Didn't see his name at this event, the sign for which I hacked to make it really contemporary:
Posted on 05/01/2011 7:24:18 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
So did CS Lewis.
Perhaps that's why the atheists on FR never follow through with the sources provided. They're too afraid that they'll be persuaded to become believers as well.
People are not saved by faith in dogmas, but by faith in a person.
Just what is it that you really want to know? Is it whether the *tribals* are saved by faith, or whether they will be saved having never heard of Jesus before?
"... whether they will be saved having never heard of Jesus before?"
This should be good.
You "odubt" it, do you? I've heard of people being intoxicated with themselves, but when one starts slurring their keyboard all I can say is: put away the bong, dude.
You write like you've been puffing on what you call your "reality" for far too long.
Speaking clearly begins with thinking clearly.
My belief about you is borne as it is from repeated observations gleaned from debates over the years with the tail-chasing mental midgets which routinely populate the atheist/agnostic debating ranks.
Those of you who show up here at FR are all little more than a bunch of lazy blubbering frauds, phony pretend-to-be-conservatives, merely leaching-off the blessings of the application of conservative principles, and are barely worth the bandwidth.
Atheists and agnostics contribute nothing of substance to any of these debates, because at the root of it they are all just their own personal stripes of liberal.
Conservatism is founded in God-based morality. It is little wonder then that FR promotes God-based conservatism.
Atheists and agnostics give lip service to, but are by definition not grounded in God-based conservatism, hence their "morality" is merely an extension of their inherent self-styled humanism.
Deconstructing the argument of an atheist/agnostic is as easy as deconstructing the argument of any liberal, because the "glue" that holds their world-view together is the same (see tagline).
LOL, now it’s typos under attack. Nothing of substance to contribute, as expected. One would assume that it wouldn’t take much in terms of intelligence to understand the message in spite of accidentally misplaced letters (mistakes they never make because they’re perfect and sane, LOL!), but no, they just trip over them and run in circles around their circular “logic” arguments. Think about the cognitive dissonance at play here: They can identify the intended spelling, but prefer to make fantastic linkages between unintended typos and the lack of mental acumen, deliberately choosing to skip what they KNOW is the intended message.
Such a bore!
It's the same thing about what "religion" is true. The co-exist bumper sticker mentality reasons that ALL religions are true, "all roads lead to Rome", every man comes to God in his own way, it's like a wheel analogy, etc. EXCEPT that if all are equally valid and relevant, then the logical conclusion MUST be that NONE are true. There are not a million ways to God, but only one way - the way HE HIMSELF provided. There is only one true God and that is true whether anybody believes it or not. IT JUST IS.
Of course, man creates his own gods but that does not change the truth of the one, true God who created all things. Those who diligently seek him, who search for him with all their hearts, will find him.
I will agree with you, Metmom, that each and every human being has to answer to God on how he/she responded to the truth that was revealed to them. As Romans says the invisible things from the creation of the world are clearly seen...so that they are without excuse. Everyone that has the capacity to think and reason must respond to the innate knowledge of a Creator. From that point on, God then allows in more light, reveals more truth, and we respond to that or not. The Holy Spirit, we are told, is in the world to convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. The native in the deepest darkest jungle who sincerely seeks the truth will be granted it by God. We must not ever limit God. He is true to his word, no matter where we may reside. I was just as lost sitting in a church in America as any "tribal" ever was, and yet God showed me the truth. He is able to reach any heart who seeks him.
No, he is utterly dense.
Oooh, spoken like a true sophist.
I wasn't even going to grace AC's comment with a reply; it is obvious that such immaturity is not limited to Muslims only.
Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell
The Jury Is In: The Ruling on McDowell's “Evidence”
Jeffery Jay Lowder
Enjoy!
Yeah, even atheists/agnostics do it, too.
Are you trying real hard to be imbecillic or does this come naturally? How infantile does one have to be to make a mounting out of molehill caused by a typo? I make typos, okay, and I don't always run a spellchecker. And I don't care if a mistype a word. Grow up.
My belief about you is borne as it is from repeated observations gleaned from debates over the years with the tail-chasing mental midgets which routinely populate the atheist/agnostic debating ranks
I guess sit takes one to know one. Lucky you.
Atheists and agnostics contribute nothing of substance to any of these debates, because at the root of it they are all just their own personal stripes of liberal.
Well, so far you have contributed nothing except blather, so I guess that makes you one of them.
Anything they can latch on to so as to avoid answering a simple question. If in doubt, attack, insult, cause confusion, etc. In short, childish.
The "liberal" witch-trials resort, when the whole collection of their counter-arguments ends up being a damp squib. They've probably never heard of Ayn Rand, either.
Boatbums, there is either a deliberate attempt to spin what I said (making a mountain of a molehill as was the case with one typo I made), or there is serious reading comprehension issue at hand. I never said that all religions are equally true, and therefore none is true. I am not sure how you came to that conclusion, but certainly not from reading what I wrote. In the future, if you wish to comment on my statements, I suggest you read my statements and not someone's paraphrase.
What I said is that there are many religions in the world, all claiming to be true and none having any proof. You can take ti form there.
Perhaps you should follow your own advice. I was responding to Metmom's post to Agamemnon which was NOT concerning your posts specifically. FYI, I DO read your posts and will ping you if I respond to them, not to worry. :o)
I don't know if they read her books in flyover areas. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.