Russia cracks down on the biggest enemy facing Civilization

11,802 Views | 177 Replies | Last: 10 mo ago by Ferg
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
one MEEN Ag said:

Sapper Redux said:

So it's not in the Bible. You have to just try and imbue a secular movement with religious justification.
You continue to show you have no Christian understanding of the world. I just showed you that is in in the bible. Its right there in the first couple of chapters. Natural rights are born out of perfect state of man when he was in communion with God. They are the capabilities of man unencumbered by sin in this world. You have the freedom to speak, the freedom to create, the freedom to share. You also have the freedom to sin.

We have sin in this world, so the first amendment is an attempt to prevent the sinful nature of rule by man to limit the rights of other men for his gain.

Sapper, this is high school level synthesis here. I implore you, actually commit yourself to learning the teachings of the church. The God you continually rail against is but a strawman in your mind, not the one sitting on the throne in Heaven.

There is a reason that other cultures who do not have the same worldview of man's creation, or mans purpose on this world, did not think to create the first amendment anytime they had the chance. It requires context that seems to evade you.




It's funny how this supposedly intrinsic ethic in the Bible is not actually discovered and promoted until about 1,700 years after Jesus died. And then was absolutely not endorsed or accepted by every Christian leader or community. Maybe there's something else involved than just the text of Genesis (which does not ever promote a civil society like the Constitution established).
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Could you provide the link to support your claims on Holy Trinity case being overturned? Can't find it anywhere.

This is all I found from 4 days ago.

"Court ruled in favor of church that illegally hired clergyman. When the Church of the Holy Trinity hired a clergyman from England to serve as its pastor, it was charged with violating the law in question. A lower court ruled against the church, but the Supreme Court reversed.4 days ago"

And this:

Justice Brewer then writes in the opinion that "beyond all these matters no purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, state or national, because this is a religious people."
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I didn't say it was overturned. You're confusing the rationale behind a decision that is specific to one area of law with pronouncement of some universal law about the role of religion in American government and society. It's absolutely not that.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

I didn't say it was overturned. You're confusing the rationale behind a decision that is specific to one area of law with pronouncement of some universal law about the role of religion in American government and society. It's absolutely not that.


Let's allow SCOTUS to decide that and not you.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
1 Corinthians 1:18-25 (ESV)

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written,

19"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart."

20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,

23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

Slavery?
See William Wilberforce and John Newton.
We were the first religion or culture to end slavery that existed since the fall of mankind.
Cool, i'll make you a medal. Does being the first to do something good mean that all bad things didn't happen? See 16th and 17th Century Christian nations Portugal and Spain. The Atlantic slave trade was dominated by Christians. Both in terms of who was capturing the selling and in who was purchasing. And the practice was expressly supported by some of the popes of the time.

Do you honestly believe that Christians get to wash their hands of humanity's dark history with slavery?

Quote:

Sexism?

The first witnesses of the resurrection in the Bible were women. In Rome, women were not allowed to be witnesses in trials. Christianity definitely mentions other women of God in the New Testament and uplifted women into their proper role.

There were some women in the Bible - therefore Christians have never been sexist. What is this argument?


Quote:

Bigotry?

You accuse us of being sinful like the rest of mankind?
No way. At least we have a worldview with a final justice for these things. This too shall be made right.
How many did godless Hitler, Stalin, and Mao kill just last century. Please. Bigoted…

Yes, Christians are sinful like the rest of mankind. Before I put words in your mouth, are you saying that Christians don't commit sins? Or that Christians haven't committed the same sins as every other culture?

European colonialism did not happen that long ago, how is it that zero Christians know what the hell happened? European Christians, very openly and publicly justifying themselves through their religion, raped the entire continent of Africa and large parts of Asia. Massive genocides, torture, human experimentation, eradication of cultures, forced starvations, and economic theft on enormous scales.

Your worldview proposed a final justice that cannot be proven or tested or explained or examined. Its a thing that simply does not exist. But if it does, what kind of justice is infinite torture for finite crime? Most Christian understandings of the afterlife are better explained by self righteousness and Christian exceptionalism with a dash of schadenfraude and disdain for other beliefs.

Quote:

Burning of heretics?
Yeah. Many, many Protestants were put to death. But we believe in forgiveness because we have been forgiven.
Oh well, I guess its like it never happened then.

Quote:

Witches?

Salem was an isolated community and what happened there was condemned by every clergyman in the American colonies. But the rest of the story is not what you learn about in government schools.
Thats why I said witches and not Salem. 50,000 witches were killed over a couple centuries in the US and Europe by Christians.


Quote:

The fact of the matter is the secularists are self-righteous hypocrites telling us how to live on this very thread.
Ah yes, the "I know you are, but what am I" defense. Well played. Between the two of us, one of us is saying they are know objective moral truth and that they have authority to impose that on others. Which of us do you think that is?

Now - all this said. I am thankful for some of the contributions made by Christianity. I'm also thankful for ancient pagan contributions, Celtic contributions, secular contributions, and on and on. Don't mistake my post above as wholesale rejection of Christian values - I'm rather pointing out that Christians have been far from perfect.

Quote:

Please go on and elaborate…

If there is an objective standard of morality and goodness, you have only your personal subjective faculties with which to understand those objective standards. This point should be obvious just given the fact that there are tens of thousands of denominations of Christians all arguing over what that objective standard is.

This puts you and me and very similar footing. Neither of us get to pretend like we know what is objectively moral or immoral.

kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheGreatEscape said:



Okay? In pre-Christian Rome when the Romans killed and imprisoned Christians for declaring that Christ is King?

Or before that in Greece if you spoke against the gods? See how they killed Plato.

What example from a secular or non-Christian culture are you going to use in order to support your claim?

Common consensus, which changes over time and contradicts itself, is what has limited Christians from posting online, has made Christians lose their jobs, secularists have hired other lesser candidates because of a Christian's convictions, and have made a parade of immorality in the public square. This is violating free speech in the public square.

So, to prove to me how pro free-speech Christians are, you give me examples of other cultures executing others for their speech. Ha! Good thing Christians never did that???

Versions of free speech absolutely existed in pagan ancient Greece. It wasn't perfect, but neither was Christianity's first pass at it.

Any actions taken against Christians because of their religion or their statements are actions that I will explicitly condemn right now. But, Christians simply must stop acting as though they are first peoples ever to be oppressed or like they are not guilty of suppressing other's free speech. For ****'s sake, this thread was opened by an article where Russian courts have decided to treat outspoken LGBTQ persons as terrorists. Do you not see the irony?

The inability of Christians to understand the eye roll from liberals when they complain about their rights to free speech while they Christians are actively and openly advocating for the censorship and public exclusion of LGBTQ persons is phenomenal. What a profound unwillingness to look at your own sins and your own faults.

There is a comic that perfectly describes all of this, I'll see if I can find it.



kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kurt vonnegut said:

TheGreatEscape said:



Okay? In pre-Christian Rome when the Romans killed and imprisoned Christians for declaring that Christ is King?

Or before that in Greece if you spoke against the gods? See how they killed Plato.

What example from a secular or non-Christian culture are you going to use in order to support your claim?

Common consensus, which changes over time and contradicts itself, is what has limited Christians from posting online, has made Christians lose their jobs, secularists have hired other lesser candidates because of a Christian's convictions, and have made a parade of immorality in the public square. This is violating free speech in the public square.

So, to prove to me how pro free-speech Christians are, you give me examples of other cultures executing others for their speech. Ha! Good thing Christians never did that???

Versions of free speech absolutely existed in pagan ancient Greece. It wasn't perfect, but neither was Christianity's first pass at it.

Any actions taken against Christians because of their religion or their statements are actions that I will explicitly condemn right now. But, Christians simply must stop acting as though they are first peoples ever to be oppressed or like they are not guilty of suppressing other's free speech. For ****'s sake, this thread was opened by an article where Russian courts have decided to treat outspoken LGBTQ persons as terrorists. Do you not see the irony?

The inability of Christians to understand the eye roll from liberals when they complain about their rights to free speech while they Christians are actively and openly advocating for the censorship and public exclusion of LGBTQ persons is phenomenal. What a profound unwillingness to look at your own sins and your own faults.

There is a comic that perfectly describes all of this, I'll see if I can find it.






I may respond to some of this later. But what i did read was that, "All truth is God's truth." That's a quote from St. Augustine from the 4th Century.

And because you are a good moralist, I commend you for this formal debate.

For that's the law written on your heart. Look at what the Lord has done for you. Become one of us. Drink the cup and taste the win (I mean wine) with me. Chew the bread and know that the body of Christ was shed for you.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Kurt, you and Sapper can call me Joshua. That's my legal name.

Joshua Brandon Wallace of Rockwall county.

wallacejosh544@gmail.com

You will find a domestic violence arrest when I was high
hallucinating on legal dope and punched my brother in my parents home. They called that Domestic Assault.

So I look like a wife beater at first glance.

But God has a redemption plan that the whole human race might not expire completely in eternity.

1 Corinthians 1:

But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.

30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord."

Nice to meet you.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And Terminus Es is my Roman Catholic ally.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is so weird
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Are you okay man?

It's a really bad idea to put your personal info out there. Differences aside, you should delete this.
PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dude, you broke him.

PabloSerna
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This reminds me of a cool DC Talk song… What if I stubble, What if I fall.

This song begins with a quote from Brennan Manning, author of The Ragamuffin Gospel:

"The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable."

TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Christians are no longer going to be in immoral anti-religious slavery.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PabloSerna said:

This reminds me of a cool DC Talk song… What if I stubble, What if I fall.

This song begins with a quote from Brennan Manning, author of The Ragamuffin Gospel:

"The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable."




Yeah. I went wild after my divorce. I disconnected from church and lived a life in the pigsty.

I'm doing well. Just saying that shouldn't be an assault charge and not be looped in with the female beaters.

My brother did nothing wrong previously nor said anything to me. I just walked up and bunched him. I was sick. I got help after jail and went to a 90 day rehab and then sober living. Some people are born with diabetes. Some people are born with the feelings disease.

You think maybe homosexual beating each other may be a
part of the law family violence laws pushed in by Obama, maybe?

I have no problem giving my personal info out to the board.

I'm just saying that it general equity law and not a sheer theocracy. It's Mere Christendom 2.0 that will eventually win.

I have a different understanding of success.

And if you want to judge me, then you'd have to borrow from the proper understanding of a Biblical worldview in order to judge me.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kurt vonnegut said:


Quote:

Slavery?
See William Wilberforce and John Newton.
We were the first religion or culture to end slavery that existed since the fall of mankind.
Cool, i'll make you a medal. Does being the first to do something good mean that all bad things didn't happen? See 16th and 17th Century Christian nations Portugal and Spain. The Atlantic slave trade was dominated by Christians. Both in terms of who was capturing the selling and in who was purchasing. And the practice was expressly supported by some of the popes of the time.

Do you honestly believe that Christians get to wash their hands of humanity's dark history with slavery?

Quote:

Sexism?

The first witnesses of the resurrection in the Bible were women. In Rome, women were not allowed to be witnesses in trials. Christianity definitely mentions other women of God in the New Testament and uplifted women into their proper role.

There were some women in the Bible - therefore Christians have never been sexist. What is this argument?


Quote:

Bigotry?

You accuse us of being sinful like the rest of mankind?
No way. At least we have a worldview with a final justice for these things. This too shall be made right.
How many did godless Hitler, Stalin, and Mao kill just last century. Please. Bigoted…

Yes, Christians are sinful like the rest of mankind. Before I put words in your mouth, are you saying that Christians don't commit sins? Or that Christians haven't committed the same sins as every other culture?

European colonialism did not happen that long ago, how is it that zero Christians know what the hell happened? European Christians, very openly and publicly justifying themselves through their religion, raped the entire continent of Africa and large parts of Asia. Massive genocides, torture, human experimentation, eradication of cultures, forced starvations, and economic theft on enormous scales.

Your worldview proposed a final justice that cannot be proven or tested or explained or examined. Its a thing that simply does not exist. But if it does, what kind of justice is infinite torture for finite crime? Most Christian understandings of the afterlife are better explained by self righteousness and Christian exceptionalism with a dash of schadenfraude and disdain for other beliefs.

Quote:

Burning of heretics?
Yeah. Many, many Protestants were put to death. But we believe in forgiveness because we have been forgiven.
Oh well, I guess its like it never happened then.

Quote:

Witches?

Salem was an isolated community and what happened there was condemned by every clergyman in the American colonies. But the rest of the story is not what you learn about in government schools.
Thats why I said witches and not Salem. 50,000 witches were killed over a couple centuries in the US and Europe by Christians.


Quote:

The fact of the matter is the secularists are self-righteous hypocrites telling us how to live on this very thread.
Ah yes, the "I know you are, but what am I" defense. Well played. Between the two of us, one of us is saying they are know objective moral truth and that they have authority to impose that on others. Which of us do you think that is?

Now - all this said. I am thankful for some of the contributions made by Christianity. I'm also thankful for ancient pagan contributions, Celtic contributions, secular contributions, and on and on. Don't mistake my post above as wholesale rejection of Christian values - I'm rather pointing out that Christians have been far from perfect.

Quote:

Please go on and elaborate…

If there is an objective standard of morality and goodness, you have only your personal subjective faculties with which to understand those objective standards. This point should be obvious just given the fact that there are tens of thousands of denominations of Christians all arguing over what that objective standard is.

This puts you and me and very similar footing. Neither of us get to pretend like we know what is objectively moral or immoral.





{Do you honestly believe that Christians get to wash their hands of humanity's dark history with slavery?}

Nope. "For all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). But Christians were the first to put an end to it based upon "Imago Dei."

And if you were a slave and went to the east, then you were castrated by the Muslims.


{There were some women in the Bible - therefore Christians have never been sexist. What is this argument?}

Yes. And later could serve as witnesses in court trial because women were the first witnesses of the resurrection. Neither the Romans nor the Greeks allowed that beforehand.

{ 50,000 witches were killed over a couple centuries in the US and Europe by Christians.}

Mad we have recorded history as well and actually repent from it. That is why Christians invented our Republic, the university, the first hospitals, free speech, religious liberty, and ended slavery. We repent and adjust to the standards of Scripture.

We've seen how secularism doesn't work because your so-called neutrality is hypocritical.

Jesus said that you are either for him or against him.

Kant took that and argued that there was no such thing as neutrality.

We've had it and secularism doesn't work and is not consistent with historic America.

{Yes, Christians are sinful like the rest of mankind. Before I put words in your mouth, are you saying that Christians don't commit sins? Or that Christians haven't committed the same sins as every other culture?}


I'm saying that Christianity is the only worldview that allows religious liberty, maintains it, and grants its followers ground to repent out of sheer gratitude for the forgiveness of sins.
Teaching people how to read and write. So that they might be able to read the Scriptures and be able to do something about government and politics.


{Ah yes, the "I know you are, but what am I" defense. Well played. Between the two of us, one of us is saying they are know objective moral truth and that they have authority to impose that on others. Which of us do you think that is?}


We impose through voting just like everyone else.
Popular sovereignty…

{Now - all this said. I am thankful for some of the contributions made by Christianity. I'm also thankful for ancient pagan contributions, Celtic contributions, secular contributions, and on and on. Don't mistake my post above as wholesale rejection of Christian values - I'm rather pointing out that Christians have been far from perfect.}

Christianity is the culmination of all truth.
"All truth is God's truth." Developed by St. Augustine…4th century.


{If there is an objective standard of morality and goodness, you have only your personal subjective faculties with which to understand those objective standards. }


I have an historic church community where the Scripture is both taught and discussed. We also are a praying church. You must have that for your subjective faculties to be overturned from their inclination to just copy and borrow most all of any morality that you have; and give no credit to how the remnant of the Christian church in culture has influenced you the most.

That and Psalm 19:1 (ESV)

"The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork."

The Scriptures are the lenses through we properly see in order to pray through our growing wisdom and understanding of the world around us (received that from Calvin).



{This point should be obvious just given the fact that there are tens of thousands of denominations of Christians all arguing over what that objective standard is.}

Sure. And most of those no longer hold to the deity of Christ. They created a completely different religion(s).



{This puts you and me and very similar footing. Neither of us get to pretend like we know what is objectively moral or immoral.}

So…on what ground other than the U.S. Constitution, do you have to stand upon in saying that the government shouldn't promote homosexuality?

You said that earlier as I recall. Did I read that correctly?


TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Do you think Christianity is good for the world or not?

Yes or no is preferable. But feel free to answer as you wish.
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm only going to respond to a couple of these because I have a busy day ahead of me. I do want to start out by saying that my intention was never to paint Christians as 'worse' than anyone else. But, rather say Christianity has plenty of blood on its hands.

I think what has been implied in this thread is that because Christianity can be argued to be 'better' than some other religions that it is justified in proclaiming itself to be humanity's moral authority. Being slightly less terrible to women or slaves and building some schools and hospitals does not make Christianity correct. It just means that maybe its a less terrible worldview than some of the others.


Quote:

And if you were a slave and went to the east, then you were castrated by the Muslims.
Whataboutism. Saying Muslims are worse or just as bad doesn't excuse Christian behavior.


Quote:

We've seen how secularism doesn't work because your so-called neutrality is hypocritical.
Neutrality might be the wrong aim and an impossible mark. Maybe it would be better to say that government's aim should be to maximize rights to as many people as possible while minimizing infringement on others as much as possible. In the context of this thread - Restrictions to LGBTQ persons rights to free speech does nothing to maximize rights. Your right to believe and practice your religion is not affected. The law only restricts freedoms and does nothing to protect them.


Quote:

Jesus said that you are either for him or against him.
And that is terrifying.


Quote:

I'm saying that Christianity is the only worldview that allows religious liberty, maintains it, and grants its followers ground to repent out of sheer gratitude for the forgiveness of sins.


Does religiously liberty not exist in the vastly more secular Western Europe?


Quote:

Sure. And most of those no longer hold to the deity of Christ. They created a completely different religion(s).
No true Scotsman.

Quote:

So…on what ground other than the U.S. Constitution, do you have to stand upon in saying that the government shouldn't promote homosexuality?

It is simply a personal belief about what I feel should be the role of government. Do you feel differently? Is it your opinion that government's role in society should include being the moral guide for its citizens? If yes, then of what use is your church?
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheGreatEscape said:

Do you think Christianity is good for the world or not?

Yes or no is preferable. But feel free to answer as you wish.

If you want a one word answer: Yes.

If you want a better answer - I think like most things it has contributed for the good and for the bad. I believe that every system of belief and religion can be shown to have contributed some good. Human sacrificing pagan Aztec religions offered people purpose, meaning, pride, community, cohesiveness, etc. Christianity has done more good than Aztec religions, I'm not putting them all on equal level.

I would say that Christianity was an adequate enough moral, ethical, and social framework to oversee the ushering in of the Enlightenment and more modern philosophical and scientific philosophies. But, now it is beginning to outlive much of its utility.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And I'm not scared at all. I recant all of my Facebook posts that did not glorify God. But thank God for his unconditional love.

YHWH helps.

I was awful in my tone.
BluHorseShu
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

Quote:

So let's add the Apostles' Creed to our state constitution.


Jews, Muslims, atheists need not apply to a government office in Texas?


And that would be completely constitutional.

But yeah…you could just make a statement that you believe in God and the afterlife.


No, it wouldn't.


Yes. Yes it absolutely is constitutional. And we have
Holy Trinity vs. The United States…as a bonus.


No, it's not. The Bill of Rights is incorporated to the states. A state absolutely cannot prevent an atheist or a Buddhist or a Jew from running for office and serving. The author of the majority opinion in Holy Trinity even said as much, "Nor is [the United States] Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions." But that's just me being polite. The tangents and arguments in a Supreme Court decision are not law. They explain why a specific interpretation was used to reach a decision. That decision does not suddenly make the United States a "Christian nation."


No. But it does establish us as a religious country.

Holy Trinity vs. United States (I just love that name) tells the United States (I.e. the federal government) that it cannot discriminate against the holding of office of differing religious beliefs. No where in the decision does it imply that the states cannot under the tenth amendment. In fact, it established that the states could discriminate qualifications for holding office because we are a religious people.




States cannot discriminate against individuals. The rights of individuals under the Constitution are also protected at the state level. You can thank the 14th amendment for that. And one part of the reasoning (not even the legal finding) behind one opinion of group of justices from a SCOTUS well over a century ago does not legally define our nation as Christian.


Holy Trinity verses the United States was in 1892. That was well after the 14th Amendment. I'm sure SCOTUS was aware of the Constitution that they were and are in charge of interpreting.

They have tried to overturn state abortion laws from banning abortion using the 14th amendment. How did that work out?

Plus, we have Holy Trinity legal precedence just in case the 14th amendment violates 1st amendment and 10th amendment rights.



Just a point of clarification for myself. HT vs US conveyed, or at least in part, that 1) the US is in fact a Christian Nation in the spirit of its development, but 2) The constitution makes clear that being a Christian cannot be a condition for holding an office. Am I understanding it correctly?
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BluHorseShu said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

TheGreatEscape said:

Sapper Redux said:

Quote:

So let's add the Apostles' Creed to our state constitution.


Jews, Muslims, atheists need not apply to a government office in Texas?


And that would be completely constitutional.

But yeah…you could just make a statement that you believe in God and the afterlife.


No, it wouldn't.


Yes. Yes it absolutely is constitutional. And we have
Holy Trinity vs. The United States…as a bonus.


No, it's not. The Bill of Rights is incorporated to the states. A state absolutely cannot prevent an atheist or a Buddhist or a Jew from running for office and serving. The author of the majority opinion in Holy Trinity even said as much, "Nor is [the United States] Christian in the sense that a profession of Christianity is a condition of holding office or otherwise engaging in public service, or essential to recognition either politically or socially. In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions." But that's just me being polite. The tangents and arguments in a Supreme Court decision are not law. They explain why a specific interpretation was used to reach a decision. That decision does not suddenly make the United States a "Christian nation."


No. But it does establish us as a religious country.

Holy Trinity vs. United States (I just love that name) tells the United States (I.e. the federal government) that it cannot discriminate against the holding of office of differing religious beliefs. No where in the decision does it imply that the states cannot under the tenth amendment. In fact, it established that the states could discriminate qualifications for holding office because we are a religious people.




States cannot discriminate against individuals. The rights of individuals under the Constitution are also protected at the state level. You can thank the 14th amendment for that. And one part of the reasoning (not even the legal finding) behind one opinion of group of justices from a SCOTUS well over a century ago does not legally define our nation as Christian.


Holy Trinity verses the United States was in 1892. That was well after the 14th Amendment. I'm sure SCOTUS was aware of the Constitution that they were and are in charge of interpreting.

They have tried to overturn state abortion laws from banning abortion using the 14th amendment. How did that work out?

Plus, we have Holy Trinity legal precedence just in case the 14th amendment violates 1st amendment and 10th amendment rights.



Just a point of clarification for myself. HT vs US conveyed, or at least in part, that 1) the US is in fact a Christian Nation in the spirit of its development, but 2) The constitution makes clear that being a Christian cannot be a condition for holding an office. Am I understanding it correctly?


Very good additions.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Romans 3: 10 as it is written: (ESV)

"None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Also on the burning of witches, neurological conditions were unknown in that day. And if you think modern Western Science started on its own, many Scottish Presbyterians were a huge influence in the scientific community.

You can thank the Scottish Empirists for popularizing science among its constituents.
Aggrad08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If we are going to excuse the actions and beliefs of Christians a few centuries ago as uniformed and therefore less absurd to believe in that era and should hence be judged less severely and not believed today I'm totally good with that.

But along those same lines I would think we should then judge the actions and beliefs of early christians or jews or muslims ect. as uninformed and probably not best to be emulated, enforced, or believed in many instances.

We've tried governments with the church in political authority-they weren't great.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bigoted towards women?

Who doesn't love their mom?
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggrad08 said:

If we are going to excuse the actions and beliefs of Christians a few centuries ago as uniformed and therefore less absurd to believe in that era and should hence be judged less severely and not believed today I'm totally good with that.

But along those same lines I would think we should then judge the actions and beliefs of early christians or jews or muslims ect. as uninformed and probably not best to be emulated, enforced, or believed in many instances.

We've tried governments with the church in political authority-they weren't great.



When things got so bad for the Romans, who were killing and imprisoning Christians priorly, the Romans finally just gave up and gave over the keys to the Christians.
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"Christians have been persecuted" and "Christians have done the persecuting" are not mutually exclusive statements, correct?
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Lord, in your mercy hear our prayer.

This is a great song for now, saints.

TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From the great Russian Eastern Orthodox Christian named Fyodor Dostoevsky critiquing godless socialism.


"Everything with them is 'the influence of environment,' and nothing else. Their favourite phrase! From which it follows that, if society is normally organised, all crime will cease at once, since there will be nothing to protest against and all men will become righteous in one instant. Human nature is not taken into account, it is excluded, it's not supposed to exist! They don't recognise that humanity, developing by a historical living process, will become at last a normal society, but they believe that a social system that has come out of some mathematical brain is going to organise all humanity at once and make it just and sinless in an instant, quicker than any living process! That's why they instinctively dislike history, 'nothing but ugliness and stupidity in it,' and they explain it all as stupidity! That's why they so dislike the living process of life; they don't want a living soul!

The living soul demands life, the soul won't obey the rules of mechanics, the soul is an object of suspicion, the soul is retrograde! But what they want though it smells of death and can be made of India-rubber, at least is not alive, has no will, is servile and won't revolt! And it comes in the end to their reducing everything to the building of walls and the planning of rooms and passages in a phalanstery!

The phalanstery is ready, indeed, but your human nature is not ready for the phalanstery it wants life, it hasn't completed its vital process, it's too soon for the graveyard! You can't skip over nature by logic. Logic presupposes three possibilities, but there are millions! Cut away a million, and reduce it all to the question of comfort!

That's the easiest solution of the problem! It's seductively clear and you musn't think about it. That's the great thing, you mustn't think! The whole secret of life in two pages of print!"



TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kurt vonnegut said:

"Christians have been persecuted" and "Christians have done the persecuting" are not mutually exclusive statements, correct?


That's an in-house discussion that we've overcome through the years of dialogue with different Christian Traditions.

Furthermore, by what standard are you going to use in order to say what Christians experienced was wrong or correct?

Lastly, please give me some examples.

That way we can compare what worldview system is worse.

Secularism vs. Christianity deaths. Let's do a study.
TheGreatEscape
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The godless French Revolution that my opponents worship…


While it is impossible to give a precise number of casualties for the French Revolution due to record keeping methods used at the time, the current estimate is somewhere between 30,000-40,000 people, at least. This is most likely a conservative estimate. From 1789 until 1799, and especially during the Reign of Terror (1793-1794), execution rates increased exponentially, and as many were arrested as killed, some never to be seen again. If you include clergy, aristocrats, wealthy nobles, and soldiers, the number is probably somewhere closer to 100,000 people.

That's 100,000 French Catholics slaughtered, probably more, by the reason alone tenant of your pseudo-religion.

https://homework.study.com/explanation/how-many-people-died-in-the-french-revolution.html

Here's your godless socialist Nazis:

National Socialist German Workers' Party

"The total number of noncombatants killed by the Germansabout 11 millionis roughly what we had thought. "

And that's just the noncombatants. Now add Allie casualties lost to the godless Nazi socialists and you will see tens of millions.

https://war-history.fandom.com/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Want to do Stalin and Mao next?

Now you go before I add Stalin and Mao.




 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.