing viewpoints. Again, @gkekoa and @reptec101 you guys were great throughout it all and I truly appreciate your contributions to this conversation.

 

[gkekoa]

First, I want to thank both of you for this civil and thought-provoking online conversation! I had more to say about genetics, the historical Jesus, and how or why a person can't be an "American' and also a "Christian" but instead I want to end this conversation because it has already done the job that I entered into it to do. The nastiness and name-calling that originally littered this thread disappeared, but even if temporarily so, I believe that it has given everyone a beat from which better political conversations can be put forth without the personalized vitriol previously seen here. Our conversations have proven that it can be done despite diametrically opposing viewpoints. Again, @gkekoa and @reptec101 you guys were great throughout it all and I truly appreciate your contributions to this conversation.

 

[skinsdad62]

Someone here predicted this Can you say malicious prosecution?

 

[chillerdab]

Please. The case was dismissed because he’s a sitting president and it violates policy to prosecute a sitting president, nothing more.

They even left it open to further prosecution, which wont happen anyway because the statue of limitations will be up before his term ends.

The slick, guilty fucking weasel skates by.

But you go on gloating if it makes you feel better.

 

[skinsdad62]

Please. The case was dismissed because he’s a sitting president and it violates policy to prosecute a sitting president, nothing more.

They even left it open to further prosecution, which wont happen anyway because the statue of limitations will be up before his term ends.

The slick, guilty fucking weasel skates by.

But you go on gloating if it makes you feel better.

please he had no case to begin with and faced malicious prosecution . and by the way i did predict it . and it looks like the NY case is going to get thrown out as well as i predicted . so FLA gone , DC gone , ga on life support and NY heading down the tubes .