It sure was.

Damn son, straight facts.

Yep.

If God exists, He is still in the classroom. Man could not remove Him. Do you really want teachers who want to teach 5 - 8 year old children about sex and transsexuality about the existence of God?

As far as I know, there are no teachers who "want" to teach about LGBT sexual intercourse. The law in Florida is to prevent any future leftist "I have to make a difference" nutjob from teaching things that most parents would be outraged about.

The left has this bizarre religious devotion to forcing children to reject their parents teachings. They act as if they have a right to mold people's children into whatever they want. They feel superior.

Funny you should bring up religion and the Left -
"If a man seems religious and bridles not their tongue and deceives his own heart then that man's religion is in vain." - James Chapter 1.

Testify!

You're not going to believe this, but The_Knight_Who_Says_Ni can confirm it, having lived through it like me.
There used to be what was called "The Bible Belt" and the "Moral Majority" which went full blast in the 1980s with their Lord and Savior, President Ronald Reagan. Now if this sounds familiar, it should, as that belt is now called "Red States," and nowadays we have the "Silent Minority," and, of course, that cartoon version of a chimp's co-star, Trump.

Why the name change you ask? Well there were these 'TV Elevangelists' or 'Televangelists' who used to rip off MILLIONS. OF DOLLARS! from their tv congregations.
Then one by one they got caught literally with their pants down in some dingy New Orleans no-tell motel room taking polaroid selfies with cheap hookers, some not even women!
Excrutiatingly laughable "I have sinned" confessions on their ripoff tv shows in their mega churches, and the movement was in full view for the world to see, and thus their decline.

People wonder where that religious stuff went, well it got flushed down the toilet with a box of used condoms by these hypocrites. Some have returned to tv decades after their disgrace to rake in more millions because stupidity can't be stopped. And hypocrites like seeking salvation from hypocrites because this way they can feign denial and play oblivious to the hypocrites that they are.

And I never paid attention to any of them because they refused to be 'tried/tested' on what they said.

Marxism is a very vain religion. It is a religion that claims that all prior ministers of Marxism were wrong and only the current ministers will do it right, until they don't.

And it is definitely a religion because it demands faith, blind faith, and intense devotion that bad economic principles will actually work.

The right has this bizarre religious devotion to forcing children to accept their cult's teachings. They act as if they have a right to mold people's children into whatever they want. They feel superior.

They removed him in the 60's. God lets man have agency, but only for so long.

Again, God is in every person and therefore could not be kicked out of schools. You want people who believe there is no God, or believe children are able to consent to have sex with adults, or that women are the property of men, teaching your child about God? Of course not.

Bro, chill. God allows you to separate from Him. He is always there waiting for you, but he lets you fall into sin. That is called agency. We have taken him from this country and no longer follow his loving commandements. He is there, of course, but we ignore him.

Where in scripture does it say that?

That is simply how God operates. It is obvious throughout the Bible. Sodom is a good example. God will be with you, but if you keep saying: "f you, I do what I want." Then he'll say: "okay, I will take my hand off you little by little." God does not force himself upon you, but he will give you nudges and tests.

I see what you mean now.

:)

Where do you get this stuff? Who are you to speak for this God if He really is real or even if not?

There are many ways to prove God's existence. I will explain a few logical ones.

We live in space, time, and matter. A continuum. Those three things cannot exist without the other. For, if you have space and time, but not matter, WHERE would you put it? If you had space and matter, WHEN would you put it? They cannot exist independently by themselves.
God exists because nothing CAN NOT create something. Since all three had to come into existence at one instant, someone had to put it there. Someone who is OUTSIDE of those three and is not bound. God.

THAT IS THE MAJOR FLAW WITH THE BIG BANG THEORY. If you have a massive ball of heated matter, how did it get there? Again, you would have to have space, time, and matter, but if that was the beginning of the universe, then how could something come out of nothing? Do you understand?

"God does not force himself upon you"

Sometimes it seems he does, like when he kills people on the spot for disobeying him

Give a specific citation from the Bible.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2038%3A8-10&version=NIV&interface=amp

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206%3A5-7&version=ESV;KJV&interface=amp

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%205%3A1-11&version=NIV&interface=amp

No, you do it.

"or believe children are able to consent to have sex with adults"

Teachers aren't telling anyone that

"or that women are the property of men"

That's what the Bible says, that's not what liberals say

And you KNOW that no teachers are grooming children? You can't know that. The legislation simply made it illegal IN THE EVENT it happens.

I never said liberals said women are property. Islam says that.

"And you KNOW that no teachers are grooming children? You can't know that"

I'm not saying that no one is doing it, I'm saying that teachers are not teaching entire classes full of students that

"I never said liberals said women are property. Islam says that"

Your comment didn't mention Islam. But again, the Bible also teaches that

You've mentioned the Bible twice. I never mentioned the Bible, Christianity or Islam (in my initial response). I was speaking of God. But as you've mentioned the Bible, I'll refer you to the New Testament: Luke 17:20-21. Also, Christianity teaches we are all saved by grace as well as respect for all people...including woman.

Going to have to correct you one thing - Respect not a man for a piece of bread for he will trespass. - Book of Proverbs. Jesus is not a respecter of man.

"You've mentioned the Bible twice. I never mentioned the Bible, Christianity or Islam (in my initial response). I was speaking of God"

I took that to mean the god of the Bible.

"Christianity teaches...respect for all people...including woman."

Except for the parts about women having to be subservient to their husbands, they have to remain silent in church, they can't be in positions of authority over men, etc

I call myself a "red letter" Christian. There are Bibles where the actual words attributed to Christ are in red print. The other words are attributed to man - man's interpretation. Being a man myself, I'll do my own interpretation. Christ never said those things.

You don't think the rest of the Bible was inspired by god?

What do you believe?

I don't believe god exists, I believe the Bible was written entirely by humans, and I know it has lots of mistakes in it

And you are entitled to your belief.

That is the end result, that is sexual radicalization.

The Bible does not say women are the property of men.

"The Bible does not say women are the property of men"

In that culture, women were the property of their fathers until they got married, then they were the property of their husbands. They did it have the autonomy of freedom that men had. And in Genesis, there's a story where women are treated as money

"In that culture." That culture is not the Bible. The Bible was written at certain time periods, inspired by the Holy Spirit. Girls were not property but were supposed to show respect to their fathers, who worked tirelessly to keep them safe from Romans who would enjoy raping them and slaving them for labor and had to constantly pay unreasonable taxes for security.

There was no "autonomy and freedom." It simply was that way, because men and women saw the value in their parts. There wasn't an organization of men keeping women from partaking in certain things, it (as I said before) was a simple acknowledgment between both sexes that the best things for men and women were different.

What story?

"That culture is not the Bible"

That culture is what led to the Bible being written. The Old Testament, at least.

"The Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit"

How does anyone demonstrate that?

"Girls were not property but were supposed to show respect to their fathers"

They were treated as property. That's why a rape victim was seen as damaged goods, because her value depended on her being a virgin when she got married.

"There wasn't an organization of men keeping women from partaking in certain things, it (as I said before) was a simple acknowledgment between both sexes that the best things for men and women were different"

Man made all the rules in that culture, so women didn't have a choice.

"What story?"

The story of Jacob working for his uncle for 14 years, and his "payment" was two of his uncle's daughters to marry

Fundamentalism in a sentence: Genesis is totally real and debunks science, the rest of the Book is passe so doesn't matter, then there's John 3:16 and that's it.

"How does anyone demonstrate that?"
That is literally one of the mysteries of the Catholic Church.

Also, yes, indeed it was culture to shun women back then, but that does not mean that God or the Bible's writers condoned it. Indeed, Jesus in the New Testament treated women with great mercy and as equals to men, even defending them.

That is literally one of the inventions* of the Catholic Church.

The "Holy Spirit" is a Roman pagan belief which has nothing to do with the Word.

"Also, yes, indeed it was culture to shun women back then"

"Protection" is what they would have called it, ot "shun"

Yes, maybe "shun" isn't the right word, but I'm not a professional writer either. I get it, you find it hard to believe in the Trinity. However, it is not a pagan invention, as it is cited in several passages of the New Testament, including in the Pentecost scene and Jesus' baptism in the book of John. Allow me to reword my other statement: a large portion of the people described in the Old Testament were bigots toward women and would never pass down an opportunity to stone them. However, the Old Testament is mostly about the sequence of events describing what happened before Jesus's time with many allegories strewn about. The writers do not support any of the bad things that happened in the writing. Think of it sort of as writing about the entire history of the United States, where you are forced to include some of the darker aspects like slavery and nativism. Just because a writer mentions slavery and doesn't give any commentary on it does not mean that the writer supports slavery.

firsthalfnotgonnalie

[[Ah yes | THE PROTESTANT | image tagged in ah yes | made w/ Imgflip meme maker]]

Yes, maybe "shun" isn't the right word, but I'm not a professional writer either. I get it, you find it hard to believe in the Trinity. However, it is not a pagan invention, as it is cited in several passages of the New Testament, including in the Pentecost scene and Jesus' baptism in the book of John. Allow me to reword my other statement: a large portion of the people described in the Old Testament were bigots toward women and would never pass down an opportunity to stone them. However, the Old Testament is mostly about the sequence of events describing what happened before Jesus's time with many allegories strewn about. The writers do not support any of the bad things that happened in the writing. Think of it sort of as writing about the entire history of the United States, where you are forced to include some of the darker aspects like slavery and nativism. Just because a writer mentions slavery and doesn't give any commentary on it does not mean that the writer supports slavery."

No, you don't get it.
Belief is irrelevant, I deal in facts. There is NO Trinity cited in a single passage of the New Testament. It was never even mentioned in the early centuries of the Church.
Same deal with the "Holy Spirit," as Jews were about the physical, no spirit anything, at least in terms of non-corporeal ghost entity thingy.

You keep framing their attitudes towards women as negative and hostile, again, this was not the case. They were property and it was for men to protect them, even from their womanly selves.

Christians keep trying to make the Word into some sort of magic tome painted in purity, goodness, and grace. It's just a book of myths and legends describing the history of a people. What we wish to define as good or evil in it is in accordance to our perspective - not even theirs. Sometimes a tale is just that, a tale, not some divine revelation reduced to a magic mantra for the self-righteous who are too busy to actually read and understand that which they characterize as some absolute and ultimate truth.

Oh you don’t believe in God… whatever then

HAHA. That culture is not what lead the Bible to exist. Did you know Aristotle and other Greek/Latin philosophers predicted prophecy before the Bible was written? God is the author of the Bible, not a culture of people.

I don't understand your question.

No, they were not. That is Islam, again, you keep mixing them up. A hore was seen as a person who rejects God, and her family's honor.

Are you assuming that men did not love their wives? No, not only did men not make the original laws (God did), but any evil thing that came out of them was due to sin. Women, as I will say for the last time, were not abused by the law, but by corruption.

"God is the author of the Bible, not a culture of people."

No, the people who authored various stories of the Bible were the authors, and the NT was authored by pagan Romans, no less. That would include the Holy Spirit you referred to above, a pagan creation.

They physically wrote it, but God worked through them. The NT was not authored by Pagan Romans, pagan Romans did not have divine knowledge to predict a thousand years into the future, as to what Jesus would do, say, and his purpose on Earth. Honestly, you know nothing about the Bible and that is sad.

No, He did not.

Beast, anti-Christ, Son of Jackal seated in Rome who shall steal the Word of the Chosen then corrupt it and call it their own?
Yeah, you let me know where that shoe 'doesn't' fit.

Council of Nicea, look it up.

Sorry, which comment wee you commenting to?

Yes, it does. That is why there were no commandments against rape and molestation of children and women, as these were considered property issues for the man of the house to deal with.

Yeah, because the Lord God Almighty not only is okay with rape, but he loved those children too. God's intention with the ten commandments was not to name every bad thing, but to make specific rules for the Israelites to follow. Rape and molestation meant death for the violator back then and you know that.

Sure thing. That is why there were no commandments in all of the 613 commanding against rape and molestation of children and women, as these were considered property issues for the man of the house to deal with.

What 613? There are only ten commandments. Or are you talking about something else?

"Property issues." What property issues? Prove it.

Yeah, I'll go post all 613 now *rolls eyes*

Bible. Read it.

Wow, I thought you actually meant what you said.

NEWS FLASH: There's a lot more to the Book that simply repeating John 3:16.
Perhaps reading it before referring to its so-called 'absolute truths' as absolute truths might make for greater efficiency when referring to its so-called 'absolute truths' as absolute truths.

Sorry, but I asked you two questions that you did not answer.
1. What 613?
2. What property issues (prove it)?

"God lets man have agency"

No, in fact it quite angered him, hence why Adam & Eve were cast out of Eden, along with the Serpent God who gifted mankind with free agency.

You, coming from a non-Christ-follower standpoint, don't understand the terms of this relationship. "Agency", not only is it not only meaning what you think but was a direct result of the fall. Agency is a debated reality in the Christ-follower world, because you are dealing with the Eternal God. However, it is accepted that agency does not mean the ability to sin, like in the Garden where Adam and Eve chose to sin, but the ability to make your choice, which may be sin. However, it is not to say that God allows everything, and who knows how many times he has subliminally stopped us from doing things. Does this make sense?

Exactly. Free agency is free agency, and that gift was gifted to mankind by the Serpent God.
Or are you calling the Word of the Lord a lie?

Again, not as you said it.

There has been debate in the church as to how the serpent was able to be in a perfect and innocent place, being his sin. And how a perfect being is able to conceive of evil. However, I think that is not to be understood. It is a creation of God that chose to take his love and churn it into hate.

Agency was born from a relationship, but, agency is also the ability to do right, so not, I am not calling God's word a lie. And at the same time, God gives us agency, so is it really agency? Yes, it is, because God is able to work in that manner, even though we don't understand it.

The Church's Roman musings are irrelevant.

Eve and Adam ate from what tree? Which God invited them to partake of it? Which God forbade it and had a hissy fit and cast them out and the world has been ruled by evil ever since because they partook of it?

Can't say that was his response then credit him with gifting humanity with something he cursed them with original sin for. Doesn't work like that.
Remove the names of the characters and shed your bogus perspective. The evil angry God is the evil angry God, and the good God is the good God, plain and simple.

God, as I have said before, gave them a decision, he is not a tyrant.

I don't understand.