Not only are you on a roll, you are mixing threads! Lol
Please tell me you haven't missed the whole deception theme, I'm in this for the long game.
Not only are you on a roll, you are mixing threads! Lol
I think I would have been burned as a warlock given the limitations of me being able to stop my mouth from running off at that stage in history...
You know Churchmouse burned a few back in the day......He said it was harder work than you thought and he used to wear his arms out getting the confession from them...He quit about 1620 or so IIRC.....Ended up marrying one of them gals he was torturing...She liked it, he liked it and she gave him a good thirty years of her life after they hooked up....I hated eating dinner over there with them..She would always put an eye of newt in my soup just so CM could watch me freak out...Good times...I miss those days...
Is this another [STRIKE]forced[/STRIKE] free thought exercise? One where we are bound by proof and theory in order to properly justify individual 1A rights?
I'm not referring to congress. But you knew that already.
So the 1A is out of the picture. Please continue on with justifying individual rights, something you know very well I am passionate about.
I want to have a discussion, so I'm in a discussion forum. If I wanted to read information, I'd go elsewhere for it.
I'd also like to know if he is a Muslim or just posting information about Islam. I have questions for the former and no requests of the latter.
I will not initiate aggression, but I will initiate voluntary discussion. I respect people, but not beliefs. Where is the force? Exercise is healthy.
So you respect people's 1a rights, but not their beliefs?
And when one mentions following God, you remind them to follow Jesus instead...
Sure exercise is healthy... but to what extreme...
We shall agree to disagree here. Respecting one's beliefs, to me, doesn't insinuate that I have to share those beliefs, anymore that it allows me to challenge them and prove their beliefs. It is, after all, their right to believe what they wish when it comes to religion, and not mine to determine which belief has credence and which does not.Yes. I respect individuals and their individual rights, I agree that congress should be prohibited from enacting certain laws as detailed in the 1A, but I do not respect beliefs nor do I possess any such "right" to demand that others respect mine. I find the very notion absurd.
We shall agree to disagree here. Respecting one's beliefs, to me, doesn't insinuate that I have to share those beliefs, anymore that it allows me to challenge them and prove their beliefs. It is, after all, their right to believe what they wish when it comes to religion, and not mine to determine which belief has credence and which does not. There is no 'christianity 101' with me.In the sense of emulating or becoming like, as individuals, of course. We're humans, so we need to become like the human expression of God. I consider that basic CHRISTIANITY 101 for any who might be otherwise confused by some of the contrasts and comparisons. I assume there are non-Christians reading this.
However extreme each individual chooses to engage. Me? I'm an extremist.
We shall agree to disagree here.
Respecting one's beliefs, to me, doesn't insinuate that I have to share those beliefs, anymore that it allows me to challenge them and prove their beliefs. It is, after all, their right to believe what they wish when it comes to religion, and not mine to determine which belief has credence and which does not.
...There is no 'christianity 101' with me.
Mayhap it's a good thing that I don't challenge you to prove you were around during the revolution, or dismiss you for not being there.
Speaking of deception, advocating that Islam is evil, was created by evil, and constituted by evil, is not indicative of civil discussion.I want to have a discussion, so I'm in a discussion forum.
Speaking of deception, advocating that Islam is evil, was created by evil, and constituted by evil, is not indicative of civil discussion.
Do us all a favor and drop that deception explicitly.
Speaking of deception, advocating that Islam is evil, was created by evil, and constituted by evil, is not indicative of civil discussion.
Do us all a favor and drop that deception explicitly.
Of course it can. Apart from God, we'd justify anything we felt like doing, even with Bible verses. That's why I maintain that deception is the problem.
Nonsense. You don't even believe that.
Nonsense. Apart from God, the Bible would be just another deception. Jesus is the Way.
What would this discussion have to do with [STRIKE]the congressional restrictions of the 1A or justifying individual rights[/STRIKE] being bound by proof and theory?
Yes. I respect individuals and their individual rights, I agree that congress should be prohibited from enacting certain laws as detailed in the 1A, but I do not respect beliefs nor do I possess any such "right" to demand that others respect mine. I find the very notion absurd.
In the sense of emulating or becoming like, as individuals, of course. We're humans, so we need to become like the human expression of God. I consider that basic CHRISTIANITY 101 for any who might be otherwise confused by some of the contrasts and comparisons. I assume there are non-Christians reading this.
However extreme each individual chooses to engage. Me? I'm an extremist.
I live by a moral code. For example, I can't justify harming innocent people.
No, I am advocating that ATM is deliberately deceptive. He states that he wants discussion, but then his actions (by way of posts) reveal otherwise.Are you advocating that Islam is good, was created by good, and constituted by good?
I am not Muslim (as you know).If not, what is it? What created it? What constituted it?
Considering those 3 aspects alone, how would you differentiate Islam and Christianity?
Not asking what you can prove but what do you believe? If you also wish to respond with what can be proven that would be educational too.
Not true. I live by a moral code. For example, I can't justify harming innocent people.
Of course I do. Anyone who pays attention to history and is willing to learn its lessons believes that. It's evidenced throughout history. For example Christians have evolved from burning heretics at the stake. Now, whenever one decides that what's being taught about their religion is false, they just start another denomination, and then the leaders of the sundry denominations write scathing books about how the other denominations are heretics or cults, but not them. That's obviously more peaceful than cleansing heretics by fire.
Well, don't be so hard on yourself. I don't think you're deceived, per se. I don't think the men who wrote what became The Holy Bible intended to deceive people. I suspect they believed what they wrote.
Well, yeah. It's how you roll.