It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Why do non-Christians come here?" Here's why -

page: 14
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinocchio

Hi.
Just Want To Let You Know That Your Post Makes No Sense To Me, And If You Are Trying To Be Sarcastic It Is Not Coming Across As Anything Clear.






Try again?

You might do better to just use ALL CAPS and "yell" at readers....it would be easier to comprehend.

edit on 1/5/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs
You do have my apology for being so defensive for my president of the United States of America. I also realize that you have that right to publish an untruth which deceives many people. President Bush or any other person should also have the right in defense of an ad hominem but unfortunately the president of the United States will probably never read the accusations that you posted and will never respond to those false accusations. My best to you and hope that you will consider a retraction of the untruth that has besmirched George Bush. '
'



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: spirit_horse


I disagree with not teaching kids about the religion.


Ok, I want you to notice what you typed. "about the religion."

I think kids should be taught "about ALL religions," but not until they are at least 10 years old......and when they turn ten, they learn about all of them.

because education



I think 10 may be too young.

I think parents should refrain from teaching their children about religion until they are teens. Parents basically brainwash their children into a belief system. They then grow up to be adults with "God" engrained in their brain. It took me a little while to really start questioning "God" because it was engrained as truth since i was a child. I cant imagine what it is like to be born into a evangelical family.

Religions are usually learned about in history class. Morals are/should be taught to children. Religions are not needed for moral teachings. If a teen wants to explore a religion, they should be able to. Not obligated to. Nor brainwashed in to.



edit on 5-1-2016 by blueman12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede




Both the White House and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who was also present at the meeting, denies that Bush ever made such a statement.


George W Bush never denied it. Silence is often an admission of guilt.

WAR: God Told Bush to Invade Iraq and Afghanistan

Donald Rumsfeld's holy war: How President Bush's Iraq briefings came with quotes from the Bible



It's Official: Bush Admin Saw Iraq As Religious War



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12


I think parents should refrain from teaching their children about religion until they are teens. Parents basically brainwash their children into a belief system. They then grow up to be adults with "God" engrained in their brain. It took me a little while to really start questioning "God" because it was engrained as truth since i was a child. I cant imagine what it is like to be born into a evangelical family.


I agree, 10 is too young. I was trying to reach for a compromise. At least by age 10, kids are out of the "magical thinking" stage. (For my part, by the time I was 10 I had already decided the stories were nonsense.)

It should, in my perfect world, be a High School (Secondary Education - ages 14-18) or College ELECTIVE (which of course, it already is an elective at collegiate level).
Others on the list of electives (in my perfect world) would be Anthropology, Sociology, Philosophy, and Western Civ.

Even middle school is probably pre-mature, simply because that age is tumultous and not that willing to absorb information. Too self-absorbed (as they should be at the ages of 11-12-13).

Then, they become Adolescents, faced with an entirely new set of tasks - individuation from the family of origin, career possibilities, preferred peer group, identity, social presentation, etc.

The most important thing to remember is that adolescents are hard-wired for 'rebellion.' It is part of the development of the brain (particularly the frontal-lobe).

edit on 1/5/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: sp



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

How can he possibly have "never read it"? After your *cough* "Challenge" as to my credibility, I went on a hunt for the evidence as to whether he did or did not "utter those words."

What I found was an enormous cache of youtube videos, articles, books, documentaries, curated quotes, and other very clear evidence that W was an "evangelical christian."

He, like Ted Cruz, felt 'annointed' and 'called' to be POTUS by "God's will."

I'd be more than happy to point you to all of the evidence that his entire presidency was "guided" by his faith in God....
However -
seeing as how you have previously smacked my hand away when offering resources, I can only presume that you would do the same were it to contain any further offerings. No thank you.
Do your own search. You will not find any denial, nor is there anything on snopes to debunk that W's evangelical christianity was a DRIVING FACTOR toward every decision he made. Every one.


edit on 1/5/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

Anyway, as to the rest of your post (I responded without finishing reading) -----

I totally agree with you.
Totally.
Thank you for declaring your opinion, which I share.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Thanks for posting these. Do you think it's worth the effort to add some extext passages? Or would it be wasted energy, since it might be batted away



*always in your corner, ww*
edit on 1/5/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Bush's conversations with God are well documented and accepted American history regarding the lead up to (holy) war with Iran and Afghanistan.

This thread is a testament to Christian diversion tactics.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

im sorry, how is secular humanism a religion? secular means without religion and humanism places man above theological figures.


That's really a good question. Secular Humanists themselves declared it to be a religion and John Dewey a humanist and signer of the Humanist Manifesto said it was "our common faith". It is the religion of man's beliefs without a belief in God. When the case was brought to the Supreme Court, the Court stated that it was indeed a religion.
And then of course there's religious humanism.

books.google.com... fHlDeMBKngBDiQksfik&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNkrW_hZTKAhUL4WMKHdZzBjUQ6AEISzAH#v=onepage&q=John%20Dewey%20and%20secular%20humanism%20as%20religion&f=fal se


Definition of Religion – Is Humanism Really a Religion? The key question is why doesn’t the current definition of religion and secularism include belief systems that do not believe in a God or supernatural things? According to some dictionaries, the U.S. Supreme Court, and many humanists themselves, religion is not limited to belief systems that believe in a God. Any non-supernatural belief system is equally religious and should be treated identically to religions that believe in a God.

In the 1961 case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Secular Humanism is a religion. Secular humanist John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of humanism as a religion. In fact, claiming that humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years. Consequently, the Secular Humanist religion that is taught in our public schools and supported by our tax dollars should have the same constitutional “Establishment Clause” restrictions that the ACLU and the court system seems to be requiring of the Christian religion.


And then there's this:

The original signers of the first Humanist Manifesto of 1933, declared themselves to be religious humanists. Because, in their view, traditional religions were failing to meet the needs of their day, the signers of 1933 declared it a necessity to establish a religion that was a dynamic force to meet the needs of the day. However, this "religion" did not profess a belief in any god. Since then two additional Manifestos were written to replace the first. In the Preface of Humanist Manifesto II, in 1973, the authors Paul Kurtz and Edwin H. Wilson assert that faith and knowledge are required for a hopeful vision for the future. Manifesto II references a section on Religion and states traditional religion renders a disservice to humanity. Manifesto II recognizes the following groups to be part of their naturalistic philosophy: "scientific", "ethical", "democratic", "religious", and "Marxist" humanism.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Relating belief in God to a belief in Santa Claus is straight up stupid. You know what else has no real proof whatsoever yet some on these forums insist is real?


Aliens
Remote viewing
Out of body experiences
Chem trails
Anything dealing with 9/11
And a lot more.

There's evidence, even if solely personal and based on opinion, that some of these and other topics might hold truth. Santa Claus is widely known to hold no truth, deism on the other hand is believed in by the majority, including people a hell of a lot smarter than most of us.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:47 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Opinion isnt evidence, its just opinion. And its widely known that the claims of OBE's, remote viewing and chem trails 'hold no truth'.

Same with deism, its based entirely on opinion.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369
But what is truth?

A fact or belief that is accepted as true.

Fact - a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true.

It is all accepted opinion, until someone comes along and convinces us otherwise.


edit on 6-1-2016 by NightSkyeB4Dawn because: I really do hate posting from a mobile.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
a reply to: Prezbo369
But what is truth?

A fact or belief that is accepted as true.


Maybe a personal subjective truth under that description, but objective truth is simply what is. Opinion doesnt come into it.


Fact - a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true.

It is all accepted opinion, until someone comes along and convinces us otherwise.



No mention of evidence in either definition?...

You can be conviced until the cows come home, but without evidence its just hot air and wasted energy.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: windword


George W Bush never denied it. Silence is often an admission of guilt.

According to Shaath, the quotation was this:
Quote --
"God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq... And I did.

"And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East. And by God I'm gonna do it."

Shaath later qualified his comments, saying that he and other world leaders at a Jordan summit two years ago "understood that he was illustrating [in his comments] his strong faith and his belief that this is what God wanted." Both the White House and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, who was also present at the meeting, denies that Bush ever made such a statement.
Unquote -----
en.wikipedia.org...

As you can see, the White House, which was George Bush, did in fact deny this silly allegation. If you would dispute this article then by all means notify WikipediA and have it retracted. Once I see that it has been retracted then I will retract my statement that Nabil Ali Muhammad (Abu Rashid) Shaath, (Arabic: نبيل شعث‎, Nabīl Shaʿath, also spelled Sha'ath; born August 1938 in Safad), is a blatant liar. Till then I will agree with Mahmoud Abbas and the American officials, who were also at this event, as testifying that it never happened.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs


I'd be more than happy to point you to all of the evidence that his entire presidency was "guided" by his faith in God....

I thank you for the invitation to supply enormous evidence that President bush was guided by his faith in his God. Even though that information is not needed in my understanding of President Bush's ideology, it is also irrelevant to this particular untruth. This thread has shown me the exact purpose of some who use these forums to build their own ideology besides religion and cause others to be misinformed. Diversion seems to be the key practice here and the purpose seems to be hatred of religion. The bottom line of this discussion is that it never happened.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede




As you can see, the White House, which was George Bush, did in fact deny this silly allegation.


Nope, the White House can, and did, say anything, and the White House lied to the American people on a regular basis, during the Bush administration.

We know all about GW's evangelistic bent....and how the ends justified the means.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede


This thread has shown me the exact purpose of some who use these forums to build their own ideology besides religion and cause others to be misinformed.


I (and others) use this forum because Religion, Faith, and Theology are notoriously (nefariously) loaded with MISINFORMATION and we'd actually like to talk about it. It's endlessly fascinating. The study of the human experience is one of my favorite activities - it is the lens through which I view most of my life.

This is not the SDA forum, or the JW forum, or the Pentecostal forum, or the Catholic forum, or 'The Bible' forum. It is a forum discussing ALL faiths, religions, philosophies/theologies. There are thousands of dedicated websites and forums for those who have chosen a staunch belief. Perhaps you might seek one of those.

Seede, I'm familiar with your ideology insofar as you have explained it to us. I realize you are a senior, and elder, and that (of course) does validate treating you with respect at the least, and veneration at best. It does not justify you attacking and defaming people who simply disagree with you.

Having a strong "faith" is fine. It does not mean you are "right", or have "the truth." It means you have a strong belief in things which cannot be proven (and apparently a propensity for flat out denying things that are proven), and that it's justified to calling people "liars."

How do you react when 'we' come here and say, "This (part of your religion) is debatable, and not a consensus." ?????

You pitch a hissy fit.
We come here with all sorts of offerings and questions, understandings and doubts, and there's not one damn thing you can do or say to stop us questioning.

Free Thinkers are your nemesis? Why do YOU care if we believe what YOU believe?
As far as I'm concerned, your 'ideology' is both incorrect AND nefarious.

Now - would you care to (if you are able) retract your juvenile insults, allegations, and libelous defamatory 'declarations', and have a grown-up dialogue? WITH ME? Not "about me" with spirit_horse. With me.

So far your efforts to sway my opinion are a big, fat FAILURE.

*patient sigh*
edit on 1/6/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: LOL!! Because I never run out of things to say, or ways to reword them....I'm a writer



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede


The bottom line of this discussion is that it never happened.


uh


what?

This discussion certainly did happen. In my world, anyway.



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

You can be conviced until the cows come home, but without evidence its just hot air and wasted energy.


Evidence - that which tends to prove or disprove something; grounds for belief; proof.

Proof - evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.

It is all grounded in what you have been taught to believe.

Evidence is just hot air that people have been taught is valid and is fact. This has been proven time and time again, and though I will admit is is no more than my personal belief, I don't think energy is ever wasted or destroyed.




edit on 6-1-2016 by NightSkyeB4Dawn because: Accidentally posted before completing.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join