I agree, but without such questions where would society stand? We are made of these questions, and to voice them is a privilege. When answers are found we question them, and we even question questions! But over all, being inquisitive and searching for the reality and answers is what we are made of and have the need to do.

No, I am not. I said I wouldn't lie, but that doesn't mean I couldn't accidentally say an untruth. If you wish to take this conversation further, PM me.
I am totally willing to debate this topic with anyone else, it's what I love.

You have a strong argument, but this topic bores me now. If you wish to prove anything else to me you will have to PM. I always answer and listen to my PM.

Sorry, but I tried to come on here with a neutral attitude, but you seem to have made me take sides. Yes, however, I do agree that Jesus is not a liar, and that he answers in his own way in his own time. I refuse to lie on this forum, so any remarks are true coming from me. (Even though I sometimes argue with myself)

Yes, it clearly defines in the bible that he knows what he is saying, although he does always say his words are true.

No, I am not saying that. What I am saying was that there was an author who said that if you gathered a hundred people together and they all prayed for cancer to be cured, the author concluded the cancer would not be cured. I was referring to the author's prayer, which would be testing God. If a genuine Christian prayed and the child died, I can only confer that it was God's plan for that child to live in a better place with him in heaven.

This does and doesn't make sense. Sure, you can predict with enough information, just as a God would know what I'm about to choose because he would know me well enough. But just because you can predict, doesn't mean I didn't choose.

Hmmmmmm…..

You are wrong. I can prove it in this single comment. I have many, solid preferences, yes. But I am also very spontaneous. One day, even though no one in my family likes shrimp, and neither do I, I bought a kebab at the market. Now, beside this vendor was a shop that had my favourite snack, and for an amazing price. Yet I chose the shrimp, because I could. Explain this to me. Or not, because you might be so struck be the thought of "OMG I'm Wrong!" that you can't answer.

Your topic makes sense and is over all, very interesting. Yes and no, is my answer. Yes because we have instincts, same as animals. No, because we sometimes focus on pleasure instead of survival. Is riding on that roller coaster good for you? No, it decreases you chances of survival or yes, it feels amazing and I want to go on it again. Get the drift?

We are supposing that his words, which are written down on paper for people to read, continue to lie to those you read them. You have made a clear point on that, but he himself knows that what he is saying is or isn't a lie, so we must consider our answers on the 'metaphorical' part from there. And, no, the quote was certainly not mistranslated. That leaves us with few possibilities.

Perhaps, but perhaps not. Did you remember to ask them whether they wanted their views public? Whether or not they actually wanted to be spoken for? I think not. I certainly do not want to be spoken for in any way, so we may assume that some of them don't agree with you using their opinion in the manner you did.

You may have taken this particular verse out of context, don't you think? Some biblical characters are some what sarcastic, and that's okay. It's not a sin to be sarcastic, or to use sarcasm. Therefore if Jesus was a perfect being, he didn't actually sin by being sarcastic in that verse.

Yes, but where do we look in the bible for the part where he says "Sometimes I can say no, and that's okay if people die in the process."? When we search for reason we find entropy, God doesn't say that he will say no, actually he repeats himself whenever he says that, yes, he answers all prayer.

You seem to understand some of what I have hinted at, so congrats. Did you know that we as a people have created language? So if we as a people came up with this much needed new word, it will be added to our common and standard definitions as so many other words have.

Many atheists don't see what they do when they try to win people over to their way of seeing things as preaching, they see it as rational discussion. — T Clark

You just spoke for 'many' people all over again, you seem to contradict yourself some times.

Your comment intrigues me. Yes, I understand that my wording was a bit peculiar, and I got a laugh out of it myself, but I was referring to the fact that they don't believe in any God, because they believe there is no such thing as a God. I understand the use of the word 'proselytizing' but as I previously mentioned it is a synonym of evangelize. These words apparently mean the same thing, so why do we use one or the other?

So because he doesn't do anything instantly or within a week, we should still assume it will happen eventually? A lot of people could die of cancer before he steps up and answers that prayer.

By lie, I mean spread false information. If Jesus tells you "Ask, and you will receive. Knock, and the door will open. Seek, and you will find."-(From the Bible) and then you 'ask' but don't 'receive' don't you feel that he's lied to you? He told you that you would receive, and you didn't. So then do we conclude he's lied to us?

The common definition of evangelize is to spread Christianity, not faith. But do you consider the word 'evangelize' to have different meanings? As in symbolism? Or are we metaphorically speaking?

There's not much more to write, seen as you've answered my questions, but what made you draw this conclusion:

I'm sure a lot of atheists wouldn't like either "evangelize" or "proselytize." — T Clark

How do you speak for so many individuals?

What you choose is determined by your (hereditary or acquired) preferences, and your surroundings. — Michael Ossipoff

Are they? Are you telling me that if I am standing next to a tree, that tree choses what I do? Or possibly what I think? Does a rock have the brain capacity to influence me as well?

Sure, that was some great thought. I just wonder, do we offend an atheist by calling them an evangelist? Also, the technical definition of evangelize is: to convert or seek to convert (someone) to Christianity. But a synonym of this word happens to be proselytize. So what do we make of this?

Your view of humanity is interesting, but I suppose what really unites us is common ground. It doesn't matter whether you have hope, or love even, when you can find common ground. Examples would be the people who hate every one, their common ground would be hate, and everybody hates something. Belief, religion and favourite items can all unite us, the problem is people disagree on some things, but they will always have something in common.

So, the conclusion is that even the act of making a cup of coffee, for example, is a direct decision from God for you to do at specific point in time. — Henri

Not so,@Henri. All though I don't completely agree with 'Christian' views, I have extensively studied their religion, and have come to this conclusion concerning it. Their God already knows what choice they are going to make, but the choice is theirs's to make. Let's say you ask me if I prefer yellow over orange, but you already know which one I'm going to pick. I consider the colors and say orange, and you already knew I was going to say that. That doesn't mean you chose for me, but you already knew.
If you don't understand I can explain this further.

That was my point, @ZhouBoTong. But I believe this conversation has gotten rather old.
My attention will be tuned else where.

You come to a philosophy and make a huge claim yet don’t want to make your thoughts public? It is stupidity. I’m an open-minded person and I’m stating it as I see it. — I like sushi

Thank-you for being open minded, but perhaps not everyone would be willing to hear what I have to say. It is not stupidity, and you don't have to 'go easy' on me because I am young. You stated your opinion, I acknowledged it as something that could be true, and left it at that. What if you don't believe what I have to say? I may not want to hear what your reply is my self, or perhaps your comment would snub my own, because more people would agree with you. Either way, you obviously are some what curious, as you have made quite clear you're upset I haven't made it public. If you want to know, just ask. It's as simple as that. You don't have to, but just know it's that easy.

Thank-you.

I am not scared, in fact I would do it if I thought it to be appropriate. This is a very open society, and the harsh reality is that not everyone agrees, and that's okay. If you feel I should go public than get at least two other people to agree with you, because other wise your own statement is the very form of criticism I'm talking about. Don't believe me? You assumed I was scared, which I am not. I was being respectful and you were rather rude. Don't worry, I forgive you. But please be more considerate to people in the future. Some 'World Peace'. You just fueled the fire for an argument(Conflict, A.K.A. Non-Peace) that isn't going to happen.

Rather not, but that may not matter to you. This current peace is not lasting, neither is it globally peaceful. The peace I'm referring to is a global peace, where even the mere possibility of war would be impossible. If any one wishes to know more please personally message me, I refuse to disclose any more information publicly for the sake of you personal opinion and mine. Making my belief public opens me to be criticized, and as my username may suggest I strongly believe that all opinions matter, despite how logical or far fetched they may seem.

We certainly are! I think most of humanity has finally agreed that war and conflict is useless and harmful, not to mention a waste. A waste in what? Resources, time, lives... the list goes on. Somebody ask me how I know true, lasting peace will eventually come, because I happen to know.