"A free thinker is Satan's slave"

[Dragon]

It takes faith to believe one day that the promise of eternal will be reality.

It takes faith to keep going every day and not simply give up and die, as we will eventually have to do. One does not have to have any particular intellectual belief to do that, but one does have to have faith -- a willingness to go on, and the maintenance of a positive attitude.

It does not require faith to believe in "the promise of eternal life." It requires dogmatism. They are not the same thing.

Disagree.

As explained.

Since this post was an answer to your "explanation," you have been answered. Feel free to respond if you please; this, however, was a non-response.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Why is it we know it's wrong to commit murder or to steal and lie ? Are you saying that it evolved into humanity.

Yes. These behaviors -- avoiding murder and theft and dishonesty -- are conducive to group survival. The evolution of these primate behaviors actually predates the human species, but we can think of it this way. Multiple groups try to survive in a hunting-gathering environment. Some groups tend to behave cooperatively. Others tend to behave in pure selfishness, killing each other, stealing from each other, and lacking the prerequisites for mutual support and trust. Who is more likely to survive as a group and pass on their genes to the next generation? Obviously the ones who can maintain at least a minimum standard of cooperation. We are all descended from people who did this, rather than from people who did not. As a result, we have the genes of those who did, rather than those who did not.

That's how evolution works.

Something else you can't prove, is this dogma you are speaking of ?

 

[Dragon]

OK, I guess I need to clarify.

If the concept of sin or wrongdoing is reasonably narrow, and the category of acceptable behavior sufficiently wide, then freedom doesn't have to be the freedom to sin. But in traditional Christian thought. it's the other way around; the range of acceptable thought, feeling, and behavior is extremely narrow while the category of sinful behavior includes almost everything. God lays down rules for us to follow governing every aspect of our lives, right down to the activity of our brains, and there is precious little wiggle-room. It is that narrowness that is anti-liberty.

Thought, Word, Action, without consideration of Purpose, Conscience, Cause and Effect, Consequence, can br Irresponsible. Try living with that.

Can you please connect your response with what you quoted? Honestly, I don't see the connection.

 

[Dragon]

Why is it we know it's wrong to commit murder or to steal and lie ? Are you saying that it evolved into humanity.

Yes. These behaviors -- avoiding murder and theft and dishonesty -- are conducive to group survival. The evolution of these primate behaviors actually predates the human species, but we can think of it this way. Multiple groups try to survive in a hunting-gathering environment. Some groups tend to behave cooperatively. Others tend to behave in pure selfishness, killing each other, stealing from each other, and lacking the prerequisites for mutual support and trust. Who is more likely to survive as a group and pass on their genes to the next generation? Obviously the ones who can maintain at least a minimum standard of cooperation. We are all descended from people who did this, rather than from people who did not. As a result, we have the genes of those who did, rather than those who did not.

That's how evolution works.

Something else you can't prove is this dogma you are speaking of ?

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

 

[Youwerecreated]

OK, I guess I need to clarify.

If the concept of sin or wrongdoing is reasonably narrow, and the category of acceptable behavior sufficiently wide, then freedom doesn't have to be the freedom to sin. But in traditional Christian thought. it's the other way around; the range of acceptable thought, feeling, and behavior is extremely narrow while the category of sinful behavior includes almost everything. God lays down rules for us to follow governing every aspect of our lives, right down to the activity of our brains, and there is precious little wiggle-room. It is that narrowness that is anti-liberty.

Thought, Word, Action, without consideration of Purpose, Conscience, Cause and Effect, Consequence, can br Irresponsible. Try living with that.

Can you please connect your response with what you quoted? Honestly, I don't see the connection.

Seemed pretty clear to me.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes. These behaviors -- avoiding murder and theft and dishonesty -- are conducive to group survival. The evolution of these primate behaviors actually predates the human species, but we can think of it this way. Multiple groups try to survive in a hunting-gathering environment. Some groups tend to behave cooperatively. Others tend to behave in pure selfishness, killing each other, stealing from each other, and lacking the prerequisites for mutual support and trust. Who is more likely to survive as a group and pass on their genes to the next generation? Obviously the ones who can maintain at least a minimum standard of cooperation. We are all descended from people who did this, rather than from people who did not. As a result, we have the genes of those who did, rather than those who did not.

That's how evolution works.

Something else you can't prove is this dogma you are speaking of ?

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

They have proved no such thing,you are now teaching dogma !

 

[Dragon]

Something else you can't prove is this dogma you are speaking of ?

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

They have proved no such thing,you are now teaching dogma !

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes. These behaviors -- avoiding murder and theft and dishonesty -- are conducive to group survival. The evolution of these primate behaviors actually predates the human species, but we can think of it this way. Multiple groups try to survive in a hunting-gathering environment. Some groups tend to behave cooperatively. Others tend to behave in pure selfishness, killing each other, stealing from each other, and lacking the prerequisites for mutual support and trust. Who is more likely to survive as a group and pass on their genes to the next generation? Obviously the ones who can maintain at least a minimum standard of cooperation. We are all descended from people who did this, rather than from people who did not. As a result, we have the genes of those who did, rather than those who did not.

That's how evolution works.

Something else you can't prove is this dogma you are speaking of ?

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

You can't point to any group of humans that did not possess laws to govern them. You only offer spectulation which consider your dogma.

 

[Dragon]

Something else you can't prove is this dogma you are speaking of ?

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

You can't point to any group of humans that did not possess laws to govern them. You only offer spectulation which consider your dogma.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

 

[Youwerecreated]

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

They have proved no such thing,you are now teaching dogma !

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Really no credibility, that is your argument agianst my arguments

 

[Youwerecreated]

It can be and has been proven; but it's also been proven (repeatedly) that you have zero objectivity on the subject of evolution and further explanations would be wasted on you.

You can't point to any group of humans that did not possess laws to govern them. You only offer spectulation which consider your dogma.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Because your reasoning is built on nothing but your imagination.

 

[Dragon]

They have proved no such thing,you are now teaching dogma !

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Really no credibility, that is your argument agianst my arguments

You have no arguments. You have no idea what evolution is or how it works. All of your arguments, on this thread as on those directed towards evolution or creationism, are directed not towards the theory of evolution itself but towards a straw man of your own devising, created in ignorance and affirming that ignorance.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

 

[Dragon]

You can't point to any group of humans that did not possess laws to govern them. You only offer spectulation which consider your dogma.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Because your reasoning is built on nothing but your imagination.

You have no way to know this, because you are completely and stubbornly ignorant on what evolution is. You not only don't know, but you refuse to learn.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

 

[HUGGY]

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Because your reasoning is built on nothing but your imagination.

You have no way to know this, because you are completely and stubbornly ignorant on what evolution is. You not only don't know, but you refuse to learn.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Sadly the only remedy to willfull ignorance is death. Fortunately for the human race those that are born into the world have access to better information than those that came before. Religion as we see it now and as it was in the past will eventually die with those that cling to myth and superstition. The best we can offer is better knowledge. We cannot force anyone think intelligently and make use of it.

 

[Dragon]

Huggy, I agree that superstition and ignorance are on the way out, and that those who affirm it are fighting a desperate rearguard action, doomed to failure. However, I don't agree that this describes all of religion. Religion is a blend of mysticism, myth, and make-believe. While make-believe will pass away, and myth be understood AS myth, mysticism is in no danger, and that means that, while it will certainly change, religion will not disappear.

 

[Marie888]

Because your reasoning is built on nothing but your imagination.

You have no way to know this, because you are completely and stubbornly ignorant on what evolution is. You not only don't know, but you refuse to learn.

As I said, you have zero objectivity -- and zero credibility -- on the subject of evolution. I will answer anyone else who is really curious. I will not answer you, because it would be a waste of time. You will simply stick your fingers in your ears and deny, as you have always done before.

Sadly the only remedy to willfull ignorance is death. Fortunately for the human race those that are born into the world have access to better information than those that came before. Religion as we see it now and as it was in the past will eventually die with those that cling to myth and superstition. The best we can offer is better knowledge. We cannot force anyone think intelligently and make use of it.

You and Dragon need to wake the hell up!!!!

Please tell me how can you argue against what Jesus Christ told us this (below verses) approximately 2000 years ago and then look at the world today and compare what He said? If there is NO God, and if you say that Jesus is not God, how on earth could He have possibly known what the fate of mankind and the world is and especially pointedly what will happen with Christians.

Hell YES, - many more people will fall from the faith like you are talking about. However, Jesus TOLD us it was going to happen. Not because of some "worldly knowledge". But because "men" do NOT want to be accountable to God. They don't WANT to submit. Blinded by darkness of own sin. We've all been there - until we each individtually sincerely call upon His Name. And then HE begins helping us - inside out.

LOOK what Christ Jesus said!! What is wrong with mankind? What is our largest issue? It's SIN! We sin against God, we sin against each other.

For crying out loud, from start to finish, God's Word even tells us what will happen. Then compare our documented history, even the populous, or how we've scattered the globe.

Jesus Christ said, because of the INCREASE of iniquity (sin), the love of most will grow cold. If you can't see that happening, I don't know what to tell you!? Please, LOOK around you!!

The world is NOT all bubblegum and sprinkles and Disney movies. Love is NOT easy. And lust is NOT love. There will NOT be world peace. Why? Because we all fall short and sin. Plain and simple. We have "self" that comes sometimes in front of others, so walls go up, relationships break down we, argue, fight, war.

So WHO will save us from these bodies of sin and death? Only One - Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew 24
4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

6And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

8All these are the beginning of sorrows.

9Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Perhaps ask yourselves this question please...

In order for world peace to happen, and for all "religions" to be knocked out somehow - someone's FREEDOM will have to go, right?. Wouldn't you agree?

Or how could world peace happen at all? Not all agree with one another, so someone will dictate to say what is illegal or legal, aye? Can you ever see 100% of the humans race all following one thing/person and obeying? Nope. We never have, and never will.

We sin. We war. We have a flesh in our bodies and we've all gotta deal with our own pride, sin, lusts every second of the live long day! LOL Seriously!! We war because we have that sin nature. God told us so and He already told us what we need to help ourselves. HIM!

We sin first against is Our Creator; the One Who made us. Sin hurts ourselves more than anything and we sin againsts each other. Thankfully, He made a way through Jesus Christ.

Again, LOOK at the world and history and the timeline and events. In the last 100 years ALONE from the beginning of time as we know it we've had TWO world wars. LOOK!!

Don't be that frog in that boiling pot of water. Jump out and take a LOOK! We are BOILING!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aszTLI4r6P8]Visible Proof Of God - YouTube[/ame]


.

 

[Intense]

OK, I guess I need to clarify.

If the concept of sin or wrongdoing is reasonably narrow, and the category of acceptable behavior sufficiently wide, then freedom doesn't have to be the freedom to sin. But in traditional Christian thought. it's the other way around; the range of acceptable thought, feeling, and behavior is extremely narrow while the category of sinful behavior includes almost everything. God lays down rules for us to follow governing every aspect of our lives, right down to the activity of our brains, and there is precious little wiggle-room. It is that narrowness that is anti-liberty.

Thought, Word, Action, without consideration of Purpose, Conscience, Cause and Effect, Consequence, can br Irresponsible. Try living with that.

Can you please connect your response with what you quoted? Honestly, I don't see the connection.

There is plenty of wiggle room, when you act on Purpose. Regardless of what you think either of what you think Traditional Christian Values are, or their limits. Acting on Conscience, in specific situation, for example, may have zero relationship with preconceived notion. When it's your energy being driven, are you focused more on the specifics of what you are doing, or on how others interpret what you are doing? Sometimes you need to make the choice between the two.

 

[Dragon]

You and Dragon need to wake the hell up!!!!

Please tell me how can you argue against what Jesus Christ told us this (below verses) approximately 2000 years ago and then look at the world today and compare what He said? If there is NO God, and if you say that Jesus is not God, how on earth could He have possibly known what the fate of mankind and the world is and especially pointedly what will happen with Christians.

Two answers, independent of one another but both equally valid and true.

1) The quote you present is quite vague and general and could apply to many different circumstances, most of them high-probability and hence exhibiting little in the way of predictive power.

2) It may be that Huggy is an atheist. I am not. I also do not dispute that Jesus was God. What I do dispute is that there is anything special in that status. I am God, you are God, Jesus was God, the entire universe is God. Big deal.

Well, actually it is a big deal. Merely saying those words does not mean one knows. Becoming aware of being divine is what it's all about -- and dogmatism works against that process, by freezing the mind in a cage of fear.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Please tell me how can you argue against what Jesus Christ told us…

That’s a trick question – one can’t argue against something that was never said by someone who never existed.

 

[Dragon]

Thought, Word, Action, without consideration of Purpose, Conscience, Cause and Effect, Consequence, can br Irresponsible. Try living with that.

Can you please connect your response with what you quoted? Honestly, I don't see the connection.

There is plenty of wiggle room, when you act on Purpose. Regardless of what you think either of what you think Traditional Christian Values are, or their limits. Acting on Conscience, in specific situation, for example, may have zero relationship with preconceived notion. When it's your energy being driven, are you focused more on the specifics of what you are doing, or on how others interpret what you are doing? Sometimes you need to make the choice between the two.

You don't seem to be describing traditional Christianity here at all. You seem in fact to be describing something mystical. However, I'm not entirely sure I understand you, so I am not sure how to respond.