Would you say true or false ?

Would you say this is true or false - Evil ALWAYS seeks to discredit God's Word and destroy man ?

True. . . .

why dont you try something more sensible

Very true.

So everyone is EVIL if they don't believe in GOD? What a load of baloney. Christians have probably destroyed more men on EARTH than any group of deluded individuals...onward Christian soldiers!!!

Thank you for providing an excellent example:

>>> What a load of baloney. Christians have probably destroyed more men on EARTH than any group of deluded individuals...<<<

What about all the tele-evagelists who USED God's word to make a fortune and manipulate people?

Like ALL of us, God will judge them before His thrown - EVERY knee shall bow (even Satan) - I'm surprised you didn't already know this.

Yeah, sounds Biblical, doesn't it ?

Moronic, more like...

***Like ALL of us, God will judge them before His thrown - EVERY knee shall bow (even Satan) - I'm surprised you didn't already know this.***

Poor retort, and this has nothing to do with the question. You asked...

***Would you say this is true or false - Evil ALWAYS seeks to discredit God's Word and destroy man?

Since you use the term 'evil' very very loosely, I'm speaking from the assumption that you'd view these 'tele-evangelist' that I mentioned as 'evil' too. Since they were in fact, using God's word (not discrediting it), but using it as a tool to gain riches and manipulate people; the correct answer would be FALSE.

There are also evil people in the world, who know nothing of God. So how can they discredit something without knowing it?

He could of said "Enemys of the Kingdom of Heaven which Jesus is King of.". . .I guess Evil was a lot simpler and less long winded.

...or he just doesn't have a firm understanding of what 'evil' really is.

then again maybe he does.

Nope... having a state of mind, where everything you don't agree with is 'evil' ...is just incorrect.

Maybe Evil wants us to believe that. . .

*sigh*

...maybe evil invented religion. - ___ -

Absolutely... True !!!

100% !!! true

amblessed>>>Thank you for providing an excellent example:

>>> What a load of baloney. Christians have probably destroyed more men on EARTH than any group of deluded individuals...<<<

An excellent example of TRUTH, if you read history as well as the bible.

*Note - I didn't say Christians were deluded. But by saying this is an excellent example, you are implying Christians ARE actually evil.

It's rather ironic that a religion which so publicly proclaims Absolute Love as its basis should, over the course of history, spawn so much unmitigated hatred and violence. Is it simply that Christianity is a failure in inspiring better conduct from otherwise hopelessly evil human beings, or is there some aspect of Christianity which in fact encourages or promotes some of the baser aspects of human behavior? Perhaps it is a bit of both. It is not difficult to see why discussion of the relationship of violence and Christianity is controversial. When asked whether Christianity supports violence and is a violent religion, does one answer "Of course -- look at the crusades, the multiple blessings of wars, warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men, and more"? Or does one respond, "Of course not -- look at Jesus, the beginning point of Christian faith, who is worshiped as 'Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace' whose Sermon on the Mount taught nonviolence and love of enemies; who faced his accusers nonviolently and then died a nonviolent death; whose nonviolent teaching inspired the first centuries of pacifist Christian history and was subsequently preserved in the justifiable war doctrine that declares all war as sin even when declaring it occasionally a necessary evil, and in the prohibition of fighting by monastics and clergy as well as in a persistent tradition of Christian pacifism"? But these answers are apparently contradictory. Does one of them trump the other? Or might there be yet another answer???
What is the object of the death of Jesus? The answer is not God but rather the honor of God. However, can God's honor exist apart from God? I think not. And it is clearly evident that although this image does not picture the death of Jesus in terms of punishment, the death of Jesus is still directed Godward, and needs to be directed Godward. If it is not directed Godward, then nothing salvific has happened. Then, Who orchestrates or arranges the scenario that produces the Godward-directed death of Jesus that pays the debt to God's honor? Putting the devil in charge would align his action with the will of God, which constitutes a logical impossibility. Further, it cannot be sinful human beings who arrange the scenario -- if it were, they would be saving themselves. Thus the only remaining answer is that it is God who has arranged the scenario that produced the Godward-directed death of Jesus in order to repay the honor of God and restore order in the universe. The answers to these questions make clear that just as surely as does penal substitution, the image of payment of a debt to God's honor, is a scenario in which God is left as the organizer of Jesus' death. God is the only one who can arrange salvation, who arranged the plan by which the Son pays the penalty of death that results in the salvation of sinful humankind. And further, the assumption underlying this atonement motif is that doing justice or righting wrong depends on the violence of punishment.

...I mean...FALSE Happy Thanksgiving!! (Whatever that means)