"Even Atheists Fear the Word 'God'..."

Originally posted by googlefudge

Edit: Would it be better if they were all gay??

Better for whom????

What I mean to say is, would he be so flippant about their positions if he was talking to a group of gay people about the error of their ways?

The parallel I'm drawing here is that neither group is going to be swayed in the slightest by what anyone writes here, and it's extremely possible that somebody's just going to get pissed off by the attempt.

Originally posted by Suzianne
What I mean to say is, would he be so flippant about their positions if he was talking to a group of gay people about the error of their ways?

The parallel I'm drawing here is that neither group is going to be swayed in the slightest by what anyone writes here, and it's extremely possible that somebody's just going to get pissed off by the attempt.

Better to be pissed off than, um, oh, never mind.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
“The results imply that atheists’ attitudes toward God are ambivalent, in that their explicit beliefs conflict with their affective response,” concludes a research team led by University of Helsinki psychologist Marjaana Lindeman. Its study is published in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion...."

Suzi, the findings from this pro ...[text shortened]... ow believers. "Faithful are the wounds of a friend" and only a few will ever tell you the truth.

And I suppose this "International Journal for the Psychology of Religion" is going to be completely unbiased.

Oh, it will stimulate discussion, alright. Just not the kind you expect.

What if the "International Atheist Society" came out with a study that claims that Christians are genetically programmed to lie about God? Would you see that study as "unbiased"? Or would you be entirely offended, and take out your ire on the person who posted here about it?

Do you get my point?

Originally posted by Suzianne
What I mean to say is, would he be so flippant about their positions if he was talking to a group of gay people about the error of their ways?

The parallel I'm drawing here is that neither group is going to be swayed in the slightest by what anyone writes here, and it's extremely possible that somebody's just going to get pissed off by the attempt.

Originally posted by Suzianne
What I mean to say is, would he be so flippant about their positions if he was talking to a group of gay people about the error of their ways?

"... he" would treat them courteously content to let Romans Chapter 1 and related biblical passages present God's Point of View. If they became interested in further discussion, I'd oblige into the midnight hours if necessary; if they vibrated with negativity, I'd thank them for their hospitality and call it a night. We have no right to interfere with an unbeliever's volition.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And I suppose this "International Journal for the Psychology of Religion" is going to be completely unbiased.

Oh, it will stimulate discussion, alright. Just not the kind you expect.

What if the "International Atheist Society" came out with a study that claims that Christians are genetically programmed to lie about God? Would you see that study as " ...[text shortened]... offended, and take out your ire on the person who posted here about it?

Do you get my point?

Originally posted by Suzianne
And I suppose this "International Journal for the Psychology of Religion" is going to be completely unbiased. [Doubtful.]

Oh, it will stimulate discussion, alright. Just not the kind you expect. [Bring it. It's not a human conflict; it's a spiritual warfare: The Absolute Truth of God's Word empowered by the Holy Spirit vs. Satanic lies and cosmic/human viewpoint.]

What if the "International Atheist Society" came out with a study that claims that Christians are genetically programmed to lie about God? Would you see that study as "unbiased"? Or would you be entirely offended, and take out your ire on the person who posted here about it? [I'd read it with care, twice if necessary, then formulate my own opinion based on its scholarly merit's compatibility with the Word of God. "Offended"? Suzi, 'with God for us who can be against us.' These are confused and lost and needy, dying human beings deserving of our prayerful concern; they're hardly a threat.]

Do you get my point? [The point I get is that this posture appears to be one of conciliation with minimal regard for the fact that: "The Word of God is alive and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and the marrow, and is a critic of thoughts and intents of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12) And that: "All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God might be mature, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)]

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
It's not a human conflict; it's a spiritual warfare: The Absolute Truth of God's Word empowered by the Holy Spirit vs. Satanic lies and cosmic/human viewpoint.

Do you reckon you've ever 'won' any 'battles' in the "spiritual warfare" you wage on this forum? I think your approach is not effective. Do you think it is effective?

Originally posted by FMF
Do you reckon you've ever 'won' any 'battles' in the "spiritual warfare" you wage on this forum? I think your approach is not effective. Do you think it is effective?

Subjective speculations about individual responses to God's Word are meaningless; He alone knows. I'll be delighted to be reunited with any and all contributors to this forum in heaven. God is my judge and He certainly knows how to discipline./

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Subjective speculations about individual responses to God's Word are meaningless; He alone knows. I'll be delighted to be reunited with any and all contributors to this forum in heaven. God is my judge and He certainly knows how to discipline./

Yes but it is you who claims to be engaging in "spiritual warfare". How can you be sure your efforts are not counterproductive?

Originally posted by FMF
Yes but it is you who claims to be engaging in "spiritual warfare". How can you be sure your efforts are not counterproductive?

"... in spiritual warfare" is referenced in the Word of God. / "... efforts are not counterproductive"
being in fellowship [the filling of the Holy Spirit] and providing accurate doctrinal information.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"... in spiritual warfare" is referenced in the Word of God. / "... efforts are not counterproductive"
being in fellowship [the filling of the Holy Spirit] and providing accurate doctrinal information.

If your actions in your "spiritual warfare" don't affect people in the way you intend or have the opposite affect on people than the one you intended then they most certainly can be counterproductive. Do you think you are an effective 'spiritual warrior'?

Originally posted by FMF
If your actions in your "spiritual warfare" don't affect people in the way you intend or have the opposite affect on people than the one you intended then they most certainly can be counterproductive. Do you think you are an effective 'spiritual warrior'?

It's apparent that you lack the frame of reference to pursue this topic.
Divine Viewpoint is diametrically opposed to human viewpoint.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
It's apparent that you lack the frame of reference to pursue this topic.
Divine Viewpoint is diametrically opposed to human viewpoint.

Well, your viewpoint is a human one, Grampy Bobby, whichever way you dress it up. It seems a bit peculiar that you would frequent a debate and discussion forum but not be concerned about whether your efforts to affect people are effective or ineffective.

Originally posted by FMF
Well, your viewpoint is a human one, Grampy Bobby, whichever way you dress it up. It seems a bit peculiar that you would frequent a debate and discussion forum but not be concerned about whether your efforts to affect people are effective or ineffective.

Droning on like Nick and Duchess doesn't change the unfortunate fact that you lack the basic frame of reference to grasp the difference between biblical and secular viewpoint. There will be no further replies to this lonely charade being played out.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Droning on like Nick and Duchess doesn't change the unfortunate fact that you lack the basic frame of reference to grasp the difference between biblical and secular viewpoint. There will be no further replies to this lonely charade being played out.

What is interesting is that your views on the bible and ~ apparently, your views on yourself too ~ seem to make you think that yours is a "divine viewpoint" rather than a "human viewpoint". It is also interesting that on a thread entitled "Even Atheists Fear the Word 'God'...", you are trying to rule out "secular viewpoints" as being somehow irrelevant. My interest in these types of things you come out with is certainly no charade.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Originally posted by Suzianne
And I suppose this "International Journal for the Psychology of Religion" is going to be completely unbiased. [Doubtful.]

Oh, it will stimulate discussion, alright. Just not the kind you expect. [Bring it. It's not a human conflict; it's a spiritual warfare: The Absolute Truth of God's Word empowered by the Holy ...[text shortened]... the man of God might be mature, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)]

Conciliatory?? Minimal concern for the Word of God??

You know better than that, Bob. Point your "spiritual warfare" cannon somewhere else. Take off your "Archangel Michael" mask. Neither are necessary.

All I am saying is that there is room for *just a little* respect here. On both sides. Don't make me regret saying that.