The Future Right-Wingers Want....

[EasternVol]

That puts the cart before the horse. Texas being backward is not because of Donald Trump. Trump chooses his positions to match those his base already has.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Right wingers want and have their preferred future. Case in point: MSN

 

[utvolpj]

Right wingers want and have their preferred future. Case in point: MSN

Can you link where the officers are identified as right wingers?

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Can you link where the officers are identified as right wingers?

i didn't say they were. I said their behavior is what right-wingers want for the future of the country. While I don't doubt the cops are racist right wing bigots, I didn't say they were. Righties love seeing cops brutalize people, and some are on recording for saying so, including your blob-god.

 

[utvolpj]

i didn't say they were. I said their behavior is what right-wingers want for the future of the country. While I don't doubt the cops are racist right wing bigots, I didn't say they were. Righties love seeing cops brutalize people, and some are on recording for saying so, including your blob-god.

Can you link to where right wingers claim to want that for the future of the country?

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

That puts the cart before the horse. Texas being backward is not because of Donald Trump. Trump chooses his positions to match those his base already has.

100%. Trump wants votes. He's not really informed enough on issues to carry on intelligently.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Can you link to where right wingers claim to want that for the future of the country?

All one has to do is listen to you right wing tip banking creatures. Your own bigotry reveals it. I've listened. You yourself know it's true to, but choose to play dumb instead. I'm not again going to the trouble of providing you links, only to see you ignore them and go off into another detour that doesn't actually respond to the links. I've been educated about that tactic by you and your MAGA-gots. Now, go and play someone else for a sucker.

 

[utvolpj]

All one has to do is listen to you right wing tip banking creatures. Your own bigotry reveals it. I've listened. You yourself know it's true to, but choose to play dumb instead. I'm not again going to the trouble of providing you links, only to see you ignore them and go off into another detour that doesn't actually respond to the links. I've been educated about that tactic by you and your MAGA-gots. Now, go and play someone else for a sucker.

I knew you had no links but just like you twisting while trying to justify your ridiculous claims.

If you believe me to be maga then you've done zero research. You have no clue yet continue to make wild claims and back them up with nothing when challenged. It's your shtick and many others see it as well.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

I knew you had no links but just like you twisting while trying to justify your ridiculous claims.

If you believe me to be maga then you've done zero research. You have no clue yet continue to make wild claims and back them up with nothing when challenged. It's your shtick and many others see it as well.

OK

 

[Cod]

I knew you had no links but just like you twisting while trying to justify your ridiculous claims.

If you believe me to be maga then you've done zero research. You have no clue yet continue to make wild claims and back them up with nothing when challenged. It's your shtick and many others see it as well.

Careful, he'll accuse you of stalking him, following him to forums etc...... then lay the almighty IGNORE on you.

I think he has some serious paranoia going on plus the TDS going on in that head isn't helpful.

 

[volbound1700]

you are falling back in the argument. you can't use one religions specific argument for their God, as justification for every other's religion formation of a god(s); or the human culture tendency towards having organized religion.

to be internally consistent you would also need to accept that each version of their god was as valid as God. which i don't think most believers are going to do. but like I said I need to read up on Bede's argument.

No you don't, in fact it doesn't make sense to follow that path. It makes sense to think the concept of God has been corrupted overtime. Genesis teaches thst very point. If God existed and appeared as stated, people would confuse Him over time. Thank of the game telephone.

This is where Science would never give proof nor could ever give proof. If you had Scientific Evidence of a God, then it wouldn't be God.

The key is in the hearts of the people, the message, and sacrifices. I get into the topics of History and Psychology to explain it.

Take Joan of Arc for example. You are telling me that a 16 year old girl who saw visions just suddenly got approval of the King to lead his armies, successfully led veterans without experience, and won battles turning the course of a war and there wasn't any outside fsvtor to it. She claims it was due to her visions of God.


Take Paul, a man who hated Christians and was a Pharisee of Pharisee that would not associate with Gentiles but suddenly changed to the Christian Apostle to the Gentles. I could keep going all day with examples.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Christian perverts, sexual deviants, are everywhere! Good....er....lord!

Hopefully he’ll reap what he’s sown

 

[LouderVol]

No you don't, in fact it doesn't make sense to follow that path. It makes sense to think the concept of God has been corrupted overtime. Genesis teaches thst very point. If God existed and appeared as stated, people would confuse Him over time. Thank of the game telephone.

This is where Science would never give proof nor could ever give proof. If you had Scientific Evidence of a God, then it wouldn't be God.

The key is in the hearts of the people, the message, and sacrifices. I get into the topics of History and Psychology to explain it.

Take Joan of Arc for example. You are telling me that a 16 year old girl who saw visions just suddenly got approval of the King to lead his armies, successfully led veterans without experience, and won battles turning the course of a war and there wasn't any outside fsvtor to it. She claims it was due to her visions of God.


Take Paul, a man who hated Christians and was a Pharisee of Pharisee that would not associate with Gentiles but suddenly changed to the Christian Apostle to the Gentles. I could keep going all day with examples.

Joan of Arc's first military move wasn't to convince the king. she was already leading troops and had won some small battles by the time she met the king. Also she was 17 and he was unwed at 26 and they had a private hours long "meeting" before she convinced him to turn over his armies to her. and the people that followed her were war weary, this was towards the end of the 100 years war. fighting for some new king they didn't know didn't have a ton of support. fighting in a crusade lead by a prophetess of God was a lot easier to support. it was also a great way to unify a France where the French King didn't even control 1/3 of the land. and the problem with the divine inspiration claim with Joan is that she ends up losing. God's inspiration has a timer apparently. her convincing the desperate new king of france to give her troops doesn't prove God.

people in prison find God too. God is there, but people "finding" him doesn't justify or prove his existence. your own game of telephone would go a long way to explaining a lot of these historical proofs you claim.

I don't understand how you can claim that scientific proof would invalidate a god, but historical "proof" does prove him? both are based on facts, or at least as close to facts as is humanly possible. Faith should be enough for any believer, but i don't see how you can accept some non-Faith based documented "proof" but not others.

 

[volbound1700]

Joan of Arc's first military move wasn't to convince the king. she was already leading troops and had won some small battles by the time she met the king. Also she was 17 and he was unwed at 26 and they had a private hours long "meeting" before she convinced him to turn over his armies to her. and the people that followed her were war weary, this was towards the end of the 100 years war. fighting for some new king they didn't know didn't have a ton of support. fighting in a crusade lead by a prophetess of God was a lot easier to support. it was also a great way to unify a France where the French King didn't even control 1/3 of the land. and the problem with the divine inspiration claim with Joan is that she ends up losing. God's inspiration has a timer apparently. her convincing the desperate new king of france to give her troops doesn't prove God.

people in prison find God too. God is there, but people "finding" him doesn't justify or prove his existence. your own game of telephone would go a long way to explaining a lot of these historical proofs you claim.

I don't understand how you can claim that scientific proof would invalidate a god, but historical "proof" does prove him? both are based on facts, or at least as close to facts as is humanly possible. Faith should be enough for any believer, but i don't see how you can accept some non-Faith based documented "proof" but not others.

Historical proof is about "people" not God and how God changes people.

That is the key to finding God is how He changes your soul. That is what faith is about. The driver is the change God has done to the people who truly find Him.

History isn't proving God physically exists but rather that God has impacted humanity and human beings on a personal level.

 

[turbovol]

Chlld rapists posing as "faith leaders"---and then invoking "god" nonsense to explain their criminal behavior.

 

[Sandman 423]

I knew you had no links but just like you twisting while trying to justify your ridiculous claims.

If you believe me to be maga then you've done zero research. You have no clue yet continue to make wild claims and back them up with nothing when challenged. It's your shtick and many others see it as well.

Isn't it odd these the folks that hate Trump because of how nasty he is, act just like him?

 

[LouderVol]

Isn't it odd these the folks that hate Trump because of how nasty he is, act just like him?

not really. they are politicians, being a hypocrite is almost required.

 

[McDad]

not really. they are politicians, being a hypocrite is almost required.

I think Sandy was referring to The Alien.

 

[LouderVol]

Historical proof is about "people" not God and how God changes people.

That is the key to finding God is how He changes your soul. That is what faith is about. The driver is the change God has done to the people who truly find Him.

History isn't proving God physically exists but rather that God has impacted humanity and human beings on a personal level.

so you believing that someone else believed in God is proof to you that God existed. but someone using science to believe in God would not be proof to you that God existed?

I would assume the person "proving" God with science would go through a similar transformation as one who otherwise believes in God.

 

[volbound1700]

so you believing that someone else believed in God is proof to you that God existed. but someone using science to believe in God would not be proof to you that God existed?

I would assume the person "proving" God with science would go through a similar transformation as one who otherwise believes in God.

You can't prove or disprove God with Science (also you need to pick specific fields of Science). God is an Omnipotent, Omniscience, Omnipresent being that exists both outside of Time and in Time. Effectively you see God every day in everything.

This is where you get into the New Testament descriptions, the Apostles, the life of Jesus (who has been historically proven), miracles, historical events, etc.

Now you could hint at parts of Science pointing to God. People cite to certain intelligent designs in creatures, the unexplainability of the pre-Cambrian explosion, the uniqueness of the rock formations at the Grand Canyon, the flaw in Science of saying Earth was formed by accident, rotation of planets, flaws in some of the fossil finds, etc. I find all that speculative and some of these arguments are questionable. I think these "hints" are not solid arguments under Scientific theories but a lot of stuff isn't. As people pointed out here, modern "science" is often not true science (at least as shown in the news). I have relatives in science and it is always a search for answers. Take Oppenheimer, the scientists in it rarely come to consensus, often turn on each other for political reasons, take educated guesses and assumptions, etc. This is real science, the search for answers. Let me tell you a surprise, there are Scientists teaching all throughout our nation and world today that believe in God. If Science disproved him, than explain these Scientists? On a personal level, I don't believe Science will ever PROVE or DISPROVE God nor do I think Science has truly explored our Universe. It is hard to make the claim when we haven't even left our Solar System in a Universe with Billions of Galaxies each with Billions of Stars.

Also different arguments work for different people. The Bible records that people even saw angels, miracles, etc. (like the Jews in Exodus) and still denied God. In many instances, you can never convince some people even if they had direct proof.

I will say this, it is hard for me to imagine millions of people willing to undergo the punishments/persecution that they faced for something they believed to be a lie. The life of Paul (a life of total change and sacrifice) is a great example. Also, as even shown by Richard Dawkins recently, the move away from Christian values in the West have NOT made things better and has caused some real issues. Now, we don't need to turn into a religious state nor am I advocating passing any laws favoring Christianity (or even favoring the ten commandments going into school as discussed in this thread), I am just pointing it out on a personal stand point.

 

[WoodsmanVol]

Isn't it odd these the folks that hate Trump because of how nasty he is, act just like him?

That depends, see, this is a meme thread, just like the opposing meme thread. Some folks just want to nitpick and make more out of it than it really is. As for Trump, I don't really hate the guy. I do pity him because Karma is a beeetch, and she has a hankering for him.

 

[LouderVol]

You can't prove or disprove God with Science (also you need to pick specific fields of Science). God is an Omnipotent, Omniscience, Omnipresent being that exists both outside of Time and in Time. Effectively you see God every day in everything.

This is where you get into the New Testament descriptions, the Apostles, the life of Jesus (who has been historically proven), miracles, historical events, etc.

Now you could hint at parts of Science pointing to God. People cite to certain intelligent designs in creatures, the unexplainability of the pre-Cambrian explosion, the uniqueness of the rock formations at the Grand Canyon, the flaw in Science of saying Earth was formed by accident, rotation of planets, flaws in some of the fossil finds, etc. I find all that speculative and some of these arguments are questionable. I think these "hints" are not solid arguments under Scientific theories but a lot of stuff isn't. As people pointed out here, modern "science" is often not true science (at least as shown in the news). I have relatives in science and it is always a search for answers. Take Oppenheimer, the scientists in it rarely come to consensus, often turn on each other for political reasons, take educated guesses and assumptions, etc. This is real science, the search for answers. Let me tell you a surprise, there are Scientists teaching all throughout our nation and world today that believe in God. If Science disproved him, than explain these Scientists? On a personal level, I don't believe Science will ever PROVE or DISPROVE God nor do I think Science has truly explored our Universe. It is hard to make the claim when we haven't even left our Solar System in a Universe with Billions of Galaxies each with Billions of Stars.

Also different arguments work for different people. The Bible records that people even saw angels, miracles, etc. (like the Jews in Exodus) and still denied God. In many instances, you can never convince some people even if they had direct proof.

I will say this, it is hard for me to imagine millions of people willing to undergo the punishments/persecution that they faced for something they believed to be a lie. The life of Paul (a life of total change and sacrifice) is a great example. Also, as even shown by Richard Dawkins recently, the move away from Christian values in the West have NOT made things better and has caused some real issues. Now, we don't need to turn into a religious state nor am I advocating passing any laws favoring Christianity (or even favoring the ten commandments going into school as discussed in this thread), I am just pointing it out on a personal stand point.

what science says that the formation of earth was an "accident". I think that was a really poor choice of words on your part.

what's wrong with the rotation of planets as explained by scientists?

and what flaws about the fossil finds?

the intelligent design is merely one of survival. we don't see the "unintelligent" designs because they failed and died out.

been to the grand canyon. definitely awe inspiring and a great example of the beauty of God's creation. but you are going to have to explain how the "uniqueness of the rock formations" is a geologic hint at God?

who says they believe it was a lie? Accepting that God is the only god, millions and millions have died for their beliefs in lies about their god.

 

[volbound1700]

what science says that the formation of earth was an "accident". I think that was a really poor choice of words on your part.

what's wrong with the rotation of planets as explained by scientists?

and what flaws about the fossil finds?

the intelligent design is merely one of survival. we don't see the "unintelligent" designs because they failed and died out.

been to the grand canyon. definitely awe inspiring and a great example of the beauty of God's creation. but you are going to have to explain how the "uniqueness of the rock formations" is a geologic hint at God?

who says they believe it was a lie? Accepting that God is the only god, millions and millions have died for their beliefs in lies about their god.

I was pointing out a variety of arguments on the matter that I may or may not believe. You can Google each of them. As I stated, none are necessarily "proven" either and are all suspect. Frankly, anything from over 5000 years ago is going to be hard to analysis. Take the Grand Canyon argument, it is currently on Amazon put together by a bunch of scientists that are Jehovah Witnesses. Definitely biased but they all have Ph.D. from credited Universities so no different in my mind than any other Scientist.

I appreciate Science for what it is, the search for answers and a pathway to make mankind's life better. However, when it gets thrown into religious/political debates, it gets often corrupted.

Everyone has their points. I have enjoyed the conversation with you and appreciate it. I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, I was just trying to explain my thoughts on the matter. At this point, we are just getting into Faith. A big part of my faith is based on experiences, people, and history.

 

[LouderVol]

Everyone has their points. I have enjoyed the conversation with you and appreciate it. I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, I was just trying to explain my thoughts on the matter. At this point, we are just getting into Faith. A big part of my faith is based on experiences, people, and history.

same.

I see science as an effort to better understand God's creation, not God himself. I think it can bring us closer to him, but you are right it comes down to faith and acts.

 

[turbovol]

I was pointing out a variety of arguments on the matter that I may or may not believe. You can Google each of them. As I stated, none are necessarily "proven" either and are all suspect. Frankly, anything from over 5000 years ago is going to be hard to analysis. Take the Grand Canyon argument, it is currently on Amazon put together by a bunch of scientists that are Jehovah Witnesses. Definitely biased but they all have Ph.D. from credited Universities so no different in my mind than any other Scientist.

I appreciate Science for what it is, the search for answers and a pathway to make mankind's life better. However, when it gets thrown into religious/political debates, it gets often corrupted.

Everyone has their points. I have enjoyed the conversation with you and appreciate it. I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, I was just trying to explain my thoughts on the matter. At this point, we are just getting into Faith. A big part of my faith is based on experiences, people, and history.

Stop. We will believe scientists and we will not believe people who have no scientific background but want to challenge scientific findings with nonsense.