ding

Confront reality
Oct 25, 2016
118,325
20,943
2,220
Houston
Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
 
America religious separatism often uses collectivism (socialism to you).

China is a neo-capitalist country.

You need to think your OPs through before posting.
 
Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.

Close enough. thanks.

They would, however, surely argue that they can distinguish between good and evil, but this would be where theirs and our definitions now clash.
 
Last edited:
There is by definition no "religion of atheism". Atheism is simply the rejection of Theism. Full stop.

That'll be three cents for brain cell rental. Three cents you could have saved by using your own. :eusa_doh:


None of which has jack friggety squat to do with socialism or any other economic ideology. But if you wanna see something that does --- check Acts 2 - 4.
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.

God is not on trial here... you are.

Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.

God is not on trial here... you are.

Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible

My motives can't be simpler. I pose the questions others didn't think to pose for themselves, knowing before I so pose that it can't be answered. And there goes the position you started from.

Works every time.
 
A good book on that very subject:

6177019._UY200_.jpg
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.

God is not on trial here... you are.

Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible

My motives can't be simpler. I pose the questions others didn't think to pose for themselves, knowing before I so pose that it can't be answered. And there goes the position you started from.

Works every time.

You've explained nothing.

If one endeavors just to find statements (from his adversaries I presume) that have errors in them to some degree, and then picks at those errors --- no matter if they are of great relevance or not --- and fails to answer the more difficult challenges in the text ----- then I consider that person to be a nuisance and motivated just to undo good intentions and not discover a greater truth or solution.
 
You've explained nothing.

Correct. I didn't need to. See how efficient that was?


If one endeavors just to find statements (from his adversaries I presume) that have errors in them to some degree, and then picks at those errors --- no matter if they are of great relevance or not --- and fails to answer the more difficult challenges in the text ----- then I consider that person to be a nuisance and motivated just to undo good intentions and not discover a greater truth or solution.

"Yammer yammer yammer no I still don't have an answer...
a wop bop aliu bidah bidoo bam boom".
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.

God is not on trial here... you are.

Pffffffffft, no jurisdiction son. Once this concept was brutally leveraged to subjugate the tribes of europe - the image of the creator in human form, this male dominator god - human beings became seen as non-spiritual beings, the natural world became something to be feared/conquered/extracted from, and any nonbeliever became “savage”.
 
Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
Why the insistence of forcing religion on atheists?

We just think your beliefs are silly...what is religious about that?
 
Humanity took a very wrong turn once it locked onto the concept of a male domintor god percpetual reality.

God is not on trial here... you are.

Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible

My motives can't be simpler. I pose the questions others didn't think to pose for themselves, knowing before I so pose that it can't be answered. And there goes the position you started from.

Works every time.

You've explained nothing.

If one endeavors just to find statements (from his adversaries I presume) that have errors in them to some degree, and then picks at those errors --- no matter if they are of great relevance or not --- and fails to answer the more difficult challenges in the text ----- then I consider that person to be a nuisance and motivated just to undo good intentions and not discover a greater truth or solution.

We know, some folks never want anything questioned. They get very agitated and nervous when their belief system is challenged. That's how shaky they are in their beliefs.
 
Their religion is socialism which worships big government and social policy. It is based on atheism and deification of man. It proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and communality or equality. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements and condemn respect for any who believe in Christianity. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. Their hostility towards traditional religions is that of an animosity between a rival religion. They can be identified by an external locus of control. They worship science but are the first to argue against it.
Why the insistence of forcing religion on atheists?

We just think your beliefs are silly...what is religious about that?

They aren't all that sure of their own non-silliness, that's all it is, the preverbial la-la-la-la with fingers in ears bit.
 
God is not on trial here... you are.

Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible

My motives can't be simpler. I pose the questions others didn't think to pose for themselves, knowing before I so pose that it can't be answered. And there goes the position you started from.

Works every time.

You've explained nothing.

If one endeavors just to find statements (from his adversaries I presume) that have errors in them to some degree, and then picks at those errors --- no matter if they are of great relevance or not --- and fails to answer the more difficult challenges in the text ----- then I consider that person to be a nuisance and motivated just to undo good intentions and not discover a greater truth or solution.

We know, some folks never want anything questioned. They get very agitated and nervous when their belief system is challenged. That's how shaky they are in their beliefs.

Never mind. I am in search of someone who has a brain. You were passed by.
 
Oh "he" certainly can be. If God is "he" --- who's the "she" that makes it a "he"?

So much for that.

Your motives are probably the strangest thing about you.

You may want to lay off the semantics and honestly examine the empirical evidence for this God of the Bible

My motives can't be simpler. I pose the questions others didn't think to pose for themselves, knowing before I so pose that it can't be answered. And there goes the position you started from.

Works every time.

You've explained nothing.

If one endeavors just to find statements (from his adversaries I presume) that have errors in them to some degree, and then picks at those errors --- no matter if they are of great relevance or not --- and fails to answer the more difficult challenges in the text ----- then I consider that person to be a nuisance and motivated just to undo good intentions and not discover a greater truth or solution.

We know, some folks never want anything questioned. They get very agitated and nervous when their belief system is challenged. That's how shaky they are in their beliefs.

Never mind. I am in search of someone who has a brain. You were passed by.

Sorry you feel so challenged.
 

Forum List

Back
Top