-
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!
As Arranged, Trump Has Been Acquitted
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Good-Ole-Rebel
*banned*
Wow...Native Americans have been impacted by Christianity. If you can find a Reservation where their are no churches, and they adhere to their past pagan culture, then try and go and live there.
Europe was impacted by Christianity from King to pauper. Just because it is but a shell of what it used to be, does not remove the impact Christianity had upon it. And the pagans there are enjoying a society that Christianity built.
Wow.
Good-Ole-Rebel
Good-Ole-Rebel
*banned*
Answer mine and I will answer yours.
Common Law
scholarship.law.upenned/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3029&context=penn_law_review
Good-Ole-Rebel
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Prechristian Native Americans appeared much happier, living outside of reservations, their cultural identities intact.
Prechristian Europeans appeared much the same way, living their lives happily as non-christians.
Then there were the Greeks <or insert any prechristian civilization in there>, mighty in their non-christian philosophies and traditions.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Link doesn't seem to work...
But be specific. Which modern laws today are based on values that are specifically Christian and not common to typical human society.
But just to be clear, while you appear to suppose that there can be no virtue without religion, and many of us would disagree with that supposition. In fact, it is quite wrong.
@Good-Ole-Rebel has it quite backwards.
Most of the cultural and ethical improvements to western society came about by leaving Scriptural morality and adopting secular humanist values. A long, slow, uneven process. But you won't find anything about representative government, basic rights like speech or association, laissez faire capitalism, or any of that stuff.
Like ancient Christians retrofitting their beliefs into the OT, modern Christians have retrofitted secular values into the NT. A few generations later, they believe it was always there. But the secular values considered "American" aren't in the Bible and never were.
I have occasionally wondered about something.
Had the Declaration of Independence been put to a referendum, a free and fair vote by all the adult residents of the nascient USA, would it have passed?
I doubt it. I honestly believe that too many of the conservative, Bible based, Christian folks would have voted for "the divine right of kings" and similar scriptural values to pass muster. The secular values in the DoI were too liberal and godless.
If you really want to see the long term results of Christianity in societies, look at Dutch Protestantism in South Africa. Or Catholicism in Portuguese Brazil, French Haiti, or Spanish Mexico.
Tom
Trump will be remembered as Andrew Johnson is - impeached. Nobody or refers to Andrew Johnson in terms of acquittal. Impeachment is forever. When enough time has passed that Trump is as poorly remembered as presidents like Andrew Johnson and Garfield, about whom people mostly only remember impeached and assassinated, Trump will still be remembered for being impeached. His children and grandchildren will hear about it continually, and Trump will gnash his teeth whenever he thinks about it.
That is not esteeming women as people, but one woman for being a chaste incubator then mother. Add submitting to husbands and remaining silent in church, and remove reproductive rights, and you have the Christian model for womanhood.
Humanism does much better. It advocates for social, economic, and political equality for women, which is what they really want, need, and deserve.
No, you lost.
He didn't move any goal post, but you deflected by so saying. His comment was apt. He was pointing out your hypocrisy for cherry picking which moral failings of the Bible you still want to bludgeon people with, and which you don't.
Here's a hysterical meme that has been floating around for several years now that beautifully illustrates the hypocrisy.
"Dear Dr. Laura
"Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
[1] Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
[2] I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She is 6 years old, healthy, and very smart. She doesn't want to be a slave, so that might be a problem.
[3] I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19 24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
[4] When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
[5] I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
[6] A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
[7] Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear contact lenses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
[8] Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?
[9] I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? What should we do with the NFL?
[10] My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws?(Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
You are a great prophet and I will go to my grave remembering that you were among the very few who placed the blame for 9/11 where it truly belonged: on abortionists, gays and lesbians. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging."
"Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
[1] Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
[2] I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She is 6 years old, healthy, and very smart. She doesn't want to be a slave, so that might be a problem.
[3] I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19 24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
[4] When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
[5] I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
[6] A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
[7] Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear contact lenses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
[8] Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?
[9] I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? What should we do with the NFL?
[10] My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws?(Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
You are a great prophet and I will go to my grave remembering that you were among the very few who placed the blame for 9/11 where it truly belonged: on abortionists, gays and lesbians. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging."
I believe that secular humanism has a higher standard for morals than your religion. We haven't been taught to demean homosexuals, for example.
Your religion advocates the divine command theory of morals, which is defined as "a meta-ethical theory which proposes that an action's status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God."
This has got to be the worst idea in all of moral philosophy. According to that, if you can convince a person that his god has ordered him to hate atheists, or gouge the eyeballs out of kittens, for example, then it becomes immoral not to do so, which is probably your position.
I challenge you to find a worse moral idea than that. That's a complete abdication of one's responsibility to be a moral agent. One is simply deferring to what he or she was told some god wants them to do.
Which is why it is false to call Christianity a religion of love. We've seen how it has generated hundreds of millions of homophobic bigots, which harms gay people, making their lives more difficult and dangerous by marginalizing and demonizing them. Worse, this religion of yours has convinced all of these bigots that they hold the moral high ground. Look at how defiantly you hold on to and repeat your homophobic message.
But you serve a useful purpose. It is very helpful that people see this. It is very helpful to see someone like @Evangelicalhumanist tell you that he finds your use of the word Sodomite to be offensive, and to see your defiant indifference to the harm you do serving as a willing vector of bigotry and hate speech.
So shine on, shining star, and show us just what your priests are teaching you constitutes love. It's what others call hate.
Word of God? No. The word of people whose lives had so little in common with ours as to be irrelevant.
But who cares if people are still reading those words in 1000 years or more? We also will probably never see a world without Druids or followers of Zeus (yeah, they still have that) - equally irrelevant to what Christianity is becoming as it slowly evaporates away. And once Christianity has lost its ability to control to the cultures in which it had hegemony, almost nobody will know it still exists.
The Modern Greeks Who Still Worship Zeus - KnowledgeNuts
Yeah, really. Trump's dictatorial nature is world famous, and apparently the Republican Party is willing to support him in it. What did people think would be the result of a sham trial? Respect for Trump, the Republicans, and America, or the opposite?
You don't have to care what the world thinks of Trump's America, but repeating that they don't understand the American system is irrelevant. They don't need to. Most Americans don't understand it.
But they do understand Trump, the kind of man he is, and how that reflects on America given his popularity.
1. Desire for military parades
2. Browbeats the press and defines it as the enemy of the people
3. Confuses himself with the nation, calling what’s bad for him bad for America.
4. Attacks investigative committees and the intelligence community
5. Attacking vanquished political opponents
6. Attempt to control the flow of information
7. Holding rallies unrelated to campaigning
8. Calling those that disagree with him treasonous and un-American
9. Demanding adulation from his cabinet
10. Admires thuggish strongmen like Putin, Duterte, and Kim Jong Un
11. Nepotism
12. Disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law
13. Expecting government employees and appointees to be loyal to him personally rather than the nation
14. Targeting and demonizing various scapegoated groups
15. Angry nationalism and xenophobia
16. Vastly exaggerate a threat to make people afraid so that they will sacrifice freedoms to him in exchange for unneeded protection
17. The use of executive action to claim powers he doesn’t have
18. Contempt for facts and evidence
19. The destruction of political norms
20. Threats of refusal to leave office when it’s time
2. Browbeats the press and defines it as the enemy of the people
3. Confuses himself with the nation, calling what’s bad for him bad for America.
4. Attacks investigative committees and the intelligence community
5. Attacking vanquished political opponents
6. Attempt to control the flow of information
7. Holding rallies unrelated to campaigning
8. Calling those that disagree with him treasonous and un-American
9. Demanding adulation from his cabinet
10. Admires thuggish strongmen like Putin, Duterte, and Kim Jong Un
11. Nepotism
12. Disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law
13. Expecting government employees and appointees to be loyal to him personally rather than the nation
14. Targeting and demonizing various scapegoated groups
15. Angry nationalism and xenophobia
16. Vastly exaggerate a threat to make people afraid so that they will sacrifice freedoms to him in exchange for unneeded protection
17. The use of executive action to claim powers he doesn’t have
18. Contempt for facts and evidence
19. The destruction of political norms
20. Threats of refusal to leave office when it’s time
No, we knew all along that Trump would be acquitted no matter the charges or evidence. The Democrats had an excellent case, but no interest in it from the Republicans.
You're trying to imply that a good life in a modern liberal democratic state is due to Christianity because Christianity is present in those countries, but life didn't get good in them until Christianity was subdued by Enlightenment values and secular humanism. What those desirable countries, which includes many nations of Western Europe, have in common, is several centuries of the moderating influence of humanist values, something the Islamic nations, especially in the Middle East, haven't had, and the main reason that they're still cutting off hands, dropping people from high towers, throwing acid in one another's face, and burning one another alive in cages. There is no reason that the Christians.
Islam and Christianity are pretty much the same religion on paper. Each reveres a Semitic desert god who is an angry, petty, vengeful, jealous, judgmental, capricious, prudish, strongman requiring worship and submission under threat of cosmic reprisal.
Believers of each attend temples (Mosques or churches) and obey paternalistic, misogynisitic clergy.
Both religions embrace magical thinking, mythology, dogma, the supernatural, and ritual.
Each feature demons angels, prayer, an afterlife, a judgment, and a system of reward and punishment after death.
They each think they have the right to determine who should be allowed to diddle whom how, who should be able to marry whom, and what women must do regarding their bodies.
Both are patriarchal, authoritarian, misogynistic, sexually repressive, anhedonisitic, atheophobic, homophobic, antiscientiific, use psychological terrorism on their children, have violent histories featuring torture, genocide and terrorism, and demand obedience and submission.
Each consider faith a virtue and reason a problem.
Each advocates theocracy over democracy.
I could go on, but you get the point. So why are Islam and Christianity rendered so differently in the countries where they dominate? Secular humanism in the West is the difference. Before that, Christians were as barbaric and brutal as the Muslims, putting people in large metal kettles and boiling them alive, or extracting admissions of impiety using the rack, the pear, and whatever other brutal torture they could conceive. Humanism eliminated that
If you switched the ideologies out, and put Christianity in Saudi Arabia and Islam in America, you would have Christian Arabs cutting off hands and heads, and American Muslims going door to door asking if you know Mohammed. America would still be a secular state with a Muslim majority forced to tolerate "infidels" thanks to humanist values, and Saudi would still be a brutal, intolerant theocracy, but a Christian one instead. There is no reason to believe otherwise.
And when the Muslims finally ban these practices, it will be because they have traded their Abrahamic practices for humanist values.
No, the origin of the US was a rejection of Christian values regarding statecraft.
If you want to see the Christian model for government, daily life, and the role of individuals, look to the Middle Ages, when Christian theocratic government was common. If you want to see the reaction to that and its rejection, look to the Enlightenment versions of those things, which you are crediting to Christianity..
I just had a lengthy exchange with another RF poster who was insisting that secular humanism was an outgrowth of Christianity. I disagreed, and refuted his claim by showing how secular humanism was a rejection of Christian values. The two have almost nothing in common beyond it being wrong to kill or steal.
Likewise here. The principles that define Americanism look nothing like those that define Christianity. When two modes of thought are related, they look alike, as Christianity and Islam do.
Christianity says there is one God, and its Bible commands us to worship it only and obey the Sabbath. Americanism says worship any god or no god.
Christianity teaches,
- "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."- Romans 13:1-2
- "Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient" - Titus 3:1
- "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king" - 1Samuel 15:23
Christianity is all about sin, redemption, and obedience. Americanism is about freedom and the pursuit of happiness. You didn't find those things in the Christian era, The Age of Faith. The Age of Reason, which followed, is a rejection of that model, just as reason itself is a rejection of faith, and faith a rejection of reason.
We should revisit these claims when he some day leaves office.
If he will have become a king or dictator, I'll admit my error.
But if otherwise, will you admit yours?
Spartan
Well-Known Member
Nice try, but your secular humanism has turned the world into a moral cesspool. And that's a fact.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
There's a lot of common sense / political correctness that sends people to Hell.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
In your dreams.
Take a quick look at the third world countries where EuroChristianity has been dominant for the last few centuries. Then compare them to the countries where secular humanist values have taken over.
Say, compare Haiti to Denmark.
Then tell me where you'd rather live. Haiti or Denmark?
Tom
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Once again, your anti religious diatribe is rife with ignorant opinion, I emphasize the word ignorant.
If you think Islam and Christianity are pretty much the same, then your ignorance of both takes center stage. A sad display.
You quote Samuel, written for Jews under the first covenant in a theocracy. It has no application to Christians.
You quote New Testament verses that show Christians are to be law abiding citizens, and extrapolate that these verses preclude them from rebellion when confronted with an unjust government. That is nonsense.
The overwhelming majority of those in our own rebellion were Christians.
Christians are to rebel in the presence of evil, that is a fundamental tenant of the faith. A severely unjust government is evil, and that is why all those Christians took up arms against British rule.
Conflating the Jewish theocracy that has passed, with the true Christian position on a free society is disingenuous.
The very purity of Christian values was degraded when the corrupted church tried to create a theocracy.
It was wrong when Rome did it, it was wrong when Calvin tried it in Geneva, it would be wrong today.
You conflate morality with the law and believe Christians do as well. Wrong.
Morality is something determined individually and collectively about behavior. It cannot be legislated, it just is. Of course their are different views on morality, and they change.
My morality is certainly not the same as yours, and when you were an American, we co existed in the same country.
The law regulates behavior that is detrimental to society as a whole. It may be moral or immoral depending upon ones perspective, yet it is promulgated in an orderly way in a representative government and applies to all citizens, regardless of their sense of morality.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And yet all of the data appears to refute that.
What do you make that claim based upon? Because people are not following your bronze age rules of morality?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Did we choose to be born here? And, as I have pointed out, people like me work against Christianity. Those of us moving America away from Jehovah. If say we've been so successful that Christians have had to pervert their faith by putting it on money, and have been so rocked by society moving away that they had to add it to things here and their so they don't forget.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Saying "I d9nt remember but it's found here" is a perfectly acceptable answer based in honesty. Would you rather me make things up?Bob isn't the only one skeptical of vague recollections as proof.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
So, you deny slavery is supported in the Bible? That Paul didn't say women are bellow men? Do you deny Ham was cursed?
I understand the basis for your belief.
But it's not compelling to non-believers.