Why the Left Mocks the Bible

  
Via:  make-america-great-again  •  2 weeks ago  •  234 comments

Why the Left Mocks the Bible
But no videos elicit the amount of contempt and mockery that videos defending religion, explaining the Bible, or arguing for God do. Why is that? There is a good reason. The Bible and the left (not liberalism; leftism) are as opposed as any two worldviews can be. While there are people who claim to hold both a Bible-based worldview and left-wing views, these people are few in number. Moreover, what they do is take left-wing positions and wrap them in a few verses from the Bible. But on...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


At PragerU, we have released about 400 videos on virtually every subject outside of the natural sciences and math. Along with two billion views, the videos have garnered tens of thousands of comments. So we have a pretty good handle on what people most love and most hate. For example, any video defending America or Israel inevitably receives many negative responses. But no videos elicit the amount of contempt and mockery that videos defending religion, explaining the Bible, or arguing for God do.

Why is that?

There is a good reason. The Bible and the left (not liberalism; leftism) are as opposed as any two worldviews can be. While there are people who claim to hold both a Bible-based worldview and left-wing views, these people are few in number. Moreover, what they do is take left-wing positions and wrap them in a few verses from the Bible. But on virtually every important value in life, the left and the Bible are diametrically opposed.






Here are a few examples:

The biblical view is that people are not basically good. Evil therefore comes from within human nature. For the left, human nature is not the source of evil. Capitalism, patriarchy, poverty, religion, nationalism, or some other external cause is the source of evil.

The biblical view is that nature was created for man. The left-wing view is that man is just another part of nature.

The biblical view is that man is created in the image of God, and therefore formed with a transcendent immaterial soul. The left-wing view – indeed, the view of all secular ideologies – is that man is purely material, another assemblage of stellar dust.

The biblical view is that the human being has free will. The left-wing view – and again, the view of all secular outlooks – is that human beings have no free will. Everything we do is determined by environment, genes, and the matter of which we are composed. Firing neurons, not free will, explain both murders and kindness.






The biblical view is that, while reason alone can lead a person to conclude murder is wrong, murder is ultimately and objectively wrong only because there is a transcendent source of right and wrong – God – who deems murder evil.

The biblical view is that God made order out of chaos. Order is defined by distinctions. One such example is male and female – the only inherent human distinction that matters to God. There are no racial or ethnic distinctions in God’s order, only the human sex distinction. The left loathes this concept of a divine order. That is the primary driver of its current attempt to obliterate the male-female distinction.

The biblical view is that the nuclear family is the basic unit of society – a married father and mother and their children. This is the biblical ideal. All good people of faith recognize that the reality of this world is such that many people do not or cannot live that ideal. And such people often merit our support. But that does not change the fact that the nuclear family is the one best-suited to create thriving individuals and a healthy society, and we who take the Bible seriously must continue to advocate the ideal family structure as the Bible defines it. And for that, perhaps more than anything, we are mocked.






The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities. They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

For nearly all of American history, the Bible was the most important book in America. It is no longer. This is a moral and intellectual catastrophe. If you want to understand why, consider reading The Rational Bible, my commentary on the first five books of the Bible. The second volume of The Rational Bible, Genesis, is published today.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
XXJefferson#51
1  seeder  XXJefferson#51    2 weeks ago

“But on virtually every important value in life, the left and the Bible are diametrically opposed.



Here are a few examples:

The biblical view is that people are not basically good. Evil therefore comes from within human nature. For the left, human nature is not the source of evil. Capitalism, patriarchy, poverty, religion, nationalism, or some other external cause is the source of evil.

The biblical view is that nature was created for man. The left-wing view is that man is just another part of nature.

The biblical view is that man is created in the image of God, and therefore formed with a transcendent immaterial soul. The left-wing view – indeed, the view of all secular ideologies – is that man is purely material, another assemblage of stellar dust.

The biblical view is that the human being has free will. The left-wing view – and again, the view of all secular outlooks – is that human beings have no free will. Everything we do is determined by environment, genes, and the matter of which we are composed. Firing neurons, not free will, explain both murders and kindness.



The biblical view is that, while reason alone can lead a person to conclude murder is wrong, murder is ultimately and objectively wrong only because there is a transcendent source of right and wrong – God – who deems murder evil.

The biblical view is that God made order out of chaos. Order is defined by distinctions. One such example is male and female – the only inherent human distinction that matters to God. There are no racial or ethnic distinctions in God’s order, only the human sex distinction. The left loathes this concept of a divine order. That is the primary driver of its current attempt to obliterate the male-female distinction.

The biblical view is that the nuclear family is the basic unit of society – a married father and mother and their children. This is the biblical ideal. All good people of faith recognize that the reality of this world is such that many people do not or cannot live that ideal. And such people often merit our support. But that does not change the fact that the nuclear family is the one best-suited to create thriving individuals and a healthy society, and we who take the Bible seriously must continue to advocate the ideal family structure as the Bible defines it. And for that, perhaps more than anything, we are mocked.”

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    2 weeks ago

' But no videos elicit the amount of contempt and mockery that videos defending religion, explaining the Bible, or arguing for God do.'

Contempt?  I don't think so

Mockery - yes - there's so much to be mocked.  

 
 
 
katrix
1.2  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @1    2 weeks ago
The biblical view is that the nuclear family is the basic unit of society – a married father and mother and their children

The biblical view is that rape victims should be sold to their rapists, that little girls should be sold to old men, that widows should be forced to marry their dead husband's brother ... that men can rape their slaves (and indeed, must set the female slave free if they fail to rape her) ...

and you think that's moral?

 
 
 
bbl-1
2  bbl-1    2 weeks ago

Bible mocked? 

"Jews will not replace us," covers it, right?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  bbl-1 @2    2 weeks ago

You realize that this article was written by a Jewish man and that most anti Semite words and acts in America comes from the secular progressive left and non from us mainstream conservatives.  

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.1  lib50  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1    2 weeks ago

Not today, its coming from the neo-nazis on the right.   Show us examples of what you are talking about.  Not supporting far right Likud policies doesn't count. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @2.1.1    2 weeks ago
its coming from the neo-nazis on the right.

Such as?  Be specific

 
 
 
lib50
2.1.3  lib50  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    2 weeks ago

Read a damn paper once in a while, its been discussed here and in public enough.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  lib50 @2.1.3    2 weeks ago

Another words you can't elaborate on your slurs

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.5  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
Such as?  Be specific

The guy who recently went on a killing spree the synagogue in California.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.1.5    2 weeks ago

The person you are talking about is John Earnest. He was an anti-Semite crackpot, who best described himself this way:

"The suspect in the deadly shooting at a San Diego County synagogue had no love for President Trump, apparently blasting him as a “Zionist, Jew-loving” traitor in a hate-filled manifesto posted before Saturday’s attack.

A person identifying himself as John Earnest posted a 4,000-word screed about an hour before the shooting saying he was motivated by his hatred of Jews and belief in white supremacy, as well as the Oct. 27 attack on the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, which left 11 dead.

As for Mr. Trump: “You mean that Zionist, Jew-loving, anti-White, traitorous c*cksucker? "


https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/28/john-earnest-synagogue-shooting-suspect-despised-z/



 
 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Don Overton @2.1.7    2 weeks ago
In other words

In other words I provided a description of the individual verbatim from the Washington Times

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.9  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.8    2 weeks ago
In other words I provided a description of the individual verbatim from the Washington Times

The Moonie Times is not exactly the most factual source.

Although the Washington Times has a very strong right editorial bias, they report straight news with a much lower bias. Therefore, we rate them Right-Center biased overall, and factually mixed due to poor sourcing, holding editorial postition that are contrary to scientific consensus, and failed fact checks.
 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.10  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.1.9    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.11  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.6    2 weeks ago
The person you are talking about is John Earnest. He was an anti-Semite crackpot, who best described himself this way:

"The suspect in the deadly shooting at a San Diego County synagogue had no love for President Trump, apparently blasting him as a “Zionist, Jew-loving” traitor in a hate-filled manifesto posted before Saturday’s attack.

A person identifying himself as John Earnest posted a 4,000-word screed about an hour before the shooting saying he was motivated by his hatred of Jews and belief in white supremacy, as well as the Oct. 27 attack on the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, which left 11 dead.

Why is it when other ethnicities go on a killing spree they are terrorists, but when it is a white male and conservative he is mentally ill wackjob? This is an excerpt from his manifesto.

“Every Jew is responsible for the meticulously planned genocide of the European race,” the manifesto said.

It also reiterates a conspiracy theory popular in right-wing circles in the United States about a Jewish-led attempt to “replace” white Americans with immigrants from other countries.

This meme was first created as satire but it is becoming a fact as Trump conservatives attempt to run from other white conservatives who go on killing sprees. 

https://images.app.goo.gl/hYgsPhCTHQeQxMDQ6

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.1.11    2 weeks ago
Why is it when other ethnicities go on a killing spree they are terrorists, but when it is a white male and conservative he is mentally ill wackjob?

The only distinction should be one is foreign, while the other is domestic. This individual acted alone, did he not, epistte?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1.13  Trout Giggles  replied to  epistte @2.1.11    2 weeks ago

This might be a bit more helpful

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2019/05/01/alleged-synagogue-shooter-was-churchgoer-who-articulated-christian-theology-prompting-tough-questions-evangelical-pastors/?utm_term=.b218e257ed9e

Before he allegedly walked into a synagogue in Poway, Calif., and opened fire, John Earnest appears to have written a seven-page letter spelling out his core beliefs: that Jewish people, guilty in his view of faults ranging from killing Jesus to controlling the media, deserved to die. That his intention to kill Jews would glorify God.

Days later, the Rev. Mika Edmondson read those words and was stunned. “It certainly calls for a good amount of soul-searching,” said Edmondson, a pastor in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, a small evangelical denomination founded to counter liberalism in mainline Presbyterianism. Earnest, 19, was a member of an OPC congregation. His father was an elder. He attended regularly. And in the manifesto, the writer spewed not only invective against Jews and racial minorities but also cogent Christian theology.

So the pastor read those seven pages, trying to understand. “We can’t pretend as though we didn’t have some responsibility for him — he was radicalized into white nationalism from within the very midst of our church,” Edmondson said.
 
 
 
epistte
2.1.14  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.12    2 weeks ago
The only distinction should be one is foreign, while the other is domestic. This individual acted alone, did he not, epistte?

Why is it that you label the foreign actor's terrorists, but you change that stance and call the domestic killers mentally ill wackjobs? Why aren't the foreign actors mentally ill or the home-grown radicals domestic terrorists? 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.1.15  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  epistte @2.1.14    2 weeks ago
but you change that stance and call the domestic killers mentally ill wackjobs?

Technically Vic said "He was an anti-Semite crackpot" which is basically saying he was a mentally ill hater of Jews.

"Pot was once a slang term for the skull, and something cracked was obviously defective — a older expression with a similar meaning that used the same word was crack-brain, and of course we still have the slang term cracked for someone who's thought to be crazy "

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-cra2.htm

And I have to assume based on his statement Vic sees some difference between "anti-Semite crackpots" and just regular old supposedly sane anti-Semites. I hear some conservatives frequently proclaim that when Obama called the Benghazi attack an "act of terror" the day after it happened that meant he was trying to somehow deflect and downplay his condemnation. Many claimed it wasn't strong enough and he should have said the full word "terrorism" instead of just "act of terror", but here we have a clearly right wing motivated terrorist who some conservatives refuse to name as such. They prefer to call him "crazy" or a "crackpot anti-Semite" instead of accepting the fact that right wing terrorism not only exists in America, but it's the far greater threat to us than Islamic terrorism.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/domestic-terror-still-greater-threat-than-islamic-extremism.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/03/15/not-all-terrorism-is-treated-equally/?utm_term=.8314c9ac0d03

https://www.csis.org/analysis/rise-far-right-extremism-united-states

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.16  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.1.14    2 weeks ago
Why aren't the foreign actors mentally ill 

Because they are frequently not. They have often been Islamic radicals who are not mentally ill, but rather at war with us.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.17  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1.15    2 weeks ago

Anti-Semitism & mental illness can both be at play as it was in the case of John Earnest. An act of terror can never be confused with a riot caused by a video tape. Obama finally admitted the obvious after Susan Rice lied to the nation.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.18  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.1.9    2 weeks ago

And?  You are trying to make some kind of point? Me thinks no one cares

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.19  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.18    2 weeks ago
And?  You are trying to make some kind of point? Me thinks no one cares

The Washington Times is not a respected source, despite the fact that you may agree with their editorial slant.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.20  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.1.19    2 weeks ago

The editorial slant on the opinion pages has absolutely nothing to do with whether the news as a source is respected or not.  The place you quoted from regarding the Washington Times is certainly not worthy of an iota of respect.  It is only worthy of hate and contempt. The bottom line is that sources like the one you quoted from will only add to the polarization and division in the media and on line as some will swallow their poison willingly while others will put what sources they criticize on a pedastal of respect and value because of it.   It unified and solved nothing.  It only polarizes further.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
2.1.21  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @2.1.19    2 weeks ago

The Washington Times is far more respected and valued than the Washington Post is.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.1.22  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @2.1.21    2 weeks ago
The Washington Times is far more respected and valued than the Washington Post is.  

That would be true only in the conservative echo chamber.

How many Pulitzer's and Peabody awards have the Washington Times won?  They don't hand to things out to just anyone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_won_by_The_Washington_Post

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.23  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.8    one week ago
In other words I provided a description of the individual verbatim from the Washington Times

Which seems to support the posit that he is a neo-Nazi from the right. In short, an utter fail. 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.24  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.17    one week ago
Anti-Semitism & mental illness can both be at play as it was in the case of John Earnest.

What evidence do you have that John Earnest is mentally ill? 

 
 
 
epistte
3  epistte    2 weeks ago

The Bible deserves to be mocked because it is obviously not to be taken as fact by rational people in the 21st century. The first lines of Genesis should be Once Upon A Time instead of In The Beginning.

The flood is an obvious parable,  which was stolen from the poem Gilgamesh, because it could not have happened. Believing that it did only make fundamentalists look ignorant when it is physically impossible for that much water to be created in a closed hydrologic system such as the Earth.

Was Bigfoot on the Ark?  Maybe unicorns don't exist because the tigers ate them?  

 Only in the bible could a whale become hotel room for a weekend. 

https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/abs_list.html

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @3    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_76_smiley_image.gifWay to prove the point of the seeded article.  

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1    2 weeks ago
Way to prove the point of the seeded article.  

Are logic and facts a problem for you?

Do you believe that Jonah lived in a while for 3 days?

Jonah is miraculously saved by being swallowed by a large fish, in whose belly he spends three days and three nights.
 
 
 
lib50
3.1.2  lib50  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1    2 weeks ago

The problem is with the people (who smugly want to impose their specific beliefs on everybody else), not the Bible itself.  Which was written by men, not Jesus, not God.  Full of parables, not literal true stories.  To speak in Bible language, when you turn a blind eye to the devil, nobody wants to listen to you.  Evangelicals and Trump supporters have real values problems, better fix them before you start sanctimoniously lecturing everybody on your 'Biblical values'.  No thanks. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1.3  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

I absolutely believe it. 100%.  

 
 
 
katrix
3.1.4  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

I know you do.  But there is absolutely no scientific evidence for any such thing - as a matter of fact, science directly contradicts such a thing being possible.  Logical people can't believe in such nonsense, or believe that the bible can be taken literally.

This is why biblical literalists can't accept science, but most Christians have no problem with it. 

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.5  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
I absolutely believe it. 100%.  

Whales capable of living inside (blue, humpback and sperm) are not carnivores. They are filter feeders that eat plankton and tiny fish.  They would not eat a person. 

 The fact that you believe what is utterly absurd is not something to be proud of.

 
 
 
Freefaller
3.1.6  Freefaller  replied to  epistte @3.1.5    2 weeks ago
sperm) are not carnivores. They are filter feeders

No big deal but sperm whales are carnivores with giant squid making up the majority of their diet

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.7  epistte  replied to  Freefaller @3.1.6    2 weeks ago
No big deal but sperm whales are carnivores with giant squid making up the majority of their diet

I was not aware of that. Thank you for correcitng me.

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.1.8  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1    2 weeks ago

Way to understand that you don't understand what people say

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.9  Jack_TX  replied to  lib50 @3.1.2    2 weeks ago
The problem is with the people (who smugly want to impose their specific beliefs on everybody else),

We have that in common. 

It needs to be said that the phrase "the people (who smugly want to impose their specific beliefs on everybody else)," describes angry liberals as well as angry Christians.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.10  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @3.1.5    2 weeks ago
Whales capable of living inside (blue, humpback and sperm) are not carnivores. They are filter feeders that eat plankton and tiny fish.  They would not eat a person. 

In Judaism and Christianity, there are these things called "miracles".  

"Miracles" are occasions where God suspends, overrides, or just completely overturns the laws of the natural world to achieve His objective.

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.11  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
In Judaism and Christianity, there are these things called "miracles".   "Miracles" are occasions where God suspends, overrides, or just completely overturns the laws of the natural world to achieve His objective.

Did you happen to notice that as our knowledge of the world around us has progressed that there are a lot fewer miracles occurring?

FYI.

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.12  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.9    2 weeks ago
It needs to be said that the phrase "the people (who smugly want to impose their specific beliefs on everybody else)," describes angry liberals as well as angry Christians.

What exactly are angry liberals trying to impose on you?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
3.1.13  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @3.1.12    2 weeks ago
What exactly are angry liberals trying to impose on you?

Socialized health care for a start.  Followed by the outrageous taxes they're going to need to collect to pay for it.

Followed by more outrageous taxes to pay for eliminating fossil fuels.  

 
 
 
bccrane
3.1.14  bccrane  replied to  epistte @3.1.11    2 weeks ago

What do you mean by fewer miracles?  There's been ever increasing miracles as our knowledge has increased.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1.15  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  katrix @3.1.4    2 weeks ago

You expect us to provide scientific facts to prove divine miracles?  Not going to happen..

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1.16  Gordy327  replied to  bccrane @3.1.14    2 weeks ago
There's been ever increasing miracles as our knowledge has increased.

Such as?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.1.17  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  epistte @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

as if God isn’t powerful enough to have one creature of his creation act to fulfill his will in the life of a person and a city.  And yes, I believe God can enact miracles .  

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1.18  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.15    2 weeks ago
You expect us to provide scientific facts to prove divine miracles?  

That's because miracles is just fictional irrational BS meant to provide an emotionally appealing and an intellectually lazy explanation for something unexpectedly fortuitous or unknown.

Not going to happen..

Of course not, since you have no such proof or evidence to begin with. Which is why claims of miracles are both equally laughable and dismissed.

I absolutely believe it. 100%.

Not surprising, despite the fact that it is scientifically impossible nor is there any evidence of such an occurrence occurring. But then, some people allow irrational belief to override logical thought.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
3.1.19  Phoenyx13  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago
as if God isn’t powerful enough to have one creature of his creation act to fulfill his will in the life of a person and a city.

yet he's not powerful enough to defeat the devil, nor communicate a clear message so that none of his creations would misunderstand it, huh ?

 
 
 
bccrane
3.1.20  bccrane  replied to  Gordy327 @3.1.16    2 weeks ago

Medical advancements in cancer treatments and other ailments as an example, all made possible by the evolution of DNA through time leading up to us.

 
 
 
katrix
3.1.21  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.15    2 weeks ago
You expect us to provide scientific facts to prove divine miracles?  Not going to happen..

Of course I don't.  Miracles don't actually exist.  Just because you can't understand how or why something happened doesn't mean it was a miracle.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1.22  Gordy327  replied to  bccrane @3.1.20    2 weeks ago

That's a matter of science, not miracles.

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.23  epistte  replied to  bccrane @3.1.14    2 weeks ago
What do you mean by fewer miracles?  There's been ever increasing miracles as our knowledge has increased.

I am not aware of any recent miracles related to our technological advances

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.24  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago
as if God isn’t powerful enough to have one creature of his creation act to fulfill his will in the life of a person and a city.  And yes, I believe God can enact miracles .  

When has that happened in the last 50 years?  Jesus appearing on a grilled cheese sandwich or a dirty window doesn't count as a miracle

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.25  epistte  replied to  epistte @3.1.24    2 weeks ago
When has that happened in the last 50 years?  Jesus appearing on a grilled cheese sandwich or a dirty window doesn't count as a miracle

Bueller.........................Bueller..........................Bueller..............................

Where and when did these recent miracles occur?

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.2  Tessylo  replied to  epistte @3    2 weeks ago

SAVE0016.jpg

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.1  Gordy327  replied to  Tessylo @3.2    2 weeks ago

That's a classic. Lol

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3    2 weeks ago
The Bible deserves to be mocked because it is obviously not to be taken as fact by rational people in the 21st century. The first lines of Genesis should be Once Upon A Time instead of In The Beginning

Feel free to ignore it then.

Do you take that exact stance on all of what you consider fiction, or do you reserve your bile for only the Bible?

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.3.1  It Is ME  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3    2 weeks ago
by rational people in the 21st century.

It's like us being in the 21st Century means Folks are Smarter now. jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.2  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3    2 weeks ago

Feel free to ignore it then.

Do you take that exact stance on all of what you consider fiction, or do you reserve your bile for only the Bible?

 

Yes, I do.  The pantheon of Hindu gods is just as mythical as the Greek and Roman gods.

 
 
 
Don Overton
3.3.3  Don Overton  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3    2 weeks ago

[Removed]

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.4  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.2    2 weeks ago

Okay.

It is just that I have never heard you criticize any of them.

Kind of like I have never heard you criticize American Indians for their religion.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.5  Texan1211  replied to  Don Overton @3.3.3    2 weeks ago
Why do republicans hate the bible

Even if that were true, WTF difference would it make?

Do you want the Bible used to pass laws?

Bet you don't!

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.6  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3    2 weeks ago
Feel free to ignore it then. Do you take that exact stance on all of what you consider fiction,

Yes, I do when people push it in my face and demand that I salute their myths.

or do you reserve your bile for only the Bible?

I'd love to be able to ignore it except for the fact that I am forced to pay for 5 religious channel, thumpers leave it on my front door, and it is constantly in both secular society and politics.

 
 
 
livefreeordie
3.3.7  livefreeordie  replied to  epistte @3.3.6    2 weeks ago

Who forces you to pay for religious programming?

does the government force you to buy a commercial product (cable or satellite) ala Obama and the commie Obamacare?

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.8  epistte  replied to  livefreeordie @3.3.7    2 weeks ago
Who forces you to pay for religious programming? does the government force you to buy a commercial product (cable or satellite) ala Obama and the commie Obamacare?

If I want to watch more than 6 channels, I have to buy a cable or satellite package. All of them have religious programming.

You should stop using words that you do not know the meanings of because the PPACA is about as far from communist as is possible. Truly communist healthcare would be free because in a communist society there is no private ownership or money due to the fact that everything is owned by the society as a whole. Truly communist societies are not authoritarian, despite what you are trying to claim.

There is nothing communist about being required to have for-profit health insurance. That is a very capitalist economic idea and having health insurance is a mature adult decision when we are required to treat the sick regardless of their ability to pay. If someone has the ability to pay for health insurance then they should do so, because if they do not then they are forcing others to pay for their care despite the fact that having health insurance would not be an undue financial burden.

 I'd rather have single payer healthcare, but that  policy would also be paid for with income deductions and taxes.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.9  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.6    2 weeks ago
Yes, I do when people push it in my face and demand that I salute their myths.

Kind of doubting that your opinion means much to them.

I'd love to be able to ignore it except for the fact that I am forced to pay for 5 religious channel, thumpers leave it on my front door, and it is constantly in both secular society and politics.

Gee, that sounds like a personal problem you have with your cable company. I find it hard to believe that someone forced you to subscribe to cable, though. I know no one is making you watch what you don't want to watch.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.10  Texan1211  replied to  livefreeordie @3.3.7    2 weeks ago

Seems weird to complain that you have religious programming in your cable package. 

Does that mean people like that aren't on board with buying certain insurance you'll never need or use?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.11  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.8    2 weeks ago

How much are you paying for those religious channels?

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.12  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.11    2 weeks ago
How much are you payi

The channel pricing isn't ala-carte, as you are well aware of. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.13  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.12    2 weeks ago

People with cable or satellite often gets tons of channels they never watch. It isn't a big deal to most folks, though.

Why is it one with you?

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.14  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.13    2 weeks ago
People with cable or satellite often gets tons of channels they never watch. It isn't a big deal to most folks, though. Why is it one with you?

I find ignorance to be very offensive. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.15  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.12    2 weeks ago

I bet you get loads of Spanish-language channels, too. Ever watch them?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.16  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.14    2 weeks ago
I find ignorance to be very offensive.

So you find it ignorant for cable companies to offer religious stations.

Why?

Sounds more like they do it to make money.

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.17  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.15    2 weeks ago
I bet you get loads of Spanish-language channels, too. Ever watch them?

Sorry, I don't.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.18  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.17    2 weeks ago

But you only complain about receiving religious channels you never watch?

LOL!

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.19  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.3.17    2 weeks ago

Damn those cable companies for forcing you to pay for Spanish-language channels!

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.3.20  Tessylo  replied to  epistte @3.3.6    2 weeks ago

' that I am forced to pay for 5 religious channels'

Did you konw that the lying sack of shit former 'reverend' Mike Huckabee has a show on cable?  I watched a minute or two of it, it was sickening.  He was talking about the press and his stupid lying daughter Sarah.

I wish I could block that garbage.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.3.21  Tessylo  replied to  livefreeordie @3.3.7    2 weeks ago
'Who forces you to pay for religious programming?'

The cable company, Duh.

I bet you don't have cable because the Deep State must be somehow involved.  

' ala Obama and the commie Obamacare'

jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
katrix
3.3.22  katrix  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.4    2 weeks ago
Kind of like I have never heard you criticize American Indians for their religion.

When do Native Americans try to push their religion into our government, laws, and schools, or use it to try to deny equal rights to others?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.3.23  Tessylo  replied to  katrix @3.3.22    2 weeks ago
'When do Native Americans try to push their religion into our government, laws, and schools, or use it to try to deny equal rights to others?' 

Never.

Just another deflection.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.24  Texan1211  replied to  katrix @3.3.22    2 weeks ago
When do Native Americans try to push their religion into our government, laws, and schools, or use it to try to deny equal rights to others?

 never claimed they did.

Way to miss the point!

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.3.25  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @3.3.21    2 weeks ago
The cable company, Duh.

I bet you don't have cable because the Deep State must be somehow involved.

' ala Obama and the commie Obamacare'

Man, I would alert the authorities if I were you----that mean old bully cable company is forcing you to buy their product!!!!!!!

Hell, it might be a class action suit---unless you are the only one they force!

 
 
 
katrix
3.3.26  katrix  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.24    2 weeks ago
Way to miss the point!

I think you're the one who missed the point.  The reason we criticize fundamental Christians, and not ancient Greeks, or Hindus, or Native Americans, is because those groups are not trying to preach at us, and not trying to shove their religion into our government, laws, schools - and our bodies. 

 
 
 
bugsy
3.3.27  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.3.19    2 weeks ago
Damn those cable companies for forcing you to pay for Spanish-language channels!

And CNN and MSDNC

She must hate those channels too because she is being forced to pay for them, or.....probably not.

 
 
 
epistte
3.3.28  epistte  replied to  bugsy @3.3.27    2 weeks ago
And CNN and MSDNC She must hate those channels too because she is being forced to pay for them, or.....probably not.

I don't watch CNN. I seldom watch MSNBC. I get my news from NPR in the morning (Morning Edition) and evening (All Things Considered).  Occasionally I will watch the BBC World News at 11:00 pm.

 
 
 
bugsy
3.3.29  bugsy  replied to  epistte @3.3.28    2 weeks ago

I didn't say you watched them. I said you are being forced to pay for them so you should be outraged about that too. After all....outraged at one, outraged at all, right?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @3    2 weeks ago
The Bible deserves to be mocked because it is obviously not to be taken as fact by rational people in the 21st century.

You mean like the people who hate the President and hate whites and hate Christians?  I don't think rational is the word that comes to mind.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.4.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.4    2 weeks ago
'and hate whites and hate Christians?' 

Who hates whites and christians?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.4.2  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.4    2 weeks ago

People doesn’t come to mind either in their case....

 
 
 
epistte
3.4.3  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.4    2 weeks ago
You mean like the people who hate the President and hate whites and hate Christians?  I don't think rational is the word that comes to mind.

Rational people despise a POTUS who cannot go a day without lying. I cannot think of anything about Donald Trump that does not make me sick.  He is the epitome of the ugly American.

Who hates white people? Considering the fact that I am white I do not hate myself.  I hate people who use their race to discriminate against others.  Do you defend racist, bigots, xenophobes, misogynists, and homophobes

I don't hate Christians. I hate people who try to force their religious views on me as secular law and/or who are hypocrites.  Is it a problem for you that I am logical and demand facts/empirical proof before I believe in something, or do you think that my logic should be limited where religious belief is concerned?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
3.4.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.4    one week ago

Rational people don’t hate unless the target of such hate is something or someone totally and irredeemably evil. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4  TᵢG    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

The biblical view is that people are not basically good. Evil therefore comes from within human nature. For the left, human nature is not the source of evil. Capitalism, patriarchy, poverty, religion, nationalism, or some other external cause is the source of evil.

Human nature is indeed the source of evil.   The listed examples are all a result of human intent and human action.  The author is pretending that 'the left' does not realize human beings are at the helm.

However, some religious people think that Satan is the source of evil.   

The biblical view is that nature was created for man. The left-wing view is that man is just another part of nature.

Is this really the left?   Seems more like the findings of contemporary science.

The biblical view is that man is created in the image of God, and therefore formed with a transcendent immaterial soul. The left-wing view – indeed, the view of all secular ideologies – is that man is purely material, another assemblage of stellar dust.

Again, it seems 'the left' then is being rational and humble by noting what we have discovered and not putting forth speculation as truth.   In contrast, those who insist the Bible is divine arrogantly profess to know that man is created in the image of God, and therefore formed with a transcendent immaterial soul, etc.    

The biblical view is that the human being has free will. The left-wing view – and again, the view of all secular outlooks – is that human beings have no free will. Everything we do is determined by environment, genes, and the matter of which we are composed. Firing neurons, not free will, explain both murders and kindness.

I think the author is stretching things a bit.   Hard to believe that most of 'the left' holds to a strictly deterministic reality.  

The biblical view is that, while reason alone can lead a person to conclude murder is wrong, murder is ultimately and objectively wrong only because there is a transcendent source of right and wrong – God – who deems murder evil.

Well, again, this simply declares an arbiter of objective morality.   Not a shred of evidence supporting this declaration.   But one can easily find all sorts of evidence for subjective (or relative) morality.   We therefore all know that relative morality exists.   Objective morality might exist too, but currently this is simply a religious belief on faith.

The biblical view is that God made order out of chaos. Order is defined by distinctions. One such example is male and female – the only inherent human distinction that matters to God. There are no racial or ethnic distinctions in God’s order, only the human sex distinction. The left loathes this concept of a divine order. That is the primary driver of its current attempt to obliterate the male-female distinction.

This is just a verbal tantrum.   The author needs to do much more than simply claim 'the left loathes divine order'.    Silly.

The biblical view is that the nuclear family is the basic unit of society – a married father and mother and their children. This is the biblical ideal. All good people of faith recognize that the reality of this world is such that many people do not or cannot live that ideal. And such people often merit our support. But that does not change the fact that the nuclear family is the one best-suited to create thriving individuals and a healthy society, and we who take the Bible seriously must continue to advocate the ideal family structure as the Bible defines it. And for that, perhaps more than anything, we are mocked.

Well the author will continue to be disappointed, because apparently 'the left' does not condemn families that do not fit the religious stereotype.   I suspect the author's head will eventually explode because this trend is unlikely to reverse.

The biblical view holds that wisdom begins with acknowledging God. The secular view is that God is unnecessary for wisdom, and the left-wing view is that God is destructive to wisdom. But if you want to know which view is more accurate, look at the most godless and Bible-less institution in our society: the universities. They are, without competition, the most foolish institutions in our society.

Well, see, this now is just semantics.   If you go by the dictionary definition for wisdom:  "The quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgement; the quality of being wise." there is no requirement to acknowledge God.   So we have that.   I certainly can see how one could argue that believing something without evidence is destructive to wisdom.   For example, I do not find Islamic suicide bombers to be wise;  they seem to be operating on pure faith in Allah.   Have to wonder if the author would consider such faith (acknowledgement and submission to God) as wise.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 weeks ago

There are none more foolish, intolerant, and arrogant than the condescending ones who cloak themselves as so called pro science and then call differing viewpoints pseudoscience as a way to content control and censor those differing points of view.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1    2 weeks ago

Where did I use the term 'pseudoscience'?    

If memory serves me (and it most definitely does) you routinely deem the foundation of modern biology to be pseudoscience.   That is, you deem biochemical evolution to be pseudoscience.   

So your comment (which in no way even attempts to rebut what I posited) seems to me to be a perfect example of projection (accusing others of what you actually do).

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
katrix
4.1.3  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1    2 weeks ago
There are none more foolish, intolerant, and arrogant than the condescending ones who cloak themselves as so called pro science and then call differing viewpoints pseudoscience as a way to content control and censor those differing points of view.  

Oops, accidentally hit "like" instead of reply to this ridiculous comment.

I'm sorry that actual definitions of words offend you so much - we did not define the word "pseudoscience," we just use it correctly.  Unlike you.  People can have differing points of view, but when they're foolishly in clear opposition to facts and logic, of course they'll be mocked.  Willful ignorance and rejection of science deserve to be mocked, just as silly delusions about the world and humanity being only 6,000 years old deserve to be mocked.  As does bigotry and hatred of equal rights for everyone.

If bible babblers quit trying to shove their nonsense down everyone else's throats and into our laws, governments, and schools - and quit trying to use their nonsense as a reason to persecute and discriminate against others - they'd probably find that people would stop mocking and scorning their nonsense.  But when they try to infect others with their stupidity, people are going to push back.

Funny how it's OK for you to mock everyone who doesn't fall for YEC nonsense or who supports equal rights, or who is too moral to support that charlatan Trump, or is too moral to accept the bible as a blueprint for how we should act (when it clearly condones rape and slavery - even demands that people enslave others - among other atrocities, besides being laughably wrong about many of the events described). 

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.1    2 weeks ago

I’m speaking of the terms as used by Mr. Dave Van Zandt of MBFC infamy and everyone who uses his definitions of the terms.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.4    2 weeks ago

When you REPLY to an individual member you are in effect speaking to that member.

Replying to a member as a proxy for someone else (in this case Van Zandt) is beyond peculiar;  it is arguably bizarre.    Especially if said member has never written anything that referenced Van Zandt.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.6  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  katrix @4.1.3    2 weeks ago

I stand by and double down on every word I wrote above as I was speaking my mind regarding the issue.  

 
 
 
katrix
4.1.7  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.6    2 weeks ago
I stand by and double down on every word I wrote above as I was speaking my mind regarding the issue.  

Zero times two is still zero.

 
 
 
Freefaller
4.1.8  Freefaller  replied to  katrix @4.1.7    2 weeks ago
Zero times two is still zero

LMAO, Katrix thank you for starting my day off with a laugh

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.1.9  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  katrix @4.1.7    2 weeks ago

But thanks to you my words are still here despite the censorship of my speaking my mind on the issue.  Words alone can’t express the sheer and utter contempt I have for those who call themselves so called pro science consensus and yet rely on a four letter crutch to content control or censor opposing or alternative points of view by labeling it as so called pseudoscience so they can be comfortable in their arrogance.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.9    2 weeks ago
Words alone can’t express the sheer and utter contempt I have for those who call themselves so called pro science consensus and yet rely on a four letter crutch to content control or censor opposing or alternative points of view by labeling it as so called pseudoscience so they can be comfortable in their arrogance.  

Are you anti science?

... labeling it as so called pseudoscience so they can be comfortable in their arrogance

Seems like a good comment directed at those who declare evolution (the foundation of modern biology) to be pseudoscience.

 
 
 
katrix
4.1.11  katrix  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.1.9    2 weeks ago
 Words alone can’t express the sheer and utter contempt I have for those

And yet you seed an article whining about people who have contempt for your anti-science agenda.  Seems rather hypocritical to me.

 
 
 
epistte
4.2  epistte  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 weeks ago
Human nature is indeed the source of evil.   The listed examples are all a result of human intent and human action.  The author is pretending that 'the left' does not realize human beings are at the helm.

I feel stupid for just realizing this but if the god of the bible is truly both omniscient and omnipotent then there can be no such thing as morality because if God knew what they were going to do before it happened then people didn't and cannot choose to be good or evil.  They are no more at fault for their behavior than the computer programmer can blame the computer itself for a malfunction. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  epistte @4.2    2 weeks ago

I agree (given those premises).   If the future is knowable then free will is not possible.   The Bible claims the future is knowable (by claiming God omniscient) thus it contradicts the claim of free will.   This is is one of many logical contradictions that prove the God of the Bible (as defined) does not exist.   

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.2  epistte  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.1    2 weeks ago
I agree (given those premises).   If the future is knowable then free will is not possible.   The Bible claims the future is knowable (by claiming God omniscient) thus it contradicts the claim of free will.   This is is one of many logical contradictions that prove the God of the Bible (as defined) does not exist.   

I had never followed the argument of determinism vs free will to its conclusion and considered the implications of biblical morality that could not exist with an omniscient god. I feel both lazy and stupid for missing something so seemingly obvious.

 The conservative Christian idea of enforcing biblical morality as secular law just evaporated.   But it would require logic to understand that claim. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
4.2.3  evilgenius  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.1    2 weeks ago
The Bible claims the future is knowable (by claiming God omniscient) thus it contradicts the claim of free will. 

Strict Calvinists would agree there is no free will. The Puritans preached that all was determined at creation including what souls were "saved". Men with free will would always choose sin, they so believed.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2.4  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.1    2 weeks ago

It is no contradiction at all.  All have the free will to make choices in their lives.  God does not by knowing the future compel us to make the choices we make.  Gods will and wish is for all to believe Him and be saved.  Many will choose not to believe. Some will vainly demand proof of his existence as a precondition to believe and will pass on of old age not believing. 

 
 
 
Veronica
4.2.5  Veronica  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.1    2 weeks ago
If the future is knowable then free will is not possible

I have been saying that for years.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.6  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.1    2 weeks ago
If the future is knowable then free will is not possible.

You misunderstand free will. 

Your free will is not effected if God knows the future. You don't. You have the choice to get out of bed in the morning or to lay there. 

The truth is that free will is part of human existence and is not effected by the existence or non existence of God. It is IMPOSSIBLE for you to not have free will. Even if you were to become suddenly convinced that there is a God, you would still have free will. 

You are mistaking a God's attributes with our human attributes. They do not necessarily intermingle. 

 
 
 
Veronica
4.2.7  Veronica  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.4    2 weeks ago

If your god already knows what people are going to do then how can there be free will?  

Gods will and wish is for all to believe Him and be saved.

That makes your god an ego maniac & completely narcissistic.  The stories told about him (like Job) make him a sadistic god at that. 

I do not dismiss the Christian god as being real, but I do not think he is the one and only.  I believe there are many gods & goddesses - some good, some not so good.

 
 
 
Veronica
4.2.8  Veronica  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.6    2 weeks ago

If god knows you are not going to get out of bed then i guess you aren't really exhibiting free will.  The choice has already been made. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Veronica @4.2.8    2 weeks ago

People who decide to get out of bed experience choice. 

It is actually literally impossible for a human being to not have free will every second they are alive. 

God exists supernaturally, so what God knows or doesnt know is not really our concern. We make our own choices as a result of self consciousness. 

 
 
 
Veronica
4.2.10  Veronica  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.9    2 weeks ago

I believe people have free will.  But I also believe that the Christian god is not all knowing.

When shit like this article gets thrown out there it sure is our concern about what their god knows or doesn't know.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.2.11  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.9    2 weeks ago
God exists supernaturally, so what God knows or doesn't know is not really our concern. We make our own choices as a result of self consciousness. 

If what we are about to do is already know for a certainty, and we are fated to do exactly what some supernatural being knows we will do, then how exactly is that free will? It implies we are tied to some sort of strings of fate that go far into the future that some supernatural being can see but we can't thus we merely have the mirage of free will. And what would be the point of this supernatural being waiting to intercede on mankind's behalf if that's what fate says it will at some point? Why wait to pass judgement on anyone if their "fated free will" has already been determined? Why let human lives play out on earth at all if all the physical meat of our existence is meant to be a relative millisecond of our existence? If you believe we have an immortal soul that was created at physical human conception that continues on for eternity after the brief moments it spent inhabiting a physical shell, and everything that soul is ever going to do or think is already known by its creator, what's the point? What's the point of first, attaching an apparently immortal alien being (our supposed immortal soul) to a very limited sack of meat and water that has to struggle for survival in a harsh physical environment, all so it can spend 99.9% of the rest of its existence in an ethereal spirit form, and every spirits actions for all eternity are already known by the head spirit. Not only does that all sound rather insane, its certainly not describing any sort of "free will".

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.2.12  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.2.11    2 weeks ago
If what we are about to do is already know for a certainty, and we are fated to do exactly what some supernatural being knows we will do, then how exactly is that free will?

Because free will and  GOD knowing something are not mutually exclusive.  Can you WITH CERTAINTY communicate with God, or absorb or even understand it's knowledge? I doubt it. So what would be the practical result of God knowing the future of an individual ? Nothing. The individual still experiences free will, as we all must. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.13  TᵢG  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.4    2 weeks ago
It is no contradiction at all.  

It is a direct contradiction based on the meaning of omniscience and free will.

All have the free will to make choices in their lives.  

Yes, I figured you were confused on this point.   Even if reality is deterministic (meaning that it is an incomprehensibly complex network of cause & effect) sentient entities (e.g. people) will still make choices.   When you choose to buy a latte at Starbucks that is technically a choice.   The question, however, is at that instant when the choice was made could you have chosen a cafe Americana instead?    If reality is deterministic then we could replay that personal moment in time endlessly and you would always choose to buy a latte.    It is like a movie, every time you watch it the characters make the same choices and the outcomes are always identical.    

If reality is NOT deterministic then free will is possible.   This is the case where you could have chosen an Americana.   That choice changes the future.   (Look up the Butterfly Effect.)   As people with free will go about their daily lives they will all make choices that interact to produce what we call the future.   The future, in this case, is unknowable.   Given an unknowable future, no entity could know the future.  Right?   An unknowable future contradicts omniscience.   Thus the presence of free will contradicts omniscience (and vice-versa).

In short, free will means you have a movie that changes every time you play it (the future in the movie is NOT knowable).   No free will means the movie never changes (and thus the future in the movie is knowable).   If God is omniscient that means the future is knowable and thus free will is impossible.

God does not by knowing the future compel us to make the choices we make.  

Correct.   An entity that knows the future does not necessarily make all the choices.   Knowing the future means tracing the cause & effect network forward to see a future outcome (fast forwarding a movie,   skipping to the last chapter in a book, etc.)   It is about knowledge, not control.

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.14  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.6    2 weeks ago
You misunderstand free will. 

This should be interesting.

Your free will is not effected if God knows the future. You don't. You have the choice to get out of bed in the morning or to lay there. 

How can the future be knowable if the individual sentient entities are making choices in real time that collectively determine the future?    If the future is unknowable then God cannot possibly know it.   

The truth is that free will is part of human existence and is not effected by the existence or non existence of God.

This applies even if there is no God.   Even if no entity is omniscient.   It all depends on whether or not the future is knowable.    If the future is knowable then it is determined before the choices are made.   That means the choices at every level are determined.   Like dominoes in a complex pattern, the cause & effect chains are all setup ready to act.   

If reality is deterministic the free will is impossible.   If reality is not deterministic then the future is not knowable (and thus omniscience is impossible).

It is IMPOSSIBLE for you to not have free will. Even if you were to become suddenly convinced that there is a God, you would still have free will. 

You need to do more than simply claim this.  

You are mistaking a God's attributes with our human attributes. They do not necessarily intermingle. 

This argument does not need God.   This argument applies even if there is no God.   It is about determinism.   If the future is knowable then reality is deterministic and free will is impossible.   If the future is not knowable then reality is not determined and free will is possible.

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.15  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.12    2 weeks ago
Because free will and  GOD knowing something are not mutually exclusive.  Can you WITH CERTAINTY communicate with God, or absorb or even understand it's knowledge? I doubt it. So what would be the practical result of God knowing the future of an individual ? Nothing. The individual still experiences free will, as we all must. 

So let's take God out of the equation and make this real simple:

  1. If it is possible to know the future (even if no entity actually knows the future) then reality is necessarily deterministic.
  2. If reality is deterministic then free will is impossible by definition.
  3. Free will can only exist if the future is not knowable.
 
 
 
It Is ME
4.2.16  It Is ME  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.14    2 weeks ago
This argument does not need God.   This argument applies even if there is no God.

Pretty definitive statement there TiG.

Are you sure, beyond a shadow of doubt ?

Or

just Theorizing !

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.17  TᵢG  replied to  It Is ME @4.2.16    2 weeks ago

Read my argument.   If you disagree then make a rebuttal.

If you have a thoughtful question I will answer it.   

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.2.18  It Is ME  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.17    2 weeks ago
If you have a thoughtful question I will answer it. 

I did have a thinking question. You chose to respond with:

"Read my argument. If you disagree then make a rebuttal.
If you have a thoughtful question I will answer it. "

Again I ask:

Are you sure, beyond a shadow of doubt ?

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.19  Texan1211  replied to  It Is ME @4.2.18    2 weeks ago

It is a game some play---demand "thoughtful" questions and answers, all the while shouting down any and all questions or answers.

Some can't accept that the whole world isn't in lockstep with them.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.2.20  It Is ME  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.19    2 weeks ago
It is a game some play---demand "thoughtful" questions and answers, all the while shouting down any and all questions or answers.

As if it was unrefutably a proven "FACTOID" too ! 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.21  TᵢG  replied to  Texan1211 @4.2.19    2 weeks ago

Note that you showed up not to provide any value but to make this personal.   Merely to spin a derogatory allegation.

 
 
 
Tessylo
4.2.22  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.21    2 weeks ago

[deleted]  

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.2.23  It Is ME  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.21    2 weeks ago
Note that you showed up not to provide any value but to make this personal.   Merely to spin a derogatory allegation.

I saw Value in Texans Comment: "all the while shouting down any and all questions or answers."

You made a definitive statement, I questioned your Definitive Statement, and you go off on some other adventure.

Why is that ??

 
 
 
Texan1211
4.2.24  Texan1211  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.21    2 weeks ago

I report, you decide!

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.25  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.9    2 weeks ago
It is actually literally impossible for a human being to not have free will every second they are alive. 

Why?  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
4.2.26  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.12    2 weeks ago
Because free will and  GOD knowing something are not mutually exclusive.  Can you WITH CERTAINTY communicate with God, or absorb or even understand it's knowledge? I doubt it.

If your course of actions is knowable before you take those actions, and is 100% accurate meaning that knowledge of what you will do is never wrong (which is implied by God supposedly knowing that information, thus it must be 'knowable') then your free will is nothing but an illusion.

And no, I cannot with any certainty, communicate with God. I could pray till I sweat blood and if I did hear a voice responding to me in my head, I'd have no objective way to prove it was the voice of God and would likely be a far better indicator of induced insanity.

But back to the point, if everything we will ever do and everything we've ever done is all pre-written in some account God has access to, then we are nothing but characters in a book written by a universal author and thus not responsible for any of our actions as we can but do what the authors says we will do.

"So what would be the practical result of God knowing the future of an individual ? Nothing. The individual still experiences free will, as we all must."

Well there you have a point. There would be no practical result of God knowing the future unless it took some active role in human lives which is what millions seem to believe as they constantly pray to one God or another. And in that case it implies even less free will since if God takes an active role in our every day lives, protecting those who beseech him, and he blesses them so that some outcome he knew would happen occurs, then he truly is the puppet master making fate dance to his will.

Saying "the individual still experiences free will" is basically an admission that free will is more about perspective, that as long as we feel like we "experienced" free will, then that's as good as the real thing.

Imagine if you will, a prayer answered...

"Oh father, who art in heaven, hallowed be they name..."

"Hey kiddo, I hear ya, God here..."

"What? Really? Oh thank God! Oh, I mean, thank you!"

"So what did you want to ask me about?"

"Well, don't you know?"

"Of course I do, I just wanted you to say it..."

"Wait a sec, is that like some kinky thing you have? You know humans will pray to you and know what they will ask for, and know the outcome of whatever actions they take and what your influence, if you choose to help them, will do, but you still need us to ask for your aid?"

"Well, yeah, that's sort of the deal, you ask, I give you what you need, not what you want..."

"So you help us overcome hardship and never let those of us who stay faithful all our lives more than we can handle, but some do fall away so you knew they would fail even when they were praying to you before they failed, right?"

"Well yeah, of course I knew they couldn't handle it and would leave the faith"

"But didn't you say you wouldn't test us more than we could handle?"

"Well, I never test those who I know will stay faithful to me more than they can handle..."

"But those you know will abandon you, you allow to be tested till they predictable break?"

"Well, that's not me doing it, that's them, that's free will..."

'facepalm...'

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.2.27  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @4.2.26    2 weeks ago

You can't have an argument like that with God! You'll be struck with lightning!

 
 
 
charger 383
4.2.28  charger 383  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.27    2 weeks ago

has anybody heard anything from God lately, that there is real proof of?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.2.29  Trout Giggles  replied to  charger 383 @4.2.28    2 weeks ago

He's coming to my monthly poker game this week

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.30  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.4    2 weeks ago
It is no contradiction at all.  All have the free will to make choices in their lives.  God does not by knowing the future compel us to make the choices we make.  Gods will and wish is for all to believe Him and be saved.  Many will choose not to believe. Some will vainly demand proof of his existence as a precondition to believe and will pass on of old age not believing. 

Your idea is only the appearance of free will, which is not actually true.

Why should I believe in a deity that has the very same proof of existing as Snow White or Humpty Dumpty? Does my belief in a myth make it true or is my devout belief irrational; and/or delusional?  I am sure that you want to believe and have been told to believe but neither wanting nor trying to follow the orders of church fathers or your parents do not constitute existence or fact. 

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.31  epistte  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2.12    2 weeks ago
Because free will and  GOD knowing something are not mutually exclusive.  Can you WITH CERTAINTY communicate with God, or absorb or even understand it's knowledge? I doubt it. So what would be the practical result of God knowing the future of an individual ? Nothing. The individual still experiences free will, as we all must. 

If God knows how you will act then you only have the appearance of free will and not actual free will. God could not know how you are going to act if we truly had free will. The fact that we cannot communicate with God is irrelevant to the issue that of god knows how you are going to act then you do not have free will.

I know that as a believe you want to be both rational, and at the same time to follow the teachings of your religion but that logical fence sitting is not logically defensible.  

 If you actually do have true free will then your god is neither omniscient and omnipotent, so why would you pray to a deity that doesn't know what you are praying for and cannot answer your prayers? This is a religious catch-22 that you are currently caught in. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.32  Gordy327  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.4    2 weeks ago
 All have the free will to make choices in their lives.  

If there was a god, there would be no such ting as free will. To us, free will is an illusion.

God does not by knowing the future compel us to make the choices we make.  

It just means our "choices" are already pre-determined. Since we do not definitively know the future, then our "choices" may make it seem like we have free will. But free will is an illusion.

Gods will and wish is for all to believe Him and be saved.

Then god should know way ahead of time who will stroke his ego and who won't. Again, no free will.

 Many will choose not to believe.

Because there's no evidence/proof.

Some will vainly demand proof of his existence as a precondition to believe and will pass on of old age not believing. 

I am incapable of believing without proof. Any rational individual would want proof before blindly accepting any claim, especially the more outrageous ones. Why should claims of god be any different?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.33  Jack_TX  replied to  Gordy327 @4.2.32    2 weeks ago
If there was a god, there would be no such ting as free will.

That's not actually the case.

To us, free will is an illusion.

If by "us" you mean "married men", then yes.

It just means our "choices" are already pre-determined.

Not at all.  Do you have children?  

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.34  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.33    2 weeks ago
If by "us" you mean "married men", then yes.

You married the wrong person because I would never try to control  my partner, just as I would not allow him to control me. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.35  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @4.2.34    2 weeks ago
You married the wrong person 

Wow.

Do you even understand how astonishingly rude that is?  

Do you understand how that's not really a socially acceptable response to a joke?

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, assuming this is just another one of those times where you've been really offensive without realizing it. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.36  Gordy327  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.33    2 weeks ago
That's not actually the case.

Uh yeah, that is the case. Unless God is not omniscient.

If by "us" you mean "married men", then yes.

"Us" as in everyone who believes in an omnipotent, omniscient god and thinks we have free will. Such a god and free will is logically incompatible.

Not at all.

If god already knows our choices ahead of time, then there is no way we will choose differently that what is known and expected. Unless god is either wrong or doesn't know.

Do you have children?

Relevance?

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
4.2.37  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.33    2 weeks ago
That's not actually the case.

it seems to be the case - freewill requires the elements of surprise and chance, these elements are not possible with an omniscient God who knows everything in advance

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.38  TᵢG  replied to  Phoenyx13 @4.2.37    2 weeks ago
these elements are not possible with an omniscient God who knows everything in advance

We can even take an omniscient God out of the equation.   Free will is not possible if the future is knowable.   Even if no sentient entity knows the future, if the future is knowable then reality is deterministic and free will is at the very best an illusion.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
4.2.39  Phoenyx13  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.38    2 weeks ago
Even if no sentient entity knows the future, if the future is knowable then reality is deterministic and free will is at the very best an illusion.

absolutely ! a simple concept many can't seem to grasp....

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.40  Jack_TX  replied to  Gordy327 @4.2.36    2 weeks ago
Uh yeah, that is the case. Unless God is not omniscient.

Interesting how you defend this position when there are real world examples all around you to the contrary.

Do you have children? Relevance?

If you had children this would be easy to understand.

If god already knows our choices ahead of time, then there is no way we will choose differently that what is known and expected. Unless god is either wrong or doesn't know.

There are countless times in our lives where we see another person faced with a choice and we know ahead of time what that person is going to choose.  It's almost daily with small children, but even with other adults, it's common.

Let's say your kid hates mustard.  You're at a cookout, and somebody asks "GordyJr, do you want mustard on your hot dog?".  Now...you know exactly how this is going to turn out, and you're not even remotely surprised when GordyJr says "no thank you". 

So you're trying to tell me that because you knew ahead of time what he would choose that it wasn't his decision??  Really??  I don't think so.

Knowing somebody's choice ahead of time does not mean it isn't still their choice.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.41  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @4.2.37    2 weeks ago
freewill requires the elements of surprise and chance,

Why?

You know right now who LFOD is going to vote for.  Does that mean it isn't his choice?

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.42  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.40    2 weeks ago
So you're trying to tell me that because you knew ahead of time what he would choose that it wasn't his decision??  Really??  I don't think so.

Problem One:  You are conflating predictable patterns of human behavior with knowing the future.    I can easily predict that when I clink my dog's food dish she will come running over ready to eat.   And we certainly would find that to be an apparent free will.   Nobody forced her to run towards her bowl.

That is predictable behavior.   Just like predicting a mustard-hating son will likely refuse mustard the next time he is asked.   Predictable behavior can even occur in a reality that does not allow a knowable future.   That is, even in a non-deterministic reality (where it is impossible to know the future), there are predictable patterns (some with extremely high levels of reliability).

The presence of predictable patterns does not distinguish between a knowable and an unknowable future.

Problem Two:  Free will applies to an entity who is affected by and affects reality as a whole.   An individual's choice is a function of the state of its body (especially the brain) and its environment (all of reality outside of the individual's body).   If my son gets a bad grade on a test I might sit down and give him (yet another) fatherly perspective, tutor him to ensure he is ready for the next test, or any number of actions.   What I choose will affect the future of those in my sphere of influence.   My choice will, in part, determine their choices.    Now unpack the history.   The choices the teacher made on test content and timing affected the grade.   My son choosing to spend too much time with friends rather than study affected the grade.   The details of the friends' lives (including their choices) affect the time they spent with my son.   There are uncountable causal factors that all ultimately lead to the bad grade.  And the bad grade is a factor in other choices (such as my parental choice).

Given we are all interconnected (consider now the butterfly effect) knowing what an arbitrary individual will choose to do at any moment in time would require knowledge of all the factors that contribute to the choice and the ability to comprehend the causal chain that will determine the choice made (again, to know the choice before it occurs).   It is not just knowing an individual's patterns of behavior, but knowing the causal chain and being able to play that out into the future to see how the dominoes fall.   

To wit, for the future to be knowable, reality must be deterministic - a complex causal chain.   

And if reality is deterministic free will is simply an illusion.    ( This is true even if no entity knows the future. )

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
4.2.43  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.41    2 weeks ago
Why? You know right now who LFOD is going to vote for.  Does that mean it isn't his choice?

for freewill to exist in your example - there absolutely has to be a CHANCE that LFOD will SURPRISE you and possibly pick another candidate or decide not to vote or even come up with another option that you hadn't thought of. (and your example isn't a great example of "freewill" - it would fall more towards predictable behavior based upon characteristics of the person and predicting how they will react/act in a given situation)

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.44  TᵢG  replied to  Phoenyx13 @4.2.43    2 weeks ago

This can get very interesting.   What ultimately causes a person to vote a certain way?   At the exact moment of the choice, the brain has produced a biochemical signal that represents the 'vote for anyone with an R next to their name' decision.   That is, all the information required to make the choice would -at that exact instant- be part of the cognitive mechanism (inside the brain).   It is a calculation computed by action potentials (etc.) in a highly complex neural network, but a calculation nonetheless.  The state of the brain at the instant of the choice determines the choice.   To make a different choice, the brain must be in a different state.

So, backing up, the actual free will must have preceded the choice.   Free will must be that which determines the brain state that produces the aforementioned choice.   Brain state is determined all sorts of factors including hormones, sensory input, health, etc.   So free will must have come from one or more of these other factors.

This is basically what is studied in the area known as behavioral biology.    Free will, if it exists, is a very tough thing to nail down.


But, of course, this is a sidebar.   Free will cannot logically exist if the future is knowable.   So if we do indeed have free will then our future is not yet determined (and thus it is unknowable - no entity could possibly know it).

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.2.45  MrFrost  replied to  charger 383 @4.2.28    2 weeks ago
has anybody heard anything from God lately, that there is real proof of?

He follows me on twitter, been pretty quiet lately. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.46  Gordy327  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.40    2 weeks ago
Interesting how you defend this position when there are real world examples all around you to the contrary.

Such as?

If you had children this would be easy to understand.

Why don't you elucidate for me rather than get snarky about it.

There are countless times in our lives where we see another person faced with a choice and we know ahead of time what that person is going to choose. It's almost daily with small children, but even with other adults, it's common.

We can predict with a degree of certainty how someone will choose based on how well we know them or by a pattern of past experiences. That is no guarantee they will choose the way you think they will. But we're talking about a supposedly omniscient god who already knows, with absolute 100% certainty ahead of time, how someone will choose. Therefore, there is no way for someone to choose differently. That choice is pre-determined well in advance. The idea there is a choice to be made is the illusion.

Let's say your kid hates mustard. You're at a cookout, and somebody asks "GordyJr, do you want mustard on your hot dog?". Now...you know exactly how this is going to turn out, and you're not even remotely surprised when GordyJr says "no thank you".

See previous statement. I could predict the answer based on my knowledge and experience. But that doesn't mean the choice is automatc or immutible. Jr. can possibly surprise me by trying mustard. But that is only possible if i have no knowledge of the actual outcome. As I am not omniscient, I don't know what the choice will be with absolute certainty. An omniscient god has that absolute knowledge and certainty.

So you're trying to tell me that because you knew ahead of time what he would choose that it wasn't his decision?? Really?? I don't think so.

See previous statement. The best I can do is predict what the choice will be.

Knowing somebody's choice ahead of time does not mean it isn't still their choice.

It means they are incapable of choosing differently if the choice is already known. They will make the same "choice" 100% of the time if that choice is already known in advance, as god supposedly does. So the choice itself is an illusion. one only thinks they have a choice.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.47  Jack_TX  replied to  Gordy327 @4.2.46    2 weeks ago
We can predict with a degree of certainty how someone will choose

Exactly.  Why does our ability not interfere with free will but somehow his does? 

I could predict the answer based on my knowledge and experience.

Good.  Now imagine your knowledge and experience being limitless.  

But that doesn't mean the choice is automatc or immutible.

The same is true when God knows how we will decide.  It doesn't mean it's not your choice.  It just means he knows you don't like mustard. (that's a metaphor, BTW)

An omniscient god has that absolute knowledge and certainty.

Sure.  That does not interfere in any way with the decision maker.

It means they are incapable of choosing differently if the choice is already known.

It simply does not.  Any more than your knowledge of the mustard hating child means he is incapable of making a different decision.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.48  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.47    2 weeks ago
Why does our ability not interfere with free will but somehow his does? 

Omniscience does not interfere with free will.   Rather, omniscience is possible only if the future is knowable.    And free will can only happen if the future is not knowable (i.e. the future is not determined ... it is formed in real time by free will choices).

  • Omniscience requires a knowable future.
  • Free will requires an unknowable future.

That is why they are mutually exclusive ... there is no interference.   So all we need do is determine if the future is knowable or unknowable.   From that we know if omniscience is possible or if free will is possible.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.49  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.48    2 weeks ago
Omniscience does not interfere with free will.

Correct.  

And free will can only happen if the future is not knowable

Nonsense, on a myriad of levels.

The predictability of an event does not remove the free will of the participant(s). 

Arbitrary philosophical declarations tend to fall apart quickly in the real world.

You and I both know someone in America will be murdered in the next 7 days.  That does not remove the free will of either the killer or the victim.  

We know there will be a recession in the future.  That does not interfere with the decisions that will be made to bring it about.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.50  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.49    2 weeks ago

You just cherry-picked my explanation and ignored the operative parts.   You ignored that actual explanation.   

The predictability of an event does not remove the free will of the participant(s). 

First there is no notion of removing free will.   No interference, right?   You just agreed.   Next, predictability is too weak.   This is about knowledge.   That is why I use the phrase 'knowable future'.   If the future is knowable that means it is possible to state what will happen.   That includes stating the choices a person will make.

You and I both know someone in America will be murdered in the next 7 days.  That does not remove the free will of either the killer or the victim.  

You are back to interference ("remove the free will").   That is not what happens.   Free will is not removed.   Remember, you agreed that interference is not at play.

We know there will be a recession in the future.  That does not interfere with the decisions that will be made to bring it about.  

Again, you even quoted my upfront statement that this is not about interference.   You agreed with my comment yet continue to argue interference.    Hello?


Omniscience is possible only if the future is knowable.    And free will can only happen if the future is not knowable (i.e. the future is not determined ... it is formed in real time by free will choices):

  • Omniscience requires a knowable future.
  • Free will requires an unknowable future.

Determine if the future is knowable.   Given that we would know if omniscience is possible or if free will is possible.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
4.2.51  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.47    2 weeks ago

Well said.  God’s knowledge of the choices we will make in the future has no impact on the decisions and acts you or I make or do in the future.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.52  TᵢG  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.51    2 weeks ago
God’s knowledge of the choices we will make in the future has no impact on the decisions and acts you or I make or do in the future.  

It is amazing that no matter how this is explained it never sinks in.

God's knowledge of the future, in this context, is omniscience.

Our ability to make choices that determine the future is free will.

Omniscience does not prevent free will.   That is not precisely what is going on.

What is going on is this:

For any entity to be omniscient, the future must be knowable.   Obviously.   If the future is not knowable then it cannot be known.   Basic logic, right?

To have free will, the future must NOT be knowable.   Obviously.   If the future is knowable then the choices one will make are predetermined (known before they are made).   No free will.  


The point is that omniscience and free will are both dependent upon whether or not the future is knowable.   The knowability of the future is the key:

  • Omniscience requires a knowable future.
  • Free will requires an unknowable future.

Determine if the future is knowable.   Given that, we would know if omniscience is possible or if free will is possible.

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.53  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.52    2 weeks ago
It is amazing that no matter how this is explained it never sinks in.

I'm not surprised. When someone s so engrossed in their beliefs, they are not receptive to logic or rational reasoning. But your explanations are spot on and logical.

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.54  TᵢG  replied to  Gordy327 @4.2.53    2 weeks ago

Thanks.   I am scratching my head trying to figure out how to make this more obvious.

I suspect the problem is a refusal to accept the reality that for any entity to know the future, the future must be knowable.   I have heard 'arguments' in the past that God has a special kind of omniscience because He is not bound by time.   Even if that (mere declaration) is true (whatever the individual thinks that actually means), that simply offers the method whereby God knows the future.   The question is whether or not the future is knowable;  not the method by which it is known.

Bottom line, omniscience requires a knowable future.

When someone s so engrossed in their beliefs, they are not receptive to logic or rational reasoning. 

And thus can reach conclusions such as dinosaurs and human beings coexisting.

 
 
 
Gordy327
4.2.55  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.54    2 weeks ago
I am scratching my head trying to figure out how to make this more obvious.

I don't think there is a way.

I suspect the problem is

Rigid thinking based on inflexible beliefs.

I have heard 'arguments' in the past that God has a special kind of omniscience because He is not bound by time.

It's just more believer logic pretzeling to rationalize their positions or beliefs.

Bottom line, omniscience requires a knowable future.

Is that regular omniscience, or the "special kind" of omniscience? jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
epistte
4.2.56  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @4.2.51    2 weeks ago
Well said.  God’s knowledge of the choices we will make in the future has no impact on the decisions and acts you or I make or do in the future.  

If your god knows what decisions people will make then they do not have free will. They have the appearance of free will but the truth is already pre-determined, even if his followers do not know it. That is still ultimately determinism, despite your obvious attempt to be a theological fence sitter.

How can the concept of religious morality exist if god knows what decisions they will make? If his follower's decisions are predetermined by God, even if it is without their conscious knowledge, then they do not have free will so their choices, good or bad cannot be credited/blamed to/on them. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
4.2.57  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @4.2.50    one week ago
You just cherry-picked my explanation and ignored the operative parts.   You ignored that actual explanation.   

You mean I pointed out flaws in your argument.

Next, predictability is too weak.

Not if that predictability is 100%.

Again, you even quoted my upfront statement that this is not about interference.   You agreed with my comment yet continue to argue interference.    Hello?

Oh good grief.  OK, if you don't like the word "interference", substitute your own.  Abridge?  Affect?  Abolish?  Impede?  Negate?  Whatever.  You pick it. 

Advanced knowledge of a person's decisions does not in any way mean that person does not make them of their own free will. 

Omniscience requires a knowable future.

OK.

Free will requires an unknowable future.

Why?  Because you say so?   Seems a bit arbitrary.  Also seems one of those wholly philosophical ideas that doesn't actually hold up very well in reality.

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.2.58  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @4.2.57    one week ago
You mean I pointed out flaws in your argument.

You ignored the argument and now are claiming to have pointed out flaws.   Deliver an actual rebuttal rather than simply pretend to have done so. 

Not if that predictability is 100%.

Ergo why I used the word 'knowledge'.   So we at least agree on the requirement that when speaking of knowing the future it is truth; not mere predictability based on a pattern of behavior such as your son's historic dislike of mustard You predicting your son will (as usual) not choose mustard does not mean you know the future, right?    In short:  knowing what will happen in the future is not the same as predicting what is likely to happen in the future.

OK, if you don't like the word "interference", substitute your own. 

The meaning is the problem, not the word used to impart the meaning.

Advanced knowledge of a person's decisions does not in any way mean that person does not make them of their own free will. 

Your 'rebuttal' is to simply repeat your claim without making even an attempt to address my argument.

Why [does Free will require an unknowable future]? 

If the future is knowable then all choices could be known (100% accurate, right?) before they are actually made.   If your choice tomorrow to wear a blue tie is knowable then you will pick a blue tie tomorrow.   Your 'choice' of a blue vs. a red tie may seem like free will but in this knowable case your free will is an illusion.

With genuine (not an illusion) free will we have the ability to choose among our options.   When we make a choice we enable future possibilities and disable others.   Each choice determines the future; the future is inched along ... revealed by every choice we make.   If the future is a function of the choices we make, the future cannot be known until those choices are made (making it 'the present').   The future, allowing genuine free will, is unknowable.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
4.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  TᵢG @4    2 weeks ago

Ironic that the author claims the bible holds the nuclear family to be the ideal when the bible is full of polygamous marriages

 
 
 
SteevieGee
5  SteevieGee    2 weeks ago

Poor poor Christians.  I really feel sorry for them.  I'd bet they wish they could just be gay Haitian junkies or Mauritanian child slaves so they could finally get some respect.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
5.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  SteevieGee @5    2 weeks ago

Again thanks for making Prager’s points for him.

 
 
 
epistte
5.1.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @5.1    2 weeks ago
Again thanks for making Prager’s points for him.

Are people not supposed to notice the obvious logical and factual inconsistencies in the Bible and the people who believe the bible to be literal fact?   The bible can nor more be factual than Snow White or Humpty Dumpty.  How would you treat people who claimed that Snow White is literal truth?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
5.1.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  epistte @5.1.1    2 weeks ago
Are people not supposed to notice the obvious logical and factual inconsistencies

That's exactly what he's asking for.

It reminds me of the snake oil salesman assistant in the crowd, the one pretending to have the malady that miraculously gets cured when he tries a drop of "Miracle Moe's Heavenly Tincture" falsely proving to the crowd its efficacy. The crowd isn't supposed to point out all the inconsistencies with his story. "Hey, didn't I see you walking around the saloon earlier? That supposedly lame leg looked just fine then...". No, don't look at the gaps in the fantasy, don't look at the inconsistencies, keep your eye on the miracle, that's all they want you to see, don't believe your lyin' eyes, don't question the possible miracle you might experience if you just buy a bottle from Miracle Moe...

 
 
 
charger 383
6  charger 383    2 weeks ago

If you got a new machine and the instructions were written like the bible, you would not be able to get it to work right

 
 
 
epistte
6.1  epistte  replied to  charger 383 @6    2 weeks ago
If you got a new machine and the instructions were written like the bible, you would not be able to get it to work right

We have lemon laws to protect consumers from products such as those.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
7  evilgenius    2 weeks ago

It's Prager and his followers that are being mocked. They should go off and build their own little commune somewhere and leave the rest of us alone, since they can't live and play well with others.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
7.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  evilgenius @7    2 weeks ago

The world will hate us for His names sake but getting our message out so that all the world at one point in time in the near term future is the goal.  We are aware of the source and nature of our opposition.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
7.1.1  evilgenius  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1    2 weeks ago
The world will hate us for His names sake...

Again, you reap what you sow. Hate will find hate. The antiquated, misinterpreted and cherry-picked "moral" guide you guys try to foist on everyone (not talking about the Bible here either) does not work. 

We are aware of the source and nature of our opposition.  

You should be aware of it every time you look in the mirror. Were I still a religious person I'd pray for your soul, being the realist I am today I figure that's your own business.

 
 
 
epistte
7.1.2  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @7.1    2 weeks ago
The world will hate us for His names sake but getting our message out so that all the world at one point in time in the near term future is the goal.  We are aware of the source and nature of our opposition.  

The world only hates ignorance, hypocrisy, and bigotry.   If you want to believe in god and spend the rest of your mortal days wearing a hair shirt and a barbed wire thong as your god dictates,then that is your religious right but don't tell others that your actions are rational or try to lesgislate your beliefs as secular law.  

 I don't care if you fly a freak flag as big as a football field, just don't expect me to salute it or to pay for it. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
7.1.3  MrFrost  replied to  evilgenius @7.1.1    2 weeks ago
Hate will find hate.

Apparently our POTUS hasn't gotten the memo. 

 
 
 
Freefaller
8  Freefaller    2 weeks ago

Why the Left Mocks the Bible

Well since I'm not on the left this hit piece really isn't aimed at me, but here's my two cents anyway.  The bible is a fine old book of mythology and fables derived from the tales, cultures and other religions of middle eastern bronze age farmers and goat herders over two thousand years ago who were completely ignorant of the way the world actually worked then collated and amended by men who wanted to use it for their own ends.  No I have no problem with the bible (other than it is poorly written) I save my mocking for those who despite all the current knowledge available believe it to be the literal truth of things and/or want to use its meandering, archaic writings to tell others how to live.

 
 
 
Veronica
8.1  Veronica  replied to  Freefaller @8    2 weeks ago

Nicely written.

 
 
 
Freefaller
8.1.1  Freefaller  replied to  Veronica @8.1    2 weeks ago

Thank you Veronica

 
 
 
evilgenius
8.2  evilgenius  replied to  Freefaller @8    2 weeks ago
Well since I'm not on the left this hit piece really isn't aimed at me,

These people thing everyone that doesn't walk lock step with them is "left".

I save my mocking for those who despite all the current knowledge available believe it to be the literal truth of things and/or want to use its meandering, archaic writings to tell others how to live.

It's those who cherry-pick through the book to tell others how to live that riles me up. Every time you point to their failing they deny it, move the goal posts or God works in mysterious ways. It's not about religion. It's certainly not about freedom of religion. It's about control, for they must be in control to prove they are special. They are "chosen" above all others. 

 
 
 
Freefaller
8.2.1  Freefaller  replied to  evilgenius @8.2    2 weeks ago
It's about control, for they must be in control to prove they are special.

Evil that is certainly true of the leadership and indeed a portion of their followers.  However a lot only use their beliefs to control their own lives (outside the public domain) and those I have no problem with whatsoever.

 
 
 
evilgenius
8.2.2  evilgenius  replied to  Freefaller @8.2.1    2 weeks ago
However a lot only use their beliefs to control their own lives (outside the public domain) and those I have no problem with whatsoever.

Nor do I. There has been a large divide among Evangelicals in the last several years. Many people (mostly younger people) want to be inclusive instead of divisive. They see that they can still be Christians without the hate preached by people like Prager. They see that most of us are very much like themselves with the same wants and needs. They see the hate for lies that it is.

 
 
 
luther28
9  luther28    2 weeks ago

Why the Left Mocks the Bible

More bullshit.

Many members of the so called left are practicing Christians (perhaps not your flavor but Christians none the less), the notion that they mock their holiest of articles is a bit ridiculous.

No one that I am aware of mocks the Bible, they may question why one would place so much stock in such a thing or an individual who may utilize it to further an agenda, but I myself have never heard the Bible mocked.

I may be prone to mock someone that puts forth such an absurd generalization as this, but I do not mock a true believer.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
9.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  luther28 @9    2 weeks ago

The article makes a clear distinction between liberals who can be Bible believing Christians or Torah believing Jews and secular progressives leftists who won’t believe either.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
9.1.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @9.1    2 weeks ago
The article makes a clear distinction between liberals who can be Bible believing Christians or Torah believing Jews and secular progressives leftists who won’t believe either.

It "makes it clear" by telling a bold faced lie.

"While there are people who claim to hold both a Bible-based worldview and left-wing views, these people are few in number."

What evidence does snake oil Prager have to support this claim? The actual polls done show about 78% of Democrats claim to be Christian while about 89% of Republicans claim the same. That doesn't seem like "few in number" to me.

https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/party-affiliation/

 
 
 
luther28
9.1.2  luther28  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @9.1    2 weeks ago

There is no distinction when it comes to belief, you either do or you do not and are free to do either.

 
 
 
epistte
9.1.3  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @9.1    2 weeks ago
The article makes a clear distinction between liberals who can be Bible believing Christians or Torah believing Jews and secular progressives leftists who won’t believe either.  

Why do you not believe that Bhagavad Gita and the iChing, because both are religious texts older than the Bible?  

 
 
 
MrFrost
9.1.4  MrFrost  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @9.1    2 weeks ago
secular progressives

I have a hard time figuring out why the right views this as an insult. We live in a secular society, always have. 

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
9.1.5  Phoenyx13  replied to  MrFrost @9.1.4    2 weeks ago
I have a hard time figuring out why the right views this as an insult. We live in a secular society, always have.

possibly because many of the religious always feel the need to constrain others under their religious views/rules, it's almost as if they wish to live in a theocracy and be ruled solely by their religion (or at least their version of their religion)

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.6  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @9.1.5    2 weeks ago
possibly because many of the religious always feel the need to constrain others under their religious views/rules, it's almost as if they wish to live in a theocracy and be ruled solely by their religion (or at least their version of their religion)

 

Including and in some cases especially those practicing the religion of "Secular Progressivism".

 
 
 
Tessylo
9.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.6    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.8  Split Personality  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.6    2 weeks ago
the religion of "Secular Progressivism".

Classic oxymoron.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.9  Jack_TX  replied to  Split Personality @9.1.8    2 weeks ago
Classic oxymoron.

I'm sure they like to think so.

But religious zealots all share certain ideological practices and behaviors.  

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ambigamy/201411/fanaticism-is-disease-alcoholism

The absolute truths that fanatics latch onto might be religious or political, right wing or left wing, Christian or Islamic, libertarian or communist, new age spiritual or old-time religious. It’s not what they believe that makes them fanatics but how they believe it, that they have final word, no need to consider further evidence, no need to ever wonder or doubt themselves again.

Consider the comparisons

  • Fundamentalist Christians believe in the inerrancy of the Biblical doctrine (as they see it).  Fundamentalist Progressives believe in the inerrancy of leftist doctrine as they see it.
  • FCs use devotion to their religion as a measure of whether someone is a good or bad person.  FPs use devotion to liberal ideology.
  • FCs gather regularly, usually in a church, to socialize and affirm their beliefs.  FPs do this at protests and rallies.
  • FCs believe other religions are attempting to enforce their belief systems on FCs.  FPs believe exactly the same thing.

Whether it's a Jesus fish or a Coexist bumper sticker on their car, we're talking about religious fanaticism.

 
 
 
epistte
9.1.10  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.6    2 weeks ago
Including and in some cases especially those practicing the religion of "Secular Progressivism".

Secular progressives cannot be a religion because if they were then they would not be secular. Secular progressives have political policy ideas that you do not agree with and you want to be intellectually dishonest and try to redefine those progressive policies as religious beliefs. The idea that you do not support progressive policies doesn't allow you to redefine words to support your differing opinions. 

Once again you think that you can modify the accepted meanings of words to fit your claims. You previously confuse objective and subjective fact when it suits you and your most attempt to redefine words threaten the existence of a common language to exchange ideas because a language only works when both sides agree to the definition. 

Why should anyone bother to invest the time to have a reasoned discussion with you when you believe that you can change definitions at will to support your obviously fallacious claims. If you had an argument that you knew was rational and were willing to have a rational discussion then you wouldn't have to resort to the illogical tactics that you do.  You have changed from creating individual strawmen to creating entire strawman armies. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
9.1.11  Sean Treacy  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.9    2 weeks ago

Fanatics are going to be fanatics, it's just a question of circumstances as to what ultimately draws their obsession. The impulse is the same.

This board has it's share of obsessive atheists  who would have been denouncing Torquemada as soft on heresy  had they been borne in 15th Century Spain.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.12  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @9.1.10    2 weeks ago
The idea that you do not support progressive policies doesn't allow you to redefine words to support your differing opinions. 

Why?  Because that practice is reserved for "Holy Disciples of The Church of Progress"? 

Progressives have been redefining and inventing new words for decades.  I left that practice off the list.  Thanks for reminding me.

Why should anyone bother to invest the time to have a reasoned discussion with you 

And yet....here you are.  Again.  Fully clothed in the regalia of righteous indignation, and determined to defend your fanaticism as the only true belief.  

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.1.13  Gordy327  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.6    2 weeks ago
Including and in some cases especially those practicing the religion of "Secular Progressivism".

How is that a religion exactly? 

 
 
 
epistte
9.1.14  epistte  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.12    2 weeks ago
Why?  Because that practice is reserved for "Holy Disciples of The Church of Progress"? 

Is supply-side economics also a religion?

Matthew 19:21

Matthew 19:24

Are these passages not in the current edition of the GOP bible that prefers Ayn Rand instead of the Gospel of Matthew? 

 
 
 
epistte
9.1.15  epistte  replied to  Gordy327 @9.1.13    2 weeks ago
How is that a religion exactly? 

We both know that he is rationalizing his hypocritical beliefs by trying to claim that the political stances of atheists are a religion.

 It would seem from my perspective that conservative Christians only live by the teachings of Jesus on Sunday from 8:00 am until noon when they return to the Bible of Ayn Rand, Alan Greenspan, Ronald Reagan, and Paul Ryan. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
9.1.16  Split Personality  replied to  Gordy327 @9.1.13    2 weeks ago

I guess that was my question also.

I find it hard to be a fanatic/beleiver about not believing in a religious deity.

hence, my comment that it was an oxymoron.

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.1.17  Gordy327  replied to  epistte @9.1.15    2 weeks ago
We both know that he is rationalizing his hypocritical beliefs by trying to claim that the political stances of atheists are a religion.

Indeed.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.18  Jack_TX  replied to  Gordy327 @9.1.13    2 weeks ago
How is that a religion exactly? 

Among some followers, it is the basis for how they determine right vs. wrong and how they determine good people from bad.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.19  Jack_TX  replied to  epistte @9.1.14    2 weeks ago
Is supply-side economics also a religion?

Do followers of the doctrine consider those who agree to be morally good people based on their agreement?  Do they consider those with differing views to be amoral or wicked?  

That's not been my experience.  The very few people who specifically support supply side economics (as opposed to the much larger group who just want lower taxes) don't tend to talk about morality.  

That's not to say that Christian fanatics have not sought to take over the GOP in attempts to legislate their own ideology.

Are these passages not in the current edition of the GOP bible that prefers Ayn Rand instead of the Gospel of Matthew?

Are you trying to support my point about religious fanaticism among liberals?   If so, wonderfully done.

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.1.20  Gordy327  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.18    2 weeks ago
Among some followers, it is the basis for how they determine right vs. wrong and how they determine good people from bad.

Whom exactly? That doesn't describe any secular progressives I know. You seem to be arguing morality, not a sociopolitical position. Right/wrong & good/bad are concepts not exclusive to religion either.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.21  Jack_TX  replied to  Gordy327 @9.1.20    2 weeks ago
Whom exactly? That doesn't describe any secular progressives I know.

It describes several people right here on NT.  I suggest the primary reason that isn't obvious is you simply haven't considered the idea in from this perspective before.

Right/wrong & good/bad are concepts not exclusive to religion either.

One of the primary functions of religion throughout history has been to establish moral codes for society.  indeed religion has been the primary driver of those rules for most of human history.

 
 
 
Gordy327
9.1.22  Gordy327  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.21    2 weeks ago
It describes several people right here on NT. 

I asked for whom.

I suggest the primary reason that isn't obvious is you simply haven't considered the idea in from this perspective before.

Your suggestiong is noted, and dismissed.

One of the primary functions of religion throughout history has been to establish moral codes for society. indeed religion has been the primary driver of those rules for most of human history.

While religion may establish its own moral codes, morality is not unique or exclusive to religion. And that still doesn't describe how secular progressivism is a religion. It seems you confuse sociopolitical ideas with religious ones.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
9.1.23  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.6    2 weeks ago
Including and in some cases especially those practicing the religion of "Secular Progressivism"

very interesting... where does this religion meet to worship ? what is their "book" they follow or the deity they follow ? who "founded" the religion ?

Consider the comparisons
  • Fundamentalist Christians believe in the inerrancy of the Biblical doctrine (as they see it).  Fundamentalist Progressives believe in the inerrancy of leftist doctrine as they see it.
  • FCs use devotion to their religion as a measure of whether someone is a good or bad person.  FPs use devotion to liberal ideology.
  • FCs gather regularly, usually in a church, to socialize and affirm their beliefs.  FPs do this at protests and rallies.
  • FCs believe other religions are attempting to enforce their belief systems on FCs.  FPs believe exactly the same thing.
Whether it's a Jesus fish or a Coexist bumper sticker on their car, we're talking about religious fanaticism.

ah.. even more interesting.. i've never heard of the "leftist doctrine" - could you provide a copy ? i could easily provide a copy of the bible if you need it. I haven't met anyone who thinks people are "bad" people who aren't devoted to the "liberal ideology" - please explain the "liberal ideology". There are regular rallies and protests for Fundamentalist Progressives ? where are these regular rallies and what frequency are they held ? what is the topic of these rallies ? usually the churches has lessons each week, concerning the bible and their God - what are the topics of these rallies.. their deity and the "liberal ideology" ? Fundamentalist Progressives believe other Fundamentalist Progressives are attempting to enforce their belief systems on Fundamentalist Progressives ? where in the world does that make sense ?

if you wish to hold the view that Secular Progressivism is a religion - you'll need a lot of answers to the questions and definitions for this "religion".

 
 
 
Jack_TX
9.1.24  Jack_TX  replied to  Phoenyx13 @9.1.23    one week ago
very interesting... where does this religion meet to worship ?

In small groups and large protests across the country.  On college campuses and in coffee shops.  At cocktail parties and campaign rallies.

Interestingly (well....probably not very interestingly), the Christian churches seeing the most growth today are decentralizing the worship experience.  People are meeting in small groups in homes on weeknights instead of in large buildings on Sunday mornings.  

i've never heard of the "leftist doctrine" - could you provide a copy ?

Nonsense.  You know very well most of its tenets.

i could easily provide a copy of the bible if you need it.

Sure.  But you could not have until Christianity had been established for 200 years.

I haven't met anyone who thinks people are "bad" people who aren't devoted to the "liberal ideology

I doubt that very seriously.  I suspect you have met plenty of people who view those not devoted to liberal ideology the same way Christian missionaries view non-Christians.... Either they don't know the "good news" or they reject it due to one character flaw or another.  If you haven't met them in person, you've certainly seen them on Newsvine or here on NT.

There are regular rallies and protests for Fundamentalist Progressives ?

Absolutely.  They don't seem to be able to help themselves.  

what is the topic of these rallies ?

The leftist doctrine you pretend not to know. They protest everything from Donald Trump's election to chicken sandwiches to speaking engagements to gun violence to milk in the supermarket to banks to protesting other protests that they disagree with.   There is a "march to impeach" later this month in DC.  They also rally for political candidates.  In the current environment, the more extreme the candidate, the better.

if you wish to hold the view that Secular Progressivism is a religion - you'll need a lot of answers to the questions and definitions for this "religion".

Oh really?  So I'm not allowed to hold non-progressive views without some sort of official approval now?  I guess that's heresy, isn't it?  Thanks for helping with my point.

 
 
 
Phoenyx13
9.1.25  Phoenyx13  replied to  Jack_TX @9.1.24    one week ago
Interestingly (well....probably not very interestingly), the Christian churches seeing the most growth today are decentralizing the worship experience.  People are meeting in small groups in homes on weeknights instead of in large buildings on Sunday mornings.  

yet they do announce on Sunday worships and in their "home gatherings" that it is for the Christian religion etc - do these small groups and large protests announce it's specifically for the "Secular Progressivism Religion" ??

Nonsense.  You know very well most of its tenets.

not nonsense - i honestly don't know this "leftist doctrine" and would be interested to read it as i have read the Bible. Please provide a copy.

Sure.  But you could not have until Christianity had been established for 200 years.

ah, so you are saying this is a "new" religion ? who is the founder ?

I doubt that very seriously.  I suspect you have met plenty of people who view those not devoted to liberal ideology the same way Christian missionaries view non-Christians.... Either they don't know the "good news" or they reject it due to one character flaw or another.  If you haven't met them in person, you've certainly seen them on Newsvine or here on NT.

no, i'm being honest (i have no reason to lie to you or anyone on here, it's pointless), i haven't met anyone who view those not devoted to the "liberal ideology" as "bad" people. Please point out some of these people, i'd definitely be interested in asking them a lot of questions as i do with the religious. If you want, just private message me their names, that's fine.

Absolutely.  They don't seem to be able to help themselves.  

what are the frequency ? do they advertise as many Churches do ? tell me more about it. Are they specifically and state specifically that they are for Fundamentalist Progressives ?

The leftist doctrine you pretend not to know. They protest everything from Donald Trump's election to chicken sandwiches to speaking engagements to gun violence to milk in the supermarket to banks to protesting other protests that they disagree with.   There is a "march to impeach" later this month in DC.  They also rally for political candidates.  In the current environment, the more extreme the candidate, the better.

so everyone who doesn't enjoy Donald Trump as president are now "Fundamentalist Progressives" ? those people in the video - how do you know they are specifically Fundamentalist Progressives ? Did they tell you ? do they wear some sort of symbol for their "religion" as most other religions do ? 

Oh really?  So I'm not allowed to hold non-progressive views without some sort of official approval now?  I guess that's heresy, isn't it?  Thanks for helping with my point.

you are allowed to hold any viewpoint you want - i don't have any issue with it and certainly don't judge you as "good" or "bad" just because you may disagree with me. I have tons of friends who disagree with me on many topics, they are liberal minded or conservative minded or in the middle and some are religious and non-religious, plus they are all different ages from 23 - 75. But if you'd like to posit that "Secular Progressivism" is a religion - then there are many questions that need to be answered and evidence to be provided to support your accusation that it's a "religion". So far it lacks many of the religious aspects. I'd be interested in hearing more and reading they copy you provide of the "leftist doctrine". Btw, the persecution complex you just demonstrated is really overplayed by many of your fellow religious brethren, maybe you should try a new angle ?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
10  Jack_TX    2 weeks ago

My personal experience, and I'll let those of you on "the left" correct me if I'm wrong, is that the mocking is less directed at the Bible and more directed at those who thump it.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
10.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Jack_TX @10    2 weeks ago

Pretty much on target with that one Jack....

The Westboro Babtist weenies are pretty much what I see as being the poster children for the entire evangelical movement.  You want people to leave you alone to pray as you wish....?   Do unto others! 

 
 
 
epistte
10.1.1  epistte  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @10.1    2 weeks ago
The Westboro Babtist weenies are pretty much what I see as being the poster children for the entire evangelical movement.  You want people to leave you alone to pray as you wish....?   Do unto others! 

The Bible says for believers to do exactly that.

Matthew 6:6 and Luke 6:31

 
 
 
MrFrost
10.2  MrFrost  replied to  Jack_TX @10    2 weeks ago
My personal experience, and I'll let those of you on "the left" correct me if I'm wrong, is that the mocking is less directed at the Bible and more directed at those who thump it.

True. I have read the bible cover to cover a few times. It's a fantastic book of stories and I think everyone should read it once. But take it literally? No, never. You'll find more truth in a King novel. 

 
 
 
Ender
10.2.1  Ender  replied to  MrFrost @10.2    2 weeks ago

I tried to read it once. It just kept going on and on about Joe begot Fred, Fred begot Frank, Frank begot Ulysses...

Couldn't take it, so I quit.

 
 
 
jim999
11  jim999    2 weeks ago

The ultra religious seem to have an issue with free thinkers and free speech, who'da thunk it?

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
11.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  jim999 @11    2 weeks ago

It is the so called pro science bigots that don’t have a clue as to what free speech is.  

 
 
 
epistte
11.1.1  epistte  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @11.1    2 weeks ago
It is the so called pro science bigots that don’t have a clue as to what free speech is.  

How it is possible that pro-science bigots can deny your free speech rights when the right of free speech only applies to a prohibition of being fined or arrested by the government because of what you have said? 

 
 
 
Don Overton
11.1.2  Don Overton  replied to  XXJefferson#51 @11.1    2 weeks ago

You tell me how the right can even be christians when they allow such things as this:

512

  and thi:

67 Bible Verses aboutRepublican Party

 
 
 
Texan1211
12  Texan1211    2 weeks ago

Some on the left often mock what they don't understand.

 
 
 
epistte
12.1  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @12    2 weeks ago
Some on the left often mock what they don't understand.

What part of the Bible or the Christian religion do you believe we not understand? 

Many lefties are Christians in the US. American agnostics and atheists were often raised in the Christian religion and we left for various reasons, so we are quite aware of the Christian religion. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
12.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @12.1    2 weeks ago
so we are quite aware of the Christian religion.

Some are astute enough to recognize that merely being aware of something has really nothing to do with understanding something.

Look through the posts here for prime examples of people mocking people for simply believing in God.

 
 
 
epistte
12.1.2  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.1    2 weeks ago
Some are astute enough to recognize that merely being aware of something has really nothing to do with understanding something.

What part of the Bible do you think I not understand?  The more than you study the Bible on a critical level the more obvious it becomes that it is a book of myths wrapped around sloppy thinking and unsupported claims. Should a person not think critically when they read the Bible?  

Look through the posts here for prime examples of people mocking people for simply believing in God.

Why should I believe in something that has no empirical proof of existing, despite the claims of ancient men who claim that their religious text was inspired by God, but that claim of divine inspiration is also unsupported?  

You have the right to believe and worship as you want to but don't attempt to tell me that theistic religious belief is factual or rational because I will disagree and have proof to support my statements. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
12.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @12.1.2    2 weeks ago
Why should I believe in something that has no empirical proof of existing, despite the claims of ancient men who claim that their religious text was inspired by God, but that claim of divine inspiration is also unsupported?

I don't believe I have ever said what you should or should not believe in.

You have the right to believe and worship as you want

Gee, thanks for not interfering with my Constitutional rights.

but don't attempt to tell me that theistic religious belief is factual or rational

Please do point out where I have done so. A quote would be swell.

 
 
 
epistte
12.1.4  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.3    2 weeks ago
Please do point out where I have done so. A quote would be swell.

You have argued on many occasions that the Christian god is real and that the Bible is a collections of his commands.  12.0 and 12.1.1

 
 
 
Texan1211
12.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @12.1.4    2 weeks ago
You have argued on many occasions that the Christian god is real and that the Bible is a collections of his commands. 12.0 and 12.1.1

That is what is commonly known as an epic fail.

Here are the posts you refer to:

Some on the left often mock what they don't understand. Some are astute enough to recognize that merely being aware of something has really nothing to do with understanding something.
Look through the posts here for prime examples of people mocking people for simply believing in God.

Nope--not one word about God being real or the Bible being a collection of his commands.

Say--this isn't another case of you attempting to quote me on what you wanted me to say instead of what I did say, is it?

 
 
 
Texan1211
12.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @12.1.4    2 weeks ago
You have argued on many occasions that the Christian god is real

You should really try to tell the whole truth--I have argued that God is real to me.

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
12.1.7  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.5    2 weeks ago

It’s clear that they have no answer for your recent comments.  

 
 
 
epistte
12.1.8  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.5    2 weeks ago
Nope--not one word about God being real or the Bible being a collection of his commands. Say--this isn't another case of you attempting to quote me on what you wanted me to say instead of what I did say, is it?

This following claim is very embarrassing when compared to your previous one, unless you are admitting that you willfully believe in a myth? From where I sit, you dove head-first into a logical hole the size of the Grand Canyon.   But that is certainly your religious prerogative to do so.

You should really try to tell the whole truth--I have argued that God is real to me.

 
 
 
Texan1211
12.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @12.1.8    2 weeks ago

Please prove your claim or just stop with the nonsense.

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
12.1.10  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.9    2 weeks ago

Well said and right on!  

 
 
 
Don Overton
12.2  Don Overton  replied to  Texan1211 @12    2 weeks ago

And you know that how?  Because of right wing I'm sure

 
 
 
XXJefferson#51
12.2.1  seeder  XXJefferson#51  replied to  Don Overton @12.2    2 weeks ago

We know it by observation of the samples of it here....

 
 
 
Don Overton
13  Don Overton    2 weeks ago

https://www.openbible.info/topics/republican_party

How can the right judge the left when they don't even follow the bible:

67 Bible Verses aboutRepublican Party

Proverbs 22:16 ESV / 27 helpful votes

Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, or gives to the rich, will only come to poverty.

Proverbs 19:17 ESV / 26 helpful votes

Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.

Leviticus 19:33-34 ESV / 26 helpful votes

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

Malachi 3:5 ESV / 24 helpful votes

“Then I will draw near to you for judgment. I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, against the adulterers, against those who swear falsely, against those who oppress the hired worker in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, against those who thrust aside the sojourner, and do not fear me, says the Lord of hosts.

Proverbs 24:11-12 ESV / 22 helpful votes

Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter. If you say, “Behold, we did not know this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it, and will he not repay man according to his work?

1 Kings 8:41-44 ESV / 18 helpful votes

“Likewise, when a foreigner, who is not of your people Israel, comes from a far country for your name's sake (for they shall hear of your great name and your mighty hand, and of your outstretched arm), when he comes and prays toward this house, hear in heaven your dwelling place and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to you, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your people Israel, and that they may know that this house that I have built is called by your name. “If your people go out to battle against their enemy, by whatever way you shall send them, and they pray to the Lord toward the city that you have chosen and the house that I have built for your name,

Ezekiel 16:49 ESV / 16 helpful votes

Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.

Habakkuk 2:6-11 ESV / 14 helpful votes

Shall not all these take up their taunt against him, with scoffing and riddles for him, and say, “Woe to him who heaps up what is not his own— for how long?— and loads himself with pledges!” Will not your debtors suddenly arise, and those awake who will make you tremble? Then you will be spoil for them. Because you have plundered many nations, all the remnant of the peoples shall plunder you, for the blood of man and violence to the earth, to cities and all who dwell in them. “Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house, to set his nest on high, to be safe from the reach of harm! You have devised shame for your house by cutting off many peoples; you have forfeited your life. ...

1 Corinthians 6:2-3 ESV / 12 helpful votes

Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!

Jeremiah 17:11 ESV / 12 helpful votes

Like the partridge that gathers a brood that she did not hatch, so is he who gets riches but not by justice; in the midst of his days they will leave him, and at his end he will be a fool.

Proverbs 13:11 ESV / 11 helpful votes

Wealth gained hastily will dwindle, but whoever gathers little by little will increase it.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 ESV / 10 helpful votes

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

Proverbs 31:8-9 ESV / 10 helpful votes

Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute. Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy.

Exodus 23:7 ESV / 9 helpful votes

Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked.

Zechariah 7:10 ESV / 8 helpful votes

Do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the sojourner, or the poor, and let none of you devise evil against another in your heart.”

Ecclesiastes 10:16 ESV / 8 helpful votes

Woe to you, O land, when your king is a child, and your princes feast in the morning!

Ecclesiastes 5:1-20 ESV / 8 helpful votes

Guard your steps when you go to the house of God. To draw near to listen is better than to offer the sacrifice of fools, for they do not know that they are doing evil. Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven and you are on earth. Therefore let your words be few. For a dream comes with much business, and a fool's voice with many words. When you vow a vow to God, do not delay paying it, for he has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you vow. It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay. ...

Revelation 18:1-24 ESV / 7 helpful votes

After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was made bright with his glory. And he called out with a mighty voice, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast. For all nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality, and the kings of the earth have committed immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living.” Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. ...

Revelation 2:1-3:22 ESV / 7 helpful votes

“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: ‘The words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands. “‘I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false. I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name's sake, and you have not grown weary. But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. ...

2 Thessalonians 3:1-18 ESV / 7 helpful votes

Finally, brothers, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may speed ahead and be honored, as happened among you, and that we may be delivered from wicked and evil men. For not all have faith. But the Lord is faithful. He will establish you and guard you against the evil one. And we have confidence in the Lord about you, that you are doing and will do the things that we command. May the Lord direct your hearts to the love of God and to the steadfastness of Christ. ...

1 Thessalonians 4:10-18 ESV / 7 helpful votes

For that indeed is what you are doing to all the brothers throughout Macedonia. But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more, and to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you, so that you may walk properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one. But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. ...

Ephesians 6:1-24 ESV / 7 helpful votes

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, ...

Galatians 6:1-18 ESV / 7 helpful votes

Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. For each will have to bear his own load. ...

Romans 12:1-13:14 ESV / 7 helpful votes

I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. ...

Romans 3:1-31 ESV / 7 helpful votes

Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.” But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) ...

Micah 2:1-5 ESV / 7 helpful votes

Woe to those who devise wickedness and work evil on their beds! When the morning dawns, they perform it, because it is in the power of their hand. They covet fields and seize them, and houses, and take them away; they oppress a man and his house, a man and his inheritance. Therefore thus says the Lord: behold, against this family I am devising disaster, from which you cannot remove your necks, and you shall not walk haughtily, for it will be a time of disaster. In that day they shall take up a taunt song against you and moan bitterly, and say, “We are utterly ruined; he changes the portion of my people; how he removes it from me! To an apostate he allots our fields.” Therefore you will have none to cast the line by lot in the assembly of the Lord.

Isaiah 30:21 ESV / 7 helpful votes

And your ears shall hear a word behind you, saying, “This is the way, walk in it,” when you turn to the right or when you turn to the left.

Galatians 5:14 ESV / 6 helpful votes

For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Revelation 11:18 ESV / 5 helpful votes

The nations raged, but your wrath came, and the time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear your name, both small and great, and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.”

1 Peter 2:1-25 ESV / 5 helpful votes

So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good. As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. ...

Hebrews 13:1-25 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Let brotherly love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body. Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous. Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.” ...

1 Timothy 6:1-21 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Let all who are under a yoke as slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled. Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful on the ground that they are brothers; rather they must serve all the better since those who benefit by their good service are believers and beloved. Teach and urge these things. If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain. ...

1 Timothy 2:1-5 ESV / 5 helpful votes

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

Romans 2:28-29 ESV / 5 helpful votes

For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

Luke 20:1-47 ESV / 5 helpful votes

One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority.” He answered them, “I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?” And they discussed it with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ ...

Luke 16:1-31 ESV / 5 helpful votes

He also said to the disciples, “There was a rich man who had a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions. And he called him and said to him, ‘What is this that I hear about you? Turn in the account of your management, for you can no longer be manager.’ And the manager said to himself, ‘What shall I do, since my master is taking the management away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. I have decided what to do, so that when I am removed from management, people may receive me into their houses.’ So, summoning his master's debtors one by one, he said to the first, ‘How much do you owe my master?’ ...

Luke 3:14 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”

Matthew 6:2 ESV / 5 helpful votes

“Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.

Amos 8:1-14 ESV / 5 helpful votes

This is what the Lord God showed me: behold, a basket of summer fruit. And he said, “Amos, what do you see?” And I said, “A basket of summer fruit.” Then the Lord said to me, “The end has come upon my people Israel; I will never again pass by them. The songs of the temple shall become wailings in that day,” declares the Lord God. “So many dead bodies!” “They are thrown everywhere!” “Silence!” Hear this, you who trample on the needy and bring the poor of the land to an end, saying, “When will the new moon be over, that we may sell grain? And the Sabbath, that we may offer wheat for sale, that we may make the ephah small and the shekel great and deal deceitfully with false balances, ...

Amos 2:1-16 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom. So I will send a fire upon Moab, and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die amid uproar, amid shouting and the sound of the trumpet; I will cut off the ruler from its midst, and will kill all its princes with him,” says the Lord. Thus says the Lord: “For three transgressions of Judah, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment, because they have rejected the law of the Lord, and have not kept his statutes, but their lies have led them astray, those after which their fathers walked. So I will send a fire upon Judah, and it shall devour the strongholds of Jerusalem.” ...

Daniel 2:1-49 ESV / 5 helpful votes

In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar had dreams; his spirit was troubled, and his sleep left him. Then the king commanded that the magicians, the enchanters, the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans be summoned to tell the king his dreams. So they came in and stood before the king. And the king said to them, “I had a dream, and my spirit is troubled to know the dream.” Then the Chaldeans said to the king in Aramaic, “O king, live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation.” The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, “The word from me is firm: if you do not make known to me the dream and its interpretation, you shall be torn limb from limb, and your houses shall be laid in ruins. ...

Isaiah 2:22 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he?

Proverbs 29:1-27 ESV / 5 helpful votes

He who is often reproved, yet stiffens his neck, will suddenly be broken beyond healing. When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan. He who loves wisdom makes his father glad, but a companion of prostitutes squanders his wealth. By justice a king builds up the land, but he who exacts gifts tears it down. A man who flatters his neighbor spreads a net for his feet. ...

Proverbs 28:1-28 ESV / 5 helpful votes

The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion. When a land transgresses, it has many rulers, but with a man of understanding and knowledge, its stability will long continue. A poor man who oppresses the poor is a beating rain that leaves no food. Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but those who keep the law strive against them. Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely. ...

Proverbs 11:1-31 ESV / 5 helpful votes

A false balance is an abomination to the Lord, but a just weight is his delight. When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom. The integrity of the upright guides them, but the crookedness of the treacherous destroys them. Riches do not profit in the day of wrath, but righteousness delivers from death. The righteousness of the blameless keeps his way straight, but the wicked falls by his own wickedness. ...

Proverbs 4:1-27 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Hear, O sons, a father's instruction, and be attentive, that you may gain insight, for I give you good precepts; do not forsake my teaching. When I was a son with my father, tender, the only one in the sight of my mother, he taught me and said to me, “Let your heart hold fast my words; keep my commandments, and live. Get wisdom; get insight; do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth. ...

Psalm 146:1-10 ESV / 5 helpful votes

Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord, O my soul! I will praise the Lord as long as I live; I will sing praises to my God while I have my being. Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation. When his breath departs, he returns to the earth; on that very day his plans perish. Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God, ...

Revelation 6:12 ESV / 4 helpful votes

When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood,

2 Peter 2:1-3:18 ESV / 4 helpful votes

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; ...

Philemon 1:1-25 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, To Philemon our beloved fellow worker and Apphia our sister and Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers, because I hear of your love and of the faith that you have toward the Lord Jesus and for all the saints, ...

1 Corinthians 1:1-2:16 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, and our brother Sosthenes, To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus, that in every way you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge— ...

Acts 6:1-15 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution. And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, “It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” And what they said pleased the whole gathering, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. ...

John 18:36 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.”

John 15:1-27 ESV / 4 helpful votes

“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. ...

John 13:1-38 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. During supper, when the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come from God and was going back to God, rose from supper. He laid aside his outer garments, and taking a towel, tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples' feet and to wipe them with the towel that was wrapped around him. ...

Luke 11:42-52 ESV / 4 helpful votes

“But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without knowing it.” One of the lawyers answered him, “Teacher, in saying these things you insult us also.” And he said, “Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers. ...

Mark 12:30-31 ESV / 4 helpful votes

And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Mark 4:18-19 ESV / 4 helpful votes

And others are the ones sown among thorns. They are those who hear the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.

Matthew 23:1-39 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so practice and observe whatever they tell you—but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, ...

Habakkuk 1:1-17 ESV / 4 helpful votes

The oracle that Habakkuk the prophet saw. O Lord, how long shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? Or cry to you “Violence!” and you will not save? Why do you make me see iniquity, and why do you idly look at wrong? Destruction and violence are before me; strife and contention arise. So the law is paralyzed, and justice never goes forth. For the wicked surround the righteous; so justice goes forth perverted. “Look among the nations, and see; wonder and be astounded. For I am doing a work in your days that you would not believe if told. ...

Micah 6:1-16 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Hear what the Lord says: Arise, plead your case before the mountains, and let the hills hear your voice. Hear, you mountains, the indictment of the Lord, and you enduring foundations of the earth, for the Lord has an indictment against his people, and he will contend with Israel. “O my people, what have I done to you? How have I wearied you? Answer me! For I brought you up from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. O my people, remember what Balak king of Moab devised, and what Balaam the son of Beor answered him, and what happened from Shittim to Gilgal, that you may know the saving acts of the Lord.” ...

Hosea 9:1-17 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Rejoice not, O Israel! Exult not like the peoples; for you have played the whore, forsaking your God. You have loved a prostitute's wages on all threshing floors. Threshing floor and wine vat shall not feed them, and the new wine shall fail them. They shall not remain in the land of the Lord, but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and they shall eat unclean food in Assyria. They shall not pour drink offerings of wine to the Lord, and their sacrifices shall not please him. It shall be like mourners' bread to them; all who eat of it shall be defiled; for their bread shall be for their hunger only; it shall not come to the house of the Lord. What will you do on the day of the appointed festival, and on the day of the feast of the Lord? ...

Daniel 7:1-8:27 ESV / 4 helpful votes

In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and visions of his head as he lay in his bed. Then he wrote down the dream and told the sum of the matter. Daniel declared, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea. And four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another. The first was like a lion and had eagles' wings. Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man, and the mind of a man was given to it. And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear. It was raised up on one side. It had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth; and it was told, ‘Arise, devour much flesh.’ ...

Isaiah 10:1-3 ESV / 4 helpful votes

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and to rob the poor of my people of their right, that widows may be their spoil, and that they may make the fatherless their prey! What will you do on the day of punishment, in the ruin that will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help, and where will you leave your wealth?

Proverbs 22:1-29 ESV / 4 helpful votes

A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold. The rich and the poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all. The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it. The reward for humility and fear of the Lord is riches and honor and life. Thorns and snares are in the way of the crooked; whoever guards his soul will keep far from them. ...

Numbers 1:20-22 ESV / 4 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

The people of Reuben, Israel's firstborn, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of names, head by head, every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were able to go to war: those listed of the tribe of Reuben were 46,500. Of the people of Simeon, their generations, by their clans, by their fathers' houses, those of them who were listed, according to the number of names, head by head, every male from twenty years old and upward, all who were able to go to war:

Leviticus 19:18 ESV / 4 helpful votes

You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Tacos!
Dean Moriarty
Ed-NavDoc
epistte


65 visitors