AntiGod education should not be compulsary (even for non wealthy)

quote:

---

In God we trust & one nation under God -was meant to be brought up to show that The government seems to like the impression it is on God's side.

---

Or, that God is on our side, and that we are not communists.

quote:

---

And that the US is considered a christian country by many.

---

The US government was founded as secular with NO STATE RELIGION. That was a very important issue to the founders, because they had just broken free from England which DID have a state religion (still does) and they believed that imposing a state religion on citizens was wrong.Read Jefferson, Madison, and Paine if you want to educate yourself on their views. (I doubt you will, though)

quote:

---

For starters, my humble little opinion would be to sell all the churches in the country. (Before you folks shut them down anyhow, and they get nothing out of it) Meet in halls, or beaches or something a lot cheaper.

---

Except that Catholics believe that they need to have their ceremonies inside a consecrated church. That's why you can't have catholic weddings outside, on the beach, etc. Already your little plan has made the largest single Christian denomination unable to practice in the way they see fit.

quote:

---

With the money, then use it to preach the gospel in all the world. Maybe some of it to rescue the kid's from your diobolical cluthes! I would also suggest they do not support bombing towns full of people, therefore get out of your godless military. I also suggest real boycotts maybe 50 million strong of evil activities and or products. I also suggest they protect their children at all costs from those anti Christ types who like to X out Christmas, and steal their faith. I could go on, but you may not like some of my more controversial opinions! Like the catacombs in Rome, you fight the way Christians should fight. Not dropping nuclear weapons on humanity, but trying to heal, save, and convert them to Love. You see Love is precisely, literally, unarguably, God! here is the equation, God = Love Love = God. That's why He gave His Son-Love!

---

Apparently, God must not want you to learn anything, use your brain, or even to tell the truth, because you surely haven't done any of these things so far.

quote:

---

So for the US itself, if they delare themselves (as they for the most part are-anti Christ)- then great! Sooner the better! Then everyone knows where they stand. Until they p or get off the pot, at least, I am all for having God taught, and promoting evilution outlawed! As it will be shortly anyhow all over the world, as the waters cover the sea.

---

"waters cover the sea?"{Fixed two quote boxes - Adminnemooseus}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 02-13-2004]

quote:

---

an impression of christianity exists, and it's fortified with vitimins, and three essential minerals.

---

Okay I get it. I watch CrankYankers too.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I would humbly suggest that you go off and re-read Genesis again. Your explanation holds no water whatsoever as evidenced by your need to BLATANTLY quote what I said out of context in an attempt to give the impression that I agree with you about Genesis 1 and 2 when it's patently obvious that I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU!!! For anyonewho missed this, let me quote the relevant parts.You said

The order is in chapter one. In chapter two, we go back and take a closer look.

You then quote me as saying

AND BOTH CORRECT

To which you reply

Of course, as I hope you can see now.

What I actually said was

The only way out of this dilema that I can see is to acknowledge that you can't take every word of Genesis to be correct - it's either one or the other and to be honest, if you want to believe in Creation then that shouldn't stop you, but you can't say that both versions can be mutually exclusive AND BOTH CORRECT.

In using my words in what I can only describe as a deceitful way you have lost any respect I had for you or your position. If this is what you deem to be debating in good faith then I think you have a lot to learn.If you try to produce good evidence to back up your beliefs and "quote" your sources, who is going to believe you now? You've DELIBERATELY misquoted me and you can deliberately misquote anyone or anything else. The sad thing is that you didn't even have the common sense to realise that, since my original quote is still available to whoever wants to read it, your little bit of dishonesty would be glaringly obvious for all to see.Finally, if the Bible is to be taken literally, what happened to "Thou shalt not bear false witness"?If any moderators are looking in can you tell me what the position is when a poster deliberately misquotes someone to give a false impression of what the original poster was saying? To say I'm seething is an understatement of epic proportions!

I wouldn't be so quick to allow this to anger you. You have won a significant point in that you have demonstrated that the individual who disagrees with you is unable to successfully carry on the discussion without resorting to blatent lies. (though, to be fair, the other possibility is that the individual has a rather low level of reading comprehension.) Amusment is a better response than anger.

Look at his last response to me... vitamins and minerals? The guy is just getting his kicks jerking people's chains. Let him go bother someone else and forget about it.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

"that I can see" fine you can't see it. I tried to patiently explain it to you, it's not 2 versions. And every word can be taken literally. You know, the bible can't be uncderstood with the "carnal" mind. If anyone is struggluing trying to understand it, what you really need to do is pray this little prayer, and then you will start to ubderstand "Jesus, please come into my heart, and forgive my sins. Thank you for dying for me, I accept your free gift of eternal life, please send me your Spirit to help me understand things, and help me love others, In Jesus name. amen"
He'll help us if we ask . Without this being born again in the spirit though, these things can not be understood. "I thank Thee, that thou hast hid these thingds from yhe wise, and revealed them unto babes."
Since you weren't able to believe me, maybe one day He'll show you. Meanwhile, it's a nice weekend coming up, I want to enjoy a lot of it. You all do the same. As far as my part in this thread, it's over. I'll leave the other posts as the last word.
--and remember, somewhere, sometime, when you least expect it.."smile you're on God's candid camera!"

Thank you for your free advice on prayer, but as a committed and practicing Christian, I can manage fine with only God's help, I don't need your tu'ppence worth.

I see. So how come the fowl of the air are created out of the ground here, but they're created out of the water in the first chapter?

This is hilarious. This is supposed to be an answer to Trixie pointing out that Genesis Two says man was alone, so God made animals, which is an obvious contradiction of Genesis One, which says animals were already made?What an answer! "It was because of what he's talking about here...the reasons-fleshing it out."Do you want to try again?Also, there's another problem in that in Genesis one, God makes man "male and female" after the animals. Male and female at the same time. In Genesis Two, it's man all alone without animals or women, then animals made for man to have a companion, then a naked woman, as you put it, as a suitable companion.This is a contradiction, and "it was because of what he's talking about here...the reasons-fleshing it out," just isn't a sufficient answer.

I'm glad you entitled your post thread is closed, because it almost surely needs to be. This last post gives up all attempt to answer anyone, and turns to a bizarre attempt at some ridiculous form of evangelism. No, you haven't. You have tried to tell us it's not two versions without any coherent reasoning behind it.Also, Trixie's right. Perhaps you only meant to express yourself by pulling her quote out of context, but it's not ok to do that. (On the other hand, Trixie, it's not like anyone at all could possibly have been fooled by the misquote into thinking you were agreeing with him.)I had already posted a couple answers to you before I saw your message 246. If you care to answer those or reasonably attempt to answer Trixie, you can have another shot at it. Otherwise, I'll just see the thread gets closed. This is going nowhere.

Yes I have, Sorry some of you folks can't seem to understand. Chap 2 goes back, Adam's already created, we go over it, and expound on it. I guess it must be coded somehow so those who just want to contradict it and make fun of it won't 'get it'. Sorry, it's plain as day to me. I suggested how you could get to understand it if you really wanted to. As far as closing the thread, that's what I thought I tried to do. So no need to threaten to do it, as I already considered it done. We'll have to agree to disagree on your big supposed contradictions in Genesis.{edited by AdminTL to fix quote code - no content changed}[This message has been edited by AdminTL, 02-20-2004]

I have to agree with gipper here. If you read it objectively, you will see that it is not always a straight step by step 'listing'.Evolution is mainly a model to explain certain facts that has been observed. These facts does not refute God, quite the countrary. It would be a confirmation that he has made the world into a truly effective place.Evolution does not counter spirituality. There is a reason why you have biology AND religion classes in school. It is so that the children (I have been one, you know) can take part of all information and form their own opinion. Following a religion blindly is just as bad as following a scientific model blindly; it is a basis for thought, and you should evaluate it in contrast to your personal experiences and reasonings.You can't argue against a model just because you do not like the facts given. That would make you indeed dangerous to your children, because it would make you try to force them into an ignorant and unfaceted view on their own lives.

Good, maybe you can join the majority of americans here, who in a recent poll agreed with gipper on a literal flood. Most Americans take Bible stories literally - Washington Times Also true evolution is merely a 'model to explain certain facts that has been observed' Creation also is a model to explain the same facts, by and large. As far as danger to your kids, perhaps socialist states who like to steal people's children at the drop of a hat are a real danger. People trying to force their belief of a lying God, and errant bible, and making fairy tales of facts, and turning facts into fables, like evolutionists also are dangerous. Pick your poison, God - or the supposedly scientific, sly, serpentine substitute sacriledge spread in schools.

quote:

---

Good, maybe you can join the majority of americans here, who in a recent poll agreed with gipper on a literal flood. Most Americans take Bible stories literally - Washington Times

---

I will do no such thing because I do not believe the bible is historically litteral, but instead contains moral allegories to make you reflect on certain important issues in your life. I can't take the bible litterally because it does not work with empirical observations, nor would it give you a sound open-minded point of view.

quote:

---

Also true evolution is merely a 'model to explain certain facts that has been observed' Creation also is a model to explain the same facts, by and large.

---

I'd argue that creationism is not a scientific model, but a spiritual one. Most of the arguments for it are based on the text in the bible, not direct observations. I do, however, acknowledge it as a way to encompass issues that science does not touch. And as I said before, a litteral creationism interpretation is directly refuted by evidence, unless you add in some strange beginning requirements.

quote:

---

As far as danger to your kids, perhaps socialist states who like to steal people's children at the drop of a hat are a real danger.

---

I hope you aren't insuinating that Sweden is some sort of corrupt and evil state. I do not think you know what socialist means, if you use it in that context.

quote:

---

People trying to force their belief of a lying God, and errant bible, and making fairy tales of facts, and turning facts into fables, like evolutionists also are dangerous. Pick your poison, God - or the supposedly scientific, sly, serpentine substitute sacriledge spread in schools.

---

Teaching the scientifical model in school does not refute the idea of God. In fact, ALL tax-sponsored Swedish schools, and I assume American too, teach these as sepparate, and compatible, things. We do not force you into any conclution; that is your own job. You are encouraged and taught to think for yourself, and to not take any lessons blindly. Indeed, one of the first things they bring up when you start science classes is that you are working with models, which are not 100% accurate, and they also give examples on the progress that has occured through history.

And let's also jump in with the near-majority (46% of those in an US survey of adults by the National Science Foundation) who don't know that the Earth takes a year to make a trip around the Sun. Just because of educational system apparently really sucks seems a poor excuse to make it worse.