How so? I already said that scripture as laws is a terrible idea. Unless you have a specific religion in mind? Elaborate please?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
a religious state?
- Thread starter syo
- Start date
How so? I already said that scripture as laws is a terrible idea. Unless you have a specific religion in mind? Elaborate please?
How so? I already said that scripture as laws is a terrible idea. Unless you have a specific religion in mind? Elaborate please?
Had to go back and look at your post to see what I was talking about.
Ok. I agree with your post. The "deadly idea" I was referring towas your saying that historically theocracy was a bad idea. I said deadly as in general. Not singling out a particular religion. In theocracies throughout history whether Jews under Moses or Dark age Catholics under the ruling Popes of that time, people were put to death over religious offense.
Akivah
Well-Known Member
And there's the problem. @A Greased Scotsman described your central concept as being only a minor concept in Buddhism. If your {Christian} theocracy was in place both @A Greased Scotsman and myself would be going to prison for disagreeing with you.
They don't care. They will repeat "Atheism is lack of belief" at you until you give up and they win by default because you've ripped your eyes out of your sockets in frustration.
Run away whilst you still can before they start throwing dictionaries at you!
As opposed to the eyeball-tearing frustration of dealing with those who refuse to accept the simple word of a member of said group since they clearly know better, you mean?