As Arranged, Trump Has Been Acquitted

[Spartan]

Goodness, you really are as I thought.

So you can't bust the resurrection. It's your Achilles Heel, Audie. The chink in your armor. The fly in your antichrist soup.

 

[Spartan]

When did anyone prove it?

When did you people ever DISPROVE IT??

 

[Audie]

So you can't bust the resurrection. It's your Achilles Heel, Audie. The chink in your armor. The fly in your antichrist soup.

You do not need to demonstrate yet again that you
either pay no attention, or you lack the simple
capacity to understand what you read.

One more time.
Is it not true that you are a creationist?
Believe in 6 day poof and flood?

IF SO-
Your version of "god" is a god who
did things like the six day poof and the ark.
These things did not happen They are fairy tales.

Got is so far?

Now, as these are fairy tales, the god who
did them is also part of a fairy tale.
Does not exist.

Got it?

It may be that there is a god, Maybe "Jesus" said
"Bang shangalang" when he popped up from the dead.
and maybe "Jesus" is also a fairy tale. No way to prove
or disprove it.

Capiche?

"Jesus" and his purported resurrection is a different topic.

Comprenez-vous?

Probably not.

And you read all these big books.

 

[Audie]

When did you people ever DISPROVE IT??

If something cannot be disproved, it must be true!!!
Is that your "reasoning"? haha.

Did you know Batboy has a secret invisible
laboratory on the moon?

You cannot DISPROVE IT, can you?

To which you might , if unwisely, say, BFD.

 

[Spartan]

If something cannot be disproved, it must be true!!!
Is that your "reasoning"? haha.

Did you know Batboy has a secret invisible
laboratory on the moon?

You cannot DISPROVE IT, can you?

To which you might , if unwisely, say, BFD.

HA! I have multiple, historical accounts of the resurrection. You have a hot air Batboy denial. How sophomoric of you.

 

[Audie]

HA! I have multiple, historical accounts of the resurrection. You have a hot air Batboy denial. How sophomoric of you.

Ok, we've seen the best you can do..
Bye.

 

[Spartan]

You do not need to demonstrate yet again that you
either pay no attention, or you lack the simple
capacity to understand what you read.

One more time.
Is it not true that you are a creationist?
Believe in 6 day poof and flood?

IF SO-
Your version of "god" is a god who
did things like the six day poof and the ark.
These things did not happen They are fairy tales.

Got is so far?

Now, as these are fairy tales, the god who
did them is also part of a fairy tale.
Does not exist.

Got it?

It may be that there is a god, Maybe "Jesus" said
"Bang shangalang" when he popped up from the dead.
and maybe "Jesus" is also a fairy tale. No way to prove
or disprove it.

Capiche?

"Jesus" and his purported resurrection is a different topic.

Comprenez-vous?

Probably not.

And you read all these big books.

If Jesus' resurrection is a different thread, then so is your Noah's Ark nonsense.

But then, you always run from the resurrection and go centuries upon centuries earlier when there isn't as much historical and archaeological evidence. That's your cover.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

What it means is that the Founders founded the country as a secular one and specifically stated as much in the Constitution. Many of them weren't even Christians, so your idea that the US was founded on Christian ideals or values or whatever doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. It seems to me that Enlightenment values are more heavily reflected in the Constitution, than anything else really.



Perhaps you could explain why you think that is.

As I said, just because they recognized the importance of separation of church and state, did not make the Constitution anti-christ or anti-god. That the U.S is founded on Christianity is a fact based upon the people who founded it. Again, one must go back to the beginning. Read the Mayflower Compact.

So, you have a Christian people coming from another Christian land and making up a new nation. Thus their Christianity will mold their views of laws and Constitution. As I have said, this is why they swore on the Bible. It is why they still do today.

Seems self-explanatory. Explain your comments as to why it isn't working so well.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Did you forget all of this:

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.​

And if you recall, that list was first provided as part of an argument that the difference in the way the Islam and Christianiity religions are manifest - one still embracing brutal practices reminiscent of the Christian church in the Middle Ages, the other more civilized - was due to the humanizing effect of secular humanism. It's not a coincidence that they stopped killing witched in the colonies once Enlightenment political philosophy gave us the modern, secular, liberal, democratic state with guaranteed protections from such abuse by the church. There is no reason to believe that the Christian church would ever have given up torturing those who it disapproved of had more civil behavior not been imposed on them.

Did you have a rebuttal for that beyond the unevidenced claim that Islam and Christianity have nothing in common?

This is the opposite problem to the one just discussed - the lack of a family resemblance between the Bible and the US Constitution, which you claim are closely related. Here you want to say that Islam and Christianity have nothing in common when it is easy to make long lists of what they have in common. How did Abraham and Moses make it into both religions? Why do they both have creationists fighting science? The answer is easy - they're kissing cousins.

This is the difference between reason and evidence based thought, and faith-based thought. With faith, you just declare whatever you wish to be true and then believe it as if it were. There's a better way to decide what is true about the world, but it involves looking at it and evaluating the evidence.

You also might like to take notice of the fact that whenever you make these unsupported claims that fly in the face of the evidence, you invite others to make compelling arguments that you are wrong that you counter only with unevidenced claims. Is that what you're looking for?

No, I didn't forget. I already said, Christianity and Islam are not the same. Your description of similarities is lame. The U.S. is a country. China is a country. They are the same. Foolish.

The fact that Islam is a religion doesn't make it the same as Christianity. What it believes, is what is to be compared to. And concerning what it believes, we are not the same.

Muhammad imitated what little he knew of Christianity to create a religion for the Arab peoples. But with his imitations, he changed what was said in the Bible. Thus, as said, we are not the same.

If you want to continue with your 'compelling argument' of Christianity and Islam being the same, that is fine. Show me how Jesus Christ in the Bible, and Jesus Christ in Islam are the same.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[atanu]

This ties my head in knots,"you are charged with obstruction of Justice and and abuse of power",ponders for a nano second,"ok prove it", the accusers retort "we have witnesses",the accused chuckles and trumphantly declares "they're not allowed".

Similar is the case of rulers in India. The ruling dispensation is out to destroy the constitution through back door bills. Mr. Modi is now going to accord an unprecedented rousing welcome to Trump in India. He is arranging for truck loads of gullible poor supporters to welcome Trump at Airport and then to a stadium where the naked emperors will again fool the gullible public. Two gel very well.

 

[England my lionheart]

Similar is the case of rulers in India. The ruling dispensation is out to destroy the constitution through back door bills. Mr. Modi is now going to accord an unprecedented rousing welcome to Trump in India. He is arranging for truck loads of gullible poor supporters to welcome Trump at Airport and then to a stadium where the naked emperors will again fool the gullible public. Two gel very well.

Trump didn't get much of a welcome here,there were protesters waiting for him.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

You are arguing that the American government was founded on Christian principles, yet the fundamental principles found in the Constitution of the US cannot be found in scripture. You won't find anything there about democracy, limited, divided and transparent government, the rule of law, church-state separation (secular government), guaranteed personal liberties such as freedom of expression, the autonomy of the individual, and the like.

The biblical model is the one that the US revolution intended to topple - kings, commands, subjects, divine right. You call yourself a rebel. The Bible commands you to submit to kings. Remember these?

• "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

No room for rebelling there.

You are simply insisting on something that is demonstrably untrue. If the US Constitution were the child of biblical scripture, there ought to be a family resemblance. Instead, there is almost no overlap.

The U.S. Constitution is the product of a Bible believing people. John Locke had a tremendous influence on the making of the Constitution. And Locke was Christian and the Bible influenced him greatly.

Google article (Reason to Ratify: The Influence of John Locke's Religious Beliefs on the Creation and Adoption of the U.S. Constitution). By David L. Wardle.

"Locke's political philosophy was important to these early Americans, but even more important were the principles that he taught about human nature. Locke's views on natural law and his firm commitment to the existence and attention of God had a significant impact on those who read his books, especially at the time the Constitution was penned." (p. 297)

"The foundational concepts of freedom and liberty contained in the Constitution are derived from Locke's teachings. The reason that the framers of the Constitution felt that a social contract is the basis of free government goes back to Lockean principles of natural law." (p. 302)

As to the verses you quote in trying to make Christians guilty in opposing any government, is like saying because the sixth commandment says 'thou shalt not kill' then Christians are not allowed to kill anything. When in fact not only did God say 'thou shalt not kill' but He instituted the death penalty for some things in Israel. And He instituted the animal sacrifices which must be killed first.

As to the Christians during the time of the American Revolution, they also were under their local law to which they were directly responsible. Much like during the War between the States, the individual was under his state law first. So if the state seceded the Christian was obeying the powers that be in supporting it.

Thus there comes times when resistance to a law of the land is justified, and when it concerns the things of God, the Christian is allowed to disobey. (Acts 5:29) "Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men."

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[SkepticThinker]

When did you people ever DISPROVE IT??

Sorry, that's not how it works.

Do you believe in unicorns, fairies, leprechauns, gnomes, tea pots orbiting Mars, invisible pixies, etc. until some disproves it to you? Of course not. Because that's not how the burden of proof works.

 

[SkepticThinker]

As I said, just because they recognized the importance of separation of church and state, did not make the Constitution anti-christ or anti-god. That the U.S is founded on Christianity is a fact based upon the people who founded it. Again, one must go back to the beginning. Read the Mayflower Compact.

So, you have a Christian people coming from another Christian land and making up a new nation. Thus their Christianity will mold their views of laws and Constitution. As I have said, this is why they swore on the Bible. It is why they still do today.

You're changing the point of discussion here. Nobody is trying to say the Constitution is "anti-Christ" or "anti-God." Rather, I was pointing out that the Constitution is SECULAR.
It's not a fact that the "US is founded on Christianity" and you certainly haven't demonstrated that. In fact, several people are currently refuting you on that point. Just repeating something again doesn't make it true. The Mayflower Compact is not the Constitution. Also, as pointed out, many of the founders were not even Christians and were inspired by Enlightenment ideals.

By the way, swearing on the Bible is not a requirement. At least one member of the House was sworn in with a Qu'ran.

Seems self-explanatory. Explain your comments as to why it isn't working so well.


Good-Ole-Rebel

Sorry, what?

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, I didn't forget. I already said, Christianity and Islam are not the same. Your description of similarities is lame. The U.S. is a country. China is a country. They are the same. Foolish.

The fact that Islam is a religion doesn't make it the same as Christianity. What it believes, is what is to be compared to. And concerning what it believes, we are not the same.

Muhammad imitated what little he knew of Christianity to create a religion for the Arab peoples. But with his imitations, he changed what was said in the Bible. Thus, as said, we are not the same.

If you want to continue with your 'compelling argument' of Christianity and Islam being the same, that is fine. Show me how Jesus Christ in the Bible, and Jesus Christ in Islam are the same.

Good-Ole-Rebel

The poster has shown you twice now.
Both times you completely dismissed it and said, "Christianity and Islam are not the same."
Now you've changed the goal posts. Again.

Are we noticing a pattern here?

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

You're changing the point of discussion here. Nobody is trying to say the Constitution is "anti-Christ" or "anti-God." Rather, I was pointing out that the Constitution is SECULAR.
It's not a fact that the "US is founded on Christianity" and you certainly haven't demonstrated that. In fact, several people are currently refuting you on that point. Just repeating something again doesn't make it true. The Mayflower Compact is not the Constitution. Also, as pointed out, many of the founders were not even Christians and were inspired by Enlightenment ideals.

By the way, swearing on the Bible is not a requirement. At least one member of the House was sworn in with a Qu'ran.




Sorry, what?

No I'm not changing anything.

The Mayflower Compact is the origin of government for the people of the U.S. The people who came to America were Christian. Everywhere they went, churches were built. They were Christian. America didn't begin in 1787.

Not only was America founded on Christianity, but it was Protestant Christianity. I don't believe it was coincidence that around the same time when the New World was being discovered the Reformation was taking place in Europe.

Yes, the swearing in using a Koran is an abomination. The U.S. continues to get farther away from it's roots which are Christian.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[SoyLeche]

No I'm not changing anything.

The Mayflower Compact is the origin of government for the people of the U.S. The people who came to America were Christian. Everywhere they went, churches were built. They were Christian. America didn't begin in 1787.

Not only was America founded on Christianity, but it was Protestant Christianity. I don't believe it was coincidence that around the same time when the New World was being discovered the Reformation was taking place in Europe.

Yes, the swearing in using a Koran is an abomination. The U.S. continues to get farther away from it's roots which are Christian.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Why do you have such a Yankee centric view of the founding of America? I would think you would be all about Jamestown.

 

[Spartan]

Sorry, that's not how it works.

Do you believe in unicorns, fairies, leprechauns, gnomes, tea pots orbiting Mars, invisible pixies, etc. until some disproves it to you? Of course not. Because that's not how the burden of proof works.

Typical loser argument on your part.

 

[SoyLeche]

Typical loser argument on your part.

So - have you disproven Thor's Hammer recently?

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

Why do you have such a Yankee centric view of the founding of America? I would think you would be all about Jamestown.

At that point in time it was not about North or South. To get technical, those who landed at Plymouth Rock were headed for Virginia.

Good-Ole-Rebel