Split from: DV Christians Unite! (Christian Only Thread)

[Tye]

Just a quick question, when you think someone is being is disrespectful is it because they are actually being disrespectful or are they just making arguments against your side? Also, I feel if you try to limit yourself talking to only certain groups of people, you're going to really miss out on a bunch of vital experiences and knowledge if you limit yourself to only one group of people. So instead of a thread for Christians only, think about making a thread were people can openly state their beliefs or non beliefs with everyone and not be judged or argued with. I feel like a lot of people think that if something makes you feel different about your religion that thing is inherently evil when it really isn't. If you want to talk to me about religion feel free I love the discussion of religion.

[Jesus of Suburbia]

This is me intruding on your "Christian only thread". Get got.

[Jesus of Suburbia]

Gonna ignore that troll above That was you not ignoring me. You got got.

[Lmrhone]

That was you not ignoring me. You got got. Honestly I'm fine with that, I just meant that I wasn't gonna respond to it. And technically I did ignore you because the entire post was toward the author of the thread. But still it doesn't matter, it never mattered, I have no reason to explain. And since I took the time to write that I might as well post something useful in a Christian thread. Faith Without Works Is Dead 14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your[a] works, and I will show you my faith by my[b] works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?[c] 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[d] And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. 25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. James 2:14-26 And something else. Featured Bible Verse: 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. Read more: Bible Verses About Love: 25 Awesome Scripture Quotes And another John 3:16 “For God so loved the world,that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. Read more: Bible Verses About Love: 25 Awesome Scripture Quotes And this is the last lol Romans 8:37-39 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Read more: Bible Verses About Love: 25 Awesome Scripture Quotes

[Jesus of Suburbia]

I just meant that I wasn't gonna respond to it. You responded twice. Ya got at the get and you got got.

[Lmrhone]

You responded twice. Ya got at the get and you got got. You edited out the part when I said "Honestly I'm fine with that." from the post youre quotiing. If you quote me can you at least quote somewhat completely? Actually this post is the second time I've actually addressed you as I stated above, the first message I posted was totally and completely aimed towards the author of the thread none of it was for you or was even meant to be read by you or to be responded to by you but I guess you felt like it was for you. I stated to the author that I was gonna ignore that post. And technically I only responded to the post that said That was not you ignoring me. You got got. and the post I quoted above. Never to the post that you initially posted in this thread. But from seeing the ignorance in your past posts you probably won't even be able to comprehend what I'm saying in this post so I should probably stop wasting time trying to explain it. But I don't know, maybe you do understand. And because of that slim chance you'll look from the standpoint of my post I will continue. Ignore - refuse to take notice of or acknowledge I refused to further acknowledge your post, that was in the first post I've long stopped ignoring you since then though. And I'll begin again after this post. May you live a long healthy life filled with happiness and my further activity in this useless, useless conversation is over.

[Jesus of Suburbia]

You edited out the part when I said "Honestly I'm fine with that." from the post youre quotiing. If you quote me can you at least quote somewhat completely? Actually this post is the second time I've actually addressed you as I stated above, the first message I posted was totally and completely aimed towards the author of the thread none of it was for you or was even meant to be read by you or to be responded to by you but I guess you felt like it was for you. I stated to the author that I was gonna ignore that post. And technically I only responded to the post that said and the post I quoted above. Never to the post that you initially posted in this thread. But from seeing the ignorance in your past posts you probably won't even be able to comprehend what I'm saying in this post so I should probably stop wasting time trying to explain it. But I don't know, maybe you do understand. And because of that slim chance you'll look from the standpoint of my post I will continue. Ignore - refuse to take notice of or acknowledge I refused to further acknowledge your post, that was in the first post I've long stopped ignoring you since then though. And I'll begin again after this post. May you live a long healthy life filled with happiness and my further activity in this useless, useless conversation is over. You're still doing it. How many gets can one honestly got?

[TheSilverWolf]

It is amazing how immature some people are, or how some people insist on being jerks to people just because they believe something that they personally don't. Good idea to create this thread. And in response to Tye's post, yes it's good to have a civil if not respectful debate, but sometimes groups of people who share something in common want to simply get together with one another, instead of having to debate with those who don't share what brings them together. Therefore having a thread that the OP labeled "Christians Only" Is not a bad thing, it's simply a place where the Christians can get together without having to explain why they believe the way they do, or have those religious vs. non-religious debates. So, good idea OP.

[Jesus of Suburbia]

Therefore having a thread that the OP labeled "Christians Only" Is not a bad thing, it's simply a place where the Christians can get together without having to explain why they believe the way they do, or have those religious vs. non-religious debates. Because obviously non-Christians are completely unable to talk about your beliefs without challenging them, right? No atheist (slash Muslim slash Jew slash etc.) could ever discuss another's religion civilly... right? A thread labeled "Christians only" is terribad and tbh a little offensive. If it were labeled "debate-free" that would be different.

[TheSilverWolf]

Because obviously non-Christians are completely unable to talk about your beliefs without challenging them, right? No atheist (slash Muslim slash Jew slash etc.) could ever discuss another's religion civilly... right? A thread labeled "Christians only" is terribad and tbh a little offensive. If it were labeled "debate-free" that would be different. Wow, you really are a hostile sort, aren't you? If one wants to have a thread where Christians get together to discuss aspects of their faith, be it bible versus, prayer, or whatever else comes to mind, what's it hurting you? There are at least two other open threads right now where there is debate about religious/non religious going on. I would ask you why you, an obvious non-believer, want to take part in a thread with a bunch of Christians discussing things about their faith--something that you don't seem to share. And a Christian Only thread would obviously be debate free, unless someone started up a debate on the various branches of Christianity--which I don't think was the intent of the OP. So again, what the heck would you want to be a part of such a discussion anyway? As a non-believer, you'd have little to contribute to any biblical discussion, except to try and disprove certain versus/stories/etc. It really seems to me you are just looking for an excuse to argue or stir up trouble. And please tell me where in my thread I even insinuated that atheists and other religions aside from Christians can discuss other religions civilly? Here is exactly what I said: yes it's good to have a civil if not respectful debate, but sometimes groups of people who share something in common want to simply get together with one another, instead of having to debate with those who don't share what brings them together. I was simply stating, in response to Tye, that sometimes people who share the same belief system simply want to discuss their beliefs without debate: to share their enjoyment of whatever commonality the group shares the same as any other club. So again I say, it seems to me you are only interested in stirring things up, and borderline trolling; otherwise you'd be posting in one of the several religious debating threads instead of this one. ~SilverWolf~

[Jesus of Suburbia]

Wow, you really are a hostile sort, aren't you? If one wants to have a thread where Christians get together to discuss aspects of their faith, be it bible versus, prayer, or whatever else comes to mind, what's it hurting you? There are at least two other open threads right now where there is debate about religious/non religious going on. I would ask you why you, an obvious non-believer, want to take part in a thread with a bunch of Christians discussing things about their faith--something that you don't seem to share. And a Christian Only thread would obviously be debate free, unless someone started up a debate on the various branches of Christianity--which I don't think was the intent of the OP. So again, what the heck would you want to be a part of such a discussion anyway? As a non-believer, you'd have little to contribute to any biblical discussion, except to try and disprove certain versus/stories/etc. It really seems to me you are just looking for an excuse to argue or stir up trouble. So you really do believe that only Christians are capable of discussing their faith civilly? Again, I have to say I'm offended. Maybe I'm interested in the culture by which I'm surrounded? Maybe I am a Christian and just recognize that this is a very un-Christian thread? Maybe I just want to talk to people with a different view on the world? Not everyone wants to debate you. I think you could learn a lot from theists and nontheists alike. Your generalization and accusations are the exact kind of hypocritical behavior you should be actively trying to avoid. Jesus taught acceptance of those who differ from you, not hatred. While I don't personally believe in a deity or a true prophet, those are words I think we can all agree with. I was simply stating, in response to Tye, that sometimes people who share the same belief system simply want to discuss their beliefs without debate: to share their enjoyment of whatever commonality the group shares the same as any other club. So again I say, it seems to me you are only interested in stirring things up, and borderline trolling; otherwise you'd be posting in one of the several religious debating threads instead of this one. Sometimes people want to discuss each other's beliefs as well. If I were to start a thread on the beliefs and practices of Buddhism (surprise surprise, I'm not an atheist!). And finally, since my last post somehow didn't clear it up and you really do seem to lack full reading comprehension, I'll put this in clear words: I don't want to debate. If I were interested in "stirring things up" I wouldn't be making that so clear. If I wanted to debate I honest to blog would be in one of those threads. I'd rather discuss theology than debate it any day.

[TheSilverWolf]

So then why not create a thread in which you discuss theology? Why come to a thread where the OP wanted a place for Christians to discuss their faith? And again, I never said only Christians could debate civily. Where in the heck do you get that out of what I said? I was simply trying to say, it is my understanding that the OP wanted a debateless thread where people who are Christians can discuss their beliefs. Are you the type that believe boys should be allowed in the Girl Scouts, and vice-versa? Because that's how you are coming across. And I might point out that your initial post sounded rather hostile, not as if all you wanted was a simple "theological" debate. You can't be offended if someone misunderstands you when your post is unclear, coming of as hostile in general, as if you are simply looking for an argument. And once more, I ask the question you have been dodging. Why is it offending to you if one select group of people wants a thread where that one select group of people can get together and discuss whatever it is that they share together? It's no different than if I were to create a Hunger Games fan club exclusively for those that have read the book. Should you be offended, if you've never read the book, that I would prefer to have one place where I post exclusively with others who have? There is no difference. ~SilverWolf~

[Jesus of Suburbia]

So then why not create a thread in which you discuss theology? Why come to a thread where the OP wanted a place for Christians to discuss their faith? Missing the point award of the year goes to SilverWolf. Are you the type that believe boys should be allowed in the Girl Scouts, and vice-versa? Because that's how you are coming across. And I might point out that your initial post sounded rather hostile, not as if all you wanted was a simple "theological" debate. I'm the type who believes in not excluding people from discussions because you're convinced they can't talk about it without trying to prove you wrong. not as if all you wanted was a simple "theological" debate. I don't want a debate. Stop saying that. And once more, I ask the question you have been dodging. Why is it offending to you if one select group of people wants a thread where that one select group of people can get together and discuss whatever it is that they share together? It's no different than if I were to create a Hunger Games fan club exclusively for those that have read the book. Should you be offended, if you've never read the book, that I would prefer to have one place where I post exclusively with others who have? There is no difference. It wasn't offending to me until you started accusing anyone who isn't Christian of being argument-crazy and unable to actually talk about Christianity. You'll notice my first few posts were just jokes. That would be fine because I haven't read the Hunger Games and couldn't possibly talk about it. I have read this book and you think I'm incapable of having a friendly chat about it just because I don't believe in what happens in it. Also I don't know why you think a little bit of sarcasm translates to hostility, but if my first serious post was hostile yours are borderline threatening.

[TimeDragon97]

Okay, enough with the trolling. Seriously. I think Christianity is complete nonsense, but at least let the Christians discuss their nonsense on their own. This thread was not intended for debate.

[Jesus of Suburbia]

Okay, enough with the trolling. Seriously. I think Christianity is complete nonsense, but at least let the Christians discuss their nonsense on their own. This thread was not intended for debate. Nobody's trolling and nobody appreciates you calling Christianity nonsense.

[TheSilverWolf]

JoS, I'm sure nobody will care if you contribute to the conversation without bashing anyone or their beliefs. I think that some dreams can have spiritual significance. In point of fact, look how often in the Bible that God communicated through dreams? So Ashikael, I would say I do think that God still at times tries to convey a message or tell us something through our dreams, lucid or not. I also think, even "ordinary" dreams can tell us a lot about ourselves, and God probably intended for us to use them as a tool to understand our minds better, and look into the things we hide from ourselves. ~SilverWolf~

[DarkKiky0]

That is a great point TheSilverWolf, I never thought about it that way before. I have a question for the people of this thread. What is your stand point on science versus Christianity? Do you think someone can believe in both at the same time?

[TheSilverWolf]

oh heck yeah. I'd like to think of myself as a mix of scientist at heart/believer in God. I believe that God created things for us to find out. In fact, more and more, science begins to prove certain aspects of Christianity to be true. For one, we can say definitively that Jesus was a real person. We can say that there really was a great flood X years ago. We can say for sure that it was indeed possible for certain things to happen. That said, our world, imo, is as such that not everything can be explained by science. I also think that science, somewhat ironically, tends to be close minded about the paranormal. But then, my beliefs, I've noticed, fall a bit out of place with many Christians so you might find my opinions a bit anomalous. For example, I believe in spirits/ghosts. I remember calling up a hotel that supposedly had ghostly activity there in one of the rooms. I wanted to find out which room it was so I could stay the night there and investigate it, maybe capture some EVPs, maybe some images and stuff. The woman, she answered and in a rather snotty tone, told me that "We're Christians and we don't believe in that nonsense." I mentioned that I'd read online that there was supposed paranormal activity people had reported and I was interested in finding out more about it. She repeated that "She is Christian and doesn't believe that," without ever answering my question and being very rude about it. I ended up hanging up, a bit frustrated--not at her close-mindedness but at her rudeness! Anyway I think science could be used to help prove a lot of this; the existence of a spiritual plane, even possibly more evidence that there is a God. Have you heard about the Christian scientists that study the Bible? Google them sometime, it's pretty interesting. What do you think on the subject, Darkkiky0? ~SilverWolf~

[DarkKiky0]

Oh my goodness, those are my thoughts exactly For years now I have had a combination belief of science and religion. I tell my thoughts to my friends and family and they either just smile and change the subject or start trying to say my ideas aren't correct. About a week ago I watched a program about how more scientists are finding more and more proof that events in the bible actually happened. One of the things that stuck out to me was how they found proof that the flood happened, which is ironic that you mentioned it haha. They explained how each layer of dirt is a record of what happened in each time period and they found a layer that is a mixture of a lot of different layers and has bones from many different times and found that the only way that could have happened was if there was a huge flood that mixed all those layers together. They also found some dinosaur fossils that had not yet fossilized, meaning that certain dinosaurs, such as the larger ones like the Brachiosaurus, were still alive a couple thousand years ago, which is the time they estimated that the flood happened. One of my thoughts has been that the only way the dinosaurs could have been completely wiped out was by the great flood, because a meteor would only wipe out the living things in the area it landed, and the scientists were backing that up. It made me so excited and hopeful. I also believe in spirits and have had more then one experience with them. My family and friends try to shoot down my experiences with spirits too, and my mom uses the bible as proof that they don't exist. She never quotes any scriptures though. I have many many other ideas on how science and religion can go hand in hand, but this post would become far too long and elaborate and I don't want to bore people. I'm thrilled to finally find a kindred spirit!

[OneUp]

Yo Imma christian, and I think if anyone ever doubts the exsistence of God they needa take a look at the quote by Edwin Conklin that says- "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop." Science will never be able to prove much of what is supernatural because they go by logic, im not saying im irrational and live in a land of faires, but im saying you cant explain paranormal things with a normal mind using normal logic. They try though, and thats all they do, try. They dont get anywhere because they dont look at Gods logic. The finite mind cant understand the infinite, and thats why there's faith. After all, what is faith when you have all the answers? a contradiction.

[Xei]

About a week ago I watched a program about how more scientists are finding more and more proof that events in the bible actually happened. One of the things that stuck out to me was how they found proof that the flood happened, which is ironic that you mentioned it haha. They explained how each layer of dirt is a record of what happened in each time period and they found a layer that is a mixture of a lot of different layers and has bones from many different times and found that the only way that could have happened was if there was a huge flood that mixed all those layers together. They also found some dinosaur fossils that had not yet fossilized, meaning that certain dinosaurs, such as the larger ones like the Brachiosaurus, were still alive a couple thousand years ago, which is the time they estimated that the flood happened. One of my thoughts has been that the only way the dinosaurs could have been completely wiped out was by the great flood, because a meteor would only wipe out the living things in the area it landed, and the scientists were backing that up. It made me so excited and hopeful. It was creationist propaganda. I'm not saying this to be combative, I'm just saying it because it's clear that you've been lied to you. Although of course you can find plenty of geological evidence of past floods, there's no trace of a flood that covered the whole of the globe at one time. As for dinosaurs, there has never been a specimen younger than 65 million years discovered. To be honest I'm not sure why it's necessary in the first place to believe that dinosaurs were alive around the time of Jesus in order to believe in Christianity. Yo Imma christian, and I think if anyone ever doubts the exsistence of God they needa take a look at the quote by Edwin Conklin that says- "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop." Why do you think that Edwin Conklin is telling the truth? Did he give you any evidence for his claim?

[DarkKiky0]

To be honest I'm not sure why it's necessary in the first place to believe that dinosaurs were alive around the time of Jesus in order to believe in Christianity. The reason it's necessary is because one of the reasons people, or non religious scientists mainly, believe the bible can't be real is because of the perts where it mentions dinosaurs. Creatures in the bible such as the leviathan and behemoth are perfect descriptions for the Elasmosaurus and the Stegosaurus. Knowing that, they say it's not possible for the bible to be true because dinosaurs didn't exist around the times the bible mentions them, but they DID find unfossilized dinosaur bones, it was in Alaska, I saw it on that program and it is all over the Internet, look it up for yourself. When you find the same level of mixed layers of earth all over the world, even in places where floods are near impossible, then that's pretty clear, unless you think you know more then a scientist who has studied it. When clear proof is provided then that pretty much shows it's not just propaganda. It wasn't on lying stations like FOX news where I saw it, it was a scientific program. The finite mind cant understand the infinite, and thats why there's faith. I find that can be true for actually believing in God, heaven, and angels but when it comes to spirits there are plenty of researchers who use tons of equipment to record their existence but approach it from a logical standpoint, and it still works to see it that way. Just because someone is logical doesn't mean they can't believe in the bible and the supernatural, and I don't see why you seem to imply that it's such a bad thing when scientists are actually helping to prove the bible is real. Haven't Christians been wanting more scientists to think that way?

[Descensus]

The reason it's necessary is because one of the reasons people, or non religious scientists mainly, believe the bible can't be real is because of the perts where it mentions dinosaurs. Creatures in the bible such as the leviathan and behemoth are perfect descriptions for the Elasmosaurus and the Stegosaurus. Terms like leviathan and behemoth are vague enough to refer to anything significantly larger than human beings, e.g. elephants, giraffes, etc. They're not exclusive references to dinosaurs. Moreover, the word behemoth is used this way in the Bible: Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. The full section is readable here Elasmosaurus was an aquatic creature that likely ate other organisms, not grass "as an ox." Stegosaurus, on the other hand, was a herbivore, so it ate plant matter. But it never ate grass, since grasses didn't evolve until long after the entire Stegosaurus genus was extinct. Leviathan is mentioned a few times, some within the context of the sea, so motivated reasoning might make one think "ELASMOSAURUS!" But again, the terms are used vaguely. There are a shitload of large animals in the oceans. Furthermore, the section on Leviathan claims the creature breathes fire and smoke "pours from his nostrils." Knowing that, they say it's not possible for the bible to be true because dinosaurs didn't exist around the times the bible mentions them, but they DID find unfossilized dinosaur bones, it was in Alaska, I saw it on that program and it is all over the Internet, look it up for yourself. When you find the same level of mixed layers of earth all over the world, even in places where floods are near impossible, then that's pretty clear, unless you think you know more then a scientist who has studied it. When clear proof is provided then that pretty much shows it's not just propaganda. It wasn't on lying stations like FOX news where I saw it, it was a scientific program. Even if a show claims to be scientific, they can show some pretty bad science. See all of the "scientific" ghost shows where they use all sorts of instruments to detect ghosts even though the devices were never designed to detect ghosts. I googled "unfossilized dinosaur bones Alaska" and, sure enough, the claim is creationist propaganda. The original claim comes from the 1998 book The Great Alaskan Dinosaur Adventure by Buddy Davis, Mike Liston, and John Whitmore. The name Buddy Davis should pop out considering he's a known young-earth creationist who is referred to by even the Answers in Genesis organization as a "paleo-artist." He has no formal paleontology training or degrees.

[snoop]

Hmm, make a thread that is exclusively for a group of people to post in on a discussion forum about religion... Did anyone really expect for atheists not to jump on a thread they were tauntingly prohibited to post in? I'm pretty sure both sides are being pretty immature here, it's pretty obvious that was the intent of the OP.

[Darkmatters]

^ Not only that, but without input from atheists how interesting could an all-christian backpatting circlejerk really be?