Religious/Anti-Religious Wars On NT

-

Since the influx of Newsvine people a few months ago, discussions about religion have increased dramatically on Newstalkers. What used to be "debates" that would pop up every couple weeks or so now appear seemingly daily. And topics that may be only partially connected to religious belief regularly turn into brawls about the Christian churches and belief in God.

I don't look at all of it, but I see some, and while both sides are at some fault for all the hard feelings, I would have to tip the scale to the non believers being a little more at fault.

First of all, I would say they are nastier and snarkier. Second, they refuse to respect the validity of "faith". By definition tenets of faith cannot be proven. Therefore it is pointless to constantly argue about whether faith in God is justified. It is the right people have when confronted daily by the mysteries of the universe and this existence. People have a right to believe there is a higher power which guides earthly events. Right or wrong they have a right to believe it. The atheists here too often seem to want to deny the believers that right.

From my perspective you would have rather the discussions be limited to certain relgious dogma or evebn be just a pat on the back instead of discussing religion or faith because you believe when atheists join in all relgious beleif and or faith is questioned and that discussion crosses line of what is acceptable. 

It also seems that you want to discuss other faiths but you dont want people who are not of your faith to discuss yours in the same manner. 

The only thing I say about other faiths is that they should stay out of politics. 

From my perspective you would have rather the discussions be limited to certain relgious dogma or evebn be just a pat on the back instead of discussing religion or faith because you believe when atheists join in all relgious beleif and or faith is questioned and that discussion crosses line of what is acceptable.

How many times and different ways can you complain because people believe in God? I do agree religion should be kept out of politics. 

How many times and different ways can you complain because people believe in God? I do agree religion should be kept out of politics.

The same number of times that people try to convert me or to force me to obey their illogical religious ideas.  Why should I back down because a certain sect of people find logic to be offenseive to their religious beleifs?  Since when is a logical mind something to be kept in check?

This is the problem that we are now facing in the US because of the effects of religion. Religion teaches people that they can reject facts, logic and reason in favor or their opinions and beleifs.

I am finsihing this book that discusses this same idea.

amazon

If it were as simple as you make it sound, everyone would be atheist. Having faith in a higher power is not unreasonable, it's just not. Some of the things that have developed out of that faith over the centuries have been unacceptable, but there is nothing wrong with the basic idea of faith that there is a God. 

If it were as simple as you make it sound, everyone would be atheist.

It is simple.

Was you born believing in a god or did someone tell you about the one that currently believe in?

It is no secret that children are indoctrinated into the religion of their parents.  So if you had had the misfortune of being born to a Muslim, then you would be your prayer rug facing Mecca at the designated time and denouncing Yahweh as a myth.

There are numerous sects of Christianity that view all of the other sects as nothing more than a cult destined for Hell.  Although, I guess the creator is going to have to restore the memories of the Alzheimer's sufferers so they know why they are in Heaven or Hell.

Do Christians believe in any of the tens of thousands of gods that mankind has worshipped and attributed as being the creator?

Atheists just believe in one less god than Christians, Muslims and any other monotheist religion.

If it were as simple as you make it sound, everyone would be atheist.

Thinking for yourself and the ability to put logic over emotional belief is not difficult for those of us who are logical.  Studying logic is not difficult, nor am I trampling the rights of people by pointing out their fallacious thinking.  It is a very sad statement on what our society is when logic is treated as a social parlor trick to only be used in the company of friends and consenting adults.

Having faith in a higher power is not unreasonable, it's just not.

Yes, it is unreasonable because that faith is not supported by logic and scientific facts. Theistic religion is the junk food of human thought because it relies on believing in something that doesn't exist and not questioning what you are told to blindly believe and follow.

Some of the things that have developed out of that faith over the centuries have been unacceptable, but there is nothing wrong with the basic idea of faith that there is a God.

There is a part of our brain that makes us susceptible to religious belief but that doesn't mean that we should give into it. What might have been socially acceptable 300 years ago is no longer such because of the advancement of knowledge.

Actually, it is quite simple. Atheists do not believe in a god, period. There's nothing complicated about that. Having faith in a god may not be unreasonable,  but it is irrational. But, people are free to believe whatever they want.

Who is forcing you to believe anything?  Do you live in some Middle Eastern Country where they will kill you if you don't believe?

I'm a lot like JR in this instance, I believe in God, I don't go to church reguarly, though I do consider myself a Christian.  Why is that so threatening to people who choose not to believe? 

And John-there were plenty here before the NV tide came in that couldn't have a civil conversation without insulting anyone that believes in God.  But you are right, there are far more articles about it now.

Who is forcing you to believe anything?

Forcing? No. But trying to influence? Oh you bet. Used to be once a week that I would get people from the local church on my porch telling me that if I don't go to and donate to their church, I would burn in hell. As a Deist? I find that hilarious. They come around less often now, thankfully. 

Do you live in some Middle Eastern Country where they will kill you if you don't believe?

I doubt he does. But, to the point, a lot of ME countries are now becoming more progressive. All we see here is the radical elements in those countries, but the reality is they have xobx, playstation, bars, dance clubs, music of all kinds, etc.. 

I'm a lot like JR in this instance, I believe in God, I don't go to church reguarly, though I do consider myself a Christian.  Why is that so threatening to people who choose not to believe? 

I don't see many attacks coming from non-believers. I have never had an atheist come up to my door asking me to not believe in (a) God. SOME Christians come off as very self absorbed, and they know better than everyone else when in fact they know nothing more than what is written in a book written by HUMANS 400 years after Christ died. 

And John-there were plenty here before the NV tide came in that couldn't have a civil conversation without insulting anyone that believes in God.  But you are right, there are far more articles about it now.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but, people are free to believe what they wish to believe and that's fine with me. Where I draw the line is one religion bashing another religion, (e.g. Christians bashing Muslims.....constantly). If we have freedom of religion, great, then we must respect all religions. PERIOD. 

We are of like mind. I don't find it unreasonable (for lack of a better term) for someone to believe in a supernatural being. It's part of who they are, who am I to tell them that they can't believe in something.

What I can tell them is that I don't want them preaching to me when they haven't been invited to. I can tell them that is unconstitutional and unreasonable for them to enact legislation based on nothing more than a feeling. Laws should be made based on science and logic, not unicorns and fairies (that's for Shep, I know he'll be here soon).

Were you born believing in a god or did someone tell you about the one that currently believe in?

Let's imagine I am born on an island, and by the time I am cognizant of my surroundings (trees, water, fruit, animals) I am all alone. 

I would wonder why I was there, how I got there, and who or what put everything else there, whether or not I had been "indoctrinated" into religion. 

People who believe in God approach those questions in one way, and those who do not approach them in another. 

What is the problem? 

All you are doing is justifying your own particular viewpoint. 

It is not unreasonable to believe that this existence as we know it was 'created' or set in motion by a supernatural force or entity. 

You can keep saying til hell freezes over that it is unreasonable, but that won't make it so. 

I totally 100% agree! 

I would wonder why I was there, how I got there, and who or what put everything else there, whether or not I had been "indoctrinated" into religion.

Maybe you would but the problem is you're making that declaration having lived your life as you have. Had you lived a completely different life you would not be the same person you are.  For example if being alone was all you knew you would possibly assume that was normal and not question it (without language skills would it even be possible to formulate such complex questions to yourself) instead contenting yourself with the normal daily tasks of food, shelter, water, exploration, safety, inventing the wheel/fire etc.  Lol the more I think of the effort it would take to survive without any prior knowledge of anything the less I believe I would engage in philosophical thoughts.

Anyway not saying you aren't right just putting stuff out there to ponder. 

And John-there were plenty here before the NV tide came in that couldn't have a civil conversation without insulting anyone that believes in God.

Bringing logic and facts into a religious discussion is not insulting anyone. If you are insulted by logic and facts then maybe it is time for introspection about what you choose to believe.

Nobody is trying to either convert you or force you to do anything, good grief do y'all never get tired of playing the victim card.................

Soliciting me for donation to a church that I do not belong to as well as trying to convince me to join is an attempt to convert me. Trying to insert their religious views into my medical care is a violation of my rights. 

B S

So calling a God someone believes in a sky fairy and telling them they're delusional and that they're faith is full of shit is logical and not insulting to you?

Uh, don't Christians do that to people of the Muslim religion?

B S

That is a brilliant rebuttal.  Take $20.00 out of petty cash for your intellectual heavy lifting.

thanks

So calling a God someone believes in a sky fairy

That is where God is supposed to live.

and telling them they're delusional

Believing in something that you cannot prove exists is the definition of delusional. Why you would want to believe in what you cannot prove is beyond me.

and that they're faith is full of shit is logical and not insulting to you?

Pointing out the many logical fallacies in religious belief in general and in the Bible should not be considered insulting unless you have a problem with the existence of logic.

Scared cows always make the juiciest burgers.  

Uh, don't Christians do that to people of the Muslim religion?

It is Ok when they do it to others, but you can't do it to them.  Jesus said so.

s/.

How is asking someone to believe in something that you cannot prove any different? Not trying to be rude to you, but how can you expect anyone to belie in God with no proof at all? There is literally more proof of Bigfoot than there is of, "God". I respect your beliefs, in some ways, I share them... But you have to respect reality as well. Yes? 

I would wonder why I was there, how I got there, and who or what put everything else there, whether or not I had been "indoctrinated" into religion.

And that no doubt is how religion started.

But we are way past that point.   We have solid explanations for most of the observations of early human beings.   There is no thought that volcanoes are the work of an angry Vulcan or that thunderstorms are projections of Zeus' ire.

I understand how someone nowadays could believe that there is more to life and that something created all this for a reason.  That remains a possibility.   But to believe ancient books making the most outstanding claims without evidence  - in a body of work that is demonstrably errant - in contradiction to modern highly evidenced explanations??

To me that is the exact opposite of critical thinking.

Y ou are making a category mistake. The believer is walking by faith (in God). We employ a well-reasoned faith (in God).

2 Timothy 3 ( NIV )

12 In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13 while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15 and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness , 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

You reason apart from God in a natural man state. Moreover, you encourage others to walk away from their well-reasoned faith and join you in your worldview: critical thinking without a God complement.

Just as you and Richard Dawkins would have men and women consider one less God, I will ask you to consider one more worldview (than your own).

We employ a well-reasoned faith (in God).

Which you cannot support with logic.

Just as you and Richard Dawkins would have men and women consider one less God, I will ask you to consider one more worldview (than your own).

Will you be considering the existence of Zeus, Ganesh, or other deities, as well?  Really giving them a fair hearing, I mean?  Granting them the same credibility you grant your own god?

The believer is walking by faith (in God). We employ a well-reasoned faith (in God).

What do you mean by 'well-reasoned faith'?   Hope, desire and feelings in general is not reason.

If you are saying the faith is well reasoned because the believer is comfortable then that really is not reason.  Reason involves facts (evidence) and logic.   And if it is well reasoned then credible, established evidence to the contrary would not be discarded.   For example, the Bible is easily shown to be errant.   Therefore it is not reasonable to treat it as the divine word of a perfect God.   Faith, as it were, is based upon the Bible getting certain critical things right.   If the Bible is imperfect then by what logic can one state that anything within it is absolute truth?

For example:

When the Bible claims a perfect, omniscient, omnipotent God who is surprised and/or disappointed by the actions of His creations we have a profound contradiction.   How does one resolve this contradiction?   Either God is not omniscient or the Bible incorrectly expresses disappointment and surprise from an entity that knows all.   Many more examples, Calbab, all making the point that a well-reasoned faith founded on the Bible is an oxymoron.

Will you be considering the existence of Zeus, Ganesh, or other deities, as well?  Really giving them a fair hearing, I mean?  Granting them the same credibility you grant your own god?

Stunning. When Zeus and other gods becomes something more to you personally than a sophistic rhetorical tool write me, I might entertain a discussion with you about your new God.  Peace.

Happy New Year 2018! (Can you hear that? Fireworks!)

So, no, you won't.  Your mythology is somehow valid, but the mythologies of others are not.

Hardly surprising.

Your mythology is somehow valid, but the mythologies of others are not.

Exactly.

I guess we would have to be a Muslim and fight over whether Yahweh or Allah is the contemporary mythical god.

Or we can join the movement to bring back the Greek gods.

io9.gizmodo

Has anyone else noticed modern organized religion is kind of a bummer? Even if your divine belief system isn't violently persecuting another, it seems like you're still trapped in a church singing dirges all Sunday. Modern religion doesn't have any   flair . This is why I'd like to offer a modest proposal: Let's bring back the ancient Greek gods. Yes, I mean Zeus, Hera, Apollo, Aphrodite, Ares, the whole shebang — and here's why I think they'd make a significant improvement over our current options.

They're relatable.   The Greek gods are definitely gods, but they're also still recognizably human. They have the same emotions, problems and insecurities as regular humans do, and thus, they're far more understandable than nebulous clouds or old bearded men on thrones.

They have variety.  If you're part of a monotheistic religion, your god is kind of your one-stop shopping for divinity. You're stuck with them, no matter what happens in your life, no matter what your current needs are. But there are tons of Greek gods! Don't think Apollo is getting the job done? Switch to Hephaestus. 

They're easily adaptable to modern life.  Most major religions haven't had a serious update for at least a millennium or so. As such, it can be hard to truly integrate these religions into modern times. But thanks to their diversity, the Greek gods would snap right into place. Hermes is obviously the god of cellphones, emails and text messages.

They are extremely open-minded.  Greek gods do not care what you are. They don't care about your gender, the color of your skin, or your sexual preference. They have never told anyone to start a war (except Ares, the god of war, and even then it was just to be having a war, not to persecute other groups). 

You know where you stand with a Greek god.  The Greek gods are like hormonal teenagers. Their emotions run high, and can change at a drop of a hat. They're easily angered and easily enamored, but they can be managed.

Greek gods will have sex with you.  That's pretty awesome. Just knowing you have a  chance  to score with a god or goddess adds a certain zest to life.

They make at least as much sense as the other guys . One of the biggest problems with the Judeo-Christian God that Christian scholars have tried to rationalize over the centuries is how a good and loving god could allow evil to exist; while they've come up with plenty of answer, none of them are particularly satisfying. This isn't an issue for the Greek gods, because they aren't pretending to be omnipotent and loving. Like humans, they can be good and evil themselves. You don't have to wonder why the Greek gods let bad things happen to good people, because the Greek gods can simply be assholes. 

They're so much more fun.  Here's a short list of things we could do if we brought back the Greek gods:
• Go to oracles.
• Go on quests.
• Fight monsters.
• Challenge gods to contests.
• Go to Hades and try to rescue dead loved ones.
• Dip babies in magic rivers, making them invulnerable.
Now, not all of those are good ideas — most of them are insanely dangerous — but man, they're still a hell of a lot more exciting than sitting in church for an hour every Sunday.

Sandy, 

read the "discussion" about the article at the link about the Greek gods.  Seems pretty familiar.   LOL!

FYI, I joined both groups Secular Nation and Critical Thinking today. I will come over and explain it all to you with videos, graphs, and charts. /s

TiG, I will take my time explaining it to you. Alas, since Friday (I was away) my private notes length has exploded. I have "beaucoup," perhaps I will answer the question in Critical Thinking group  that I just joined this AM. (Maybe I can make it an article over there? Hmm.) Here's looking at us, 'kid'!

Stunning. Your sophistry, that is. Breathtakingly stunning. See you in 'club' Secular Nation soon. Perhaps, we shall discuss how you rationalize your way out of nihilism.

OMGG (Oh my Greek gods)!  I'm betting we know some of those folks!

The guy who insists that his nonexistent "evidence" need not abide by the same rules as any other evidence is accusing me of sophistry.

FYI, I joined both groups Secular Nation and Critical Thinking today. I will come over and explain it all to you with videos, graphs, and charts. /s

i look forward to it, let's see what you can do  

Remarkably disturbing.

More ad hominem?  That's pretty much where it always ends up with you, isn't it?

The first problem would be a language.

Who would teach you the words?

Without words, how can a wild child learn to think or question anything..........

OMGG (Oh my Greek gods)!  I'm betting we know some of those folks!

OMGG - Love it!  

As an almost lifelong Christian, I still find myself saying "oh my god".  Now I can unabashedly and comfortably replace it with "Oh, my Greek gods!!!"  and "What the Hell" becomes "What the Hades" .  WWJD = "What would Zeus do?"

I could really have some fun being a Zeusist.  Although, I plan on steering clear of Hera.  That woman is one mean bitc...uh, goddess when she gets her dander up.

I'm betting we know some of those folks!

No doubt.  Although, there are some I would like to know.  They seem like a lot of fun!

Although, I plan on steering clear of Hera.  That woman is one mean bitc...uh, goddess when she gets her dander up.

Well, with Zeus always stepping out on her, with mere mortal women, no less, can you blame her for being a bit grumpy?

Well, with Zeus always stepping out on her, with mere mortal women, no less, can you blame her for being a bit grumpy?

Grumpy?  No.  

However, 

greekgodsandgoddesses

• Hera had no concept of justice when angry or jealous; she could not forgive the women with whom Zeus had sexual relations—even if they were innocent of wrongdoing.

• Hera punished one of Zeus’s love interests, Io, by putting her in the charge of Argus. Argus had a hundred eyes and kept vigilant watch over her so that Zeus could not come to her aid.

• Hera turned Callisto into a bear because Zeus fell in love with her.

• Hera arranged the death of Semele, another of Zeus’s mortal conquests, although she did not directly cause it.

LOL....as long as your faith is allowed........read what you wrote.

On the other hand, the "Christians" too often want to apply their religious beliefs to the conduct of the wider society. Religion should be separate from state. So called "dominionism" where religious politicians want to sneak religious dictates into national policy on the belief that America is a "Christian" nation are 100% wrong.

If they didn't do that there'd be no reason to point and laugh at them.    That's why you don't see too many folks here ridiculing Buddhists, Hindus, Jews or Shintoists.....because none of those groups try to use the secular state to enforce their sharia laws, nor do they constantly whine about their loss of privilege like Christian extremists do.

This was a situation that concerned me about 3 months ago, and I posted an article entitled: "Why the Disagreements Over Religion", on which you voiced a similar concern that you have done here. I am in agreement with you on this topic, in that debate is one thing, but ridiculing and insulting goes beyond.

Second, they refuse to respect the validity of "faith". By definition tenets of faith cannot be proven. Therefore it is pointless to constantly argue about whether faith in God is justified.

I think these discussions are good (especially in the USA) but should be respectful to the individuals.   It is the very fact that faith is belief without evidence that brings forth the need to challenge the beliefs.   Challenge = intellectual, not adversarial or nasty.

As I have noted quite a few times, one can justifiably believe that it is more likely the known universe was created rather than evolved.   Modern science strongly suggests cosmological evolution, but it is quite possible that a sentient entity created the known universe.

But when we go beyond that - into beliefs penned by ancient men - and especially when some act on these beliefs, responsible adults should raise challenges to the beliefs.   We should challenge the notion that homosexuals should be killed.   We should challenge the notion that human slavery can be tolerated under certain conditions.   We should challenge the notion that apostates should be murdered.   We should also challenge the notion that biology is based on bullshit, that the Earth is < 10,000 years old, that man coexisted with dinosaurs, etc.  We should challenge the notion that a perfect, omniscient God would be surprised by the actions of His creations or that free will is even possible if God is omniscient.

So when an agnostic atheist - a skeptic - raises a challenge to an unfounded belief, as long as it is done intellectually (not emotionally) I see this as a net good for modern society.

Hopefully religions have evolved for the better since the days that some of these scriptures were written. I think that is basically the case, but it is an ongoing process. 

Christianity certainly has evolved for the better IMO.  But of course the nutcase sects still exist.  Judaism strikes me as religious wisdom - more philosophical than faith-based.   Islam is not a religion I would defend; it is the most dangerous affront to critical thinking in existence today.

some of the reasons for arguments: 

    Some say they are saved or born again and want to share that

    Some want to boss people around

    Some want to get new members for their group and  advance their objectives

    Some are following tradition or way they were raised

    Some are free and want to stay that way  (that's Me)

I've said this a million times - if religion would stay in its lane, religionists would never hear from atheists again, unless they asked for a debate.  Atheism is mostly a reaction to overt theism.  Religion in the US already has it good, but it is insatiable.  They have tax free enterprise, plenty of private space, plenty of adherents, parochial school options, some of the most valuable real estate in the country - but so many of them aren't satisfied unless they can be in the public square, and in the public schools, and given special clearance to openly discriminate against others.

Just a damn shame those pesky people who follow religions have actual Constitutional rights, right?

It must be so tiresome for you to hear religious views all the time, right?

Constitutional rights to discriminate?  Constitutional rights to ignore the separation of religion and government?

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

And yet Christianity is the only religion that Christians want to be tolerated in public spaces.

Skirting the CoC [ph]

Just a damn shame those pesky people who follow religions have actual Constitutional rights, right?

Not all superstitious folks try to use the state to enforce the sharia laws of their cult.   Some of them value a separation of church and state, but it's a real shame that they seem to be in the minority.

Just a damn shame those pesky people who follow religions have actual Constitutional rights, right?

How much more, "Freedom of Religion" do you need? 

How much more, "Freedom of Religion" do you need?

Apparently they need the freedom to use their superstitions as an excuse to harm others.

I believe that will be when all other religions in this country are outlawed and you will have to tithe to a church or face penalties and/or imprisonment

They say they support the First Amendment but when they insist that a monument of the 10 commandments belong on my Capitol grounds....they don't believe in equal treatment for all

You should subscribe to the Friendly Atheist on Patheos.  They send me tons of articles that prove how wrong you are.

That was your lamest dodge yet.

You dodged my entire argument.  There have been thousands of examples of public sector abuse of the “freedom of religion” that you are trying to change the subject to.  You want to pretend there haven’t. 

They say they support the First Amendment but when they insist that a monument of the 10 commandments belong on my Capitol grounds....they don't believe in equal treatment for all

It's kind of pathetic that they need the state to endorse their superstitious cult.    And these are usually the same folks who whine about the state being intrusive.

Whatever it takes that there be no restraint on the part about congress making no law prohibiting the free excercise there of of any believers religious beliefs in all aspects of their lives.  

Whatever it takes that there be no restraint on the part about congress making no law prohibiting the free excercise there of of any believers religious beliefs in all aspects of their lives.

I doubt that you will approve of the consequences when the person happens to be a non-Christian and they have the very same absolute religious exercise rights that you seek.  

People of all religions and even those who don't believe must have the very same free exercise rights that you claim for yourself.

I guess you never had to walk through a gaggle of Krishna's at an airport huh?

Lol, haven't seen that for decades, but it does bring back memories.

Get ready for Baphomets on public property, then.

When the Hindus asked for a monument to one of their gods on Arkansas Capitol grounds, they were told no. But the Ten Commandments are just fine and dandy.

"Freedom for me, but not for thee."

I have to agree with you. Emphatically. Some evangelicals, not all of them, are dangerous to others.It benefits us all to point them out. along with other dangerous people.

Excellent.   

She’s no fun at a bachelorette party when the male stripper shows up. 

Sadly, many feel the need to claim theirs is bigger than others which is why they should be first in line for everything, but when asked to prove it they get angry and say you just have to trust them and take it on faith...

I quit asking after coming up on the short end of the stick a couple of times. 

I always get asked to put my twig away.

I think of Professor McGonagall saying this whenever I see this meme.

Oh, jeez.  I was thinking of her more as Lady Violet, but that would be hilarious coming from McGonagall.

I have been reading Butters posts for years. She doesn't have a mean bone in her body. Lay off. 

Agreed. I don't understand why some people think that they have to pick on her. She certainly, and in no way, deserves it. It is that kind BS that tends to turn people away from posting on NT, or leave it entirely.

No one is any better than she is, nor has the right to treat her with disrespect, while insisting it for themselves.

Brother John, religion is not overrunning NewsTalkers that I can see. Admittedly, I have not ran through the other categories in any great detail, but a cursory look reveals this:

1. News  & Politics     25,402 articles

    Photography & Art     1757 articles

    Other     1257 articles

    Health, Science, Technology     1182 articles

    Entertainment     744 articles

    Religion & Ethics     677 articles

    World News     608  articles

    Sports     211 articles

2. Do not quench the spirit of debate, please.  Let us come here and figure this stuff that is hurting us, or which is running amuck in our land and the world, out! Hopefully, we can all get what we need from using the categories as 'sounding boards.'

3. Religion and Humanism are 'big ticket' on the Internet. They "just are." Maybe, that's all good thing!

4. One anemic category on NT, and it is both surprising and appalling, is Sports. Oh boy! Apparently, we ARE a nerdie bunch! LOL!

It’s sad we are so weak on sports.  With a five seed limit something has to give.  I satisfy my sports posting elsewhere.  

Too bad the same can't be done with the ridiculous religious seeds.

My sports hang out place from my old AOL days:     http://aolcfboutcasts.proboards.com

but yeah i can answer the questions, I'm simply not going to.

Your dodge is duly noted, and not unexpected either.

God gave all of us free will of choice.

If there was a god, there would be no such things as choice.

it's directly above a few comments and explains my stand on this perfectly well.

And I've explained that when you post something as factual or true, then expect to be challenged on it, as that is a logical and rational response.

and demand proof of his existence.

See previous statement. Why would anyone believe some claim, no questions asked?

Their hearts are not open in any way shape nor form to hearing anything about the matter,

Our minds are open to evidence or proof. Of which, you never seem able to provide any.

they simply want to scream GOD IS NOT REAL at the top of their lungs,call him some imaginary fairy in the sky and mock and laugh at those who do believe.

Since you're incapable of substantiating your claims regarding god, the denial of acceptance of such claims is the logical and default response.

Simply not true. 

God may know what you are going to do, but it doesn't mean you don't experience free will. 

For the sake of argument , let's say there is today a God that controls all the future. 

You still choose to have chicken for dinner tonight instead of beef.  You experience free will, even though TO GOD it is foreordained. God is the only one who experiences your 'lack' of free will. From your perspective, it is fully intact. 

This is difficult for people to understand, but it is actually not possible for human beings to not experience free will constantly, God or no God. 

You still choose to have chicken for dinner tonight instead of beef.  You experience free will, even though TO GOD it is foreordained.

Not if god made you the type of person who would choose chicken over beef tonight.

If he made us, in the full knowledge of what we'd do, then he made us without free will.

God may know what you are going to do, but it doesn't mean you don't experience free will.

If god already knows what I'm going to do, long before I even do it, the what I "choose" is already set in stone. I am incapable of "choosing" any differently. Free will is just and illusion.

You still choose to have chicken for dinner tonight instead of beef.  You experience free will, even though TO GOD it is foreordained. God is the only one who experiences your 'lack' of free will. From your perspective, it is fully intact. 

It's not a choice if the future is directly controlled or already known what my choice will be. From my perspective, it might seem like I'm making a choice. But the reality is the exact opposite. That's why it's an illusion.

This is difficult for people to understand, but it is actually not possible for human beings to not experience free will constantly, God or no God. 

You just contradicted your first statement.

You still choose

to make only choices that fit with Yahweh's plan for mankind.

Did Pharaoh have a choice when Yahweh "hardened his heart?"

Many logical up votes.

This turns out to be a difficult notion for many to grasp because it requires suppressing intuition and applying pure reason.

Whether God knows what you are going to do has no bearing on your experiencing choice. Even if you think that your future is predetermined, it is your choice to think that. 

Since we don't have any access to God's foreknowledge, it has absolutely no bearing on our experiencing free will. 

I don't know why this is ever even described as an issue. 

Yes. 

But the reality is the exact opposite. That's why it's an illusion.

If it were an illusion it would be possible for you to operate outside that illusion. But you can't. 

Since we don't have any access to God's foreknowledge, it has absolutely no bearing on our experiencing free will.

Whether we have any access to god's foreknowledge or not is irrelevant.  If our choice is already made for us, as it would be if god created us already knowing what we'd do, that negates our free will.  If our free will has been negated, and we are just unaware of it, then our free will is an illusion.

How so?  God was in charge of his thoughts, according to the Bible.  God made it impossible for him to act other than as he acted, in order to make a point - god set himself up with an enemy, whether that enemy wanted to be an enemy or not, so he'd have someone to vilify, and fight.

If our free will has been negated, and we are just unaware of it, then our free will is an illusion.

The illusion would be thinking that you don't have free will in that case. 

It is not possible for human beings to not experience free will, whether God exists or not. You might as well deny gravity as deny that you have free will. This is the case whether God exists or not. 

The illusion would be thinking that you don't have free will in that case.

Only if you're redefining "free will".  If you're only free to make preordained choices, then you're not exercising free will at all.  Your argument relies solely on whether or not we perceive ourselves as exercising free will.  Whether our choices are "free" or not is not dependent on whether we're aware of their preordination.

An omnipotent, omniscient god and free will by its creations cannot both be true, by the definitions of those terms.

It's an illusion because we think we have a choice, when we really do not.

If something is predetermined, them there is no choice. Our "choices" are set for us. It's not my choice to think otherwise because it's a logical conclusion. There is no other alternative. Unless god is wrong and/or not omniscient. 

Since we don't have any access to God's foreknowledge, it has absolutely no bearing on our experiencing free will.

That is the illusion part that Gordy mentioned.

Whether God knows what you are going to do has no bearing on your experiencing choice. Even if you think that your future is predetermined, it is your choice to think that. 

Since we don't have any access to God's foreknowledge, it has absolutely no bearing on our experiencing free will. 

freewill itself requires the concepts of surprise, chance and the unknown - you've already stated that your god already knows the choices made so there is no chance, no possible surprise and nothing is unknown which completely negates the concept of freewill since with freewill there is always chance, surprise and the unknown.

Absolutely correct. With or without being made by Spirit Being, even in the closed-universe of Chance, ultimately, mankind like the beast and rocks surrounding it does not have free-will. Something else always will decide humanities ultimate end.

If we are to believe that God deliberately gave us free will, then what is an example of an organism that he deliberately did not give free will to?  How is free will something to be treasured, if there is literally no organism known to man that doesn’t exhibit it?  Humans, flies, amoebas - we all have it.  It’s not really even a thing if everything has it.  It’s like saying God gave us the gift of time.  Makes no sense.

I don't even see how free will is an issue related to "God". Since we cannot help but experience free will  (no one can say "no thanks" to free will) the existence or non existence of God has no bearing on it. 

God has no bearing on it.

So Yahweh does not have any plans, Yeshua is not coming back and Revelations should not be a part of the NT?

Since we cannot help but experience free will (no one can say "no thanks" to free will) the existence or non existence of God has no bearing on it.

I agree, but the most common religious excuse for any situation is “that’s because God gave us free will.”