Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Ok how about a hypothetical. If the next president of America is a super charismatic Christian and convinces congress to add an amendment naming Christianity as the State Religion... Would this be bad?

In four or five generations there would be true believers from millions of offspring of current generations. Obviously there would still be unbelievers. Would this be wrong?

---

Like clockwork:

Quote:

---

I'm still curious as to what laws, backed through the threat of violence, draw people closer to Christ. I would like to see a few examples of the kinds of laws he wants to enact, and explain how they'll lead others to Christ. Of course, I'd really love it if Doc would address the fact that Christ never once used coercion to get followers, but instead let those who rejected Him leave freely. Of course, I'm sure we'll just be met with more absurdly poor analogies and deflections instead of actually addressing posts/questions.

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

What on earth do you think backs up those laws you are wanting?

You have zero interest in a discussion though. This is your standard schtick and it is really nothing but intellectual cowardice. You ignore and deflect because your position is simply not consistent with the teachings and example of Christ.

RetiredAg said:

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

What on earth do you think backs up those laws you are wanting?

You have zero interest in a discussion though. This is your standard schtick and it is really nothing but intellectual cowardice. You ignore and deflect because your position is simply not consistent with the teachings and example of Christ.

---

You are the coward. Answer my hypo. Is it wrong if Christianity was changed to the State Religion?

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

You're talking about using the state to enforce your desires on the people. It is violence. Its threat of force. If I don't comply they will take my money or property or liberty.

Quote:

---

You are the coward. Answer my hypo. Is it wrong if Christianity was changed to the State Religion?

---

I'll refer you back to my previous post on how discussions work.

Person A: Asks question
Person B: Answers question, asks their own
Person A: Answers question, asks their own
Rinse and repeat for mutually respectful conversation


Conversation, however, does not go like this:

Person A: Asks question
Person B: Answers question, asks their own
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own

So, when you want to start answering the questions asked of you, then perhaps we can have a discussion.

Mr. Timid said:

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

You're talking about using the state to enforce your desires on the people. It is violence. Its threat of force. If I don't comply they will take my money or property or liberty.

---

So you're against civil rights laws?

Mr. Timid said:

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

You're talking about using the state to enforce your desires on the people. It is violence. Its threat of force. If I don't comply they will take my money or property or liberty.

---

Exactly. And if violence, or the threat of violence, isn't used to enforce a law, then the law is rendered obsolete. The law only possesses power based on the lawmakers willingness to enforce said law with violence.

What's even more disturbing is his appeal to Constantine while ignoring Christ. Heck, power over the kingdoms of the world was offered to Christ, and He explicitly rejected it. But, think of all the good He could have done!

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Mr. Timid said:

---

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Nice try clown... No ones talking about violence lol

---

You're talking about using the state to enforce your desires on the people. It is violence. Its threat of force. If I don't comply they will take my money or property or liberty.

---

So you're against civil rights laws?

---

Absolutely

So are the civil rights laws wrong?

I should probably update this to reflect where we are in this "discussion"

Person A: Asks question
Person B: Answers question, asks their own
Person A: Answers question, asks their own
Rinse and repeat for mutually respectful conversation


Conversation, however, does not go like this:

Person A: Asks question
Person B: Answers question, asks their own
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own
Person B: Answers question and repeats initial question
Person A: Ignores question, asks their own

Doc Daneeka said:

---

So are the civil rights laws wrong?

---

Yes. Now why don't you go back and answer retired's question now that I've answered the same question twice.

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Ok how about a hypothetical. If the next president of America is a super charismatic Christian and convinces congress to add an amendment naming Christianity as the State Religion... Would this be bad?

In four or five generations there would be true believers from millions of offspring of current generations. Obviously there would still be unbelievers. Would this be wrong?

---

You have to be very specific about what the Amendment does? Your question is absolutely impossible to answer as it stands.

Does it simply name Christianity as the state religion without changing any other laws, rights, etc.? Is it just a meaningless label that gets stuck to the country? Or does it outlaw other religions, make pre-marital sex, infidelity, divorce, homosexuality, heresy, witchcraft, and all the other stuff illegal?

Quit it dude.

Doc,

I will go ahead and repost all my unanswered questions here so he can hopefully address them:

• Did Paul ever force non-believers to accept Christ?
• So what kind of theocratic laws are you wanting to enact? Can you give me some examples?
• Where are we ever charged with coercing people to the way of Christ?
• Can you reconcile your position w/ the teachings of Christ in the Prodigal Son and rich, young ruler stories? If so, how?
• So the examples of the Prodigal Son and the rich, young ruler only applied to 1st century persons?
• Can you give me an example of some laws that are going to draw a man's heart closer to God?
• Did Christ coerce people to follow Him?
• Do you believe the ends justify the means?
• Are you aware that Constantine put off baptism as long as possible so he could be "absolved" from as much sin as possible?

These are the questions you've yet to answer. If you wish to continue, please answer these. If not, then your intentions are clear and I'll just be on my way.

The amendment would name Christianity as the state religion. Meaning all Christian references (statutes, pledges, monuments, etc) could not be changed and must be required at every government building.

Doc Daneeka said:

---

The amendment would name Christianity as the state religion. Meaning all Christian references (statutes, pledges, monuments, etc) could not be changed and must be required at every government building.

---

lol and that's going to result in people becoming followers of Christ? Here I thought we had to get our hands dirty and go out in to the world and make disciples of people. It would have been so much clearer if Christ just said "go out and put My name on big granite monuments, because that's what will really draw them in".

Retired answer me this and I'll answer you. If Christ did not do something... Is it forbidden?

Jesus: "Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet."

Doc Daneeka: "Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, send coercive state agents to their homes, confiscate their money and, if necessary, throw them in a cage."

Doc Daneeka said:

---

Retired answer me this and I'll answer you. If Christ did not do something... Is it forbidden?

---

Seriously man, do you honestly expect me to answer any more questions from you given the level of intellectual cowardice you display by refusing to answer a single question of mine? I have 9 questions that have been unanswered by you, going all the way back to the first page.

• Did Paul ever force non-believers to accept Christ?
• So what kind of theocratic laws are you wanting to enact? Can you give me some examples?
• Where are we ever charged with coercing people to the way of Christ?
• Can you reconcile your position w/ the teachings of Christ in the Prodigal Son and rich, young ruler stories? If so, how?
• So the examples of the Prodigal Son and the rich, young ruler only applied to 1st century persons?
• Can you give me an example of some laws that are going to draw a man's heart closer to God?
• Did Christ coerce people to follow Him?
• Do you believe the ends justify the means?
• Are you aware that Constantine put off baptism as long as possible so he could be "absolved" from as much sin as possible?

Y'all think I was a talking about an inquisition? Lol

Keep dodging.

I'm not answering your questions. You have the negative spirit

Doc Daneeka said:

---

I'm not answering your questions. You have the negative spirit

---

Oh, I knew you weren't going to answer my questions. They run directly counter to what you're saying. It's why you've been ignoring them from the beginning.

You would be against at such an amendment?

If you say you would be against such an amendment I know your just trolling. What Christian would be against such an amendment. Honestly

Doc Daneeka said:

---

You have the negative spirit

---

BTW, what do you mean by negative spirit? Is it the same one that led you to call someone a "clown"? Or to say I needed to "grow up"? Think what you will of me, but these are valid questions, and your refusal to answer them is telling of the strength, or lack thereof, in your position.

• Did Paul ever force non-believers to accept Christ?
• So what kind of theocratic laws are you wanting to enact? Can you give me some examples?
• Where are we ever charged with coercing people to the way of Christ?
• Can you reconcile your position w/ the teachings of Christ in the Prodigal Son and rich, young ruler stories? If so, how?
• So the examples of the Prodigal Son and the rich, young ruler only applied to 1st century persons?
• Can you give me an example of some laws that are going to draw a man's heart closer to God?
• Did Christ coerce people to follow Him?
• Do you believe the ends justify the means?
• Are you aware that Constantine put off baptism as long as possible so he could be "absolved" from as much sin as possible?

You are trolling now bud.

About to leave work for the day, but you are aware that asking completely relevant questions that run counter to your argument isn't "trolling", right? Hopefully, in the future, you will be willing to answer honest and relevant questions. Our conversations will go much smoother if you do. Peace to you, brother.

Doc Daneeka said:

---

What Christian would be against such an amendment. Honestly

---

The kind that thinks that the amendment as outlined would be at best, ineffective, and at worst entirely counter productive.

Doc Daneeka said:

---

The amendment would name Christianity as the state religion. Meaning all Christian references (statutes, pledges, monuments, etc) could not be changed and must be required at every government building.

---

So. . . .add idols at government buildings? Thats it?

No one would want a Christian amendment? I'm thoroughly surprised

Doc Daneeka said:

---

No one would want a Christian amendment? I'm thoroughly surprised

---

Why? It will:

1) be no more effective at making us "Christian" as does other hollow gestures such as putting "In God We Trust" on the currency or "One Nation Under God" in the state loyalty oath.
2) be counterproductive by immediately pushing nonbelievers further away from Christ as they feel attacked and dig in for a fight.

Want to influence society? Then the church needs to be the radical alternative to the ways of the world we're called to be, allowing the world to see Christ through our love of the marginalized, broken, and even our enemies. Your way will simply create more enemies. Christ's way will turn enemies into brothers.

Retired, i dont know why you insist on being a troll