Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which will become a read-only site October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 113 of 113  •  Prev 1 ... 108 109 110 111 112 113
Switch to Forum Live View Was America Always a Christian Nation?
1 day ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 12:00AM #1121
El Cid
Posts: 2,407

Aug 21, 2015 -- 1:04AM, Roymond wrote:


Aug 21, 2015 -- 12:33AM, El Cid wrote:


Aug 8, 2015 -- 10:38AM, TPaine wrote:


ec: It is living document when amended properly. Nowhere do the founders say that you make it mean whatever you want and create rights out of thin air as the SCOTUS did this summer. Gays should have tried to get the an amendment passed if they wanted to a right to "marry". The founders believed our rights come from "the laws of Natures God" which are known to only exist in the bible. If you what you say is true, Stalin could have claimed that he as the president has the right to take over all businesses for the "general welfare" or the unenumerated rights referred to in the 9th amendment.


tp: The Constitution doesn't have to be amended to secure the civil rights of a group that some states refuse to give them. The right for the federal government, including all three branches, exists based on the 9th Amendment which was incorporated by the 14th Amendment. Many Founders were not Christian and did not believe the Bible was the "word of God."



First, You still have not provided a rational source for the right of marriage even for heterosexuals. If it was a right, then the government would have to provide everyone with a spouse.




BS.  The government doesn't have to provide everyone with a church, or a printing press, or goods or property.




No, but it has to provide you with the opportunity to practice your religion, speak or write your mind, and obtain property. But you are claiming a right to marry, not a right to have the oppportunity to marry.  

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 day ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 12:14AM #1122
El Cid
Posts: 2,407

Aug 21, 2015 -- 12:16PM, TPaine wrote:


Aug 21, 2015 -- 12:07AM, El Cid wrote:


No, Calvinism is the most biblically accurate theology. I am not referring to the straw man version of Calvinism, which erroneously believes that it teaches that humans do not have free will.



Why don't you read what John Calvin wrote on the subject in his Institutes of the Christian Religion which I provide a link to Here?




No, he did believe that we have free will but our will is corrupted and we always freely choose to disobey God without coercion. Here is a good explanation. The archaic writing of the Intsitutes is somewhat confusing but this guy does a good job of explaining it: www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/did-j...

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 day ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 9:58AM #1123
TPaine
Posts: 10,064

Sep 3, 2015 -- 12:00AM, El Cid wrote:


No, but it has to provide you with the opportunity to practice your religion, speak or write your mind, and obtain property. But you are claiming a right to marry, not a right to have the oppportunity to marry.



Actually, as far as the government (either state or federal) goes they give you a marriage license which gives you the opportunity to many. Just because you have the license doesn't mean you are married. You still have to go through a civil or religious ceremony.

"The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by which other rights are protected. To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery, for slavery consists in being subject to the will of another, and he that has not a vote in the election of representatives is in this case." -- Thomas Paine: First Principles of Government (1995)
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 day ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 10:19AM #1124
TPaine
Posts: 10,064

Sep 3, 2015 -- 12:14AM, El Cid wrote:


No, he did believe that we have free will but our will is corrupted and we always freely choose to disobey God without coercion. Here is a good explanation. The archaic writing of the Intsitutes is somewhat confusing but this guy does a good job of explaining it: www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/did-j...



The site you linked isn't working. However, I didn't find the Institutes confusing at all. I much prefer reading the document itself rather than reading what someone whose curriculum vitae I don't know writes on the topic.

"The right of voting for representatives is the primary right by which other rights are protected. To take away this right is to reduce a man to slavery, for slavery consists in being subject to the will of another, and he that has not a vote in the election of representatives is in this case." -- Thomas Paine: First Principles of Government (1995)
Quick Reply
Cancel
11 hours ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 11:33PM #1125
El Cid
Posts: 2,407

Aug 23, 2015 -- 5:20PM, amcolph wrote:


Aug 23, 2015 -- 4:41PM, El Cid wrote:


Aug 10, 2015 -- 10:36AM, amcolph wrote:


Aug 10, 2015 -- 12:40AM, El Cid wrote:

BTW, Christianity INVENTED modern civilized society.




When Mahatma Gandhi was asked what he thought of western civilization, he is reported to have said, "I think it's a good idea. They ought to try it."




I am not denying that we have always lived up to our ideals, but at least we had a standard by which to criticize ourselves and improve, we are in the process of losing that standard now.




Good.  We need a better one than anything you have to offer.




There are no better ideals than Christ's.

Quick Reply
Cancel
11 hours ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 11:39PM #1126
El Cid
Posts: 2,407

Aug 23, 2015 -- 6:29PM, amcolph wrote:


tp: I'm paying attention. Just because you can't argue against the the equivelency between a Muslim driver's license clerk refusing to give one to a woman and a Christian wedding license clerk refusing to give a gay couple one you're claiming I'm not paying attention.


ec: There is no equivalence, one is who the person is, the other is what the person does.


amc: The parallel is an exact one.  The Fundamentalist county clerk refuses a marriage license to a gay couple not because they are gay, but because of what they want to do with the license.


The Wahabite clerk refuses a driver's license to a woman not because she is a woman, but because of what she wants to do with the license.



No, at its core the first case is because of what they are going to do. The second case is at its core because she is a woman. If she was not a woman then he would issue the license.





tp: Just who's civil rights does a conscientious objector violate?


ec: Potentially everyone in the nation's. If large enough numbers object to a war, it could threaten all the rights of the citizens of because we would not be able to defend ourselves against our national enemies.


amc:  If so many of the citizens object to a war that troops cannot be raised to fight it, then the war should not be fought.




Not necessarily, if that had happened in America during WW II and the majority of Americans were against the war and refused to fight, the world would be a much worse place today.

Quick Reply
Cancel
11 hours ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 11:58PM #1127
El Cid
Posts: 2,407

Aug 24, 2015 -- 10:13AM, TPaine wrote:


ec: That just shows the big difference between Christianity and Judaism. Fortunately the USA was much more influenced by Christianity than Judaism. BTW, Christianity INVENTED modern civilized society. Though for the last 50 years or so we have become less civilized in many areas of western society.



tp: Christianity did not invent modern civilized society. There were civilized societies long before there was Christianity. Examples are Egypt, Phoenicia, Greece, Rome, India, China, Japan, Celts, American Indian tribes, and Nordic countries. Science was the main cause of modern society. It took moving away from faulty religious dogma by men like Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes, Francis Bacon, Newton, Leibniz, John Herschel, and William Whewell that brought about the Industrial Revolution.



ec: Actually I should have said modern Western Civlization. Modern science was also invented by Christans and was made possible by the Christian worldview. Most of the intellectual greeks believed that working with their hands was for slaves so they never really got the modern concept of ongoing experimental science started. Most of the men you listed were Christians and some were very devoout like Galileo. Almost all the founders of the main branches of modern science were Christians.


tp: Pagan Greece and Rome played a large part in the development of Western Civilization. Actually, China was also a leader in science. They invented the pulp paper-making process and established the use of new materials used in making paper, movable type printing, gunpowder, and the compass. Galileo may have been a devout Christian, but the church found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. Scriptures used were Psalm 93:1, 96:10, and 1 Chronicles 16:30. Galileo was sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life for refusing  to "abjure, curse and detest" those heliocentric opinions.




The Greeks and Romans did play a role in the development but not as much as Christianity, especially in the areas of human rights, modern science, and modern hospitals and universities. You have to remember that at that time the church leadership placed Aristotle above the Bible in describing cosmology. Nowwhere in the bible does it teach that he earth is the center of the universe and that the sun goes around the earth. But Aristotle DID teach these things. Those verses you reference can also be understood in the hebrew to mean "the earth can not be moved from its path." And none of those verses say that the earth is the center of the universe.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 hours ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 7:48AM #1128
amcolph
Posts: 19,978

Sep 3, 2015 -- 11:33PM, El Cid wrote:


Aug 23, 2015 -- 5:20PM, amcolph wrote:


Aug 23, 2015 -- 4:41PM, El Cid wrote:


Aug 10, 2015 -- 10:36AM, amcolph wrote:


Aug 10, 2015 -- 12:40AM, El Cid wrote:

BTW, Christianity INVENTED modern civilized society.




When Mahatma Gandhi was asked what he thought of western civilization, he is reported to have said, "I think it's a good idea. They ought to try it."




I am not denying that we have always lived up to our ideals, but at least we had a standard by which to criticize ourselves and improve, we are in the process of losing that standard now.




Good.  We need a better one than anything you have to offer.




There are no better ideals than Christ's.




Then why don't you adopt them?

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 hours ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 7:54AM #1129
amcolph
Posts: 19,978

Sep 3, 2015 -- 11:39PM, El Cid wrote:



tp: I'm paying attention. Just because you can't argue against the the equivelency between a Muslim driver's license clerk refusing to give one to a woman and a Christian wedding license clerk refusing to give a gay couple one you're claiming I'm not paying attention.


ec: There is no equivalence, one is who the person is, the other is what the person does.


amc: The parallel is an exact one.  The Fundamentalist county clerk refuses a marriage license to a gay couple not because they are gay, but because of what they want to do with the license.


The Wahabite clerk refuses a driver's license to a woman not because she is a woman, but because of what she wants to do with the license.


ec: No, at its core the first case is because of what they are going to do. The second case is at its core because she is a woman. If she was not a woman then he would issue the license.



Not convincing.  What I see is a sophistical argument to the effect that the Christian clerk should be able to shirk her legal duty because she is a Christian, while the Muslim clerk may not because he isn't a Christian.





tp: Just who's civil rights does a conscientious objector violate?


ec: Potentially everyone in the nation's. If large enough numbers object to a war, it could threaten all the rights of the citizens of because we would not be able to defend ourselves against our national enemies.


amc:  If so many of the citizens object to a war that troops cannot be raised to fight it, then the war should not be fought.


ec: Not necessarily, if that had happened in America during WW II and the majority of Americans were against the war and refused to fight, the world would be a much worse place today.




So who decides?  If the citizens of a democratic republic are not to decide whether the nation should fight a war, who will?




This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 113 of 113  •  Prev 1 ... 108 109 110 111 112 113
 
    Viewing this thread :: 1 registered and 1 guest
    Registered users: TPaine
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook