Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

YouBet said:

---

I don't know Max Miller but he's apparently a dumbass. His original tweet doesn't get any more direct yet he didn't intend to say that? And be's not going to run from it but he's just going to hand wave it away?

He simply should have owned it and said he went too far, apologize and leave it at that.

---

The right thing would be stepping down. Anything short of that is a disgrace. I don't want people who think like him deciding our nation's laws.

Dies Irae said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

You are high. He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me".

The Good Shepherd does not let the single sheep wander around aimlessly and say "you're good, just do you" he leaves the 99 to bring the 1 back into the Fold.

---

He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life," but he never said follow me or die. Like Rapier said, "It's a choice," to follow or not. Jesus gave people miracles and the word of God, but whether they made the choice to believe in and accept him was up to them. Forced faith isn't faith at all.

---

It's even worse than follow him or die. It's follow him or risk damnation.

Does the Good Shepherd allow the lost sheep to roam? Or does he bring them back to the flock?

---

If you force someone into faith, they have by definition not chosen to accept Him because they didn't have a choice to make. If you can't understand the importance of that distinction, then there's no helping you.

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Well, when did he ever make statements advocating for government control over religion? When did he get political at all? He was fine with laws of the land at the time and freedom of religion, but you think he would have flip flopped by now and demanded that Catholicism be forced on everyone?

I think he would have had a very real problem with the Catholic Church (and other denominations) if we're being honest. I don't think he'd have a problem with a society giving people "free will", which is what God gives us.

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Well, when did he ever make statements advocating for government control over religion? When did he get political at all? He was fine with laws of the land at the time and freedom of religion, but you think he would have flip flopped by now and demanded that a bunch of creepy ass heretical clergymen claiming to be offshoots of the apostles forcing their religion on everyone?

I think he would have had a very real problem with the Catholic Church (and other denominations) if we're being honest...and I am not talking about pedophilia and the coverups, nor the recent liberal wishy washy popes who stray from Christianity. I don't think he'd have a problem with a society giving people "free will", which is what God gives us.

---

Yes, I do. How do I know this? Because he instructs his disciples to listen to the scribes and Pharisees even if we are not to emulate them. Why does he say this? Because they sit in the seat of Moses.

The entire Bible is a story of righteous authority. Angels were thrown down to hell when they declared their own freedom of religion. The imagery of scripture is that of Kingdoms and Kings, and Keys to the kingdom, Christendom exploded due to the Reign of Constantine and then flourished and was spread by the Catholic kings of Europe. The only reason that you're not bowing to Mecca multiple times a day is because some badass Catholic Kings and their vassals shouted "God wills it" and turned back the Muslims from both France and Spain.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

---

Well if I can't use Catholic writings we need to throw the Bible out as well. What time period do you consider the 'Catholic period'

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

You are high. He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me".

The Good Shepherd does not let the single sheep wander around aimlessly and say "you're good, just do you" he leaves the 99 to bring the 1 back into the Fold.

---

He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life," but he never said follow me or die. Like Rapier said, "It's a choice," to follow or not. Jesus gave people miracles and the word of God, but whether they made the choice to believe in and accept him was up to them. Forced faith isn't faith at all.

---

It's even worse than follow him or die. It's follow him or risk damnation.

Does the Good Shepherd allow the lost sheep to roam? Or does he bring them back to the flock?

---

If you force someone into faith, they have by definition not chosen to accept Him because they didn't have a choice to make. If you can't understand the importance of that distinction, then there's no helping you.

---

If you can't understand the distinction between CHrist being "very much in favor of something" and him sorrowfully watching his beloved creation subvert his will through his gift of free will, then there's no helping you.

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Well, when did he ever make statements advocating for government control over religion? When did he get political at all? He was fine with laws of the land at the time and freedom of religion, but you think he would have flip flopped by now and demanded that a bunch of creepy ass heretical clergymen claiming to be offshoots of the apostles forcing their religion on everyone?

I think he would have had a very real problem with the Catholic Church (and other denominations) if we're being honest...and I am not talking about pedophilia and the coverups, nor the recent liberal wishy washy popes who stray from Christianity. I don't think he'd have a problem with a society giving people "free will", which is what God gives us.

---

Yes, I do. How do I know this? Because he instructs his disciples to listen to the scribes and Pharisees even if we are not to emulate them. Why does he say this? Because they sit in the seat of Moses.

The entire Bible is a story of righteous authority. Angels were thrown down to hell when they declared their own freedom of religion. The imagery of scripture is that of Kingdoms and Kings, and Keys to the kingdom, Christendom exploded due to the Reign of Constantine and then flourished and was spread by the Catholic kings of Europe. The only reason that you're not bowing to Mecca multiple times a day is because some badass Catholic Kings and their vassals shouted "God wills it" and turned back the Muslims from both France and Spain.

---

Why does Jesus never make legislative or political recommendations? And I am definitely glad people fought to defend their lands from the foreign hordes. That has nothing to do with biblical gospel, that is merely defending ones nation/culture/religion from being destroyed.

Instructing people on how to be good Christians is not championing state sponsored/mandated religion. Jesus NEVER advocated for such things, plain and simple. He was entirely concerned with growing his father's heavenly kingdom and with his followers spreading the truth wherever they went.

He even said "pay unto Caesar what is Caesar's". That wasn't a statement on the importance of high taxes...merely that he was not concerned with such earthly political matters.

Nanomachines son said:

---

No! Stating the core beliefs or principles of your faith isn’t bigoted as Lizzie did, its religious freedom and no one should be scolded for that.

It’s also wrong to speak about religious freedom while simultaneously harassing people who freely express their beliefs. https://t.co/NbgKr1MvIi

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) August 16, 2023

When Ilhan Omar is more correct than you, that's how you know you've messed up.

This is absolutely true.

---

Ilhan seethes with hatred towards both Jews and Christians. We just found out she hates Jews just a little more.

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

---

Well if I can't use Catholic writings we need to throw the Bible out as well. What time period do you consider the 'Catholic period'

---

I respect you as a poster and person of faith, but I can't have a religious discussion with someone who thinks the Apostles were "catholic". We will never see eye to eye on this topic, but no ill will.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Well, when did he ever make statements advocating for government control over religion? When did he get political at all? He was fine with laws of the land at the time and freedom of religion, but you think he would have flip flopped by now and demanded that a bunch of creepy ass heretical clergymen claiming to be offshoots of the apostles forcing their religion on everyone?

I think he would have had a very real problem with the Catholic Church (and other denominations) if we're being honest...and I am not talking about pedophilia and the coverups, nor the recent liberal wishy washy popes who stray from Christianity. I don't think he'd have a problem with a society giving people "free will", which is what God gives us.

---

Yes, I do. How do I know this? Because he instructs his disciples to listen to the scribes and Pharisees even if we are not to emulate them. Why does he say this? Because they sit in the seat of Moses.

The entire Bible is a story of righteous authority. Angels were thrown down to hell when they declared their own freedom of religion. The imagery of scripture is that of Kingdoms and Kings, and Keys to the kingdom, Christendom exploded due to the Reign of Constantine and then flourished and was spread by the Catholic kings of Europe. The only reason that you're not bowing to Mecca multiple times a day is because some badass Catholic Kings and their vassals shouted "God wills it" and turned back the Muslims from both France and Spain.

---

Why does Jesus never make legislative or political recommendations? And I am definitely glad people fought to defend their lands from the foreign hordes. That has nothing to do with biblical gospel, that is merely defending ones nation/culture/religion from being destroyed.

Instructing people on how to be good Christians is not championing state sponsored/mandated religion. Jesus NEVER advocated for such things, plain and simple. He was entirely concerned with growing his father's heavenly kingdom and with his followers spreading the truth wherever they went.

He even said "pay unto Caesar what is Caesar's". That wasn't a statement on the importance of high taxes...merely that he was not concerned with such earthly political matters.

---

For the main reason that Jesus transcends politics. Politics are the way in which we orient society in his absence. What does it mean when we talk of the 'Christian' culture of Western Civilization. Is that just a preference? Or are there some negotiables that come along with that?

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Newsflash, not forcing religious faith on someone IS giving them freedom of religion. They're one and the same, so there is no "walkback" here.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

---

Well if I can't use Catholic writings we need to throw the Bible out as well. What time period do you consider the 'Catholic period'

---

I respect you as a poster and person of faith, but I can't have a religious discussion with someone who thinks the Apostles were "catholic". We will never see eye to eye on this topic, but no ill will.

---

Okay, then you have an argument with around 75% of Christianity compromising the oldest Churches of Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

In the book of ACTS why did the apostles nominate a replacement for Judas?

Christ simply was not against freedom of religion. There is no biblical basis for him being so. Same with the apostles. Show me scripture, and I'll reconsider my position.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Newsflash, not forcing religious faith on someone IS giving them freedom of religion. They're one and the same, so there is no "walkback" here.

---

No it isn't. Does a Rastafarian have freedom of religion if he cannot practice it in his own way? Are Mayans allowed to sacrifice virgins to appease their God? Discuss amongst yourself.

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

Jesus was not and never was a libertarian. The Bible shows God to be a very jealous God and one of the very 10 commandments is "thou shalt put no other gods before me."

God approved of free will but he does not and never will approve of sin. Worshipping anyone other than him is a literal sin.

You are giving human characteristics to God, stop doing that.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

You are high. He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me".

The Good Shepherd does not let the single sheep wander around aimlessly and say "you're good, just do you" he leaves the 99 to bring the 1 back into the Fold.

---

He said "I am the way, the Truth and the Life," but he never said follow me or die. Like Rapier said, "It's a choice," to follow or not. Jesus gave people miracles and the word of God, but whether they made the choice to believe in and accept him was up to them. Forced faith isn't faith at all.

---

Only through Jesus may one achieve Eternal life. The Second Death awaits all who chose not to believe in Him.

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

---

Well if I can't use Catholic writings we need to throw the Bible out as well. What time period do you consider the 'Catholic period'

---

I respect you as a poster and person of faith, but I can't have a religious discussion with someone who thinks the Apostles were "catholic". We will never see eye to eye on this topic, but no ill will.

---

Okay, then you have an argument with around 75% of Christianity compromising the oldest Churches of Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

In the book of ACTS why did the apostles nominate a replacement for Judas?

---

The OG churches were more akin to protestant Bible studies than modern Catholic church. In style and substance. There is zero doubt in my mind that Jesus would be much more repulsed by the modern Catholic church than he would be with any government in this world.

Sid Farkas said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

No! Stating the core beliefs or principles of your faith isn’t bigoted as Lizzie did, its religious freedom and no one should be scolded for that.

It’s also wrong to speak about religious freedom while simultaneously harassing people who freely express their beliefs. https://t.co/NbgKr1MvIi

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) August 16, 2023

When Ilhan Omar is more correct than you, that's how you know you've messed up.

This is absolutely true.

---

Ilhan seethes with hatred towards both Jews and Christians. We just found out she hates Jews just a little more.

---

Like most Muslims, she probably has dreams of Jesus calling her to serve him. Despite Islam being what it is, this actually makes sense when you consider this fact.

Nanomachines son said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

Jesus was not and never was a libertarian. The Bible shows God to be a very jealous God and one of the very 10 commandments is "thou shalt put no other gods before me."

God approved of free will but he does not and never will approve of sin. Worshipping anyone other than him is a literal sin.

You are giving human characteristics to God, stop doing that.

---

Jesus gave commandments. Neither he, nor any apostle, advocated for local or state governments to force people to obey them. It's crazy to me that you can have any problem whatsoever with what Rapier is saying in that quote. No one is saying he'd identify as a libertarian. He simply wasn't political...AT ALL...although much of his rhetoric (sell your cloak and buy a sword, worse than a millstone and being drowned at the depths of the sea etc) would p*ss off modern libs, no doubt.

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

---

Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the sword the second time. It's not awkward at all if you read the Bible because that's what God and Jesus say repeatedly over and over in the OT and the NT.

God is intolerant completely of the worship of other gods and religions. There is a reason false prophets will suffer worse in the afterlife.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Well, when did he ever make statements advocating for government control over religion? When did he get political at all? He was fine with laws of the land at the time and freedom of religion, but you think he would have flip flopped by now and demanded that Catholicism be forced on everyone?

I think he would have had a very real problem with the Catholic Church (and other denominations) if we're being honest. I don't think he'd have a problem with a society giving people "free will", which is what God gives us.

---

I recognize that you edited out your statement, but...

I'd like to point out that it is a common argument by people opposed to Catholicism to conflate what clergy may do in error or sin with the doctrines of the Church. The Church recognizes that all men are flawed, even up to the Pope. Which means that all men will fail in living up to the full tenants of the faith by degrees. Just because men fail, it does not invalidate the faith. Find for me in the Catechism where it says that it is permissible for clergy to abuse or to force conversion by the sword. (Rhetorical, I don't want to further derail)

Quote:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

On the topic, why would God give us freewill if not to choose Him? And in order to exercise the freewill that He gave us, there must be an alternative or freewill is pointless. Therefore, God not only allows for people to not believe in Him, he requires it as an inherent trait of His gift of freewill. To deny someone the freewill to not choose Him would actually be an affront to His gift and plan.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

Jesus was not and never was a libertarian. The Bible shows God to be a very jealous God and one of the very 10 commandments is "thou shalt put no other gods before me."

God approved of free will but he does not and never will approve of sin. Worshipping anyone other than him is a literal sin.

You are giving human characteristics to God, stop doing that.

---

Jesus gave commandments. Neither he, nor any apostle, advocated for local or state governments to force people to obey them. It's crazy to me that you can have any problem whatsoever with what Rapier is saying in that quote. No one is saying he'd identify as a libertarian. He simply wasn't political...AT ALL...although much of his rhetoric (sell your cloak and buy a sword, worse than a millstone and being drowned at the depths of the sea etc) would p*ss off modern libs, no doubt.

---

People always forget that Jesus is also a king. He is the abject ruler of humanity. His very nature dictates a ruling body with him at the top. Read this thread for more information.

Christian Nationalism has been trending lately with many not understanding what it means.

It’s important for Christians to know what Christian Nationalism is, isn’t, and it’s Biblical case

The Biblical Case for Christian Nationalism a 🧵 pic.twitter.com/UY0HEWK8N5

— Smash Baals (@smashbaals) April 19, 2023

Nanomachines son said:

---

Mary Bailey said:

---

Not really. He's just panicking because the reaction was strong and completely one-sided. He meant exactly what he posted.

---

Lol. Your message was conveyed exactly how it was intended. You just realized you pissed off a major voting bloc that put you in office. We’re not tolerating this kind of rhetoric from you guys anymore. We are done. https://t.co/69ampUuuaC

— Matthew Pearson☩ (@_matthewpearson) August 16, 2023

Exactly, he got Ratio'ed hard and now he's backpedaling.

---

He might not win the next time he runs. I hear Bud Light is looking for someone to head up marketing, he might be a good fit.

Nanomachines son said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

---

Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the sword the second time. It's not awkward at all if you read the Bible because that's what God and Jesus say repeatedly over and over in the OT and the NT.

God is intolerant completely of the worship of other gods and religions. There is a reason false prophets will suffer worse in the afterlife.

---

Do you think Jesus would be proud of you for exterminating atheists and idolaters? Or would you be jumping the gun and getting ahead of his plans?

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

---

Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the sword the second time. It's not awkward at all if you read the Bible because that's what God and Jesus say repeatedly over and over in the OT and the NT.

God is intolerant completely of the worship of other gods and religions. There is a reason false prophets will suffer worse in the afterlife.

---

Do you think Jesus would be proud of you for exterminating atheists and idolaters? Or would you be jumping the gun and getting ahead of his plans?

---

Where in my post did I say anything about genocide?

Nanomachines son said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

Jesus was not and never was a libertarian. The Bible shows God to be a very jealous God and one of the very 10 commandments is "thou shalt put no other gods before me."

God approved of free will but he does not and never will approve of sin. Worshipping anyone other than him is a literal sin.

You are giving human characteristics to God, stop doing that.

---

Jesus gave commandments. Neither he, nor any apostle, advocated for local or state governments to force people to obey them. It's crazy to me that you can have any problem whatsoever with what Rapier is saying in that quote. No one is saying he'd identify as a libertarian. He simply wasn't political...AT ALL...although much of his rhetoric (sell your cloak and buy a sword, worse than a millstone and being drowned at the depths of the sea etc) would p*ss off modern libs, no doubt.

---

People always forget that Jesus is also a king. He is the abject ruler of humanity. His very nature dictates a ruling body with him at the top. Read this thread for more information.

Christian Nationalism has been trending lately with many not understanding what it means.

It’s important for Christians to know what Christian Nationalism is, isn’t, and it’s Biblical case

The Biblical Case for Christian Nationalism a 🧵 pic.twitter.com/UY0HEWK8N5

— Smash Baals (@smashbaals) April 19, 2023

---

I agree with all of that. Just saying,. I do not agree that Jesus would advocate for killing or imprisoning people who don't follow a certain specific brand or sect of Christianity.

Nanomachines son said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

---

Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the sword the second time. It's not awkward at all if you read the Bible because that's what God and Jesus say repeatedly over and over in the OT and the NT.

God is intolerant completely of the worship of other gods and religions. There is a reason false prophets will suffer worse in the afterlife.

---

Do you think Jesus would be proud of you for exterminating atheists and idolaters? Or would you be jumping the gun and getting ahead of his plans?

---

Where in my post did I say anything about genocide?

---

Ok maybe our government shouldn't kill non-believers or those who practice other religions, but we should at least imprison them or put them in camps right? That would be the righteous thing to do and Jesus would approve?

What would the just punishment for not following a state sanctioned sect of Christianity...let's say "Catholicism"...since that is the "one true church" LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLL

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

AGC said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Actually Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion.

He never once tried to force people to follow him; it was always a choice and it still is today.

He would never be in favor of Christianity being like Islam, which is convert or die.

---

So what happens when He comes back?

---

That's a completely different discussion.

---

It's different because it's really awkward to explain that the king comes back and doesn't tolerate dissent (despite being very freedom of religion, apparently). Much like God wiped out the giant clans around Israel and demanded that foreigners leave their gods behind to join them. It's a sclerotic view of Christ to focus on His time on earth for the purpose of salvation/redemption and say that rest of who He is must recede rather than integrate them into a whole.

How would freedom of religion work anyways when the messiah arrives to say, 'Here I am!' and no one recognizes Him? It's not like the Judeans practiced a different religion.

---

Jesus came as the lamb the first time and will come as the sword the second time. It's not awkward at all if you read the Bible because that's what God and Jesus say repeatedly over and over in the OT and the NT.

God is intolerant completely of the worship of other gods and religions. There is a reason false prophets will suffer worse in the afterlife.

---

Do you think Jesus would be proud of you for exterminating atheists and idolaters? Or would you be jumping the gun and getting ahead of his plans?

---

Where in my post did I say anything about genocide?

---

Ok maybe our government shouldn't kill non-believers or those who practice other religions, but we should at least imprison them or put them in camps right? That would be the righteous thing to do and Jesus would approve?

---

No need to do that. Make the government explicitly Christian and promote Christian laws and beliefs. They will leave of their own accord or convert. I would much rather they convert obviously but sometimes their hearts are hardened and conversion becomes impossible.

Nanomachines son said:

---

If you don’t want government to honor Christ who do you want it to honor?

-Satan
-Buddha
-Mohammad
-Gandhi

Oh, you want it to be neutral and honor no one?

Well we tried that and got drag queen story hour.

Either Christ will be honored as King or chaos will reign.

— Smash Baals (@smashbaals) August 16, 2023

I find it interesting that it appears that there is an increasingly growing portion of evangelicals (including Baptists and Presbyterians), Catholics, and Orthodox all who are moving to Christian Nationalism. We may not agree on a lot of doctrine but we all recognize the important of Christ being honored as King of the Nation.

---

Agreed. That is not anti-freedom of religion though.

And this is more relevant with almost each passing day.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Seriously how does anyone reconcile "Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" with "God desires all men to be saved".

Jesus says he's the Way, the truth and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through him, and desires that all men will be saved; but he's a fierce proponent of people not believing in him and going to hell?

---

Of course he desires it, but he will not force it on us. It is our choice.

We all know what you think about religion. You want a totalitarian Catholic state where pretty much any sin is a death sentence, and it would be convert or die.

---

How do you square that with my being against the death penalty?

Also, you've gone from Jesus would be very much in favor of freedom of religion" to "will not force it upon us". That's quite the walkback. Is that the end of your walkback or do you have more room to go?

---

Give me one piece of evidence that Jesus was against "freedom of religion". Bible only, Catholic writings don't count.

---

Well if I can't use Catholic writings we need to throw the Bible out as well. What time period do you consider the 'Catholic period'

---

I respect you as a poster and person of faith, but I can't have a religious discussion with someone who thinks the Apostles were "catholic". We will never see eye to eye on this topic, but no ill will.

---

Okay, then you have an argument with around 75% of Christianity compromising the oldest Churches of Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

In the book of ACTS why did the apostles nominate a replacement for Judas?

---

The OG churches were more akin to protestant Bible studies than modern Catholic church. In style and substance. There is zero doubt in my mind that Jesus would be much more repulsed by the modern Catholic church than he would be with any government in this world.

---

How were they more akin to Protestant Bible studies than the modern Catholic Church. He is a writing from St.Justin the Martyr describing the mass in 135 AD.

Quote:

---

But we, after we have thus washed him who has been convinced and has assented to our teaching, bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized [illuminated] person, and for all others in every place, that we may be counted worthy, now that we have learned the truth, by our works also to be found good citizens and keepers of the commandments, so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation.
Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands.
And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to ge'noito [so be it].
And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.

---

That is the same format as the Mass I attend several times a week.

The Liturgy of St.John Chrysostom, still used in Eastern Catholic and Orthodox celebrations, was developed in the year 400.

You think Christ would recognize some sleeve tatted barista worker baptizing people in rose petals?