ronjs

Sounds like you have already reached a conclusion,so you not really asking a question,so much as making a statement

Well,if you go back and read the earlier posts,it might refresh your memory.

And your the one totally misrepresenting what i'm saying to avoid addressing the issue.

The semantics of the word does not take anything away from the fact that many people,be it Hitler,Stalin ,Pol Pot, Jim Jones or any other person decides for themselves what is right or wrong in their own minds.This is very clearly seen very often in our dealings with people who may see reality quite differently than others. 

Elaborate

yes and most people believe their opinions are true even though they may be false.Did Hitler think it was right to kill 8 million plus,and did Stalin think it was right to kill that many before breakfast?

No many people have contrary beliefs to another and both think they are right. And if you are wrong about something I don't know..., do you think you are wrong about anything.

 Well, some people are convinced that the earth is flat and no amount of evidence will change their mind. So, in their own mind, they are right.

And its likely that they cant be convinced otherwise

What they think is true,is true to them

And i never implied that.

Not for me to say, everyone has to determine this for themselves.We learn best from our own experience.

I'm not saying you are guilty of anything,i'm  just pointing out that people can be wrong even if they are convinced that they are right.

Any creator has the right to destroy their own creation and since the creator is also a God of perfect justice,his acts won't always be seen as moral by mere mortal standards.

Doesn't really make any difference why someone's logic is wrong, it could be a combination of both those reasons.

People use all kinds of things to help them cope,if one believes they are a hopeless sinner that needs all the help they can get then it is no surprise that religion helps people cope.

If ones logic is faulty then one believes by faith, although they may not realize it. 

Truth is also not contingent on consensus

Your (or mine)good, logical, reasons may be invalid because as yet to be discovered evidence could cause major changes what one believes. This happens quite frequently in science.  

Faith "complete trust or confidence in someone or something"

You don't know the cause but you are sure that it happened, sounds like faith to me. Many long-held "facts" have been overturned by the discovery of previously unknown evidence.

Faith is a prerequisite to scientific inquiry. 

Speaking in tongues is supposed to be edifying and there should be an interpreter present at the time.I  have seen neither in churches I have attended where this is practised

And, of course, the atheist who can't address the issue.

 Heaven,since they are not in a position to accept or reject the savior.

So,i take it that you don't agree that dinosaurs were reptiles

Dinosaurs were/are reptiles a few of which were rather large,(reptiles continue to grow for thier whole lives, assuming they have a continuous food source).The average size of dinos was about that of a sheep. Megafauna are large animals who, like dinosaurs were created for a purpose.

As i have said repeatedly, we all have the same evidence but interpret it differently since it never speaks for itself. Many see fossils as taking millions of years to form and others point out that it has to happen fairly quickly and dating methods have been shown to be not terribly reliable due to the life span of radiation, especially when it comes to deep time. It is generally thought that much of the physical evidence for the GOE was destroyed by the flood so that we have to rely on written records which is detective work, not science. 

Actually, we have the same evidence,rocks, fossils etc.

And you are willfully ignorant of the limitations of science even though the scientists themselves are tentative with most of their conclusions, a fact that most people and the media miss. Science can never yield absolute conclusions because  they cannot  be sure they have all the evidence.   

And I could say that you have never studied creationists viewpoints or you never understood them. We generally see things according to our presuppositions and interpret the data accordingly. As for dating anything that we don't truly know the age of there are numerous examples of wrong ages assigned to things we know the age of. 

Creationism has the same evidence, we just interpret it differently and both use the scientific method, although it doesn't always take science to interpret evidence, whether it be evolutionary or creationism.

 I cannot imagine anyone pretending to believe anything, what would be gained? Personally, i firmly believe the universe is 10,000 years old maximum and see nothing contrary to that, even after studying both of the different viewpoints.  

Why would a scientist set out to prove a theory unless they believed (had faith) that it was true?

Faith is a prerequisite to scientific inquiry

Maybe if you can clarify your statement

Sooooo  what do all these things have to do with anything i
said??????? Certain interpretations are what many object to. Computers, heating , medicine are a result of good science whereas historical science is about detective work when dealing with something that is not directly observable.

Actually Christians and secular science have the same physical evidence ( the rocks, the fossils etc.) but evidence has to be interpreted, it doesn't speak for itself. As far as i know, no fossils have been dug up with birth certicates attach

The dominion mandate instructs Christians to do science, we need to study the world in order to have dominion over it.

The problem is not with science per se, but the interpretations of the evidence, which can be very different depending at least in part to ones presuppositions. 

Any plan requires cooperation, so if you freely accept God then His plan will lead you, if you freely reject Him then He will reject you. God will take 2 steps for you but you or anyone still have to take one step.

An omniscient being can give free will to who He pleases, and he would not want automatons.

Soooo,,,,. does my alleged disengenuousness prevent you from addressing the subject matter?

No, Gods Plan will be fulfilled as there will always be those who are willing to conform to his will.

 So what alleged contradictions are we talking about in particular.

No, they have freedom to choose whatever they want, just as you or anyone else is free to choose whether or not you believe in God or not.If there was no choice then everyone would choose the same.No one can be forced to believe anything.

Those experiences are not from God, but are from the deciever trying to corrupt peoples thoughts and actions.Many come back from these

 NDEs with messages that are unbiblical.

God would take everything into account

Free will means people can be influenced by whatever they like

Bloody satan always mucking up the ALL MIGHTY god's plans, maybe he's not ALL MIGHTY?

Satan is not capable of mucking up God's plans,but he can influence people

 Apparently there are quite who have horrible experieces during NDEs but it rarely gets reported.Also Satan can masqeraide as a being of light, so what these people are actually seeing during these experiences Satan and his demon disguised as Jesus and His own.People can't visit heaven and come back.