I don't think so. He is a Christian politician.
-
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!
Why do US Christian fundamentalists want a theocracy?
- Thread starter Tambourine
- Start date
-
- Tags
- christianity theocracy usa
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Ergo, tolerance becomes a problem when you believe in intolerance. Doesnt matter what others believe. It diesnt matter what facts say. It's all about me and what I want.
Ah, but both sides are meant to intend that as a temporary arrangement, until the child grows up and lives an independent life, and shapes his or her own destiny.
You've acutely anticipated my next line!
Well played! A lovely credential! Me, I'm peasant stock back to the Paleolithic. You have to look at my wife's tree to find some aristos.
It's a rather unsettling thought, placing one's future in the hands of an alien species, no? I mean, why do they bother, what are they really after?
To oversimplify, the idea of resurrection / an earthly body is consistent with Hebrew tradition, and the idea of the soul, and post-mortal judgment (Minos, Rhadamanthys and one more), and heaven (the Underworld, the Elysian Fields to the right, Tartarus to the left) is from the Greek.
I actually see death as useful, the part of life that gives us the word 'deadline' and makes sure we get things done. Our strongest instincts are still the Darwinian ones, survive long enough to breed (and, with H sap sap, where the infant needs care for five years before getting any independence, to see the offspring through that period). I accept that I'll die; and that I'll leave a ripple in the circle of family and friends; and that the ripple will be extinct when my grandchildren die ─ the same forward as backward (though I did bring some of the dead back to life when I put a family history together last century).
Besides, if people don't die, if we don't get rid of the big villains as well as the big heroes, that's the stagnation, the retarding of society, the locking of the future into an undead past. And where are all the rascals going to live? On rafts?
Go well!
Indeed, \\//
That's a pun
Last edited:
Yes, I understand; but humans “groing up” doesn’t really seem to make them capable of ruling themselves beneficially, does it?
We need guidance, IMO. (As per Churchill’s comment, indicating ‘the best is the worst....’)
I doubt that! Odds are, we all have some ‘aristos’ in our background.
BTW, through that same lineage — Gaskill, from Gascoigne — I’m also related to Richard Nixon! Yes, Churchill n Nixon were distant cousins, too.
[Strokes chin, looks thoughtful] Oh, Nixon ... Nixon eh? Well well ...
They want money! Lol.
No...he is our Father. He gave Adam life, Luke 3:38.
Adam’s choice (to rebel), though, gave rise to the issue, ‘Is man capable of ruling himself, w/o God’s help’.
So, for the most part, Jehovah has stayed out of mankind’s self-rule, letting them make, and suffer from, their own mistakes. But remember, we only endure suffering 70 to 80 years, usually. If some humans suffer real bad, it’s a lot less....then we “Sleep”. John 11:11-14. Until the Resurrection, John 6:44; Acts of the Apostles 24:15.
Jehovah God also provided for redemption of humankind’s imperfection, which resulted from inheriting our forefather Adam’s fallen condition....allowing His own Son to be born as a perfect human, to ultimately offer his own life as a ransom for Adam’s perfect life that he lost. Romans 5:12
He and Jesus, because of their love, paid a high price for us...they’re excellent rulers, with the power to effect real change!
IMO
Yeah, I know...I almost didn’t add that!! Lol.
Y'know, I've read the Garden story a number of times, and not once have I found any mention of 'rebel', 'sin', 'original sin', 'the fall of man', 'death entering the world', 'spiritual death' or the need for a redeemer. Nor any identity of the Snake with Satan (who in the Tanakh is one of God's courtiers, not the ArchVillain eg Job). God does NOT chuck them out because of anything they did. He says quite clearly why he chucks them out at Genesis 3:22: "Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever"─ 23 therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden ..."
As for Adam's choice to rebel, you'll recall that God had deliberately denied Adam and Eve knowledge of good and evil. If you don't know good and evil then it isn't possible to sin because you can't in any meaningful sense INTEND to sin. This was the state Eve was in when she bit the fruit, and this was the state Adam was in when he bit the fruit. Neither was capable of intending to offend until afterwards. So I see no rebellion.
In fact I suspect you're glad ─ I certainly would be ─ that Eve gave mankind knowledge of good and evil. It's an extremely positive thing to have. To blame her is like condemning and punishing the guys who invented penicillin or espresso coffee.
And Ezekiel devotes his 18th chapter to pointing out that sin is not inheritable anyway eg 20 "The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself."
Before I answer that, can you give me an example of man successfully ruling himself for long, wise, uninterrupted, uncorrupted periods of time WITH god's help?
I mean, this is the God whose first effort at administering a civilization was such a disaster [he] could think of no other way forward than to drown the lot (bar one teensy boatload).
the question, though, is who is intolerant.
tytlyf
Not Religious
Nah, the founders weren't Christian believers. The people who wrote the Constitution weren't Christians.
The leading figures in the framing of the US Constitution included deists and humanists.
But we're talking about the part of the First Amendment that forbade the establishment of any state religion. And while the deists and humanists would have no trouble with that, the principal agitation came from the rival bands of believers with the example of the Anglican church in England before their eyes.
tytlyf
Not Religious
My point was that the people who created the "separation of church and state" were not Christians to begin with.
I don't follow. Do you mean that the principle of separating church and state goes back to an earlier place and time?
I’d read it many times, too. But without help from JW’s, I never grasped much....especially not the issues raised in the Garden account, about sovereignty & about God’s really being called a liar. I didn’t get it on my own.
Death is mentioned, though...the result that would come from disobeying. And in Romans 5:12, Paul says “thus, death spread to all men.” From the “one man”. Inferring an inherited trait.
As for a Redeemer, Genesis 3:15 prophesies that need.
In the Garden, there was no bad for A&E to be warned about. Hence, why Eve felt so comfortable approaching a snake. Or at least, not running from it, when it began talking.
TTYL, my cousin.
Oh, BTW, it isn’t through my Gaskill lineage that I’m related to Nixon & Churchill, it’s through Lawrence & Cassandra Southwick. They’re my 10-G grandparents. And just found out that Liv Tyler, the young actress that was in the movie Armageddon? She too descended from them! Liv Tyler is my 11th cousin, 1 time removed. Kid you not.
Info found on FamousKin.com.
Google Lawrence and Cassandra Southwick...interesting story!
Sorry, I missed this.
I’d like to address it....a son wouldn’t be “thrown in jail” for crimes his father committed, but offspring still suffer from the choices their parents make....like poverty, or moving to another area, or (especially from the womb) addiction to drugs....even developing mental illness from abuse.
We suffer from A&E’ s bad choice.
And we did inherit imperfection from them....
The prohibition was easy to follow, there was so much other food...it wasn’t the only tree.
And if they hadn’t stolen from it, they never would’ve died!
Remember that Scripture I posted, Revelation 21:3-4? Says “tent of God is with mankind”? It also says “death will be no more”!
That must mean everlasting life!
Medical researchers have found that as humans age, the ends of our chromosomes- our telomeres - get shorter, and our bodies lose their ability to rejuvenate.
What if that is the key? But it’s only something Jehovah can adjust?
Someday maybe we’ll find out.
Last edited:
If there was nothing bad in the Garden of Eden, then how was the serpent there in the first place? Your point contradicts itself.
Nothing bad was expected.
Jehovah does not act as the “thought police.” He respects the privacy of all His intelligent creatures.
I mean, why would anyone rebel, when everything they needed for enjoying life, was given to them? And helpful guidance provided, to discover and learn new things? That’s what loving fathers do, right?
But one spirit creature started thinking arrogantly, thinking about receiving more recognition than he deserved, becoming discontented.
We don’t learn much about him until the books of Job, Ezekiel, the Gospels, and Revelation are completed. And others.
Satan — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Take care.
Well, in the story, the Snake tells no fibs. If anyone misspeaks, it's God, with [his] statement that if you eat the fruit you'll die the same day.
You'll find that it's expressed as a warning, not a threat ─ DON'T eat the fruit BECAUSE you'll die the same day. And not DON'T eat the fruit BECAUSE I ******* said so.
And of course Adam and Eve were always going to die ─ God expressly pitches them out of the Garden to keep them mortal, to prevent them from eating of the tree of life and becoming immortal like [he] is.
Paul didn't get that from the Garden story. If I remember correctly, that idea is first found among Alexandrian Jews towards the end of the 2nd century BCE. And / or it may be the product of midrash, a Jewish practice from that era of taking of any verse of scripture to use as a springboard for flights of fancy.
I respectfully demur ─ 3:15 says nothing of the kind.
And if it did, it would be referring to God as redeemer.
But as we saw, since they were denied knowledge of good and evil, the warning that was given was meaningless anyway ─ until afterwards.
But the Snake spoke only the truth. And as I said before, it's a thoroughly excellent thing that Eve did, bringing humans the knowledge of good and evil, so whichever way you look at it, she deserves tremendous approval.
And as Ezekiel 18 makes perfectly clear, you can't inherit the blame for sin anyway.
Golly, your Lordship! Terrific bragging rights! I'm envious.
Last edited: