Jump to content

freeday

Authentic Christian Believer
  • Content Count

    560
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About freeday

  • Rank
    Skeptic
  • Birthday 08/07/1979

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.myspace.com/freedayrn
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Mississippi
  • Interests
    fast cars

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    Very Feasible

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. normally i would never say something to this extent, but InspectoGeneral i don't think is a christian, i think he is a member of this sight that is spoofing. 1 he reffered to hansolo as han, 2 he has the edit button (which i still can't use) 3. his tone and demeanor does not reflect that of a christian who cares, but a person that is trying to piss someone off.
  2. no big deal, white raven. i wish i could tell you why i hang around, but i can't. i know there is no way i am going to convert anyone on here. but i have devoloped some friendships on here. so i guess that is why i hang around. and have learned a thing or two.
  3. Yes. Absolutely, freeday. Names hurt, and it doesn't really matter how much "truth" the speaker sees in their own words. But if someone comes wandering in here and declares me to be evil without even knowing which of the six billion earthlings I happen to be... It does tend to make me rather irate. (And yes, I know that "But they started it" isn't the best of defenses. I am trying to get a bit less ballistic in my responses.) i understand where you are coming from, i see how it pisses you off when a person comes on here and tell you to turn or burn, without even taken the time to see if you have ever heard the message before. i am on another board that talks about cars and such, and it pisses everyone off when somebody comes on there and starts making fun of our cars. they are ussaully banned pretty quickly.
  4. a christian shouldn't accuse you of being a sinner, we beleive we are all sinners. furthermore, a christian should never judge you. period. you don't have to be a christian to be a good person, and being a christian doesn't mean you will be a good person. good works is not what gets you into heaven. it is faith. a good christian should lead by example, not by pointing out the flaws in other peoples lives. whether you are a christian or not, anybody would be offended if they were called names.
  5. i am sorry, i should have quoted with what i agreed with you on. funny enough you have made me even more of a litarilist, Its good to read things literally when they are meant to be taking literally the trouble is the bible is composed in various kinds of idioms, not just the literal and this seems to drive people into defending things that ordinarily they would never dream of doing themselves. I think the danger is that after many years of burying the conscience a person starts to become the thing they profess. the more i read. yes i see the light. the light of God's saving Grace! Good for you I just hope this will be shown in greater tolerance to other human beings who do not share your take on God there is one thing i am strongly working on. and that is not to judge other. how can i say that i am better than you just because of what i believe? i can't. don't ever think that i am judging you. that is not my job.
  6. GM, does it take faith to disbelieve in Zeus? In the cookie monster? In the flying spaghetti monster? Yes, if you believe that anyone one them is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, the creator of all things/natural laws and who chooses to remain unseen. An atheist makes a choice based on no evidence open to the senses, so does a true xtian. Agnosticism is the more technically correct description for what you are hinting at. No? Then it doesn't take faith to disbelieve god either. When you choose to believe something when there is no firm evidence either way you are making an act of faith. You are no different to me than freeday or any other person who makes a choice when there is no verifiable evidence. Agnosticism refuses to play the faith game. Your forced definitions of faith are not so far removed from the logical errors that xtians make. The distinction I make between atheism and agnosticism you may not agree with but I am not alone in holding them. I have zoomed in on the word faith in order to highlight what I think is the key issue in the choice of between agnosticism and atheism. I don't have to use the word faith to support my argument but in context it forces a deeper appreciation of the issues. If you find it unhelpful then drop it. i am sorry, i should have quoted with what i agreed with you on. funny enough you have made me even more of a litarilist, the more i read. yes i see the light. the light of God's saving Grace!
  7. Golden Meadows: excellent post, i was just about to write the same thing, but you wrote it much better than i could have. duderonomy: i preffer a vanilla frappe, double expresso shot, whole milk, with whip cream on top. really gets you in the mood for some scripture.
  8. so athiesm is not so different than christianity. you have a belief there is no God, due to no evidence of his existence. i have a belief in God due to no evidence of his non-existence. here is my conclusion. In the end, God’s existence must be accepted by faith (Hebrews 11:6). Faith in God is not a blind leap into the dark, it is safe step into a well-lit room where 90% of people are already standing. (this percentage is not just limited to christianity)
  9. i'm not sure what float down the river ment. must be an older saying. even myself, a professed christian has gone floating down the river before. but i believe the verse actually said plank. you have to cut her a break though. based on her principles and beliefs, she feels that she is only trying to help you. then in return she gets called idiot. this is very demoralizing for anyone. but she feels guilty for leaving, because she feels she has an obligation to help you. you have to understand that this can cause frustration. but she doesn't realize that all we are called to do is spread the word. i feel confident that everyone on here knows the message of Jesus. so she just has to realize, that it is out of her hands.
  10. although i do like amy and her beliefs. I am already married. you would like her too. funny enough, you had an indepth conversation with her on one of the posts. she primarily wrote most of the probability posts. Hiroshima, August 6, 1945. Around eight in the morning. Nagasaki, August 9. Total immediate fatalities: Approximately 400,000 people. July 20, 1969. Apollo 11. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon, and (I think) Michael Sheppard (sp?) up above. I was eleven going on twelve, and watched it live on an old black-and-white television in my parents' home. My point being, forgetting is not inevitable. All of the above was strictly from memory, no wiki-peeking involved. We remember that which we care about. you remimber it more vividly because you are closer to that generation. i knew some of it but not all. the generation under us, will know even less. good memory though.
  11. I highly doubt it. The OT may say that, but it doesn't make it true - especially if the Xian god made regular appearances, which are necessary for human beings, who are social creatures. A little socializing by the Xian god shouldn't be too hard if he wants our worship, right? To me, it is obvious that there was no "saviour" and that we never needed any in the first place. example: when the A-bomb was dropped. it would be considered one of america's greatest accomplishment as far as technology goes (please don't take this the wrong way). you would think something that would be remembered forever. i couldn't tell you when it was dropped, i always forget which city was hit first. another. when we landed on the moon. it was one of america's greatest accomplishments. i can't remember the date. the ships name. only one astronaunt. there are several websites with speculations it never happened. my point being, with time. all things are forgoten. the greatness of it is forgoten. and then it just becomes a story.
  12. So much easier to throw out tired dogma than to try and come up with a substantive reason why we should go back to believing. You know, I kinda feel sorry for thumpers like freeday and amy and kat. It's only after you step back from this religion and see the whole picture that you realize how completely ridiculous it all is. We see the forest. They see trees. your not going to find every if, and, but in the bible. we can only theorize about such. I don't have a clear cut answer on this. sorry for the tired old dogma. it is my percieved truth.
  13. Now we're getting somewhere. That's what I'm getting at. People that have not heard the Gospel have a better chance of going to Heaven, then people that have heard it. Since a person that live righteously, but haven't heard the Gospel have a good chance of going there, while a person that live righteously and hear it, have a large chance of rejecting it and hence seal their fate of going to Hell. So all considered, it's better NOT to preach the Gospel, but let people just live their lives. ahh, yes, ignorance is bliss. you make this assumption with the idea that your life is better off without God. I believe my life is better with God. and if i am to believe in God, i must follow his commandment of testifing. 1john5 (i don't have a bible with me, but it is somewhere around there). for me to get to heaven. i must believe, live by his standard and provide testimony. so God wants me to tell everyone of his Love. although i think he might be easier on the ignorant, they still will be judged by how they lived. Varokhar wrote : "You god knows nothing and I dare him to prove he exists and/or has any power over me. Right now." if he came down and did some miracle by chance, some would think it a miracle. others would not and dissmiss it. then 500 years from now it would be forgotten about, then debated, picked apart to where nobody would believe it to be true. and the people who believed would be called literalist. and people would tell them to piss off. this is a predominent theme in OT, God would perform miracles, revivals would happen. over time people would forget and revert to thier old ways. to ME it is obvious that we needed a Savoir.
  14. It is not the general consensus. Are you unfamiluar with Higher Criticism and the Documentary hypothesis? i have read briefly about it, i know it as the JEPD hypothesis. Biblical archaeologist W.F. Albright stated that even the most ardent proponents of the documentary hypothesis must admit that, like the Book of Jasher, and the Book of the Wars of the Lord, no tangible, external evidence for the existence of the hypothesized J, E, D, P sources exists. The late Dr. Yohanan Aharoni, in his work Canaanite Israel during the Period of Israeli Occupation (referenced from simpletoremember.com states that "[r]ecent archaeological discoveries have decisively changed the entire approach of Bible critics" and that later authors or editors could not have put together or invented these stories hundreds of years after they happened.
  15. what about those who didn't hear the gospel, are they bound to hell? i don't think they are. 2 Pet 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. (sorry for the KJV, i am at work and this is all i have available.) I think the ignorant are judged differently than the people who have heard the gospel.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.